👉 Watch next! Big White lens review: ruclips.net/video/28yh1yJhR-E/видео.htmlsi=jMiP2cRZg_qVkQFT 📸 OM1ii vs G9ii: ruclips.net/video/6VRB6sXYFAc/видео.htmlsi=RSLnVuJTMzZFjaX9
As an owner of the 150-600, I was very impressed with your honest review of it. It's not for everyone - but it's perfect for my bird photography. At this point, I could never go back to the other lenses I've used. Thanks for taking the time to make this video.
@@jangarcia1338 Absolutely, then why not go full frame and be done? You will have better image quality (laws of Physics) except maybe at the longest focal end, if you want to crop.
I love it! I’ve had it for about 8 months. It’s a great wildlife lens. It’s fast focusing and has great range. I’ve found a good way to carry it. I attached a Peak Design plate and anchor link on the lens foot, attached another anchor plate to one of the built in rings on the lens, and attached my peak design strap to them. That way the camera and lens lays horizontally across my body instead of pointing down like it would, connected just to both of the built in rings. It seems awkward to have it point straight down. I took the advice of RUclipsr Thomas Eisl in his review and installed my battery grip. It gives my right hand more to hold on to and provides a counter balance when zooming in all the way by turning the lens barrel. Having 2 settings for the lens tension when zooming is really nice. Sometimes I turn the lens barrel to zoom. Sometimes it’s easier to use a push pull method, especially for flying birds. No, it’s not cheap and I wouldn’t call it small and light, but it’s worth every Penny.
I have stayed with Micro Four thirds with the Lumix Leica 100-400mm lens ,preferring it over any APSC camera Body +Sigma 150-600mm Lens (or the Tamron one!) for the simple reason that the Sigma is just too huge and heavy to carry and with the Demosaicing/Denoising software available in DXO Photolab, the micro four thirds offers excellent quality for Bird photos...for me, Birding is enjoyable as an activity when I am in close proximity to the Birds and in a position to observe them with naked eyes...and for this purpose a 100-400mm Lens is more than adequate and quite often I wish that I had not zoomed out max but left a little more room around the Bird to catch more of the environment as well ( a Lumix 100-300mm Lens was ideal and 300mm was good enough for most close ups of even small birds !)...This monstrous Zoom of 150-600mm Lens with a chunky weight is a clear 'NO' for me and I think most people would feel likewise considering its size and weight...occasionally, if one needs extra reach, it will be more practical to carry and additional Nikon P950 which shoots raw and use DXO photolab to deal with image quality issues....Absolutely no need to lug around this monster of a Lens that is totally out of character with Micro four thirds .
I find it to be a very disappointing release. The size/weight is excessive for a m43 optic - it's also hecka expensive vs essentially the same lens in other mounts. Perhaps it's just not for me. But OM needs to step up its game if it's truly trying to corner the wildlife niche - they'd be wise IMO to look at how Nikon has been filling out its tele lineup, and think how they could start to offer viable, compact alternatives. I find it baffling how most FF 100-400s are f/4.5-5.6, whereas the m43 options both top out at f/6.3 🤷♂
If you have magic trick to make a lens like that smaller with the same aperture, you should tell Sigma to hire you. Because even the best super computers out there can make a lens like this physically smaller.
I got the Sigma 150-600 EF mount lens brand new on sale for $799. There is no reason this M43 lens should cost so much. All we need is an EF to M43 thats works on the OM-1
@@PeterJohns-zj2rw I have used the Sigma 150-600mm F5-6,3 DG OS HSM Sports with no issues via metabones adapter on my E-M1 II. Of course, only single AF works. But the IQ was convincing. Of course, it only makes sense on the longer end above 300mm. Below one gests even better results using it on a full frame body instead. In the end I have sold it, because any lens in that bulk and weight class is just too big and heavy for me and I had barely used it. But having this as a native lens option makes total sense to me. Only price is too much in my opinion. For the price difference, better buy the E-mout version and an e-mount camera.
The reason why I switched to MFT is the small size and weight. Lumix needs to bring back the small bodies and lens makers need to make small lenses. I don't care about it being razor sharp and just be small and focus properly and I'm happy.
@@dedclownsRfunnygreat point, but that's the point where the M43 advantage disappears. The M.Zuiko 100-400mm is already a rebadged Sigma. I'd love to see original developments of either a lighter 100-400mm or even something like 200-500mm also appropriately lighter, but I'm afraid that physics make it extremely hard... somehow worked for Canon 100-400mm RF lens...
@ProfessorJohnny69 I know, and it wouldn't be a problem for any M43 camera newer than EM1.2. My adapted Sigma 150-500mm with 1.4x TC is F8.8 at the long end and focuses just fine on the EM1.2. So if Olympus or Panasonic were brave enough to market a longer and cheaper even if slower lens, I'm sure they'd be as popular as 75-300mm...
As someone who used to own both the Canon 400mm f2.8 and 800mm f5.6, I am often amused by complaints of weight. The Canon EF 800mm is over twice the weight of this OM zoom, and the Canon is a fixed focal length. That lens gets very heavy after a while and is impractical without a monopod. This lens seems to me to be VERY lightweight, and extremely versatile. With a 2x plus 1.4x teleconverters stacked, it should be a reasonable option for photographing Jupiter and Saturn. Zoom at these very high focal lengths is worth its weight in gold since it helps in acquiring small subjects (like planets.) I also find the "just a Sigma rebrand/price" complaint ridiculous. The optical formula is only a portion of the manufacturing costs. The coatings, the lens motors and electronics, as well as weather sealing, plus the development cost and cost of tooling spread across the expected sales numbers can easily add a thousand to the cost of a lens. The Canon EF 800 f5.6 cost more than four times the cost of this OM zoom. For what it is, and its capabilities the OM super-tele is both very reasonably priced, and amazingly lightweight. Superb value for money.
I don't really have a problem with rebranded lenses and I understand they've made a few changes, but I think a €1000 price premium over the Sigma 150-600mm is way too much. I got the Lumix 100-300mm used for €320 a few years ago and I'm finding it really hard to justify getting a lens with a longer focal length considering their prices and weight.
Because i use the Panasonic system i would go for the leica 50-200mm + 2X teleconverter for the same price as the OM/Sigma 150-600 as travel tele. I would lose some light and range but it would be small, good enough quality and versatile. It would also be the best follow up lens for my Leica 12-35 f2.8 and leica 25-50 f1.7. Thanks for a great video!
Two really good episodes on Tele lenses, especially as I'm looking for something longer than my Panasonic 200mm Prime. But... And its something that I can not shake from the back of my tiny little mind. I'm hoping to see some real world reviews/examples of Olympus Tele glass on Panasonic bodies. I realise that all your episodes are in the can, and rolling out in a set order. If I had one wish, from all the excellent reviews and advice that you have given me, it would be squashing my unfounded fears of mixing glass with Olympus and Panasonic bodies with real world examples. Its really hard to find anything on the web or RUclips with such a mix and match approach.
Thank you very much for taking the time to do this comparisons and also showing amazing landscapes, highly appreciated! Looks like after the change to OM System, the company is still using the momentum and legacy from Olympus. Releasing a lens based on full frame shows a lack of new ideas and the willingness of focusing on profit and margins. The philosophy of Olympus (I used to shoot with the OM1 and OM3 in the 70s-80s) is vanished. The sense of compactness vanishes with these releases. I understand that if you need computing power, you need to generate heat, therefore the bodies increased in size, however, this continuous trend is difficult to support and accept. I hope this is an exception on their road to grow and comeback to the essence and the beauty of Micro Four Thirds.
😂😂😂 Love it when OM refurbish Sigma Standart FF zoom lens 150-600 well why not great video!!! Sigma original on L mount works as well good 150-600 and is kind of cheaper I think when Metabones will make an update to their adapter 0.71x it could be better in low light with the original EF Sigma 150-600...
I'm a bird photographer and I'd recommend people worked on their field craft more if they think they need a 150-600mm MFT lens. The 300mm F4 is a far better lens than the 150-600 for the same price. For larger birds the 200mm PL 2.8 or Oly 40-150 2.8 do a very good job as well.
Excellent and fair review. Not for everyone (but neither are the compact f4 lenses either…what great options m43 and OMDS has!). It is large, but consider how large a ff 1200mm lens would be…yikes! And the coots of a ff 1200mm … YIKES!! It is my realistic dream lens (big White is beyond my reality $$). Some notes: There are even more “tweaks” than you point out. There are specialized elements and more which Thomas Eisl points out. Lastly is physics: a completely redesigned lens wouldn’t be much smaller. 600mm is 600mm. Just compare it to the size of the 400mm Big White. It’s not incredibly larger. Fact is that 600mm is a lot of lens. The m43 advantage is that it has a ff framing equivalent of 1200 mm while carrying and paying for 600mm. As you aptly pointed out…”not for everyone.” I say that’s okay. I’m glad my segment of the photography world has this tool. I won’t be offended if the next product doesn’t fit my wishes. We all can take turns. Cheers! 😊
Great points! I think the whole photography community would be better off if that was everyone's attitude. Not ever product is for every person and is absolutely fine. So long as the target audience love it it's a win
I'm a 70 year old 5' woman, not big, and I have been carrying the 150-600 for years on my Canon full frame. I have an OMD EM1 mkii, and will be getting this lens for that. My 150-600 was sharp as a tack, even at the long end (which I used all the time) and is very usable. Big White is just too expensive for me, I'd be more worried about breaking it that shooting.
I have a M43 body, but I also shoot full frame Canon mirrorless, and I love the RF 200-800, which in crop mode gets me nearly identical reach. So I can see its utility for M43 wildlife shooters. The Canon is $1900, so it's not a huge leap in price for the Sig-- I mean Olympus, considering its niche.
Excellent review, almost making me want one of those! .. Almost. I think though, I'm still in the mindset that says the 300mm f4 Pro + 1.4x converter would probably do the job for me. Right now I'm not doing enough super-tele work to justify it, so carrying on with my £80 Canon FD300mm f5.6 manual lens, which is doing embarrassingly well on the G9. It's totally up to me to nail the focus, but when I do the results are pretty decent.
I don't doubt the quality and having the extra range is great. That said, the reason I switched from Full Frame to MFT was because of the more compact lenses. I had fractured my back and carrying pro Full Frame lenses was not possible for long periods of time. Yes, this is still smaller than having a 300-1200mm lens (if you can even find that) on Full Frame. That said, this lens could be smaller if designed specifically for MFT. The Pana-Leica 100-400 is what I'm using now and although sometimes I want closer, I'm not willing to sacrifice the weight and size.
I would really love to test both these OM lenses but can’t afford the cost or the weight of either one of them. I will have to stick with my PanaLeica 100-400.
With my Bigma 50-500 which tips the scales at 1.8kg, coupled with the fact it has no OS, it is really tripod only and the effort of keep lifting it and lifting it and holding it is tiring. It's around that weight where you'd want a carbon tripod. With a very long lens there is a temptation to use them at long distance, like over a kilometre, but then we get distance blur, dust, heat and water vapour in the air; they're best used at moderate distance.
I would perhaps consider it I didn't already own the 300/2.8, that gives me 600/5.6 with the teleconverter. I'd say OM systems need to come out with a successor to the E-M1X though. The combination of a light camera body and a heavy and front-heavy lens is VERY taxing on the upper body in the long run and a heavied camera body actually makes the whole thing easier to use. There are even people selling weights that attach to the camera body to make handling of light cameras with huge lenses easier. The 300 tips the scale at around 3.4 kilograms so a heavier body really helps but it would probably be an even better match to the 150-600. Oh, and the lens I REALLY wish OM systems would come out with? A 600/4.0! The latest breed of full frame 600s are a lot lighter than they used to be and would be stunning on micro 4/3!
Good and helpful review. Thanks, especially, for pointing out the advantage of the MFT sensor capturing the sharpest focus area of the (adapted) lens. It’s a great lens for a niche market.
We use tamron 150-600 adapted EF glass / as AF-S and non digital manual focus work super fine for bird photography. Ergonomics is sweet, but weight … but getting this right lua a metabones Ultra 0.71 will set you back only 1200,- Pounds…
I enjoy your channel. I own the original G9 and the 100-400mm Lumix/Leica lens and I'm pretty happy with it. However, given the smaller, 20-meg sensor there are times I wish I had more reach for bird photography that I can't get through cropping. But, I also really enjoy traveling light. Does this OM system 150-600mm work on the G9 and/or G9 Mk2? As a field stop-gap I've set up a custom function to shoot JPEGs with the 2x digital converter in the G9's menu. I don't know if this is an option on the G9 Mk2 BUT, while being a little inconsistent, using the 2x digital converter with a low ISO, on relatively static subjects (nesting subjects), can produce results better than I was expecting. Perhaps you'll give this a try sometime for a video on your channel. I would be interested in your opinion.
I like my 100-400 f/5-6.3, but it's a little dark. So if I wanna heft a lens that's one f-stop faster, I'll get the Sigma 150-600mm, add a Metabones Canon-to-MicroFourThirds .71 Speedbooster & voila! For about $1850 USD, I'll have a 106-426mm F/3.5-f/4.5 that weighs twice as much, but is twice as fast. Yeehaw!
The reason I switched to M43 for nature photography was because I was tired of lugging around my Sony camera and heavy 200-600mm lens. That heavy kit made me less likely to go out shooting. I sold the heavy gear (at MPB, natch) and got a good deal on an OM-1, the Oly 300mm f4 and the 1.4x teleconverter. Now I’m eager to go to the park and spend time with the birds because my gear no longer gets in my way. I think that many of the people who would put up with a 4.5 pound telephoto lens for wildlife photography are full frame shooters. Emily, you talk about the lenses that make M43 make sense. This isn’t one of them!
The Signa150-600 is a heavy one. I could rest it with Canon APSc attached. Full screwed out it has a strong force in your left arm. It is training for your arm. 😊
I think if it was the price of the non-rebranded sigma, I would consider it. If it wasn’t my money, I would go for the 150-400/4.5 (though there are concerns that the latest not-made-in-japan version is different optically). But since it’s my money, I’ll stick to the 50-200 w/1.4tc till I can find a used 300/4, 200/2.8, or mk2 PL 100-400.
I would be interested, very interested even, if they released a version that worked with Panasonic ibis. I'm also curious how this compares to the leica 100-400 mk2 with a teleconverter
Great video - as always... Thank you for all that you do. --QUESTION-- How can I let LUMIX know that removing the "Multiple Exposure" feature from the S5 series and the New Micro 4/3 bodies, was a very bad idea. Where is the best place to submit feedback directly to LUMIX?
I've had the E-mount version of this Sigma lens for abour 8 months now, and I can't deny that it's painful to use for an extended period. Monopod definitely recommended. It does, however, punch far about its price class in terms of autofocus and sharpness.
A fair review I think, but I think you have understated, "just a wee bit", the impact of its weight and ergonomics.I rented one of these for a week to try it out. It's an excellent lens - not quite as sharp as the 150-400 but an extraordinary value for the money if just measured on image quality, and light-years better than my 100-400, and the longer reach is nice. But, it is unimaginably heavy for my 75-year-old bones to be hauling about. I recently returned from a two-week trip to Ecuador with the Pro lens, and I was suffering massively from the repeated use of this lens, multiple hours/day, 12 days nonstop, and I think the Sigma lens would have been too much. The Sigma is also not as ergonomic as the Pro lens in my hands - I have large hands and can balance the Pro lens on the palm of my hand on its longer tripod foot and manipulate both the zoom and the focus with different fingers, not so much on the Sigma, where the lens foot is smaller and leaves you with a more awkward grip and the focus is harder to get to. And the changing balance as you extend the lens is very noticeable. I got my best results by flipping the (non--removable) tripod collar to the top and just supporting the lens barrel with my hand. The reverse-taper zoom adjustment was surprisingly comfortable on the hand, but even on the "easy" setting, it cannot match the silky-smooth action of the 150 etc lens.A final plus I am obliged to mention - this lens connects with the OM1 SyncIS for the same full 7+/- stops of image stabilization that the Pro lens offers. It is noticeable and excellent. If I find myself doing a lot of tripod shooting I might buy this lens - excellent optical quality for the money. Anyway, my two cents. Keep up the excellent work - hard to find honest and sane people on the Internet these days:)
Great review as always, but got me thinking maybe I got a bad copy. Mine was so bad I sent it back after just a few days testing, lacked anywhere near the sharpness wide open. I'm used to the incredible 300 pro, and some amazing Pentax glass (inc sigma k mount) - it didn't stack up against any of them including super tele zoom that is way cheaper, or even the very cheap 55-300 PLM from pentax. I found the 300 pro plus the mc20 is far sharper if somewhat less flexible
Agree the 300mm F4 with 2.0x teleconverter is bloody brilliant on the right day with the right subjects. I also love the fact it becomes a 1:1 macro lens (less than 35mm frame width) with a 1.4 meter working distance.
Thanks Emily, great video. Beautiful images🎉🎉🎉. I am not into bird photography, otherwise I would probably get it. However, I really like car racing...😮. Maybe if I win the lottery 🎉🎉🎉.
Great video based on use and not specs, thanks. On the one hand kudos to OM Systems for thinking outside the box, adapting an existing lens so that time to market is fast and establishing itself as the undisputed long-range system of choice. As OM Systems users we all need the company to thrive. But on the other, size and weight and the unfathomable price make it a no-no for me. That and the fact that I am more than happy with my 300f4+TCs for birding.
For much less of a price I can get the Canon version by Sigma and a "not-a-speed-booster" smart-adapter; I even get a used market 1.4 and 2x canon tele converter in for less of the OM version... So where is to point? What am I missing? (Panasonic user)
@@12symmo Can a MFT body provide enough current to shift that heavy focus element? Metabones requiring external power for such lenses gives me to think. Somebody showed the combination with a tamron 150-600, canon 2x, metabones speedbooster on YT; So at least the combination works. Is it viable and how does it compare, I would like to find out. As Panasonic user I don't get Dual IS anyway, if the AF does well it could be an alternative
Thank you for your pragmatic review, which I was interested to hear as you have a greater, broader range of experience with different lenses for M43 than me. I’ve owned my 150-600 for a couple of months now and have used it quite extensively, especially at RSPB sites/reserves. It is not a lens I thought I would buy because it goes against the reasons I changed over from FF to M43. However, for my own purposes, it does have plenty of advantages especially in terms of reach and I can cope with the extra weight when the additional reach is preferred. I also have the 300mm F4 Pro (sometimes used with a 1.4 TC), which I prefer for walking around and is optically superior to the 150-600. My only disappointment is under some conditions I do get some CA fringing shooting birds in flight when the sky is the only background.
Sigma making a lens for OM System - same story as with the 100-400mm. But I don’t mind and even find a somewhat higher price acceptable, because the lenses do have enhancements, a higher build quality and are for a smaller market niche than the original. By the way: Even the highly appraised 75mm is likely to be made by sigma, since it has “made in Japan” - where Sigma have their factory, but not OM System.
Absolutely not for me. But for the m43 system its a killer lens. With the x2 and you get 2.4 M, two point four meter (in equal numbers for 35mm), just look at those numbers, that is something no other can do. And for that it has its place.
Marketing a full frame lens design for micro four thirds just isn't something I'm willing to support. I chose this system for a reason after all. Especially with modern high resolution full frame sensors you might as well get one of those and crop if you need the extra reach. I sincerely hope this is just the slowed down development due to the restructuring of Olympus into OM System showing through and not the way OM wants to go, because that would basically kill the system for people doing sports and wildlife.
The cropping argument is in this case overly simplistic. The subject is smaller in the viewfinder. There are fewer pixels on the subject (no full frame sensor is this dense), less auto focus points available in the cropped area again due to density. And whilst most of the glass is the same the rear elements are not nor is the ability to use sync stabilisation (this is a biggy at these focal lengths). Nor is the extra weather proofing that's been added.
I'm not sure what people are complaining about. If that's the biggest an MFT lens gets with a 1200mm max field of view (which you rarely use), IDK man grab a Canon 1200mm prime for $20,000. This lens is, to me, perfect for skittish subjects that you know are around. And Rob Trek had a blast with the thing.
The big issue with having more than 600mm in many wildlife scenarios is that you start to see lost of sharpness because of air movement. I use 400mm on apsc and when cropping in waterbirds photographed in high temperatures they are really soft due to this. Not to say that the price of this OM version of Sigma is quite ridiculous for what it is. The weight and frontheavyness also make not unpleasant experience.
Well, I no longer call it rebranded. You clearly showed thatvis a redesigned lens. The extra button, the better OIS compared to the sigma version, and the lens coatings. That is not rebranding. It's new design features, and that makes the word rebranded false statement. I want this lens, despite its too pricy for me. So far i will keep the more true rebranded Sigma/Olympus 100-400. Its a good enough lens for now. Despite needing 1.4x extender.
Thank you. Interesting video. Regardless of the price of the Sigma lenses. The 150-600 is too expensive for me, considering that I would probably use it rather rarely. So I'll probably stick with the Oly 100-400 for the time being.
Dear Emily, a comparison in image quality of the following 3 zooms would be helpful for many MFT fans: The Olympus 40-150/2.8 Pro vs. the new Leica 35-100/2.8 (Mkiii) vs the Leica 50-200. I think most users want to have one of these 3 zooms in their bag as a standard setup. I have seen your reviews about the Olympus 40-150 and the Leica 100-400, but I think most users want to decide between the other 3 mentenioned candidates for travel. Another important point: I use the Lunix G9 (Mk1) and Olympus EM1.3. Unfortunately both, the new Lumix G9ii and the new OM System 1 became way bigger and require a different size of bag plus handholding for a whole day in a city is less comfortable due to a thicker grip. Maybe you can point to these downsides to the appropriate people. Because of these downsides, I will never upgrade to these bodies. I would be surprised if I would be the only one with this decision. The OM5 is not an alternative because it does not have an AF joystick and the bottom plate breaks easily with the peak design shouldee strap system with heavier lenses.
I also would love to see this on a Panasonic body G9 or mkII. I’d like to have the lens but not if I also need to trade bodies to make best use of it. Maybe see you next time you’re in Seattle. Go Hawks.
I find it funny, as the Sigma 150-600 was the reason I switched from Canon to Olympus. The 75-300mm Olympus gave the same performance for less weight when compared to Full Frame. Now we have a 300-1200 equivalent. Complete madness. Or is it? At the photography show at the NEC, there was a bunch of guys looking like they were getting their body building training in with some Full Frame Telephoto lenses. When you consider they're spending tens of thousands to get less reach, it's even funnier. I can even understand the £1000 uplift when the Full Frame equivalent would cost 5 to 10 times more.😂😂
You already had a 300-1200 "equivalent" on Canon: just crop. With high pixel count sensors and pixel-enhance software, not an issue any longer. What you USED to gain with Olympus/OM System were light, elegant lenses with plenty enough range. Now we get this overpriced repackaging of an old lens design.
@Vincenzo-bm1up I'm not up to speed on Canon sensors. As MFT has either 20mp or 25mm on a quarter of the sensor size of Full Frame are the latest Canon sensors 80mp to 100mp.
One question... Can one buy the Sigma FF Cannon EF version and put an EF to MFT adaptor? Would that be the same or similar as getting the native MFT version? 🤔
Another great review. Thank you. I am about to sell my Sigma 150-600 C because, for me at 73 years young, it is too heavy to hold: so this lens is a "No from me".
Thank you Emily for your video! I have recently bought this lens 150-600) and I have taken impresive pictures of the moon. I also want to take it out but I need a biger backpack. Please Emily, takung unto consideration that this lens has a hard frontsl lend cap, could you tell me in which position should I transport it (vertically or horizontally?)
I think this is the kind of lens that is very very specialist. Maybe ok for the "new market" that OM Systems is pursuing but at the same time, I think this will be a bit of a bane for MFT. Just remember: you can do some rather severe crops in high megapixel full frame options also. I still think going big bodies only on their modern tech is a mistake for MFT.
Emily, going on the overpriced lens theme, you could segue to a video dedicated to adapting EF to m43 with a smart adapter or speedbooster, 3rd party lens vs Canon…
while I have great respect for Sigma, I really wish this lens had been modified more for m 4/3 to be either wider max aperture or smaller/lighter, which should have been possible since the 4/3 sensor is only using the middle of the image circle.
Hi! Yes it will work fine, the only thing you'll lose out on is dual stabilsiation, which is only compatible with the higher end Oly/OM cameras. But the stabilisation in the g9ii is more than good enough in my opinion 😊
Thanks for your reply Emily I will buy it then ? I am on your Facebook group so I will do a post when I am up and running take care and thanks again for the info
Too large for me. Big White is much more tempting for me, but the combination of its price and size makes me think I‘d never use it enough to make it worth owning. Loved your review of this lens and Big White!
Sold my em1 ii and 75-300 ii to buy a g9 ii and a pany/leica 300mm because it's the max wt weather sealed combo that i could handle and afford. Soon to be 74 w/4 spinal fusions and 6 stents no thank you. If I need more reach in body teleconverter for me.
I use the Sigma 150-600 DGDN on my Lumix S5II, I took it to Bempton Cliffs in horendous rain and it held up fine. Also worth noting that the Sigma app is useful for making the Sigma 150-600 customisable. Glad it's come to OM-System cameras but it is overpriced imo.
I’m sure someone needs that much focal length… I can’t understand the pricing though, I might have been tempted for half its actual price. I’m fine with my canon 100-500, if I want small birds I’ll find a way to get closer.
I have my own eyes. The white one is barely noticeably sharper at 400mm. OM-Sigma performance will drop by the 600mm but not by a factor similar to 1.5crop from the image taken with the big white. Yes. We are talking now less than 9Mpix! But even if you use built in 1.25x TC giving you 500mm f5.6 (not 5.3) you stil have to crop 1.2 times, which robbes you of over 6Mpix
Imagine paying almost twice for a rebranded, too heavy, build for a bigger imagine cirkel lens... Almost like paying extra for a nikon branded Tamron lens.
in my opinion the best value for money continues to be the olympus 100-400. Which has a better image quality than the leica 100-400 which becomes too soft especially at 400 mm. The olympus 150-400 as a telezoom remains the best of the best but in relation to the price it does not surpass the economical 100-400. This om-sigma 150-600 does not convince me for weight and size and price, olympus should have redesigned it from scratch and it could have been smaller than the olympus 150-400.
I am in the process of upgrading my Sony RX10IV for a better low light (whenever modern AI Denoise can do magic) and if possible a bit more reach, were did you find info about the 150-400 being that much better that the 100-400 ? Edit: found a RUclips video about comparison, and the price of the 150-400, I did not realize that it was the "big white"... Way too much $$$ for a hobby 😢
I think the cameras are still as good as ever for other aspects than wildlife. But I can understand the will to "own" the reputation as "the best system for wildlife photography", the same way Lumix MFT tries to "own" the name as the best video system for up to 4-6K (underneath 8K) and OM as the best composite photo system, and the best macro system . I wish it is time to release a similar campaign by OMDS and Lumix to make MFT to concor the reputation as best "Street camera system". It's time to boost by release of weatherproof OM-10 and a simpler non weatherproof OM-20 and an even more simpler, cheeper and OM-50, plus PEN-F2, leight PEN-L11, mini PEN-M3. And Lumix to make replacement for the GX9-series, the GX80-series, the GM1. Small, fun, creative, stylish, usable and above all, loved by street photographers from pro to amateur.
Another smashing review! I think we need to keep you on the Fire Islands as you are doing such awesome reviews! 🙂 As for this lens, it's not for me, but I love that OM System released it because it gives the MFT system a range - for practical purposes - which exceeds any other format on the market. I believe it also is an "MFT" lens because it's half the size of a Fools' Frame equivalent, so is true to the "small system" mantra. For those who think it is "overpriced" because it's "just a rebranded Sigma" try telling your Lexus dealer that those cars are just rebranded Toyotas. OMS saved a lot of development costs and put that money where it mattered with better lens coatings (and likely better glass), better *Sync* IS, better weather sealing, and better controls. It's a niche product, for sure, and by my estimation, partnering with Sigma made it feasible to release, whereas a clean sheet design wouldn't have made financial sense.
@@12symmo I guess I'm unclear about the point of your comment. I think it's just awesome that the MFT system has a native 1,200mm lens at a reasonable price. 🙂
👉 Watch next! Big White lens review: ruclips.net/video/28yh1yJhR-E/видео.htmlsi=jMiP2cRZg_qVkQFT
📸 OM1ii vs G9ii: ruclips.net/video/6VRB6sXYFAc/видео.htmlsi=RSLnVuJTMzZFjaX9
As an owner of the 150-600, I was very impressed with your honest review of it. It's not for everyone - but it's perfect for my bird photography. At this point, I could never go back to the other lenses I've used. Thanks for taking the time to make this video.
To me the problem is that it is a FF lens design. Same with the 100-400. Sigma full frame lenses.
@@jangarcia1338 are there technical reasons that this is a problem ?
@@jangarcia1338 Absolutely, then why not go full frame and be done? You will have better image quality (laws of Physics) except maybe at the longest focal end, if you want to crop.
I love it! I’ve had it for about 8 months.
It’s a great wildlife lens. It’s fast focusing and has great range.
I’ve found a good way to carry it. I attached a Peak Design plate and anchor link on the lens foot, attached another anchor plate to one of the built in rings on the lens, and attached my peak design strap to them. That way the camera and lens lays horizontally across my body instead of pointing down like it would, connected just to both of the built in rings. It seems awkward to have it point straight down.
I took the advice of RUclipsr Thomas Eisl in his review and installed my battery grip. It gives my right hand more to hold on to and provides a counter balance when zooming in all the way by turning the lens barrel.
Having 2 settings for the lens tension when zooming is really nice. Sometimes I turn the lens barrel to zoom. Sometimes it’s easier to use a push pull method, especially for flying birds.
No, it’s not cheap and I wouldn’t call it small and light, but it’s worth every Penny.
Puffin Nostril will be the name of my new band 😂
I have stayed with Micro Four thirds with the Lumix Leica 100-400mm lens ,preferring it over any APSC camera Body +Sigma 150-600mm Lens (or the Tamron one!) for the simple reason that the Sigma is just too huge and heavy to carry and with the Demosaicing/Denoising software available in DXO Photolab, the micro four thirds offers excellent quality for Bird photos...for me, Birding is enjoyable as an activity when I am in close proximity to the Birds and in a position to observe them with naked eyes...and for this purpose a 100-400mm Lens is more than adequate and quite often I wish that I had not zoomed out max but left a little more room around the Bird to catch more of the environment as well ( a Lumix 100-300mm Lens was ideal and 300mm was good enough for most close ups of even small birds !)...This monstrous Zoom of 150-600mm Lens with a chunky weight is a clear 'NO' for me and I think most people would feel likewise considering its size and weight...occasionally, if one needs extra reach, it will be more practical to carry and additional Nikon P950 which shoots raw and use DXO photolab to deal with image quality issues....Absolutely no need to lug around this monster of a Lens that is totally out of character with Micro four thirds .
I find it to be a very disappointing release. The size/weight is excessive for a m43 optic - it's also hecka expensive vs essentially the same lens in other mounts.
Perhaps it's just not for me. But OM needs to step up its game if it's truly trying to corner the wildlife niche - they'd be wise IMO to look at how Nikon has been filling out its tele lineup, and think how they could start to offer viable, compact alternatives.
I find it baffling how most FF 100-400s are f/4.5-5.6, whereas the m43 options both top out at f/6.3 🤷♂
If you have magic trick to make a lens like that smaller with the same aperture, you should tell Sigma to hire you. Because even the best super computers out there can make a lens like this physically smaller.
I got the Sigma 150-600 EF mount lens brand new on sale for $799.
There is no reason this M43 lens should cost so much.
All we need is an EF to M43 thats works on the OM-1
Correct. I tried what you have on em5.3 and it wouldn’t focus. Oh well.
@@PeterJohns-zj2rw I have used the Sigma 150-600mm F5-6,3 DG OS HSM Sports with no issues via metabones adapter on my E-M1 II. Of course, only single AF works. But the IQ was convincing. Of course, it only makes sense on the longer end above 300mm. Below one gests even better results using it on a full frame body instead. In the end I have sold it, because any lens in that bulk and weight class is just too big and heavy for me and I had barely used it. But having this as a native lens option makes total sense to me. Only price is too much in my opinion. For the price difference, better buy the E-mout version and an e-mount camera.
The reason why I switched to MFT is the small size and weight.
Lumix needs to bring back the small bodies and lens makers need to make small lenses. I don't care about it being razor sharp and just be small and focus properly and I'm happy.
The Olympus 75-300mm is fantastic for a small long zoom.
@@dedclownsRfunnygreat point, but that's the point where the M43 advantage disappears. The M.Zuiko 100-400mm is already a rebadged Sigma. I'd love to see original developments of either a lighter 100-400mm or even something like 200-500mm also appropriately lighter, but I'm afraid that physics make it extremely hard... somehow worked for Canon 100-400mm RF lens...
@@buggersofoz The Canon lens is F8 at the long end.
@ProfessorJohnny69 I know, and it wouldn't be a problem for any M43 camera newer than EM1.2. My adapted Sigma 150-500mm with 1.4x TC is F8.8 at the long end and focuses just fine on the EM1.2. So if Olympus or Panasonic were brave enough to market a longer and cheaper even if slower lens, I'm sure they'd be as popular as 75-300mm...
Point taken. OTOH this lens is mainly for birders / wildlife -- is there even any equivalent length in FF? If so it's got to be way bigger than this.
Missed opportunity for “MACRO four thirds”
Dang
As someone who used to own both the Canon 400mm f2.8 and 800mm f5.6, I am often amused by complaints of weight. The Canon EF 800mm is over twice the weight of this OM zoom, and the Canon is a fixed focal length. That lens gets very heavy after a while and is impractical without a monopod.
This lens seems to me to be VERY lightweight, and extremely versatile. With a 2x plus 1.4x teleconverters stacked, it should be a reasonable option for photographing Jupiter and Saturn. Zoom at these very high focal lengths is worth its weight in gold since it helps in acquiring small subjects (like planets.)
I also find the "just a Sigma rebrand/price" complaint ridiculous. The optical formula is only a portion of the manufacturing costs. The coatings, the lens motors and electronics, as well as weather sealing, plus the development cost and cost of tooling spread across the expected sales numbers can easily add a thousand to the cost of a lens. The Canon EF 800 f5.6 cost more than four times the cost of this OM zoom.
For what it is, and its capabilities the OM super-tele is both very reasonably priced, and amazingly lightweight. Superb value for money.
A Test with the G9II would be intereresting
The puffin photo at 1:40 is great.
I have the Zuiko 100-400 5-6,3 and I am pretty happy with. Lightweight and sharp.
I don't really have a problem with rebranded lenses and I understand they've made a few changes, but I think a €1000 price premium over the Sigma 150-600mm is way too much.
I got the Lumix 100-300mm used for €320 a few years ago and I'm finding it really hard to justify getting a lens with a longer focal length considering their prices and weight.
Because i use the Panasonic system i would go for the leica 50-200mm + 2X teleconverter for the same price as the OM/Sigma 150-600 as travel tele. I would lose some light and range but it would be small, good enough quality and versatile. It would also be the best follow up lens for my Leica 12-35 f2.8 and leica 25-50 f1.7. Thanks for a great video!
Two really good episodes on Tele lenses, especially as I'm looking for something longer than my Panasonic 200mm Prime. But...
And its something that I can not shake from the back of my tiny little mind. I'm hoping to see some real world reviews/examples of Olympus Tele glass on Panasonic bodies.
I realise that all your episodes are in the can, and rolling out in a set order. If I had one wish, from all the excellent reviews and advice that you have given me, it would be squashing my unfounded fears of mixing glass with Olympus and Panasonic bodies with real world examples. Its really hard to find anything on the web or RUclips with such a mix and match approach.
Thank you very much for taking the time to do this comparisons and also showing amazing landscapes, highly appreciated! Looks like after the change to OM System, the company is still using the momentum and legacy from Olympus. Releasing a lens based on full frame shows a lack of new ideas and the willingness of focusing on profit and margins. The philosophy of Olympus (I used to shoot with the OM1 and OM3 in the 70s-80s) is vanished. The sense of compactness vanishes with these releases. I understand that if you need computing power, you need to generate heat, therefore the bodies increased in size, however, this continuous trend is difficult to support and accept. I hope this is an exception on their road to grow and comeback to the essence and the beauty of Micro Four Thirds.
😂😂😂 Love it when OM refurbish Sigma Standart FF zoom lens 150-600 well why not great video!!!
Sigma original on L mount works as well good 150-600 and is kind of cheaper I think when Metabones will make an update to their adapter 0.71x it could be better in low light with the original EF Sigma 150-600...
I'm a bird photographer and I'd recommend people worked on their field craft more if they think they need a 150-600mm MFT lens. The 300mm F4 is a far better lens than the 150-600 for the same price. For larger birds the 200mm PL 2.8 or Oly 40-150 2.8 do a very good job as well.
Excellent and fair review. Not for everyone (but neither are the compact f4 lenses either…what great options m43 and OMDS has!).
It is large, but consider how large a ff 1200mm lens would be…yikes! And the coots of a ff 1200mm … YIKES!!
It is my realistic dream lens (big White is beyond my reality $$).
Some notes: There are even more “tweaks” than you point out. There are specialized elements and more which Thomas Eisl points out.
Lastly is physics: a completely redesigned lens wouldn’t be much smaller. 600mm is 600mm. Just compare it to the size of the 400mm Big White. It’s not incredibly larger. Fact is that 600mm is a lot of lens. The m43 advantage is that it has a ff framing equivalent of 1200 mm while carrying and paying for 600mm. As you aptly pointed out…”not for everyone.” I say that’s okay. I’m glad my segment of the photography world has this tool. I won’t be offended if the next product doesn’t fit my wishes. We all can take turns. Cheers! 😊
Great points! I think the whole photography community would be better off if that was everyone's attitude. Not ever product is for every person and is absolutely fine. So long as the target audience love it it's a win
I'm a 70 year old 5' woman, not big, and I have been carrying the 150-600 for years on my Canon full frame. I have an OMD EM1 mkii, and will be getting this lens for that. My 150-600 was sharp as a tack, even at the long end (which I used all the time) and is very usable. Big White is just too expensive for me, I'd be more worried about breaking it that shooting.
GM5 as a lens cap is a flex I totally respect. Kudos.
I enjoy this channel so much that it made me buy a g9ii just to have a reason to listen to her. But my wife stole my camera.
I have a M43 body, but I also shoot full frame Canon mirrorless, and I love the RF 200-800, which in crop mode gets me nearly identical reach. So I can see its utility for M43 wildlife shooters. The Canon is $1900, so it's not a huge leap in price for the Sig-- I mean Olympus, considering its niche.
Excellent review, almost making me want one of those! .. Almost. I think though, I'm still in the mindset that says the 300mm f4 Pro + 1.4x converter would probably do the job for me. Right now I'm not doing enough super-tele work to justify it, so carrying on with my £80 Canon FD300mm f5.6 manual lens, which is doing embarrassingly well on the G9. It's totally up to me to nail the focus, but when I do the results are pretty decent.
I don't doubt the quality and having the extra range is great. That said, the reason I switched from Full Frame to MFT was because of the more compact lenses. I had fractured my back and carrying pro Full Frame lenses was not possible for long periods of time. Yes, this is still smaller than having a 300-1200mm lens (if you can even find that) on Full Frame. That said, this lens could be smaller if designed specifically for MFT. The Pana-Leica 100-400 is what I'm using now and although sometimes I want closer, I'm not willing to sacrifice the weight and size.
I would love to see it used with the GM5, this combo looks hilarious
My GM1 on the back end of the Bigma 50-500 looked utterly ridiculous but it worked.
I would really love to test both these OM lenses but can’t afford the cost or the weight of either one of them. I will have to stick with my PanaLeica 100-400.
With my Bigma 50-500 which tips the scales at 1.8kg, coupled with the fact it has no OS, it is really tripod only and the effort of keep lifting it and lifting it and holding it is tiring. It's around that weight where you'd want a carbon tripod.
With a very long lens there is a temptation to use them at long distance, like over a kilometre, but then we get distance blur, dust, heat and water vapour in the air; they're best used at moderate distance.
Great video again Emily May! Well balanced (but heavy) information as usual. Thanks.
Om system you know where to send it! Need me a play with this! 😮
I would perhaps consider it I didn't already own the 300/2.8, that gives me 600/5.6 with the teleconverter. I'd say OM systems need to come out with a successor to the E-M1X though. The combination of a light camera body and a heavy and front-heavy lens is VERY taxing on the upper body in the long run and a heavied camera body actually makes the whole thing easier to use. There are even people selling weights that attach to the camera body to make handling of light cameras with huge lenses easier. The 300 tips the scale at around 3.4 kilograms so a heavier body really helps but it would probably be an even better match to the 150-600.
Oh, and the lens I REALLY wish OM systems would come out with? A 600/4.0! The latest breed of full frame 600s are a lot lighter than they used to be and would be stunning on micro 4/3!
Good and helpful review. Thanks, especially, for pointing out the advantage of the MFT sensor capturing the sharpest focus area of the (adapted) lens. It’s a great lens for a niche market.
We use tamron 150-600 adapted EF glass / as AF-S and non digital manual focus work super fine for bird photography. Ergonomics is sweet, but weight … but getting this right lua a metabones Ultra 0.71 will set you back only 1200,- Pounds…
Use metabones without optics! One wants the reach of 600mm and not shorten it.
I enjoy your channel. I own the original G9 and the 100-400mm Lumix/Leica lens and I'm pretty happy with it. However, given the smaller, 20-meg sensor there are times I wish I had more reach for bird photography that I can't get through cropping. But, I also really enjoy traveling light. Does this OM system 150-600mm work on the G9 and/or G9 Mk2? As a field stop-gap I've set up a custom function to shoot JPEGs with the 2x digital converter in the G9's menu. I don't know if this is an option on the G9 Mk2 BUT, while being a little inconsistent, using the 2x digital converter with a low ISO, on relatively static subjects (nesting subjects), can produce results better than I was expecting. Perhaps you'll give this a try sometime for a video on your channel. I would be interested in your opinion.
Would love to see someone review this in the field of sports photography - football, for instance 👏
Awesome video, Emily! Cheers from Bulgaria 🤙
I like my 100-400 f/5-6.3, but it's a little dark. So if I wanna heft a lens that's one f-stop faster, I'll get the Sigma 150-600mm, add a Metabones Canon-to-MicroFourThirds .71 Speedbooster & voila! For about $1850 USD, I'll have a 106-426mm F/3.5-f/4.5 that weighs twice as much, but is twice as fast. Yeehaw!
Great review. I enjoyed hearing about the features and seeing what the photos that you took looked like.
The reason I switched to M43 for nature photography was because I was tired of lugging around my Sony camera and heavy 200-600mm lens. That heavy kit made me less likely to go out shooting. I sold the heavy gear (at MPB, natch) and got a good deal on an OM-1, the Oly 300mm f4 and the 1.4x teleconverter. Now I’m eager to go to the park and spend time with the birds because my gear no longer gets in my way. I think that many of the people who would put up with a 4.5 pound telephoto lens for wildlife photography are full frame shooters. Emily, you talk about the lenses that make M43 make sense. This isn’t one of them!
The Signa150-600 is a heavy one. I could rest it with Canon APSc attached. Full screwed out it has a strong force in your left arm. It is training for your arm. 😊
I think if it was the price of the non-rebranded sigma, I would consider it. If it wasn’t my money, I would go for the 150-400/4.5 (though there are concerns that the latest not-made-in-japan version is different optically). But since it’s my money, I’ll stick to the 50-200 w/1.4tc till I can find a used 300/4, 200/2.8, or mk2 PL 100-400.
That lens and camera combination does look silly! LOL. I don't this lens, but I have been lusting after the 150-400 PRO.
I would be interested, very interested even, if they released a version that worked with Panasonic ibis.
I'm also curious how this compares to the leica 100-400 mk2 with a teleconverter
Great video - as always... Thank you for all that you do. --QUESTION-- How can I let LUMIX know that removing the "Multiple Exposure" feature from the S5 series and the New Micro 4/3 bodies, was a very bad idea. Where is the best place to submit feedback directly to LUMIX?
I've had the E-mount version of this Sigma lens for abour 8 months now, and I can't deny that it's painful to use for an extended period. Monopod definitely recommended.
It does, however, punch far about its price class in terms of autofocus and sharpness.
A fair review I think, but I think you have understated, "just a wee bit", the impact of its weight and ergonomics.I rented one of these for a week to try it out. It's an excellent lens - not quite as sharp as the 150-400 but an extraordinary value for the money if just measured on image quality, and light-years better than my 100-400, and the longer reach is nice. But, it is unimaginably heavy for my 75-year-old bones to be hauling about. I recently returned from a two-week trip to Ecuador with the Pro lens, and I was suffering massively from the repeated use of this lens, multiple hours/day, 12 days nonstop, and I think the Sigma lens would have been too much. The Sigma is also not as ergonomic as the Pro lens in my hands - I have large hands and can balance the Pro lens on the palm of my hand on its longer tripod foot and manipulate both the zoom and the focus with different fingers, not so much on the Sigma, where the lens foot is smaller and leaves you with a more awkward grip and the focus is harder to get to. And the changing balance as you extend the lens is very noticeable. I got my best results by flipping the (non--removable) tripod collar to the top and just supporting the lens barrel with my hand. The reverse-taper zoom adjustment was surprisingly comfortable on the hand, but even on the "easy" setting, it cannot match the silky-smooth action of the 150 etc lens.A final plus I am obliged to mention - this lens connects with the OM1 SyncIS for the same full 7+/- stops of image stabilization that the Pro lens offers. It is noticeable and excellent.
If I find myself doing a lot of tripod shooting I might buy this lens - excellent optical quality for the money.
Anyway, my two cents. Keep up the excellent work - hard to find honest and sane people on the Internet these days:)
Not sue what happened to the editing, but ignore the strikethrough
Great review as always, but got me thinking maybe I got a bad copy. Mine was so bad I sent it back after just a few days testing, lacked anywhere near the sharpness wide open. I'm used to the incredible 300 pro, and some amazing Pentax glass (inc sigma k mount) - it didn't stack up against any of them including super tele zoom that is way cheaper, or even the very cheap 55-300 PLM from pentax. I found the 300 pro plus the mc20 is far sharper if somewhat less flexible
Agree the 300mm F4 with 2.0x teleconverter is bloody brilliant on the right day with the right subjects.
I also love the fact it becomes a 1:1 macro lens (less than 35mm frame width) with a 1.4 meter working distance.
I like the long lens series of your videos ❤
Thanks Emily, great video. Beautiful images🎉🎉🎉.
I am not into bird photography, otherwise I would probably get it.
However, I really like car racing...😮.
Maybe if I win the lottery 🎉🎉🎉.
Great video based on use and not specs, thanks.
On the one hand kudos to OM Systems for thinking outside the box, adapting an existing lens so that time to market is fast and establishing itself as the undisputed long-range system of choice. As OM Systems users we all need the company to thrive.
But on the other, size and weight and the unfathomable price make it a no-no for me.
That and the fact that I am more than happy with my 300f4+TCs for birding.
For much less of a price I can get the Canon version by Sigma and a "not-a-speed-booster" smart-adapter; I even get a used market 1.4 and 2x canon tele converter in for less of the OM version... So where is to point? What am I missing? (Panasonic user)
How fast is the autofocus on those adapters?
@@12symmo Can a MFT body provide enough current to shift that heavy focus element? Metabones requiring external power for such lenses gives me to think. Somebody showed the combination with a tamron 150-600, canon 2x, metabones speedbooster on YT; So at least the combination works. Is it viable and how does it compare, I would like to find out. As Panasonic user I don't get Dual IS anyway, if the AF does well it could be an alternative
Thank you for your pragmatic review, which I was interested to hear as you have a greater, broader range of experience with different lenses for M43 than me. I’ve owned my 150-600 for a couple of months now and have used it quite extensively, especially at RSPB sites/reserves. It is not a lens I thought I would buy because it goes against the reasons I changed over from FF to M43. However, for my own purposes, it does have plenty of advantages especially in terms of reach and I can cope with the extra weight when the additional reach is preferred. I also have the 300mm F4 Pro (sometimes used with a 1.4 TC), which I prefer for walking around and is optically superior to the 150-600. My only disappointment is under some conditions I do get some CA fringing shooting birds in flight when the sky is the only background.
Sigma making a lens for OM System - same story as with the 100-400mm. But I don’t mind and even find a somewhat higher price acceptable, because the lenses do have enhancements, a higher build quality and are for a smaller market niche than the original. By the way: Even the highly appraised 75mm is likely to be made by sigma, since it has “made in Japan” - where Sigma have their factory, but not OM System.
Sigma also made the Olympus 25mm f/1.8, and several lenses going back to the original Four Thirds DSLR lenses.
Absolutely not for me. But for the m43 system its a killer lens. With the x2 and you get 2.4 M, two point four meter (in equal numbers for 35mm), just look at those numbers, that is something no other can do. And for that it has its place.
Marketing a full frame lens design for micro four thirds just isn't something I'm willing to support. I chose this system for a reason after all. Especially with modern high resolution full frame sensors you might as well get one of those and crop if you need the extra reach.
I sincerely hope this is just the slowed down development due to the restructuring of Olympus into OM System showing through and not the way OM wants to go, because that would basically kill the system for people doing sports and wildlife.
The cropping argument is in this case overly simplistic. The subject is smaller in the viewfinder. There are fewer pixels on the subject (no full frame sensor is this dense), less auto focus points available in the cropped area again due to density. And whilst most of the glass is the same the rear elements are not nor is the ability to use sync stabilisation (this is a biggy at these focal lengths). Nor is the extra weather proofing that's been added.
I'm not sure what people are complaining about. If that's the biggest an MFT lens gets with a 1200mm max field of view (which you rarely use), IDK man grab a Canon 1200mm prime for $20,000. This lens is, to me, perfect for skittish subjects that you know are around. And Rob Trek had a blast with the thing.
Great review. I would love big white, but this is a great (and comparably affordable) alternative.
The big issue with having more than 600mm in many wildlife scenarios is that you start to see lost of sharpness because of air movement. I use 400mm on apsc and when cropping in waterbirds photographed in high temperatures they are really soft due to this. Not to say that the price of this OM version of Sigma is quite ridiculous for what it is. The weight and frontheavyness also make not unpleasant experience.
Well, I no longer call it rebranded.
You clearly showed thatvis a redesigned lens. The extra button, the better OIS compared to the sigma version, and the lens coatings. That is not rebranding. It's new design features, and that makes the word rebranded false statement.
I want this lens, despite its too pricy for me. So far i will keep the more true rebranded Sigma/Olympus 100-400. Its a good enough lens for now. Despite needing 1.4x extender.
A little large for me. I can't justify buying a telephoto lens but if I did get one I would lean towards a 100-400mm lens. Nice video.
Nice and fair thoughts, thanks!
What we really need is the Tamron 150-500. Even with a 10-20% mark-up, it would be very good on m4/3.
Could you push and pull the inner barrel with the 150-600?
why couldnt om system do a 150-600 mft version, not just a FF with a different mount
Thank you. Interesting video. Regardless of the price of the Sigma lenses. The 150-600 is too expensive for me, considering that I would probably use it rather rarely. So I'll probably stick with the Oly 100-400 for the time being.
Dear Emily, a comparison in image quality of the following 3 zooms would be helpful for many MFT fans: The Olympus 40-150/2.8 Pro vs. the new Leica 35-100/2.8 (Mkiii) vs the Leica 50-200. I think most users want to have one of these 3 zooms in their bag as a standard setup. I have seen your reviews about the Olympus 40-150 and the Leica 100-400, but I think most users want to decide between the other 3 mentenioned candidates for travel.
Another important point: I use the Lunix G9 (Mk1) and Olympus EM1.3. Unfortunately both, the new Lumix G9ii and the new OM System 1 became way bigger and require a different size of bag plus handholding for a whole day in a city is less comfortable due to a thicker grip. Maybe you can point to these downsides to the appropriate people. Because of these downsides, I will never upgrade to these bodies. I would be surprised if I would be the only one with this decision.
The OM5 is not an alternative because it does not have an AF joystick and the bottom plate breaks easily with the peak design shouldee strap system with heavier lenses.
I also would love to see this on a Panasonic body G9 or mkII. I’d like to have the lens but not if I also need to trade bodies to make best use of it. Maybe see you next time you’re in Seattle. Go Hawks.
I find it funny, as the Sigma 150-600 was the reason I switched from Canon to Olympus. The 75-300mm Olympus gave the same performance for less weight when compared to Full Frame. Now we have a 300-1200 equivalent. Complete madness. Or is it?
At the photography show at the NEC, there was a bunch of guys looking like they were getting their body building training in with some Full Frame Telephoto lenses.
When you consider they're spending tens of thousands to get less reach, it's even funnier.
I can even understand the £1000 uplift when the Full Frame equivalent would cost 5 to 10 times more.😂😂
You already had a 300-1200 "equivalent" on Canon: just crop. With high pixel count sensors and pixel-enhance software, not an issue any longer. What you USED to gain with Olympus/OM System were light, elegant lenses with plenty enough range. Now we get this overpriced repackaging of an old lens design.
@Vincenzo-bm1up I'm not up to speed on Canon sensors. As MFT has either 20mp or 25mm on a quarter of the sensor size of Full Frame are the latest Canon sensors 80mp to 100mp.
One question... Can one buy the Sigma FF Cannon EF version and put an EF to MFT adaptor? Would that be the same or similar as getting the native MFT version? 🤔
Another great review. Thank you. I am about to sell my Sigma 150-600 C because, for me at 73 years young, it is too heavy to hold: so this lens is a "No from me".
Thank you Emily for your video! I have recently bought this lens 150-600) and I have taken impresive pictures of the moon. I also want to take it out but I need a biger backpack. Please Emily, takung unto consideration that this lens has a hard frontsl lend cap, could you tell me in which position should I transport it (vertically or horizontally?)
I think this is the kind of lens that is very very specialist. Maybe ok for the "new market" that OM Systems is pursuing but at the same time, I think this will be a bit of a bane for MFT.
Just remember: you can do some rather severe crops in high megapixel full frame options also. I still think going big bodies only on their modern tech is a mistake for MFT.
t looks like you are enjoying your GM5. I want one, but they are so expensive. My GX85's shutter got stuck... 😔
MEGA four thirds!
For the price it's a must have, but the ultimate goal for me is Big White!
Emily, going on the overpriced lens theme, you could segue to a video dedicated to adapting EF to m43 with a smart adapter or speedbooster, 3rd party lens vs Canon…
Hi all is this lens compatible with a Panasonic g8m2 camera thanks
while I have great respect for Sigma, I really wish this lens had been modified more for m 4/3 to be either wider max aperture or smaller/lighter, which should have been possible since the 4/3 sensor is only using the middle of the image circle.
I would have that lens rather than the 150-400 because of the price. I can't justify the white if I'm not going to sell the work I make with it.
Hi dose this lens work with a Panasonic g9m2 camera ? And is there any compatibility issues ? Thanks all and great video Emily take care all
Hi! Yes it will work fine, the only thing you'll lose out on is dual stabilsiation, which is only compatible with the higher end Oly/OM cameras. But the stabilisation in the g9ii is more than good enough in my opinion 😊
Thanks for your reply Emily I will buy it then ? I am on your Facebook group so I will do a post when I am up and running take care and thanks again for the info
Too large for me. Big White is much more tempting for me, but the combination of its price and size makes me think I‘d never use it enough to make it worth owning. Loved your review of this lens and Big White!
One second you said Leica 200mm, my fav wildlife lens. Now I need a long zoom to accompany it….. don’t look at big white
Sold my em1 ii and 75-300 ii to buy a g9 ii and a pany/leica 300mm because it's the max wt weather sealed combo that i could handle and afford. Soon to be 74 w/4 spinal fusions and 6 stents no thank you. If I need more reach in body teleconverter for me.
I use the Sigma 150-600 DGDN on my Lumix S5II, I took it to Bempton Cliffs in horendous rain and it held up fine. Also worth noting that the Sigma app is useful for making the Sigma 150-600 customisable. Glad it's come to OM-System cameras but it is overpriced imo.
How does it compare to the Olympus 100-400/5-6.3?
Much better in all aspects except for weight and size.
OMG!!!
I’m sure someone needs that much focal length… I can’t understand the pricing though, I might have been tempted for half its actual price. I’m fine with my canon 100-500, if I want small birds I’ll find a way to get closer.
I have my own eyes. The white one is barely noticeably sharper at 400mm. OM-Sigma performance will drop by the 600mm but not by a factor similar to 1.5crop from the image taken with the big white. Yes. We are talking now less than 9Mpix! But even if you use built in 1.25x TC giving you 500mm f5.6 (not 5.3) you stil have to crop 1.2 times, which robbes you of over 6Mpix
Big white + mc14 = 700mm f6.3 and not much of a quality loss 👍👌
Imagine paying almost twice for a rebranded, too heavy, build for a bigger imagine cirkel lens...
Almost like paying extra for a nikon branded Tamron lens.
in my opinion the best value for money continues to be the olympus 100-400. Which has a better image quality than the leica 100-400 which becomes too soft especially at 400 mm. The olympus 150-400 as a telezoom remains the best of the best but in relation to the price it does not surpass the economical 100-400. This om-sigma 150-600 does not convince me for weight and size and price, olympus should have redesigned it from scratch and it could have been smaller than the olympus 150-400.
I am in the process of upgrading my Sony RX10IV for a better low light (whenever modern AI Denoise can do magic) and if possible a bit more reach, were did you find info about the 150-400 being that much better that the 100-400 ?
Edit: found a RUclips video about comparison, and the price of the 150-400, I did not realize that it was the "big white"... Way too much $$$ for a hobby 😢
Will it work with Lumix g9?
It will 😊
The most important thing is said by Emily from the future :)
Making a MFT a wildlife camera?
Anyone thinking this as a mistake?
I think the cameras are still as good as ever for other aspects than wildlife. But I can understand the will to "own" the reputation as "the best system for wildlife photography", the same way Lumix MFT tries to "own" the name as the best video system for up to 4-6K (underneath 8K) and OM as the best composite photo system, and the best macro system . I wish it is time to release a similar campaign by OMDS and Lumix to make MFT to concor the reputation as best "Street camera system".
It's time to boost by release of weatherproof OM-10 and a simpler non weatherproof OM-20 and an even more simpler, cheeper and OM-50, plus PEN-F2, leight PEN-L11, mini PEN-M3. And Lumix to make replacement for the GX9-series, the GX80-series, the GM1. Small, fun, creative, stylish, usable and above all, loved by street photographers from pro to amateur.
OM-S are impressive. But their investors aren't giving them the funds required for new lenses. Makes one wonder what's being invested in new bodies.
Tell me you tried the GM5 whilst the big lens was on… :)
Nice lens but too much for me. In fact the big while is too heavy for my back :-). Anyhow very great balance review,
i want that
Oooo, look at the size of that beasty
Another smashing review! I think we need to keep you on the Fire Islands as you are doing such awesome reviews! 🙂 As for this lens, it's not for me, but I love that OM System released it because it gives the MFT system a range - for practical purposes - which exceeds any other format on the market. I believe it also is an "MFT" lens because it's half the size of a Fools' Frame equivalent, so is true to the "small system" mantra. For those who think it is "overpriced" because it's "just a rebranded Sigma" try telling your Lexus dealer that those cars are just rebranded Toyotas. OMS saved a lot of development costs and put that money where it mattered with better lens coatings (and likely better glass), better *Sync* IS, better weather sealing, and better controls. It's a niche product, for sure, and by my estimation, partnering with Sigma made it feasible to release, whereas a clean sheet design wouldn't have made financial sense.
Small system except nobody is trying to make a 300-1200mm zoom, so there’s no comparison.
@@12symmo I guess I'm unclear about the point of your comment. I think it's just awesome that the MFT system has a native 1,200mm lens at a reasonable price. 🙂
I'd much rather use the 300pro with the TC or buy a used R7 and 800f11 and just go out in decent light than buy this tbh.