OM Systems 100-400mm v 150-400mm Lens Comparison
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 06. 2024
- In this video I compare the Olympus 100-400mm lens against the far more expensive 150-400mm. Is there a difference in optical quality? Well the good news for those who splashed out the cash for the more expensive lens yes there is. However, if you bought the cheaper version you will be pleased to know the difference in optical quality is not great and the 100-400 has the advantage of being much lighter and more compact. And that is why most people bought into MFT for lightness and smaller sizes. Maybe the 100-400mm is the better buy even if you can afford the 150-400mm.
Combined with the OM-1 camera body both are excellent lens to own.
Web gallery of test images
www.nature-photography.co.uk/...
My web site
Mike Lane wildlife photography www.nature-photography.co.uk/
Equipment I use or are mentioned in the videos I produce for CZcams. These are affiliate links and this channel will receive a small commission at no charge to you.
Olympus Cameras
OLYMPUS OM-D E-M1X Camera amzn.to/36ebMR7
OLYMPUS OM-D E-M1 MARK II Camera amzn.to/2GljWfO
Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III Camera amzn.to/33ZUpRa
Olympus Lenses
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm f/4 IS Pro Lens amzn.to/2S3PzNm
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f/2.8 IS Pro lens amzn.to/3jbt9px
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 7-14 mm F2.8 PRO Lens amzn.to/343ZeJv
Olympus M.Zuiko DIGITAL ED 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 amzn.to/3ifEvY6
Other Lenses
Panasonic LUMIX 100-400 mm LEICA Lens amzn.to/3mYb8gD
Tripods
Manfrotto 502 Fluid video Head with flat base amzn.to/30j6fFg
Hides
Photo hide Buteo Mark II One Person amzn.to/2S6H4RF
Bag throw over hide in leaf amzn.to/30hXYBh
Bag throw over hide in army dpm amzn.to/34b9Xlc
Bag throw over hide in waterproof army pattern amzn.to/2G6mcHS
Camera Bean Bags
Grippa Camera Bean Bag, Prefilled amzn.to/3jcvn7Y
Grippa Camera Bean Bag , Empty amzn.to/3mYQHjs
Camera Bean Bag, Prefilled amzn.to/2S9sJE9
Grappler Camera Bean Bag, Army Prefilled amzn.to/2S83UZe
Grappler Camera Bean Bag, Leaf Prefilled amzn.to/2Gfbw9y
Great video as always! No ads, no annoying music, no tiresome over-enthusiasm, no faff, just useful info and photos. Thanks!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Tiresome over-enthusiasm lol, I know what you're talking about 😅
@@MikeLaneFRPS now, that's HOW to make a lens video - and omitting the fluff & ads just makes me watch and re-watch it. You're right - youtube compression is a real problem. I shoot 4K video, run it through davinci resolve and upload to YT, but on playback it looks awful compared to the calibrated OLED monitor I used in post. if you have a chance, it would be great to compare the 300mm f4 with the 2.0x TC attached to the 450mm as I'm trying to decide between those two options.
Agreed with the completely objective unbiased approach Mr. Lane gives. His mission is simply stating the facts.
The other thing the Olympus ambassadors how many times do they have to remind us that they are Olympus ambassadors as if it is a big deal. It is a big deal to them because they are run-of-the-mill photographers and nothing special. with exception Andy Rouse Who is a great photographer. Glad I got that off my chest.
This is my first time finding you and watching one of your videos. You are to be complemented. I am very impressed by your entire presentation, approach, perspective and conclusions. I am grateful you performed this test and shared your efforts as you did. Thank you!
Nice video Mike and thanks for the comparisons, I’m sure many of us really appreciate your effort’s. I’ve just checked out the gallery of images and agree with your conclusions, that being said at 6x the cost there isn’t 6x an improvement in IQ. Just shows what a great buy the 1-400 actually is. As always a great watch and thanks for your time and effort’s.
Thanks for the detailed comparison. Very useful.
My pleasure!
Great work, Mike! I use the 300mm IS Pro without a tc and it is super sharp at f4.
Good to hear (& see) that the 100-400 hung in there…thanks for your work👍🏽
Thank you for your down to earth and realistic review. I just subscribed to this channel bevause this is the type of review you don't find out there anymore. Most of them are just commercials in a longer format. You made me feel better with my decision of getting the 100-400 one, since anyway I can't afford the other one lol.
Welcome!
Excellent video. Extremely helpful to someone (me) who just switched to the OM-1 and wondering how big of a difference there is between these lenses. Thanks for taking the time to make this!
Glad it was helpful!
Dear Mike, many thanks for this comparison.Kind Regards from Italy
My pleasure!
Thanks Mike! I have never seen a better lens review. I love that you used live birds and then put the photos on your web site or a blind test. I got 4/6 correct but am going for the smaller and less expensive lens. Thanks for saving me several thousand dollars.
Thanks.
wonderful and very informative like the extra gallery Thank you
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you very much for the review and for posting the pictures. There is no doubt that the 150-400 is sharper with more detail than the 100-400 but the immediate difference I noticed was the bokeh: very smooth and creamy with the 150-400 but more distracting with the 100-400. Less important with panning shots, perhaps, but I guess that bokeh could be the first giveaway in telling the difference between images from the two lenses.
This one just showed up in my recommended feed, so first ever video I`ve seen of yours. Good one, subscribed and looking forward to look closer into your stuff. :-) Been in the M43 universe for about 8 years, primarily Lumix brand.
Welcome aboard!
This is a helpful video. Thanks. And thanks for the web based photos.
Glad it was helpful!
Nice comparison vid Mike. I much prefer the wildlife videos that you do but I understand that some people like gear comparisons though. Keep up the good work.
I prefer the wildlife videos too, but equipment reviews get more views on average.
Love your channel Mike.
Thank you very much.
I’m very happy with my combo OM-1, Leica 100-400, Oly 40-150, Oly 300mm and TCs. I would love to have the 150-400mm but is hard for me to justify the buy of this lens. In the same way is difficult for me to justify change the Leica against the Olympus 100-400. And the Leica is very compact! I just came back from a trip in Brazil and I took wonderful pictures using the em1iii and the Leica 100-400. A lot of light and Birds!
Fantastic video! Thank you!
Glad you liked it!
Great vid as always, on the verge of finally upgrading from my first kit (nikon D3200) - thinking of coming to OM, I love macro and it seems a good choice - would also love to see some vids on macro!
I keep thinking of doing something about macro, but it is not my subject area.
Good comparrison Mike.
Thanks for this, Mike. I have had the 100-400 since it's launch and am very happy with it, 150-400 is out of my financial grasp! It performed well enough on my EM1 Mk2's but now on the OM1 it really comes into it's own. I trust the ISO and with the extra stops available there it compensates for the lens aperture, so much so that I use it a lot with the MC14 now.
Hey! Thanks for the video. I had the 100-400, and regret selling it off. The 150-400 is way out of my reach ($$$), and the weight is why I am selling my Nikon 200-500 f5.6, I know the 150-400 is 600 grams less, however at 1875, that is still too much that I want to carry connected to my EM1Xs. I have the 300 pro, and the 40-150 pro, and the 1.4x and 2x TCs, and that works very well for me. It mostly comes down to technique, and practice practice, and did I say practice. With practice, I am able to get very nice bird shots with my Nikon F4! and the 80-200 f2.8. But that weighs as much as me! I too take the videos online with a grain of salt. When I am thinking of an expensive lens or even a camera, I will rent it and give it a try. This has saved me a lot of money. Cheers!
As an ex Olympus user and now Sony user, I found your Video very interesting. I too still think on my Olympus gear when in the field especially when the weight of the 200-600 sets in on the shoulders, having today reached 65, my thinking is, maybe one day I will return to this format.
Would also like to say that I have just received via Amazon your Lens cover for the 200-600mm and it looks a super product. Now I have a lot more time on my hands I look forward to more of your video exploits around the world....Regards..
Thanks.
Many thanks for doing this video comparison Mike. I'm strongly thinking of swapping from Canon to the Olympus EM1X or OM1 and getting the 100mm-400mm lens for wildlife photography and this is really helpful.
Good idea, just take the OM-1, it's a quantum step better than all the other older bodies
@@joerghummerjohann4854 yes body is, but lens and images are too?
A good solid comparison Mike. I've both these lenses and tend to use the lightweight 100-400 when walking around and mobility is required and the 150-400 when in a hide or semi static position with a tripod. They complement each other nicely.
I have been doing the same recently.
Thanks very much for your video. I have been looking at both of these lenses, but sadly am not in a position where purchasing either one, regardless of price, is much of a possibility for me. I have been hoping the 100-400mm would be as comparable as you are demonstrating it to be. So your video is very encouraging to me! Thanks again!
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks for this video. Weight is a major issue for me, the OM-1 and 100-400mm is at my limit (last night I was out photographing rally cars and the Om-1/40-150 f2.8/flashgun was really very close to my limit) so you've confirmed my view that the150-400mm is not worth lusting after, thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Based on that side-by-side comparison of the dummy woodpecker images, I’d say the difference of the two lenses is largely due to micro contrast. The 150-400mm seems to have more “pop”. Great video, thanks for sharing!
Thanks.
Thank God for this review. Loved it. I own so many M4/3 lenes and I'm not ready yet to plop down $6000 for a new one. I do have the 100-400 and love it.
Thanks.
Interesting comparison Mike. Plenty of food for thought there. ( Nice to meet you at Walmsley on Thursday)
Thanks, you too!
Mike, I do like your videos, just recently found your channel - and you do it just to show to the people, not to earn money, not to get famous. Really good! About this subject my 10 cents: I do have the 100-400 for quite some time for the very simple reason that I do not want to afford the much higher price. I had it with me in pretty heavy conditions in Africa and I do use as well the 300PRO lens. Optical same finding as you: Fair quality, the PRO lens is better but not so much. Different from you I tend to use it without the tripod. And here is the big difference - I can use it the whole day, no chance doing this with the 150-400 (which a friend owns, and I used it a few times). The lock switch - also different from your experience - is always in use. I very recently bought the OM-1, before I only had a EM1 III - and I am eager to see the subject detection improving my hit rate with that lens. What I can say - same as you - the TK2 does not work so well with it (the TK1.4 does), but with the 300PRO the TK2 is perfect! The problem with the 300 is just that it is not half as versatile as the zoom lens. So I tend to use the 300PRO with or without TK on the tripod (using a laser aiming system to find the subject).
Great video. I have the 100-400 which I'm now using on the OM-1 I bought at the show last week, and I have to say I have been exceptionally pleased with it. It is the perfect compromise between optical quality and portability and brought me back into using Olympus after using Sony for a while.
I dare say the 150-400 is better, but I'm sure it's not £5000+ and nearly 1kg better!
Thanks for sharing
Nice one Mike I have the PL 100 x 400 and very happy
I still use it occasionally on windy days. Get less vibration with the smaller surface area.
I like the way you think, Sir. It is direct and sensible.
Thank you.
Very good video, Mike. I always look forward to your new video every Saturday. I have a couple of questions. If you do not have your tripod which lens would you carry? And for BIF which lens is better?
I use the 150-400 99% of the time for everything now. If I was going on a long walk uphill maybe the 300mm f4 would be favoured.
@@MikeLaneFRPS Thanks.
Great video! Maybe another one about your settings for om1 which you have mentioned?
I have done one on setting for the OM-1 and AF.
this is really helpful. i was craving the big lens but it is more than i can spend - nice to know the optical quality while better does not make the 100-400 look like junk. Yay!
Glad it was helpful!
Mike, I don't own an Olympus digital camera and at this stage of my life I doubt that I ever will. But I still find your reviews interesting and watch them all the way through. :)
Thanks.
Thanks Mike for this video! I own the cheaper one and can't afford to get another! I'm sure that I have full conviction in my 100-400!
Actually in a video (available only in Japanese), the chief engineer of OMDS mentioned about 100-400, it is not just cheap option of 150-400, but it let us guess how better 150-400 would be since 100-400 is itself good enough.
Hi Mike, thanks for that comparison! I had the chance to test the 150-400 and the 300Pro in a shop during an Olympus demonstration day. They let me test them with both the new OM-1 and my own G9, that I know very well. I liked a lot the 150-400, especially the built-in extender. But at home, watching the few shots I did I have to say the ones taken with the 300Pro seems to me slightly better. So I bought one second hand (the 300Pro). I'm impressed by the quality of that lens, even with the 1.4x extender and the autofocus is impressive and I don't miss the zoom. Way successful than the Varioelmar 100-400 in my experience. So I still can't find a good reason to pay 7500.- chf for the 150-400 lens for my use, other than extensive professional nature work or having more brass than sense.
I bought a used 300mm f/4 recently and it is brilliant. I’ve used it extensively (c.400 photos) with the 1.4 and the 2x converters at the Eastbourne Airshow. It’s perfectly good with either.
Nice one mate, I recently bought the new OM1 and you have answered most of my questions. As a hobbyist birder I see no need to spend up big on the pro lens. I'm in Australia and am likey to be only birding on sunny days. Liked and subscribed.
Glad it helped
Thanks Mike very interesting, I have the 100-400 and I'm quite happy with it. I have used the 150-400 and the wait defence for me is to much, I don't think I could carry the bigger lens all day far to heavy. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks.
I have had the Olympus 100-400 for over a year and I am very pleased with the purchase. I use it for a variety of situations, little bit of wildlife, a bit of sport, bit of tele-macro, some landscape, and some astrophotography. I use it on a Panasonic G9. My favorite feature is that it is small enough to fit in my backpack with a bunch of other lenses. The lens you have with you is 100 times better than any too-heavy-to-carry lens, no matter how good it is.
Totally agree
Nice one Mike. I think I'll be sticking to my Z100-400. May upgrade from my EM1 Mk3 to the OM1 (if my wife decides to buy it for me for xmas! Lol).
😁👍
I got rid of my Nikon gear because of the size. The Oympus I use -the 300mm F4 has revolutionised my photography. I haven't used my benbo and Gimball for over a few years now. I never use video, which you have to employ a tripod for.
Thanks
No problem
Very nice video!!!👍👍👍
Thanks
You're very welcome!🙂
Thanks Mike, excellent video! I have been shooting with the 100-400 since I got my OM-1 in March and have been very happy with it. But today I finally got to the top of the waiting list and after some deliberation decided to make the investment for the 150-400 too. I saw that one other commenter mentioned this, but for me a really big factor in the decision (perhaps the biggest) was the fact that you can get 50fps with autofocus from the 150-400 versus "only" 25fps on the 100-400 as it's not a Pro lens. I think this makes a really big difference for flight shots and other fast action sequences. I didn't catch that in the video so maybe it was accidentally edited out as you said below, but thought it was worth highlighting.
I've come to the top of the list today and am now deliberating - was expecting it to be next January!! Are you pleased with your purchase? I already own the 300mm f/4. It's the f/4.5 with the versatility of a zoom plus the IQ that is attracting me.
Ideal 👏👏👏
Thanks Mike. As nice as the Pro lens may be I'm pleased that I was able to include the 100-400 f5-6.3 IS lens to my lot (two years ago) as there was no way I could justify spending the amount required for the Pro lens, however I am also pleased with what Topaz can do for my images from a 'lower budget' lens. 🙂I am also thankful I was able to add the OM-1 recently (at a good discount) which makes bird photography somewhat easier too.
Good to hear.
Topaz is magic!
I purchased the 100-400 ($1,500 US) a few days ago based on your evaluation. I have compared the stills and video captured with this lens to the Olympus 300 mm f4 ($3,000 US) prime lens without using the teleconverters. Your evaluation is correct. When both lenses are used on the OM-1 body the captured images are excellent and there is very little difference between the two lens although the edge goes to the 300 mm prime lens as expected.
Thank for your excellent advice and beautiful bird pictures. I need to start hanging out in blinds.
Good to hear.
Excellent.
Many thanks!
Hey Mike, great Video. Where would you put the 300F4 Pro in a ranking of the 3 lenses?
I have not done side by side tests of the same image, but I would not expect to see a difference between the 300mm and 150-400mm. Except the 300mm would be better with extenders, especially the 2x.
I’ve had the same problem with the 2 times stabiliser. Wouldn’t it be lovely if the software could highlight best focus in a batch! Many thx
Hi Mike.. Great video. Do you know if the in-built teleconverter only works of you have the most recent firmware on the camera body?
The built in converter is a mechanical feature. No electronics involved so firmware make no differenece.
Been waiting for this comparison for quite a while and you did a great job with it. It appears the biggest difference is cost of the lenses. If you still have your G9 I would really like to see how that big lens functions on the Lumix.
I'll second that first comment. Paused the video to look at the sample images and I kept saying to myself, 'yes but is it worth the extra 5k?'. A tiny sharpen tickle in post perhaps.
I have replaced the G with a GH6 but only for video. Hardly taken a stills image with the GH6. The lens performs fine with video.
So the difference between the 2 lenses is slight. The Panasonic 100-400mm lens is generally believed to be a bit sharper than the Oly 100-400 mm. So maybe there is no difference between the sharpness of the Panasonic 100-400 and the big white Oly lens!!
Brilliant and as usual and a very sensible video.
Hi Mike, enjoyed the video. The telling thing for me, after reading all the comments from other viewers, is that you use the 150-400 lens 99% of the time. One other thing-where did you get the lens covering?
www.outdoorphotographygear.co.uk for the lens cover.
Many thanks for the interesting comparison. I looked into the pictures - and for me the difference is rather small - and definitely much smaller than the financial difference. As the 150-400 is far out of my budget my conclusion is, that the 100-400 will be more than sufficient for me. Currently I use the 75-300, and I think here the 100-400 can be a good improvement.
I use the 100-400mm when walking a long distance. Half the weight and hard to see a difference in the pictures.
Great video for the difference between the two lenses. I’m fortunate enough to be in the position of owning all three of them, the 300 f4 Pro, the 100-400 f5-6.3 and my recent acquired 150-400 f4.5 Pro. I think the 300 f4 pro does do well with the TC 2.0 but I agree that the 100-400 does not do too well even with the TC1.4, it needs to be the right condition for it to be ok such as no heat haze and the air quality to be reasonable good for it to work. The 150-400 f4.5 Pro I have not tried with either TC but by itself the thing is image quality is no par with the 300 f4 but with such a high price, I do expect it to perform a bit more.
That is not what the video says. He makes it clear that the difference between the 2 zooms is slight. He does NOT say that the 100-400 "does not do too well". And surely heat haze will affect all lenses, no matter how much they cost or how complex the optics are.
Hey Mike I love your channel. Id love your advice and opinions on a couple of things. What is your opinion on the Olympus 100-400 vs the sony 200-600, both being non pro grade lenses which one offers better optics and stabilisation.
If you had to choose between the om1 and something from sony like a7r4-5 full frame as a multi purpose camera, birds, planes and landscapes what would you choose :)
I always find the Olympus 150-400 is just to expensive 🫰 and I feel I could probably purchase a better overall set up. Thanks for your time 😊
Hi, I did own a Sony A1, but know nothing of other Sony cameras. I used it with the 200-600mm which I was very happy with. I did a series of YT films comparing the OM-1 and 150-400mm to the Sony A1 and 200-600mm. There was nothing in it. Very close call.
I never give much thought to image quality. I would probably be happy with any of them. It is features I look at. It has to be a zoom, no more prime lenses. Procapture is vital. Flickerless viewfinder (they all have it now). FPS the faster the better.
Great video Mike is the 150-400 sharper than the IS pro 300 f4 ?
I have not done side by side tests of the same subject, but would expect them to be equally good. The 300mm f4 will be better with extenders though.
Very good review no crap just straight to the point i have the om1x and the olympus 100 to 400 with both tcs and are very pleased with it now the olympus 150 to 600 is out considering that and a upgrade to the olympus om1 waiting for prices to settle the olympus 150 to 400 pro is out of my price range its a decent car money lol
I am in no hurry to buy the OM1 mk2. Not an exciting spec.
Interesting video. Ive been shooting video more and more, mainly with my oly 300mm F4, teleconvertors and a GH6. At times I think i could use a zoom to easily get duffernt framing of the subject. Based on your video the 100-400mm would probably be sufficient for this? In sunny conditions I'm often shooting at f8 to keep the exposure down anyway. Have you shot much video with both these lenses?
Lots of video with the 150-400. None with the 100-400. I find it harder to judge quality with video, but would expect the difference to be as minimal as with stills.
@@MikeLaneFRPS thanks :)
Great video Mike and just what I wanted to hear as I can't afford the 150-400. One question. Do features such as pro capture work on 100-400 mm?
Yes it works, but the maximum fps rate is lower with this lens. From memory I think it is 25 fps maximum.
@@MikeLaneFRPS Many thanks Mike
Hi Mike, I’m going back through some of your older videos as they are so good for information. I’m currently wondering if the 100-400 is better in quality and focus tracking than the 300/f4 + 1.4 extender?.
The 300mm by itself would be better than the 100-400mm, but the difference is minor. Add a 1.4x and they would be much the same. As I try to explain in several of my YT films it is so diffciult to compare AF performance on flying birds. I can't tell you the answer, but would expect the 300mm by itself to perform best.
Mike do you always shot jpeg ? great videos by the way
I normally shoot Raw. If I mention jpeg in this film it would be for test pictures that I would not be keeping and do not need to process.
Very helpful video. thank you. There is a question below from a commentator asking whether you should turn the image stabilisation off on the camera and just leave it on on the lens or whether you can use both even though they are not in synch. As you say you do not use synch all that much you might not have an opinion but from my experience with synch on the 100 - 400 it is essential to turn off body synch and just use the lens. when I have not done so my image has had a weird fuzzy effect. I think it makes a crucial difference. do you have a view?
Some people say they conflict with each other. During my testing I had body and lens IS on and had no issues. I do not know what happens if there is a conflict between the two, but would expect some jarring, sudden movement in the viewfinder. I am not using the 100-400 day to day as I have the 150-400mm, but I will try and use it more and move it around a bit to see if I can create an issue.
That concrete table makes me nervous. ... great review btw.
It's not concrete, it's an old patina wood bench. No need to get nervous.
Fantastic video.
Confirms rationalizing my buying decisions - after the fact. I went with the 100-400mm to cover the versatility of having that zoom range - realizing I am sacrificing in the speed and sharpness department to a minor extend. I will never be able to justify the big white lens, but I did find a used, mint 300mm f4 at 2/3 the current retail price. When I need more detail, more speed and better IS, I will go with the 300mm, when I have great light or need the flexibility of the zoom, I am covered.
You mentioned not being satisfied with the MC20 on the 150-400. Several days ago I tried the MC20 on my 150-400 and after a few sessions I felt the same as you..not real good about it. After a few bird sessions of BIF and perched I decided to try one last thing...I upped my shutter speeds. ie.. for BIF I was using 1/2500, which was fine for the lens with no attached TC, and I was getting very little (less than 1%) usable images. At 1/4000 I am getting a much much better keeper rate enough to happily warrant more practise and testing.
Hi Mike, thanks for your help and expertise.
I don't have the long Olympus lenses - the 40-150 f2.8 is my longest Olympus. I agonized over buying the 100-400, but in the end plumped for the Panasonic / Leica 200 f2.8 - bought used without the extender. I find this to be excellent and very "cropable", easily cropping to the equivalent of 300mm and often to 400mm, even though it reduces the mpixels.
Even so I would like the longer reach of the long Oly lenses. I did try the two extenders on the 40-150, but soon sold them, putting the money towards buying the 200 2.8, as I was very disappointed with the extender results - AF speed and image quality being a problem for me. I shoot motor sport as my main photographic tasks and birds optionally when there are no motorcycle or cars to shoot! Although a little short on reach, the 2.8 comes into its own in poor light.
All I can tell you, you can get sharper image with Leica/2.8 and cropping than with Oly 100-400. I wanted the buy that lens myself but I returned it after a week. For that price the image quality isn't there. Unlike cropping in, the issue I have with Leica is I can't zoom back. Despite the weight, I am decided to get Sigma 60-600 and use it through a reduction on my G9. But honestly I wouldn't invest in long telephoto M43 lens. They are overpriced fot the image "quality" and being to slow as well. As much as I love M43 system in general, all of my recent lens were for FF and I'm using then with a reduction because I can get much better built and image quality for often less money. Which kinda is hilarious if you consider everything is much smaller and cheaper when building those lens. Even the dual IS isn't dealbreaker for me anymore. But even when (not if sadly anymore) I switch back to FF, I will keep my G9 only because of that Leica 200/2.8 because it truly is a beast. 🙂
@@michalsiegel6717 Thanks Michal - Something I hadn't thought of trying, Although I gave up FF because of the weight.
This is a very helpful review, and very reassuring to those who are using the 100-400mm. But what about the middle ground? Have you been able to compare the 150-400 PRO lens with the 300mmF$ IS PRO, with and without the x1.4 TC? Thanks for any insights you can share.
I have not done side by side tests, but they would be hard to tell apart. External extenders reduce the quality on both.
Hello Mike
As always, I've enjoyed another video of yours
I now do have a question though!
I have the 100-400 , and have taken some great photos with it , and some not so great ( probably more a bit above average, compared with others I've seen) but I am very happy with it and the results!
I am thinking about the new 150-600 , is it something you've had any experience with , and if so , what are your opinions of it please? ( You may have reviewed it, but I've not seen anything come up ! )
My other option is , and although a lot of money, is the 150-400 pro !
I know I'm going to get cracking results with it , but how would it compare with the 100-600 ?
Thanks Mike 👍🏻
Sorry not something I have tried and not llikely to. It seems to get very good reviews.
@@MikeLaneFRPS
Thanks Mike
Yes it does
I'm in two minds between the them both still
Very nice presentation and reasoning. While I admire the engineering behind the 150-400mm lens I value the portability and versatility of my Lumix/Leica 100-400. I'm hopeful there will be a Mark 2 version of the G9 that employs some of the AF advances Lumix has engineered into its latest full frame S5 camera.
Thanks for watching!
Actually m4/3 lenses still have weight advantages with other system's lenses. For comparison canon 800mm 5.6 L lens is 4.5 kg and the by size there is a still huge difference. Thank you for your very informative and nice review.
Thanks for sharing
Mike, have you tried the 300mm f/4 pro? I see a lot of photos online take with this one, with or without the 1.4 extender. People seem to get very sharp results - better than the 150-400?? The advantage would be weight and half a stop.
I’m also thinking about getting the 40-150 2.8 pro because it would complement my current setup.
FYI, I have the 150-400 with my OM1. I moved from Nikon to this combo about two months ago for birds/wildlife, while keeping my FF Nikon gear for other stuff - landscapes, astro. I’m still learning the features of the OM1 but so far …… wow!
The 300mm was the only choice until recently. I still have mine. An excellent lens. You can see a reduction in quality with thex1.4 on.
Hi Mike. With the test shots did you shoot both lenses wide open or stop the 150-400 down to match the 100-400? If both are wide open then the wider aperture of the 150-400 is likely to give a cleaner image with better subject separation which I suspect would help to give the images more pop in the test
Long time back now, but I think both would be wide open. I would not expect to see any difference.
I think the constant aperture of the 150-400 is useful to video because the exposure remains the same as you zoom. But for someone who moves a lot the 100-400 is obviously preferred. It is so nice to have both
I can't zoom because I get vibration as I turn the lens. Needs an electronic zoom.
@@MikeLaneFRPS You are right. I forgot this was a big lens
This was very interesting to me and I'm in no way able to justify even for a tiny bit the 150-400. If anything, I was pondering at the thought of either getting the entry level 75-300 vs the 100-400 as I am an extreme beginner amateur (shot mainly underwater macro for years and now trying to move top side for other critters in the air this time). You seem to come to the conclusion that the 100-400 is in itself a great value if it can stand properly next to the Pro behemoth and that's good enough for me :)
The small difference in image quality would not bother me. But I would miss the built in 1.25 extender
I went with the bigger lens. I removed the cannon from my Abrams tank and mounted the lens in its place. It fits perfectly.
Mike, what about ND filters for video? Do you use them?
No I have never used then.
Hi Mike, great video and comparison. You mention in the video that the 100-400 has 3 stops of stabilisation, presumably one can use the in camera stabilisation instead of lens stabilisation. Am I correct in saying the in body stabilisation is 7 stops?
The body has 7 stops IS.
@@MikeLaneFRPS Hi Mike, many thanks for your prompt reply. Great detailed videos. I’m trying to decide which new camera to buy having just sold my Sony A9 and 200-600mm. The combination was getting too heavy for me to hand hold. I’ve got it down to a choice of three options. Fuji X-H2s with 150-600 mm with 1.4x tele, LUMIX G9 M2 with new 100-400 M2 and 1.4x tele or OM1 with 100-400 (not 150-400) + 40-150mm pro + 1.4x tele. Will visit a camera shop next week to try them hopefully that will help me decide which one to go for. Lighter weight, Excellent CAF, Good IBIS are what I’m looking for in the new kit - All the CZcams videos I’ve watched seem to make them all closely matched.
I have had the Lumix G9 Mk2 for a week and so far for birds in flight stills feel the OM-1 is better. For video AF the G9 MK2 is fantastic. Leaves the OM-1 a very poor second.
M@@tonyb736
@@MikeLaneFRPS Many thanks for your informative response. I wonder if they will be able to improve the AF with firmware updates. Guessing they may be able to as it’s only just coke out. Though it may be the best it can do as it doesn’t have a stacked sensor. Have you had any experience with the Fuji X-H2s and the Fuji 150-600mm?
None at all.
@@tonyb736
i would say same is true of the canon 100-400 ef II vs rf 100-500 very small differences
Mike great video using the 100-400mm on a tripod do you turn off IBS on the OM 1 and lens or just leave it on ??? thanks Jack
I always leave it on. Hold the shutter button down to keep IS active and with your left hand switch IS on and off on the lens.
In the viewfinder you will see IS working when on. There is always enough vibration in a long lens to give it work to do, no matter how solid and heavy the tripod.
@@MikeLaneFRPS thanks Mike
Reat comparison video between these two lenses. I do own both and use the 150-400/4.5 most of the time. Still, it makes me think I should use the 100-400/4.0-6.3 lens more.
HI Mike thanks for showing us the real world differences between both lens. You as a Professional Photographer would you be happy to submit your work captured from the 100 to 400 ? If so then I think, non professionals can say " if it's good enough for Mike then who are we to argue? " Thank you Mike as always I enjoyed the video.
Thanks.
Olympus 100-400 is closely based on Sigma 100-400 lens (and I mean CLOSELY - Sigma licensed its formula to Olympus and it is manufactured in Sigmas factory in Japan) which was optically astonishing performer on a FF sensor. But still I am surprised how well it performs on m43.
I would think the biggest advantage of the 150-400 would be if you were out in the woods shooting owls early in the morning. Other than that, can't be sure I'd drop the cash on any super telephoto beyond $2000. Happy to hear I have great choices between the 100-400, 300 f4, and the Pannu 200 2.8.
What about 300 mm f4 pro with x2.0 TC vs 150-400 with x1.4 TC? Which would be sharper? That would be 1200 mm f8 vs 1400 mm f8.0
Great video! I wish all 'professional' reviews were of this quality. I accudentally stumbled on this video and as a Canon user i hope you make a comparison between R6/R7 with 100-500 and OM-1 with any of their 3 telephoto lenses, if you haven't done so yet. Which i am about to check.
Did you find any conclusion? I saw everyone ditching canon for om1 but I can't even find decent photos made on om1
It's really hard, once you get used to the build and feel of good kit, along with those little features that just seem sensible or right, to take a step back. And it's the details, tolerances and niceties that push the price through the roof. I have two MFT lenses... and they don't get much use. What i still use every day (adapted) are the massive and fast ZD SHQ lenses - the f/2 and 2.8 zooms and primes (the 300 and the 90-250 weigh 3.6kg each). But i shoot landscape, environmental and industrial, often in low light - wildlife is really only opportunistic stuff for me. That 150-4/500 reminds me a lot of those ZDs in terms of its apparent build quality and design. That alone makes me covet it in a minor way, despite it being comparatively slow. The price is an obstacle too, but if i take the big ZDs as a baseline... the 300 f/2.8 was US8k on release in 2003, and the 90-250 f/2.8 was over six - i have no idea what that is in today's money - then it almost seems reasonable for what it apparently is. And with all the versatility (reach and MFD) at only 1.8kg, it'd make a great EDC lens. Really appreciate the time and effort you put into the video. Cheers and all the very best - from NZ.
Thank you
Thanks for the comparison. Very interesting if one is into M4/3.
Well, I'm not, and I'm not sure I'll ever be. When my current Canon gear stops working (may it never happen!), I might look at Olympus and OM systems.
But so far with my very limited budget I find it very difficult to find good arguments not just to continue using what I've got.
100-400 is the equivalent of 200-800. My Sigma is the equivalent of 240-960 on my Canon 90D APSC DSLR. So as far as reach goes, I'm covered. Extenders - even 1.4X - don't work too well, however, but that's not a real problem; 960mm ought to be enough. And I'm sure there are sharper lenses than my 150-600, but it's certainly sharp enough. I also assume many cameras have better autofocus, but I get a very acceptable keeper rate with both my 90D and my 70D.
I am still far from ready to give up my optical viewfinders.
I'm in the same camp. The 150-600 with an APSC DSLR seems to be the best allround combination if you're fine with almost 3kg of gear. Was debating on buying an R7, but it's sadly not compatible with the 150-600. I absolutely prefer optical viewfinders, but the AF improvements in mirrorless cameras are quite intriguing.
The recent viewfinder improvement are huge with mirrorless. I am no longer aware it is not optical with the OM-1 and the Sony A1.
Nice run down! How would you compare them both to the 300 mm f/4?
That’s my question too. It’s hard to imagine anything sharper than the 300mmf4, which is also a pro lens.
The 150-400 is faster for the reach. With the 1.25, it's a 500mm F5.6. Comparatively, the 300mm with the MC-14 is also F5.6, but only at 420mm. So depth of field is shallower on the 150-400 when using at max zoom. A bit faster.
Versatility is a big thing. I often use my 300mm F4 without TC, as well as with MC-20. It's inconvenient to change all the time in the field. With the 150-400, it's much more versatile and convenient. Image quality is probably around the same. You're paying for the convenience of not needing to remove and install teleconverters.
@@wildcat1065 Last year i tested the 100-400 vs 300/4 for 3 months and nearly daily use (for a digital magazine). Mainly birds, butterflies and mammals. I even tested in video mode but mainly stills. I often used two cameras (emx and em1 MKII). about 10 000 images for each lens. I must say there´s a big big difference acording to AF speed, AF accuracy and optical resolution. I noticed the most difference when photographing hairy insects. With the 100-400 i nearly never got a sharp image so that the fine structures like the hairy "fur" on a bumblebee, a butterfly or a mot was sharp and crispy enough. Sometimes it seemed that some images were nearly there. My conlusion is that the AF accuracy is much lower in the zoom, not only the optical resolution.
@@tonysvensson8314 I have same findings. I tested 100-400 with MC-14 vs 300mm F4 with MC-20. 1120mm vs 1200mm. The prime was noticeably sharper, despite using the bigger TC. Also got more reach. MC-20 with the 100-400 is unusable.
I have not done side by side shots of the same subject, but would not expect a difference between the 300mm and 150-400mm. But with the 300mm you would get better results with extenders.
Mike I think the cheaper/smaller lens is limited to 25fps in the SH2 mode? Malcolm
Yes that's right. If I did not say that in the video it must have got left out in the edit.
Hi Mike! It is me again... :D I have another question. I know you have big experience with Olympus telephoto lenses and MC-14 MC-20 converters. How would you compare following setups for wildlife in terms of IQ when focused correctly, AF performance and IS performance:
1) 300mm f4 PRO + MC-14 vs 100-400mm f5-6.3 @400mm
2) 300mm f4 PRO + MC-20 vs 100-400mm f5-6.3 @400mm + MC14
They are roughly comparable focal lengths with roughly comparable max apetures (prime being tad better in both those terms) at very different price points and flexibility levels. But how about the real life performance? Let's assume that I would mainly use it handheld or on a monopod at walk-about shooting.
I can't remember ever putting an extender on the 100-400mm. I have never done side by side tests of any of those combinations. I doubt there would be much difference between option 1.
Good video. The 100-400mm lens weighs 1120 g.
You are right about both of lens but is difference class and price is.I own both of them plus 300f4 but I sold 100-400 for some of my friend because never touch after I have 150-400
What about 300 mm f4 pro with x2.0 TC vs 150-400 with x1.4 TC?
I SOLD 100-400 WHEN I BUY 150-400 JUST ABOUT THE SAME RANGE
I wish they produce a 100-400 5.6 with sync IS way less expensive than the 150-400 4.5
Or a 200-600 like the sony.
I use the Olympus 100-400mm on the OM-1 but have been unable to get a clear answer on one question. If image stabilization is turned on in the camera, should I turn image stabilization on in the lens as well, or turn it off? I get conflicting opinions on this.
Thanks,
Dave
Some people say they conflict with each other. During my testing I had body and lens IS on and had no issues. I do not know what happens if there is a conflict between the two, but would expect some jarring, sudden movement in the viewfinder. I am not using the 100-400 day to day as I have the 150-400mm, but I will try and use it more and move it around a bit to see if I can create an issue.
I have the same issue. It’s especially noticeable there are clashing problems when using video. I actually found turning in body off and leaving lens on got me the best result but I haven’t been able to reproduce that since :/
The switch on the100-400 lens has priority over the camera IS . If the lens OIS is switched ON then it controls image stabilisation not the camera.
I can't really afford the 100-400mm but I was looking at a secondhand 75-300mm ii lens not sure how good it is for wildlife?
Not a lens I have owned.