Olympus 100-400mm f5.0-6.3 - [My FIRST Impression]

[@photohounds]

Looks like a great compromise for those of us that probably won't have the money or space for big bertha when she comes out.

[@fleetingdays]

Peter, thank you for sharing this insight! It was because of you that we moved away from Canon. We love all of our recently acquired Olympus gear! We love Olympus workspace! It is wonderful that Olympus is putting out a new lens! We are a disabled veteran and enjoy photography! Absolutely, a subscriber to your KZbin channel! Thank you!

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thank you.

[@paulathomas4944]

Hi Peter, Olympus have produced a winner here. Since you published your review I've seen the reviews by a number of pro wildlife photographers and they've been overwhelmingly positive. The images David Tippling has released are very good even when using the teleconverters. He also photographed a Swallow flying straight towards him so I'd say that the AF speed is fine even if is a bit slower that the 300/f4. You usually want a high shutter speed for bird photography (ideally 1/1000th or faster) so 3 stops of IS is fine. Add in Olympus build quality and weather sealing and you've got a great lens which I'm sure will bring a lot more wildlife photographers to the system. ATB Paula

[@BlueRusso]

I figure the 150-400 mm lens will be beyond my budget; the 300 f/4 is by about a $500 margin the most expensive piece of Olympus equipment I own, and it gets used for everything from insects on flowers to the moon. The fixed focal length is limiting. I will likely continue to use the 40-150 mm PRO with the 2.0 teleconverter for shooting surfers at the local beach. I'd like greater reach, but this combination gives very good autofocus. and good image stabilization in full sun. The 100-400 may prove workable for surfers, may make a good travel lens (with the 12-100) and can replace the 75-300, which up to 210 mm and maybe farther can give very sharp images. So I went ahead and ordered it.

[@aililaoshi]

I just ordered this lens...thanks, Peter!

[@ForsgardPeter]

Great to hear!

[@mkoschara]

Thanks for taking the time and reviewing this lens.

[@jonathanashton4758]

As expected every review of the lens has been favourable, it would appear to be good value for money. I would not consider buying this lens until I have seen the 150-400 Pro lens review, the latter will be better for a number of reasons, but the question is how much better and how much more expensive. Bearing in mind I have the 40-150, 300mm and MC14, MC20 the 100-400 would make for a more flexible option and the need for two bodies less likely. I feel this 100-400 obviously gives good results - but how good compared to the 300 f4 with/without TC? I am not immediately tempted.

[@rhiwderinraytube]

unfortunately too late in coming for me - I bought the Leica version !! Great lens!

[@kidlatazul]

Thank you for the review, I've been anticipating this lens for some time, but wanted to hear from experts like you before investing in it. The main reason I bought an EM-1 mark II last year was for travel. (It turned out to be good for much more than that!) There's a growing list of places to go and things to see on my bucket list, and this lens fills the void in my bag for a lens that will allow me to get good images of wildlife that I either can't or don't want to get close to. For an enthusiast like me who takes pictures as a hobby, this lens checks nearly all the boxes (features, price, weatherproofing, size and weight, focal range), with the possible exception of low-light capability, which will be a challenge for any long lens. All in all it's just what I need; I will be buying one once they're available to the public. (Just as an aside: the first serious camera I owned was a Nikon 1 J5. (Please, no laughter! It was all I could afford at the time, and did much more than the pocket cameras I'd been using.) I took that camera, and its 75-300 mm lens, on a bucket-list trip to Kenya in 2015. Admittedly, the Nikon 1 had shortcomings. But that lens fully extended is the full-frame equivalent of 830 mm, yet easily fits in a sling bag. I got some memorable shots with that camera and lens, shots that I still treasure today. In a roundabout way, it also convinced me that Olympus was the right fit for me: the smaller sensor didn't necessarily mean diminished image quality, but did mean that traveling with it would be substantially easier than with a full-frame camera. I'm hoping some day to go back to east Africa, with my EM-1 II and this lens, to get the shots that I missed the first time around.)

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thanks for sharing.

[@jeroen2082]

I never owned one but liked the idea of Nikon 1 a lot. Such a shame Nikon pulled the plug. It could be a great system but was stabbed down by the techgeeks who only care about sensor size to brag about.

[@AndrewSowerby]

@@jeroen2082 I agree - it could have been great. I kept trying out the Nikon 1 V2 whenever I got the chance, but something just didn't feel right and I was put off by the price. There was nothing wrong with the image quality in decent light though. Shame they gave up on it.

[@TheAccountingProfessor]

This lens was not even on my radar screen because I did not expect the weather sealing, and I was waiting for the 150-400 Pro which was probably going to be too expensive for me. This 100-400 is very attractive and is now very high on my list. I also kept considering the 300 Pro, but this new lens throws the 300 out of contention. Thanks for the great review, Peter.

[@Lordvader330]

This lens looks like a keeper. I do a ton of wildlife photography. I would love to give it a try.

[@DriveLongRoad]

Impressive. From now you need only 2 lenses for the live. The 12-200 oly and this new small big thing. 😎

[@hanmikkers8340]

One major advantage compared with the pana leica 100-400 is the option to use the mc 14/20 extender.

[@ForsgardPeter]

That is true.

[@koolkutz7]

Thanks for your overall impressions Peter. It looks like a tidy lens especially for wildlife. I can't wait to see that new 150-400mm F4.5 lens though; that will be awesome!

[@SivakumarReddyPraSid]

Appreciate your review Peter. Looks like a good lens for a good price. I just bought the 300 mm on second hand. While it's tempting to buy the new one, I might put the 300mm a good use first 😊, in the current situation in Australia, I might have to wait a bit to move around to go take some great shot of wild life anyways.

[@buddha01meister]

To me, it is the best telelens I ever bought. Being my main subject is aviation photography, it was a long wait, but it was worth the wait. Great lens for your buck. bought it in Netherlands when it became available in September 2020 and received it half October 2020. So far, I find it fast enough on AF, easy to handle, IS and IBIS on works quite well. actually better then I expected.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thanks for sharing!

[@anthonygarbo8114]

I have pre ordered the lens. It has been on my list for sometime. We have interesting wild life here in Arizona and I look forward to the adventure . . . great review Peter.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Sounds really cool. This lens is most likely very good for wildlife!

[@rudolfabelin383]

Wow! I didn't expect this Peter. What a lens per dollar!!!! 200-800mm in FF. Saw Gordon's review of this earlier and it is really good. I can consider buying this one for my GH5!!

[@skysurfer5cva]

Thanks for your impressions, Peter. This lens has been on my list since it was announced and your review and a few others confirm my intention to buy it. The 100-400 plus my 40-150 f/2.8 will make the perfect kit for the zoo, the local wildlife refuges, and a few places I go to along the central California coast where lots of bids congregate. I am not skilled with fast birds in flight, but I do OK with slow birds in flight and sitting birds. :-) However, I just ordered an E-M1iii (should be here tomorrow), so the 100-400 will have to wait. My toy fund has been growing more slowly during lockdown. :-(

[@ulrichsamosii6058]

I just got this lens on loan to test looking forward to seeing what it will do in this South Mississippi (USA) humid weather . Will let you know.

[@srfbum123]

Great review....Love the focus distance limiting switch on the lens.

[@Smaug1]

'know what might be a fun comparison? Adapted vs. native @ 300 mm. I suspect this native lens would blow away the adapted lens, but a lot of us who are trying not to spend too much will at least start with an adapted lens. I found an OM 300/4.5 from Japan for $150, which is approximately 10% of the cost of this lens. For those of us who only occasionally need super-telephoto, that is still a good option.

[@ForsgardPeter]

That is a good idea. Lets see what I can do about that.

[@JimRobertson]

Good review Peter. I currently have the 40 to 150mm and the MC20 and very pleased with it. I am intrigued by this lens, but waiting for the 150 to 400 pro before I decide. The lack of a sync'ed stabilization is disappointing, but not too surprised given the lens not being a pro lens, plus the pricing. The 150 to 400 is going to be heavy and expensive, but for birds in flight it might be the only real option if I want a longer zoom lens. I noticed you had some birds in flight in your sample images, but I also heard you mentioning the fewer keepers than with the 300mm and the slower AF. Both are not unexpected, but I want to know the real difference before taking the plunge. The 300mm is a VERY attractive lens, but I prefer the flexibility of a zoom assuming good quality. Thanks for the review!!

[@TheMarenches]

Fully agree with you, I'll also take a decision only after I've seen the 150-400, especially the pricing (I have no doubts about the quality of the future "toy"!)

[@Kopetefish]

Great photos! Thanks for the impressions

[@ForsgardPeter]

Glad you like them!

[@TrondAndreTmtebakken]

since the 75 to 300 is not weather sealed, this is a lense that I will consider.

[@MrHasherd]

Thanks Peter for yet another down to earth video. I use the Panasonic-Leica 100-400 mm lens for my bird photos and I can’t see why I should switch to this new one from Olympus. Cheers.

[@ForsgardPeter]

If you have the Panasonic version most likely your are all set!

[@jcurtis4082]

Interesting lens. Thank you for the review Peter.

[@thechriswrobelexperience1809]

Great video Peter! Great photos too, looks like a great upgrade from the 14 to 150 ii, I think I'll wait for the 150 to 400 pro later this year or early next year. Keep up the great content

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thanks.

[@geoffclinton8575]

What I like with the Olympus 100-400 is the potential to use the IS on the lens with IBIS in camera any help you can get using a long lens is always welcome. Also the ability to use the 1.4 and 2 times extenders is a great feature. Will try the lens in a few weeks time and do a direct comparison against the Panasonic 100-400. I bought the Panasonic 100-400 about 4 years ago, it was not the sharpest lens. But the optics failed and locked up. It was under warranty and when it was returned it was a different lens, much sharper focus.

[@evgenipoptoshev4112]

Thanks for the video! Looks like an interesting lens, much more practical than Canon RF 800/f11 for instance.

[@RogerBenno]

Looks like a good price for such a lens. Weather sealed and good optics? Sounds very good for the price. I don't shoot wildlife so probably won't buy this. However there are others that do, and this lens definitely fills a place in the product lineup. Hopefully Olympus will get behind this and market it well so they can showcase to the world their technology.

[@AndrewSowerby]

I use telezooms for most things, not only wildlife. They're so versatile! Flowers, insects, detail shots, portraits, landscapes - they're good for all of them. On my Pentax system, my 55-300 is one of the most used, and I often shot beyond 135mm (so equivalent to 100mm on this lens on MFT). I wish there was a 40-250mm lens for MFT, because the 40-150 and 75-300 just miss the mark a little bit for me. Just a personal preference, of course, and I'm sure I could get plenty of use of this lens. The image quality, most importantly of all, is there.

[@paulharrison7761]

Thanks for the video Peter. I'll probably be buying later this year or early next. From what I've seen/read its a winner. I invested in an EM1x before the sale to JIP was announced but see no reason to jump to another system at the moment. EM1x is bullet proof and this stuff should last years (fingers crossed). Hope they follow through with the 8-25 PRO next year. Time will tell I guess. Stay safe.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thanks.

[@antonykyriacou8300]

Re would I buy this lens, hmmm ? Actually I’m not sure, I would like to see the Pro version first and then decide. I know the Pro version will make my eyes water 😂 with its price but in the long run it might be worth it. Question for you...can you photo stack with this new lens ? Many thanks. AK

[@wiseoldfool]

I'm thinking this lens and the E-M10 MKIV make a very attractive combination for a serious photographer who has travel high on their priority list, particularly those of us who have had quite a lot of birthdays. I find it interesting that such high quality equipment is pitched as entry level!

[@ForsgardPeter]

It could work as a travel lens if long focal lenght are needed.

[@mfreider]

Even it is not a PRO Lens, looks like Olympus did excellent job as optically and as mechanically. All basic things are there. Yes , there are no SyncIS but it is clearly a feature which they are reserving to PRO lineup and I think something good is coming in PRO telephoto range something f/4 with SyncIS , so they don’t want to compete with themselves. No objection. But looking on recent Canon’s 600mm and 800mm f/11 RF lenses where you better completely forget about tracking AF in real environment, this new lens from Olympus is light years ahead :) I pretty sure, for non pro, common folks like me this lens would make lots of sense. Especially for people who want to do some bird shooting and want to try 800mm equivalent without braking neither bank nor they back.

[@stevebonn3463]

A few years back, I photographed a caribou about 1/2 a mile away in Denali National Park, using an EM5 II with a Lumix 100-300mm II lens, at 300mm. The image is a nice record of my experience, but it's very noisy and pixelated. I can imagine taking a similar picture at 560mm with this lens and a 1.4x teleconverter, on an EM1 Mark III. I'm fairly sure the quality would go up dramatically. Still, $1,500 is more of a once-a-year type expenditure for me, and this year it will go to the EM1 Mark III. Probably next year I'll get this lens. At a minimum, I'll rent it before any major wildlife excursion.

[@okimurafranck7672]

Subscribed your review mark 2 vs mark 4 was one of the best video reviews

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thanks.

[@VictorGandia]

Looks good. What do you think it's the place of the 75-300 in the line up? Further than the 100m extra telephoto and the weather sealing, do you think this new 100-400 improves significantly the 75-300? Thank you!

[@ForsgardPeter]

I have used the 75-300mm a long time ago and I would say that the new 100-400mm lens is better.

[@billybeerman2657]

It got my attention but I would wait 6 months to a year before buying. I want to see more reviews from people using it for birds and wildlife specifically. Right now the Panasonic Leica 100-400mm f4-6.3 ois still looks tempting.

[@006Romano]

Nice review Peter, thanks! Which lense would you recommend for astrophotography between this one and the 300mm F4 (coupled with an equatorial mount)?

[@ForsgardPeter]

That is a hard one. I think both are ok. The 300mm f4 is faster, but then it is fixed focal length. The 100-400mm is also a lot cheaper.

[@006Romano]

@@ForsgardPeter Thanks Peter! So I will consider getting this 100-400 lense, turning to 800mm (1600mm FF equivalent!) with the MC20 teleconverter!

[@WOLFTICKVIDEOS]

Good review Peter. Nice bird shots, very sharp. I think your review is the most detailed so far. I wish it was a 5.6 or a little less expensive. $1500 for 6.3 not sure I can justify. Thanks for the video.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thanks! 👍

[@AndrewSowerby]

After all the doom and gloom following "The Announcement", its fantastic to see great new lenses and bodies coming out, as promised.

[@h0ll1s]

Thanks for the review, as an owner of an OMD EM 10 mkII I'm always looking at what lens to buy next! This would be a great zoom lens although the Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm f/4-6.3 for me seems like a better choice and cheaper too (in AUD). Would you be able to make a comparison video of these two lenses?

[@ForsgardPeter]

We just made a plan to do a comparising video about these two lenses with Matti Sulanto. As soon as I can get a hold of it.

[@diegoabw]

i got the panasonic-leica 100-400mm. the image quality is good, but the zoom ring is very stiff. that's really annoying because i can't zoom in or out while looking through the view finder. go to a camera shop and try by yourself.

[@keitholbrantz882]

the Panasonic zooms in the opposite direction than olympus--manageable, but awkward if you are also use an Olympus zoom lens in your kit. And the zoom ring is very stiff on the Panny.

[@mich8261]

I never thought about the lens IS vs Olympus body IS. I am currently using the Panasonic 100-300mm on the E-M1 mk1 with IBIS. I wonder if I should instead use the lens IS?

[@ForsgardPeter]

You should try and turn off the IBIS. Usually Lens IS works better on long lenses.

[@MichaelRedford]

Thank you for the info. I wonder if comparisons will pop us soon vs the Panasonic ver. I feel like the stabilization comparison will be very interesting to see. You really broke down the AF details that no one else has. I'd personally like to see a sports comparison but I know I'm in the minority. Subbed

[@ForsgardPeter]

It is coming. Doing it with Matti Sulanto during next weekend.

[@MadEnglishTV]

If there's no sync IS, do you think the stabilization would be just as good if used on a Panasonic camera?

[@ForsgardPeter]

Not sure about that. It needs to be tested.

[@k6usy]

Just purchased this lens, now I need to get out and use it.

[@ridealongwithrandy]

UPDATE: I just pulled the plug and bought the 100-400, I have to wait til the end of December, but then I got this for my critter shooting in the spring. I have the Spider Holster setup, one EM1X with the 40-150 Pro on one hip, and now I will have the other EM1X and the 100-400 on the other hip :)

[@ForsgardPeter]

Nice!

[@datachamp]

Thanks for the video, I’ve been waiting for this lens as I have an EM1 Mk II but since it doesn’t have sync IS I now have a choice with the Panasonic equivalent. You don’t seem very enthusiastic about it, perhaps because you don’t use this type of lens. Your comments on the AF and image quality seem a bit lukewarm even though your actual images look good. I have the 40-150 Pro lens and find the MC14 degrades the images quite a lot, I find even my 75-300mm is as good at 210mm (but slower). I will have to think if 400mm is worth it over 300mm depending on the AF, it’s difficult to hold steady at this focal length. I was expecting to buy it but nowI am now uncertain whether to invest more in Olympus gear.

[@mariusm2402]

Thanks for the review Peter. It looks like a really nice upgrade to the 75-300mm - a direct comparison would be nice to immediately trigger g.a.s. (gear acquisition syndrom) (just seen there is a trade in offered by olympus here - 200 Euro discount 🤔). On the other side i realize how seldom I use the 75-300 mmm... So most probably my money would be spend better for a different focal length.

[@Kopetefish]

I use a G9 and the E-M5 II with PL 50-200mm + 1.4x TC for birding. Wanted to get this one for the Olympus but if there's no sync IS, I might as well get the PL 100-400 which has dual IS on my G9 at least...

[@diegoabw]

how is the zoom ring in the 50-200mm? it is very stiff in the 100-400mm

[@Kopetefish]

@@diegoabw no problems with the zoom ring on the 50-200! But I've heard other people complain about the 100-400's zoom ring as well...

[@ericarmadilo60]

Lens is on order. Looking forward to using it with OMD EM1 Mark III

[@paulag7634]

Had mine on order since Sept. Getting a little bit frustrated waiting.

[@michaelshorts9436]

I'm just a casual user of a long lens, so I bought the Panasonic 100-300 last month. The price is much less.

[@nsbhagwat]

Peter, 1 question and a request:- Question - with a crop factor of 2 on mft this lens will be 200 - 800 eqv with corresponding aperture? Am I correct? Request - can you please do a comparison between canon 100 400 L lens with this one? Regards Nikhil

[@jayargo2109]

Hi Peter I left a reply around a month ago ( to which you replied, appreciated a lot .. thank you ) It was re the 75-300 lens ( at the time , I had the omd 10 with that lens ... Wasn't long before I " upgraded to the em5 mkiii ) I'm off on a safari later in the year and would like to ask Firstly, would the 100-400 , be too big for the em5 Secondly, would it be any better than the 75-300 Thirdly, would it be better to go with the 300mm pro lens Fourthly, would that lens be too big And lastly... would either of the potential new lenses be more than adequate for the Safari? Thank you

[@ForsgardPeter]

From those I would pick the 100-400mm. I have not tested it against the 75-300mm. The size is quite ok if you choose the 75-300mm, but then the 100-400mm will have more reach.

[@jayargo2109]

@@ForsgardPeter thank you very much for the quick reply Peter I may trade in the 75-300 ( if it's a good deal ) then , and go with the 100-400 The image quality looks very good Cheers Jay

[@tinabergstrom3331]

In the US I am told by one of our Olympus Educators who had the opportunity to try it out that it will cost $1500 US dollars

[@ForsgardPeter]

Could be, it is always a bit hard with the prices in different parts of the world.

[@hauke3644]

Why no Sync.IS? That’s a weird decision... Anyway, I would prefer a modern, pro version of the old 70-300/4.0-5.6, which I still use.

[@alpcns]

A beautiful optic - the examples you showed were excellent, very contrasty and tack sharp. The "normal" Pana 100-400 is probably cheaper, and although a good lens, I doubt it's build quality and image quality is entirely on par. The Leica version is said to be very good indeed but has no in-lens stabilization AFAIK, and is costly. If I did a lot of bird photography using M3/4 I certainly would invest in the Oly plus 2 tele extenders.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thanks.

[@tobiasdavid3096]

alpcns There is a Panasonic Lumix 100-300mm and a Panasonic Leica 100-400mm. Both have IS. The 100-300 is about €580 and the PanaLeica €1500. The PanaLeica is the only Lens in my M1.2 where I use the Lens-IS over IBIS. Interesting on the Oly is the ability to User the MC extender.

[@alpcns]

@@tobiasdavid3096 I stand corrected: the Panasonic is 100-300mm and the Leica is 100-400mm, and both have IS - I didn't know that. What's your experience with the 100-300mm?

[@borderlands6606]

@@alpcns The reviews I've seen show the Leica Panasonic version being optically better than the Lumix tele, as you would expect. Although it lacks zoom and aperture variation, the similarly DOF Canon 800mm f11 is £979. Which must be a temptation for wildlife photographers.

[@alpcns]

@@borderlands6606 Thanks! Appreciate it.

[@dannybrusseel5525]

Hi Peter i bought the lens yesterday and for some reason its not so sharp on my omd em1. I suspect its because of isis not beeing in sync and especially with older omd camera's

[@ForsgardPeter]

I cold be that the IBIS is not as effective as it is with other lenses. The lens is sharp. Just have to have shutter speeds fast enough.

[@dannybrusseel5525]

@@ForsgardPeter thank You Peter, with my omd em1 should i turn ibis off in the body or what do You think is the best solution?

[@pma177]

Zoom is really handy, but I already have the 40-150 and 300 so I wonder if it will take the place of those. The weight is about the same as the 300, so taking all 3 is probably a no-no. I think I'll wait and see if I can afford the 150-400 as and when it comes out.

[@edwardrussell5413]

I am with you Peter, think I will wait for the 150-400 as well- best by a lottery ticket :-)

[@MrRgr004]

Hi Peter, enjoying your videos as usual, am the happy owner of an OMD 5 Mk II and a 14/150 zoom lens. I like it very much because it is extremely flexible. The 100/400 zoom is fore sure very interesting but I am wondering if the M.Zuiko Digital ED 40‑150mm F2.8 PRO could not be a better alternative instead for the more or less amount of money. Any pros / cons, comments much appreciated. Rgds / Roland from Normandy (France)

[@Mr0303rma]

Dear Peter, Would you be so kind to explain your decision to make some photographs on ISO 800 with this new lens? I saw your video about ISO invariance and ETTR. If one keeps this video in mind then I should expect photographs on ISO 200 and ETTR and corrected in post-processing.

[@ForsgardPeter]

I think you should make a test and see what the results are. In general ISO800 is ok if you expose properly.

[@karlchristoffer1275]

Maybe I am wrong, but I missed Your drive on this review, a bit fluffy perhaps -many words no say... (sorry, no offence! ) I think I will take the 40 - 150 f 2:8 pro instead, think I might be better off... Take care and stay well! Karl

[@pamelasuttonlegaud]

I have the leica 100-400mm... do you think the Olympus version is better? (It cost AUD $1700)

[@ForsgardPeter]

It is very hard to say. I have tested the Leica 100-400mm only briefly. What I know is that the Olympus 100-400mm is a good lens.

[@pamelasuttonlegaud]

@@ForsgardPeter Thanks Peter.

[@yac1066]

Hello, I think the Leica 100-400 and the Oly 100-400 are in the same rank of quality. Why switch to the Olympu, maybe for compatibility with ProCaptL mode!

[@tobiasdavid3096]

I‘m in the same situation. I‘ll stick with my PanaLeica though. Only the ability to use the MC rangeextenders could be interesting.

[@pamelasuttonlegaud]

@@tobiasdavid3096 I bought a camera grip as I wasn't used to the weight and it is SO much better. I haven't tried range extenders...

[@aaronperkinson8314]

I will be interested when some are available in the Olympus outlet. I would sell my 75-300mm and get this with a 2.0 extender...that would be the edge I need for moon shots...

[@shaunbradbury2486]

Yes going to get it now f

[@davet8835]

100-400 mm is that same range as the Lumix, but I understand that lens can't be serviced. Can this Olympus be services if something happens

[@ForsgardPeter]

Yes you can get Olympus service for this lens.

[@friatankar]

I'm glad it did not have the White color as in the prototyp. My question is did they skip the built in teleconverter?

[@MegaSamzam]

This is not the 100-400 Pro lens which is due at the end of the year. I believe that lens will be f/4 thru the zoom range plus it has the built in teleconverter.

[@hpeterh]

White color and inbuilt extender is a different (150-400) and much more expensive lens that is still to be released.

[@ForsgardPeter]

As the comments say this is not the 150-400 f4.5 lens. It will launched later this year.

[@marklaurendet1861]

Interesting they did not give it sync IS, I guess to not make it compete with the pro lens. I think this may make it harder to sell compared the the Panasonic offering with their G9. Looking forward to the Panasonic / Olympus comparisons

[@ForsgardPeter]

We have planned a video about that with Matti Sulanto. We try to make for next week, but not sure yet if that is too soon. But it is coming.

[@Stefan_G_BC]

Hello Peter, what do you think about the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO plus 2.0 teleconverter as an alternative to the new M.Zuiko ED 100-400 mm IS? The combination of the would at least offer a higher max aperture if used without the converter. Would be grateful if you could compare in a video. I definetely would buy you a coffee ;-).

[@ForsgardPeter]

I will if I can get a hold of the 100-400mm lens.

[@Stefan_G_BC]

@@ForsgardPeter Hi Peter, thanks for your response. Interestingly, the 100-400 is not available in Germany right now. All shops show the same information. However, I am still very interested, but keen to know what you think about the alternative. In particular comparable picture quality at 300 mm.

[@Stefan_G_BC]

@@ForsgardPeter Thank you, Peter. Would be really great to know what the advantages and disadvantages of the two options are. In particular with regard to picture quality.

[@HytheBoatman]

Does it support Pro Capture mode on EM3 MkIII?

[@ForsgardPeter]

Yes it does.

[@raytbrown2]

I like your channel. And I appreciate you POV. That said, I must say, your last two? This lens and the new body? Your voice says, "Yes! 8 or 9 out of 10? But your body language and enthusiasm say, they're a 3 out of 10. That is a bit confusing, but helpful. I feel you're shopping for a new system. Which is OK.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Interesting observation. It was early morning and maybe the bright sun made my face look a bit odd. Also the tones are a bit darker than usual.

[@BigStipowski]

Whoo hoo it's here.. more expensive than I thought.. but I guess they have to try and be profitable with the sale to JIP now..

[@shermanhenzel8505]

Excellent review, but I will pass and wait for the pro telephoto coming this winter. I currently have the 40-150mm prolens, the 300mm pro lens and the MC-14 and MC-20. This is my kit for wildlife and bird photography. I tend to shoot in low light and the 100-400mm would be too slow.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Yes the 150mm-400mm f4.5 is an exciting lens. It also will a lot more expensive. I also wait for that lens.

[@Photo-Design-Studio]

I would like one :)

[@brianlaunchbury4491]

Robin Wong said there is a partial sync is.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Well it kinda is, but not the same way as in the 300mm f4 lens. It is optimising the IS when both are on, but it does not use them in Sync like SyncIs works.

[@FrankFiene]

So because of diffraction the sweet spot is at f/5. At 400mm and f/6.3 diffraction starts to be visible. In my opinion this is unusable with extenders.

[@sabymondal]

Does not have the MFT vs FF weight advantage with its *1120 g.* Sigma 100-400mm 5-6.3 FF lens weighs *1160 g.* Really disappointing in this important aspect.

[@stehlealexander]

Sigma Lens!!!! ....

[@philmtx3fr]

Good review Peter ... but honestly with no IS synch, less aperture than Leica and more expensive ... I don t see the value.

[@ForsgardPeter]

I think the Leica is a bit more expensive than this one.

[@philmtx3fr]

Hi Peter perhaps it depends from the countries. My first searches in France showed the Leica qt 1100 euros and the Olympus at 1300.... but true that there are not a lot of reseller for the Olympus yet. Anyway , except if a comparison shows a clear advantage on Olympus for sharpness, my first feeling will remain the same. Leica seems of more value on the paper.

[@lpdautube]

Thanx for your vidéos Peter. What will be the price ? 1.3 k€ ? What about the : panasonic lumix g leica dg 100-400mm f/4-6.3 vario-elmar asph power ois ? available at even less than 1k€ ... faster - weather sealed, Leica quality, ... KR Louis Philippe DECKERS

[@ForsgardPeter]

Where can you find the Panasonic version that cheap? At the moment it is $1797,99 at B&H. I found a few places were it was less than 1200€, but not in stock.

[@lpdautube]

​ @Peter Forsgård Hi there, thanks for your answer : on this place for exemple (*), but some other vidéos of collegues convinced me to chose for the lates Olympus. What about the software upgrade needed for the cameras ? (*)

[@lpdautube]

(*) be.mydigitaland.com/panasonic-leica-dg-vario-elmar-100-400mm-f-4-0-6-3-asph-power-ois-h-rs100400e.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwm_P5BRAhEiwAwRzSO60k5Ovz4UxWrD7gTFdMdVdYx7CTUaYGFxOhvJwEjnz0OhidZHjLYBoCpcAQAvD_BwE or www.t-dimension.com/de_fr/checkout/cart/ KR LPhD.

[@philipp.b.75]

No Sync-IS ist indeed a showstopper for me and not explainable, why they've left it out. 😔

[@ForsgardPeter]

I was wondering that too, why it is not SyncIS.

[@mfreider]

My guess, Olympus has some similar zoom not exactly the same but similar coming in PRO line with f/4 and with Sync IS, this is why they do not want to undermine it. Personally, I think it is reasonable.

[@ForsgardPeter]

The is the 150-400mm f4.5 lens coming by the end of this year.

[@stehlealexander]

Because it is a Sigma Lens!!!!!!....

[@philipp.b.75]

@@stehlealexander I think, that is quite obvious ... has even the same size, as a FF-lens.

[@giac01]

Same lens design as the sigma 100-400 for DSLRs, but twice the price. Otherwise a good lens ☃️

[@kornasteniker3939]

Hmm, 1300€ for a non-Pro lens? That seems a bit too much for my liking. In Comparison: The Pana Leica 100-400 is approximately the same price and can sometimes be found for around 1000€ on sale... Almost 1 stop more light at the lower end of the focal length and the Leica grade build quality speaks for itself.

[@diegoabw]

try the pana-leica at the shop before buying it. the zoom ring is very stiff

[@mayor86-ok]

In my opinion the economic situation of Olympus is reflected inside his products. This lens is very very interesting but the lack of Sync IS is a delusion for me. My photography style is changed when i bought the m1 mark2. the IBIS inside the camera allow me to use very often longer times and lower iso. this is the most important feature of olympus gears and it allow to compare / overcome also FF sensors in some situation. So they needed to invest in all new sync is lens series. For example the 12-45 f4 is a waste of money in this hard economic period. They will sell 10 pieces of that lenses all over the world in total. Instead a new 12-40 2.8 / 2.0 with sync is a very interesting and remunerable lens. The m1 mark 2 was the last innovative camera that olympus presented. m1 mark3 m1x m5 mark 3 are almost the same camera. the lack of investment is also clear in this case. In my opinion the computational photography is the future so olympus needed to improve the software and the AI AF of all the new cameras so much. Canon for example invested in mirrorless and in a few years equalize sony in autofocus and olympus in ibis capabilities. Sorry to say it but it is the time to say good bye to olympus because this is an agony.

[@ForsgardPeter]

Thanks for sharing. Interesting opinions.

[@mfreider]

Among all PRO Lenses which I have 12-45/4 is one of my favorite. Perfect travel combo for me with EM5MKIII. Agony of Olympus? Not sure if stock market would be a good indicator but just quick glance. From beginning of the year, Canon stocks : -40%, Nikon: -41% and Olympus socks: +14%. Yes they imaging division is losing money but total loss is 1/10 of profit of just one endoscopic division. If you really look on they financial reports - Olympus profit grew 34% in past year ;) at the same time losses of imaging division halved. Too many people just read headlines and making quick conclusions , reading few hundreds page financial report especially for Japanese company is hard, really hard.

[@mayor86-ok]

The result is that Olympus imaging division is on sale... I invested so much in Olympus system and I’m frustrated about this situation ... my opinion was: “90 % of photographers don’t need apsc or ff cameras, the future is M43 because sensors will be much better in the near future so no one will need bigger lenses “ ... I’m wrong, the market is “all in” in FF segment. And the innovation in the m43 stopped. The technology is here, Sony a7riv has almost the same pixel dimension of a 16 mp m43 and the dynamic range and iso performance are way better than our oly sensors, the problem is that companies think that the most remunerable future is FF so bye bye m43.About 12-45 f4, in my opinion it is not so fast and he die near 12-40 2.8 and 12-100 f4 for travel. It has sense in a healthy market.

[@mfreider]

Domenico D'Urso I have 12-100/4 for different reasons. Picked 12-45/4 over 12-40/2.8 because when sun goes down, nothing beats 17/1.2 anyway :) but fact that I don’t like to use 12-40/2.8 is not a judgment about this lens. About sale of imaging division, I would advise to calm down and keep shooting ;) If tomorrow Sony will decide to spin off Image Sensor Division (there are multiple attempts and reasons behind it) would you panic over FF and Sony Cameras in general? Probably not. Same goes about Olympus and m43. New sensors will arrive to m43, not right now, not next months but they will come. Personally, I am looking with optimism on camera market , especially on future of m43 but my thinking is too long to to explain and would go against media hype but market conditions are looking much worse for FF. I am just judging by financial reports. For example even everybody thinks - Pentax is dead , if we look on Ricoh financial report, they imagining division is PROFITABLE ;) So, let’s take pictures instead of worrying about our “investments” ;)

[@mayor86-ok]

@@mfreider Thanks for your comment, I really hope i'm wrong !!!

[@geraldbraun6267]

No focus clutch for 1500 dollars? No deal for me.

[@romainprovost7164]

Do you have bokeh with this lens ?

[@ForsgardPeter]

Yes you do.

[@Ed-bj5eq]

no I would't buy it, I prefer the 75-300mm instead, no weather sealed but smaller, lighter, less expensive and from 600 to 800mm equivalent there is not much of a justifiable diference for me. I had experience going from a Fuji HS20EXR (720mm eq) to a HS50EXR (1000mm eq.), except for taking moon photos never found a real need to go longer than 600mm

[@garybrown9719]

Olympus had sinc IS it would be the best camera I'm not going to carry a tripod Ill pass and keep my g9 100-400mm which has sinc IS

[@locatedeatar3642]

firmware in the way

[@Duckstalker1340]

Jeez more expensive than the Leica 100-400mm with way less build quality, no sync IS, 6.5 stops vs 2 stops, slower at wide end, the only plus thing is this thing takes extenders.

[@ForsgardPeter]

At least in B&H the Pana/Leica is more expensive than this lens. So it is many other places too. The IBIS is 3 stops on the lens or you can use the IBIS. That is from 4.5 to 7.5 depending on the Olympus body that is in use. Yes the IBIS is not as effective on long lenses as Is in the lens.

[@Duckstalker1340]

@@ForsgardPeter It must be a thing in Australia then, the Leica 100-400mm is going for $1800 and less while the Olympus is going for more than $2200.

[@quentintarantino01]

I wonˋt buy the lens, because I have the 40-150 Pro, the 300mm Pro, the 1,4x Teleconverter and the 2x Teleconverter.

[@ForsgardPeter]

You are well covered.

[@johannesimmonen2125]

Melkein yhtä hyvä kuin panasonicin 100-400mm

[@ForsgardPeter]

Tarkoitus vertailla Matti Sulannon kanssa millainen ero näissä oikeasti on. Varmaan ens viikolla tulee video ulos aiheesta.

[@RamblingTog]

A noiseless camera would be more welcoming than a daft telephoto lens

[@BurkmanInVancouver]

I don't understand this post. My Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II and Mark II both have a silent shutter option. It's available on other Olympus cameras too. I don't hear any noise, nor do my subjects when silent shutter is turned on.

[@BurkmanInVancouver]

If you are talking about noise in the image, no camera is noiseless.

[@Centauri27]

@@BurkmanInVancouver And why do people always talk about/freak out about noise when it's only evident when you pixel peep? Ever see noisy photos on Instagram or Facebook? And new advanced AI tools like Topaz DeNoise AI cleans up my m4/3 images & preserves details so that it's virtually indistinguishable from FF.

[@BurkmanInVancouver]

@@Centauri27 I agree. The only time I've found noise a bit of an issue is when I take photos of a moving subject in dim light. A FF sensor would help there, but that's it. I'll take that trade-off (and all cameras have a trade-off of some kind) to get the size and image stabilization.I set my exposure just short of getting blown highlights to get the most out of the camera and use Topaz DeNoise. I've been completely satisfied with my photos and I have a pretty critical eye.

[@Centauri27]

@@BurkmanInVancouver Do you use Topaz DeNoise or Topaz DeNoise AI? I switched to their AI version some months ago and along with their other AI-powered versions, I've been extremely impressed. I've worked on ISO 12,800 files and it was able to remove the noise without obliterating fine details (like a construction crane way off in the distance in the background of one of my landscapes).

[@howardchud9097]

Too wide, too long, too heavy. Balance with camera body is awful.

[@GregConquest]

Damn, right out of the gate, you ask for a subscription and a notification request. We’re supposed to do those things after we’ve seen the video. Doing it backwards is like getting married, then going on your first date. Automatic thumbs down from me. .... I hope this video is good enough for me to remember to change it to a thumbs up at the end. ... Please stop asking for these things at the beginning of videos. It is just stupid.

[@ForsgardPeter]

I know it sounds odd to say it in the beginning. To my experience it works better that way. That is what my data says. I have tried a different approach, but with worst results. It is data driven decision to say that in the beginning. Some do differently and they might have a good reason to do so. You are right that it something to consider.

[@photographybysterkus7726]

Greg I totally disagree. He's not asking you to like the video. He's asking you to subscribe for more content which you obviously will or will not do by the end of the video. Many times people forget to do that after they watch the video. I know I do. Your comment gets an automatic thumbs down from me and I won't be changing it later. Give me a break. Ps. Horrible analogy by the way.

[@GregConquest]

@@photographybysterkus7726 He can ask to subscribe at the end of the video. It's only makes sense to do so after you've actually seen the content. Subscribing at the outset, before you've seen the content, is just going to crowd users' subscription's folder being bloated. It makes no sense for users to do this. Reversing the order is just dumbing the process down.

[@GregConquest]

@@ForsgardPeter It is unfortunate that you might be right. You're just benefitting from an unethical practice. It's not the end of the world. It is dumbing down social media, though :-(

[@photographybysterkus7726]

@greg conquest frankly people like you are dumbing-down social media. "Unethical" ...really? You're definitely one of those jag offs that needs to have the last word so though I know it's coming this will be my last comment. And I'm not leaving this here for you. You can't argue with Stupid. I'm leaving this for Peter and any other contributors that are out there. These guys spend a lot of time making videos and informational content for amateur photographers and enthusiasts like myself. They make little if any money doing it but frankly I'm glad they do because it benefits so many. It's sad that you're hung up on the fact that he asked for people to subscribe to his channel rather than listening what he has to say. And at the end of the day you can make up your own damn mind if you're going to subscribe or not whether he asks at the beginning or the end. Unethical...give me a break. Go back to Facebook and and troll your friends and acquaintances there. We don't need you here.