OM System OM1 Mkii & 150-600 Lens. Are We Losing Our Way?

Buy Me a Coffee - paypal.me/BrianJamesWhite
Become a Patron of the channel at Patreon for extra content and privileges
/ thatmicro4thirdsguy
Video shot on Lumix G100 & Lumix 12-32 f3.5-5.6
Any views expressed on this video or any other videos on this channel are purely my opinion and are not to be taken in any way as formal or professional advice.
Olympus Firmware page
cs.olympus-imaging.jp/en/supp...
Panasonic Lumix Firmware Page
av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/...
HUGE THANKS TO MY PAYPAL SUPPORTERS
Title Music: Country Cue 1 by Audionautix is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution licence (creativecommons.org/licenses/...)
Artist: audionautix.com/
#microfourthirds #olympus #lumix

[@LukeTaylorPhotography]

I like this channel because its one of the only m4/3 channels that isn't sponsored (formally or informally) by Olympus or Lumix. Most of the other channels are too concerned about their professional relationship with the camera manufacturers to give honest reviews. Great job!

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Thank you. I try to be fair if I can but sometimes their actions, especially marketing wise, astound me. In truth there are very few bad or even poor products on the market but that doesn't mean they can take advantage. I'm convinced that both of these products will perform flawlessly and that they will be reasonable value for money but I'll still hold them to their word and their standards. Best wishes, Brian

[@dayeah765caoni3]

Have you been living under a rock? Check out robin wong, bob trek

[@whamni]

I can't see my EM1 mk2 going anywhere soon, I love it. Good to see you back and brilliant video.

[@nickcrispe1321]

Agreed! All the magic was in the EM-1 Mark ii. Weatherproof, Pro-Cap, IS, and AF you can work with. I have an OM-1 and like some of its tricks, but the EM-1 Mark ii was a high water mark.

[@jay-by1se]

I agree.. I'm struggling to find a reason to update. Built in filters are probably the only thing that is exciting so far.

[@WMedl]

I am 7sing EM1 M2 since 2017 and I will continue though the rubber around the external flash or receiver is loosing. But I hope that the new OM1 M2 will let drop the price of the M1 substantially. By the way I hope that an OM10 with tilting screen and phase detection AF will appear....

[@richiemattinson2415]

Me too ❤

[@ValiRossi]

Same here. I was using it today. Love my Mkii.

[@mirrorlessreflections]

100% agree! As customers we're being played, the OM1 and 100-400 is as big as I want to go, although I still prefer to use the 40-150 2.8 where possible. And I just don't get why, apparently, the OM1 can't have at least some of the improvements via firmware?

[@MrReadboy]

An OM1 firmware upgrade has been officially announced for this Autumn.

[@stephenfinch4534]

I have only been with Olympus OM System for 5 years and I can understand that some users have strong views on the weight issue, but Companys must respond to what is going on in the industry as a whole to survive. I am glad the new company is taking a fresh view of things. What attracted me to the brand was the jaw dropping tech available, and I really enjoy my photography even more from my FF days which I dont miss at all. So perhaps a step back to assess things. And lets not forget to enjoy our kit and move forward!

[@mikesch0815]

I miss something like a Lumix GX8 II, a new PEN, some nice pancake lenses. I use to work with L-Mount and mFT. There is more progress in L-Mount today than in mFT. I love my old GX8 with the 100-300mm II from Panasonic. Light, usable under good light situations. And I love my S5II with the heavy 70-200 2.8, unbeatable in low light... But mFT really lost its way, since they don't continue their small bodies and some of the small lenses.

[@toncouwenberg8646]

Glad you are back! I fully agree on your statement.

[@CameraCombo]

Good analysis.

[@mk1photography61]

Thanks for the video i agree. I have Olympus OMD EM1 MK3 and the cheap Olympus 75 300 very happy and lightweight for bright days!

[@ludwigohallorans6395]

I use the same lens with EM1 MK2 very happy. My only disagreement is that Olympus already has a big lens (150-400) as big as this one, no complains there? I do agreed I feel like cheated because of the rebranding

[@shumla7ranch]

I used to own that 75-300 zoom lens; it gives VERY sharp, crisp photos. A few years ago I bought the 40-150mm f2.8 and it is one of if not THE best lens I've ever owned. Also great images. Just bought and received the 150-600mm lens and used it yesterday for the first time. Yes it's heavy. The jury is still out on its overall performance.

[@jacquesgiard6943]

Thanks!

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

No problem! And thank you for your support of the channel too. Brian

[@The-skillschool]

Very interesting, thanks for your thoughts.

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

My pleasure!

[@johndawson7335]

Agree Brian, to me the advantage of MFT is small form factor providing excellent image quality. An updated Lumix GM1 would be the ideal camera for me with small pancake/prime lenses. I have a GX9 which I love, an update of that would be welcome (weathersealing/updated EVF). I have a G90 which I find a bit on the large side, wouldnt go any bigger than that.

[@rdscleaners]

I agree…good points!

[@terrynoon8467]

I agree totally Brian. OM systems is focussing on birders with deep pockets rather than the rest of the Olympus (I use the name deliberately) fraternity. They are in danger of losing us altogether. So let’s see the benefits in the latest om camera filter down to the rest of us users before we wander off to Fuji or Sony. Oh and I have heard that the 9-18mm is a simple rebadging exercise also.

[@EdwardBartel]

@@ridealongwithrandy THIS!!! 👍

[@EdwardBartel]

OK, so OMS releases 1 big lens and you are upset because they are "focussing on birders." Were you equally upset a few short months ago when they released the 90mm macro lens because OMS was "focussing on bugs?!?" Come on now!

[@terrynoon8467]

I wasn’t just referring to the rebadged Sigma lens with a large premium price but primarily the camera itself. I really do hope that OM Systems do alter course from making their offerings incredibly niche. I am just disappointed if their only concession is the (expensive) macro lens referred to.

[@rreichar1]

Having more choices is a good thing IMO. I think that the 150-600mm is a great addition to the system. It relatively compact for the focal length. Bird photographers need as much reach as they can get. I will likely buy one. I have used the Canon EF version of this lens and had zero issue with it. It’s not that big or heavy for what you get.

[@StevenT75]

I agree with your comments. This new 150-600 has been altered by OM System from the original Sigma design. It has a better claimed stabilization rating, plus an extra stop when paired with an OM camera. It should have better weather resistance although it's hard to know for sure. One important thing for MFT users is the difference in cost compared to the M. Zuiko 150-400mm f/4.5 TC $7,500 vs $2,700. Size and weight are about the same. I've yet to find a wildlife shooter of the 150-400mm that has commented on it being heavy.

[@Itsnotsafeandeffective]

I think most bird photography bench mark is kingfisher in flight with feather detail dipper or wren. humming bird in other climates. I've owned a Canon 400mm f2.8 and had it metabones to a Sony a6300 with results I've never been able to match with any of the 150-600 ranges. I've had some good shots with them but nothing that rivals the 400mm. I use the om-1 with 300mm f4 and mc14. it has good results but not the same league.

[@tank422376]

Simple, if I don't have size/weight advantage on M43, I will jump to full frame for better image quality.

[@gregsullivan7408]

Very good point re that 150 - 600 - lot of wasted glass! All they've done (presumably) is change the mount, which crops the image circle!

[@stehlealexander]

you re right !

[@petermcginty3636]

Thank you Brian. In general, yes, I agree that MFT could get back to iis core ethos. However, on this lens, specifically, I respectfully disagree. There were a lot of birders that wanted a lens better than the 100-400mm, but cheaper than the 150-400mm pro version (which is about $AUD12,000). However, R&D is massively expensive and it may not have been cost efficient to build something like this from scratch. Also, it is not a "re-badged" version of the Sigma lens - I would suggest that it is a "customised" version. (A) The stability system of the lens has been synched with the IBIS of the camera (B) the lens has been adapted to use OM System teleconverters (C) the AF of the lens is synched to the OM system (D) The lens has been treated to IPX1 (E) I believe that it also now had programmable function buttons.

[@kokhowe]

Agree. Though I didn't like the fact that the 150-600 will be almost 1kg heavier than the 100-400, I will still get it to replace my 100-400 for the extra reach when it is available.

[@EdwardBartel]

The "Sport" version of their FF model also only has 4 stops of stabilization, while this this one has 6 in camera PLUS the synch IS. I agree with you, it is more than a "rebadged" version of the Sigma lens.

[@kiwikea2002]

I agree with your assessment. From my personal perspective - there are other ones of course - my use cases are left behind, which center around compact & light & good image quality. My favourites still are Olympus Pen E-P5 and small primes, photography centered. (I do own an Olympus E-M1 III, but it's seeing not as much use as I intended.) So - I'm playing "stick with your guns" for the time being. But that's just me.

[@lindamarx1256]

I'm a panasonic user but feel exactly the same way: "my use cases are left behind, which center around compact & light & good image quality"

[@estraume]

I use the Panasonic-Leica 100-400 on my OM-1. That lens is the max size for a M4/3s lens for me. I have some primes for portraits and macro, but often I only bring the OM-1, the 12-40/2.8 and the 100-400 when I go for a walk in the woods. It is all I need most of the time, and it weighs less than 2 kg.

[@rumattso]

The price of the 150-600 is insane, in Norway it costs usd 1384 more than the version with FE mount. I understand there will be some extra costs for Sigma to change the mount and some other small things, but 1384 dollars more???

[@FierceSleepingDog]

So don't buy it.

[@andreibrad8487]

You are comparing the wrong lens. The price for the Sigma 150-600 Sport is 1700EUR. The price for the equivalent fov lens, 1200mm on FF is around 20k and weighs 16kg for the Canon.

[@zarrow50]

Check Out Camera Conspiracies as they point out the insane overpricing

[@eagleeyephoto8715]

@@andreibrad8487It is same lens only with different mount and there should be compared as they are made in same way.Cost price is exactly same .

[@johnburns5426]

Hi Brian, I shoot Canon full frame and Canon APSC. The lack of Canon, and 3rd party APSC lens for Canon, has always annoyed me. As I get older and feebler, I have been looking at MFT for a small compact body, and lens to match. Now we have a full frame 600mm telephoto lens for MFT, and the new Panasonic G9ii MFT camera is in a full frame body. It is not a question of losing our way, but simply economics. In a shrinking market, no manufacturer can make a full range of lenses for the different format cameras that they produce.

[@friedrichb1623]

Excellent video Brian, I agree, if that is the only way OM System is going, we are losing our way. We need smaller cameras and regular firmware updates. From a short few business factor the expensive gear makes sense, but I will stay with my E-M 1 mark 2

[@berntlie6799]

I don't think we are "loosing our way". I don't do videos, and I don't foresee that I will in the future (I don't have the temperament for planning and editing such things). Still, I have no issues with Olympus... eh OM Systems ... putting resources into improving video capabilities for other users. I don't do macro photography, but I have no issues with OM Systems providing lenses for those that do. I don't do super wide angle work, but I have no issues with OM Systems providing lenses for those who do. -- A friend and Nikon users sometimes "taunts" me with questions of the big lenses for m43... "isn't that against the entire idea of m43"? Not as far as I see it. An FF lens equivalent to the 40-150/2.8 is much bigger. Yes, it would have been nice with a 150-600 specially made for m43 format, to make it smaller/lighter than the supposed 2 kg of the new ("Sigma") lens [the Sigma lens doesn't support SyncIS, does it? Is the Sigma lens IPX53?? There are probably some OM Systems additions]. But is this a problem/is this loosing our way? What would the alternative be? * OM Systems would not attract all of the "bird photographers" that they currently do, or * OM Systems would spend much more resources on making their own 150-600 mm m43 lens, at the expense of making small "normal" lenses. * There are already plenty of small lenses for those that mainly want a small system. I can put the 12/2.0 in one pocket, the 45/1.8 in another, and the 17/1.8 on the camera. No problem. And the 12-45/4, 40-150/4, and 20/1.4 constitutes a very compact system, too. And I haven't even looked into all the other lenses from Panasonic and the plethora of other producers. -- So -- what is it that is missing from the current line-up. What lenses/cameras are you asking for? * 1.4 versions of the 1.8 lenses mentioned above? [With the 20/1.4, I don't see the need for a 17/1.4 or 25/1.4, but others may. ] * Or updated versions of the 1.8 lenses? Less plastic/weather sealed? May be attractive, but these will of course be more expensive. * More fixed focus super wide angle lenses? * A Pen F-2? The Pen F-1 is a beautiful camera, but quite dated (first 20 Mpx sensor from Olympus, but very slow auto focus). A Pen F-2 will not be cheap, though. * More megapixels? Not something I need: it takes more storage space, I rarely print photos (and those I have printed are perfectly fine), m43 is perfectly fine for web publishing, if I need a higher resolution, I can use the handheld HR mode (now with 14 bit resolution on the Mk II). I don't mind a higher resolution for those who need it. But a 20 Mpx m43 sensor already has the pixel size of what a 75+ Mpx FF camera would have, so I don't see how one can avoid more noise/poorer DR with higher resolution. -- Is OM Systems (or m43) loosing its way? Not from my perspective.

[@whfowle]

I came to MFT because I needed a hybrid camera that would shoot video and pictures. I bought the Panasonic G7 just before a trip to Alaska. I liked the quality of the images a lot. So later I bought the G9 and then the Olympus M1 mk 2. Over time I built up a small batch of lenses. I really like the small size and low weight as well as the quality of the products. Leading edge features are also a big factor. I still use big heavy Nikons and Canons but I really don't like to carry all that weight. For most purposes, I don't need the higher quality I get from the FF systems. I do birding some and I don't want to carry the Hugh 500 and 600 primes so getting the same reach from MFT's is drawing me to that side of photography.

[@trishfre2]

Just finished watching the last half of the meetup with Rob Trek etc - all my fav photographers together! It was interrupted by a hospital visit - mine! Am OK, and really enjoyed watching that meetup and will watch the next. So glad you were able to join the others, Brian. New camera sounds interesting. Would have preferred a 24mp camera, and surprised it’s not following Panasonic. Won’t be buying one. Am worried that their lenses are being built by Sigma. I have Sigma lenses for other cameras, they’re heavy, and good, but for MFT! And the weight! I have the 100-400mm f5-f6.3 and that weighs 1.120g - heavy enough! Hardly use it. Tend to agree with you that they might have lost their way. Thanks for the review, Brian😊

[@cjk1943]

I agree with you 💯 on the lens

[@thomasstirr3018]

Hi Brian, I believe your assessment is based on the old, failed Olympus strategy that eventually lead to the division being sold to JIP. OM Systems is following a niche market differentiation strategy and focusing on specific groups of camera users who value the fundamental advantages of its products. These include wildlife/bird photographers, extreme outdoor/travel photographers, and handheld macro photography. I've shot with full frame, APS-C, Nikon 1 and now Olympus/OM System M4/3. I didn't switch because the system is small and light. I switched to take advantage of the incredible computational photography technology that is resident in the latest generation of OM-D/OM System cameras like Pro Capture L/H, in-camera focus stacking, Handheld Hi Res, Live ND, and AI subject tracking. IPX1 weather sealing was another important factor, as well as IBIS performance. I shoot with a pair of E-M1X bodies which are the most efficient, comfortable and ergonomic cameras that I've ever owned. The new OM 150-600 is ideal for serious bird photographers who use OM/Olympus bodies. Given its reach and the computational photography technology that is available to use with OM 150-600 it is a comparatively small and lightweight solution. This isn't a lens for beginners. If folks feel it is too large and heavy for their needs... then they shouldn't buy it. Tom

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Thanks Tom for a great reply and very well reasoned points of view. Best wishes Brian

[@davelock3166]

I have an OM1, and I am not ticked off at all. The buffer thing is irrelevant. Om1 is big enough. If I wanted that feature, I would use a video camera/mode and pick a frame. After all, it has been proved that the quality is good enough for submission to agencies if that is what you are after. The lens is at least affordable if you want a big tele. I moved from big lenses to a more useable system -MFT, and for wildlife stuff, OM still fits the bill.

[@Superbus753]

Well i have an om-1 too. What im annoyed with is the still lacking af system together with om systems statement that there is no firmware update planned. Damm we bought a flagship camera and they wont fix problems to sell us the same camera + bigger buffer with an improved fw for another 2400$. Same hardware especially processor means it should be able to tun the same af algorithms as the mkii!

[@FierceSleepingDog]

A sane post in days of insane posts and comments. Thank you.

[@Emerald_City_]

Great statement, @@Superbus753 !

[@johnbradshaw5900]

My favourite body is the E-M1X, that body is antithetical to everything MFT is meant to be about being a bit of a monster but it's such a lovely camera to use with handling and build quality which makes just about any other camera I've picked up feel ordinary. So for me the move of MFT into more expensive bodies and bulkier gear isn't an issue. And they still make the OM-5 as a very light and compact camera. Higher end models tend to have higher margins and the market has moved to enthusiast and professional models, the market for cheap entry level cameras seems happy with smart phones (which is fair enough really, I'm very happy with my S23 ultra phone). I have no issue with OM-D working with third party lens manufacturers like Sigma, just about all companies do it (Cosina built their business model on producing lenses which carry other names) and the 100-400 is an excellent (if bulky) lens. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the kit type lenses were outsourced. However, one of the attractions of Olympus has always been the Zuiko lenses which even today combine superb build quality and optics, if OM-D moves away from that tradition and just buys in lenses from companies like Sigma going forward with no further developments of their own then that would be a much bigger concern for me.

[@Group51]

Given its up to 2400mm FF with 2x speed booster, does the size really matter? Are there good alternatives? I gather any FF equivalent for FF camera would be truly massive.

[@johnbradshaw5900]

@Group51 I agree, for long reach photography the new Zuiko super tele lenses are still compact and light relative to alternatives. The 100-400 is big and heavy relative to other MFT but a great alternative to what would be a monster 200-800 in other sensor sizes. I think Olympus have (correctly in my view) identified that a niche which is especially well suited to the format is nature and wildlife and are going for that. And despite my reservation should buying in lenses become their standard approach, working with Sigma is allowing them to fill that niche without breaking the bank for themselves or their customers. There's no reason that they cannot maintain the appeal of MFT as both a compact, light and relatively affordable system and as a more expensive one for nature and super telephoto photography.

[@olafweyer859]

All my Olympus cameras developed issues in tropical climate but EM1X never did let me down. It hasn't overheated ones, not even when shooting hours of video. Unless OM Systems gives me a reliable sturdy beast like the EM1X (build quality, I don't necessarily need two gribs), I don't care for a new body no matter what else it brings to the table.

[@johnbradshaw5900]

I am in Singapore where the climate is permanently warm and humid. So far the M1X has been unfazed by environmental conditions.

[@michaelshorts9436]

I first thought that Micro 4/3 lost its way when I saw that the Lumix G9 Mark ii has the same chassis as the S5. What's the point of Micro 4/3 if it is not smaller and lighter?

[@edduffy9366]

I would say yes, MFTs cameras have been growing in size and in price. My first Micro 4/3rd camera I purchased was back in 2014 and the reason I got the camera was specifically for the smaller size and cheaper price, but yet with awesome functions and picture quality. I like the new OM-1 Mark II, but I think it should at the most be $1999 for body only in my opinion. I can get a full frame camera body for the price of the OM-1 Mark II body alone price. My big however, is that I am considering getting this new camera.😅

[@trevorfentiman5283]

Would love a new gx80 as it’s so pocketable and with the 12-42 will easy fit in a pocket

[@DavidEnglert]

I don't know if it's losing their way or just the circumstances of the industry. The camera industry has taken a beating over the last decade and half, and the first casualties were the smaller compact cameras, people just aren't buying them. The part of the market that is left is the very compeditive pros/hobbyists market, and by and large they like features and tech. Couple that with Olympus spinning out the camera division as OM systems (for aforementioned reasons), OM found itself with a short runway to show vibrance in the market and that means focusing on flagships hopefully just for now. The new rebranded sigma lenses?, well also an unfortunate reality business wise it was a quick way to get something affordable for the nature/sports photographers that OM is building niche in. As a company I don't think OM has the resources that it had as Olympus did so they will do things like reliable lenses for a while. I want a Pen-F Mark 2 like a lot of folks, but I want my system to be around more and I hope what they are doing works to that end.

[@interlapse]

In Norway OM SYSTEM OM-1 Mark II costs almost USD 300 more than the Fuji XH2. I think there must be very good arguments to justify choosing OM-1 II over the XH2.

[@allenharrison7902]

I agree with you completely Brian, OM Systems just seem to want to milk as much money as possible out of the loyal Olympus customer base (See what JIP did to Sony Vaio laptops). I bought into micro four thirds as a lightweight, travel friendly option to my full frame gear. However I was just at the point where I was going to sell all my M4/3 gear when Lumix released the G9II. So instead I sold my 2 Olympus bodies and purchased 2 G9II's. I love the cameras and I love the small format. But to take what is effectively a $1500 FF lens, change the cosmetics and sell it for twice as much is pretty rude in my opinion. I feel now that only Lumix has any real interest in the M4/3 format. Shame on you OM Systems!!!

[@Emerald_City_]

I was just thinking the same... it used to be the other way around.

[@armanddimeo6575]

I agree. I wish OM System would focus more on making smaller and lighter cameras and lenses. Full frame cameras and lenses are getting smaller while Micro 4/3 cameras and lenses are getting larger. It appears that OM System is releasing pricey, high profit products. The re-branded Sigma lens saved the company a huge amount in development costs. OM System needs to get back to the roots of the format.

[@woodymeristem2223]

The new OMS lens and the G9ii are not MFT size units, if I wanted gear that size I'd buy Sony, Nikon or Canon gear.

[@eagleeyephoto8715]

No OM system lost stickers to rebrand smaller lenses but they have ones with extraordinary price

[@kevinhugo]

Totally agree Brian. If there's a legal reasoning behind the rebranding of the OM1 that's fine but what about the EM10 and PENs, not too mention all their older lenses, surely they all need rebranding too? I'm worried that they will quietly drop the PENs and EM10 and concentrate purely on the OM1/OM5 and wildlife shooters. I've had Olympus micro43 cameras for more than 10 years and was attracted because of the small size. Currently I can't see myself buying another one.

[@zayacz123]

I, like many others look starry eyed at new camera introductions, but I like to skip a generation. I went from the EM 1 Mark 2 to the OM 1 and will probably wait for the OM 3. I am interested in the 150-600 since a large portion of my photography is birding. I’m not pre ordering. I like to wait for all of our wonderful KZbin reviewers to let me know what they think. And I need to hold one first to determine whether its size will bother me. Thank you for being one of our wonderful KZbinrs.

[@RogerBenno]

No problem with the size or price of the lens. Waterproof, sync is, Tele converter compatible. Insane magnification. This is a specialist wildlife lens. Im delighted that om system have provided us with this. Its affordable for what it is and many manufacturers dont provide the equivalent. Is it full frame? Who cares, it will be on a tripod anyway.(over 1 metre focal length). Well done om system

[@corrbox2]

Hi Brian, This is my 1st time offering a comment on one of your reviews. You offer many great points about the new OM-1 Mark II. This is greatly appreciated and very well done. I understand why camera companies, in this came OM Systems and Sigma are joining forces together to manufacture a new "fantastic" zoom lens. In fact I give them credit for merging their technologies together to offer us this BIG lens. The M4/3rds photographers who need a long lens appreciate this from OM Systems. Why should OM System reinvent such a lens when Sigma has the technology to modify their existing lens to M4/3rds? The R&D on such a lens must be expensive. In the beginning of M4/3rds, we did not have the long lenses, we had to go to a FF or APSC sensored camera. Now we have these larger, yet BIGGER lenses, I get it, I accept this. The glass necessary for such a powerful lens is going to create a bigger package. I know you understand this, and I am sure that photographers of wildlife and sports accept this from OM Systems and Sigma. Frankly, I think it was inevitable that when it comes to a long lens, even with todays lens technology, the lenses for a super zoom would have to be in these large lens bodies. The small frame of the OM-1 MII can still be fairly compact for street and wedding photography. I know a bunch of very talented wildlife photographers who love these lenses. I still believe they are smaller than a FF large zoom lens. I think your points are very well taken and you offer "food for thought". Thank you again for your points. Everything you say ius well taken and appreciated. 👍 😎 📷 👋

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Thank you for the comments, appreciated. Please watch the follow up video to this where I’m holding a lens above my head where I express my thoughts maybe a bit better after I’d had time to reflect. I’m meeting up with the local OMDS rep tomorrow (thurs) so hopefully I’ll be able to see the kit, give it a try and update my views too. Best wishes

[@guygaron1162]

Thank you Brian. I agree the lens is a take on the Sigma FF. Not sure they are exacctly the same. Looking in the specs on Sigma and OM Sytem sites, it seems the OM System lens has one more glass and one more group. Also, unless i missed something, the Sigma lens does not have in-lens-IS. The in-lens-IS plus sync IS on MFT might explain part of the price difference. Keep up the good work!

[@StevenT75]

At B&H in the USA the Sigma is listed at up to 4 stops, and the OM as: Sync IS provides 7 steps of correction on the wide end and 6 steps on the telephoto end. The lens alone without Sync IS has 6 steps of correction on the wide end and 5 steps on the telephoto end. It seems that OM System is proud of this rating, as I've never seen such a detailed description of stabilization.

[@christophmuller3511]

You are comparing against the wrong lens, the newest E and L mount version has exactly the same number of lenses and groups.

[@StevenT75]

The lens I stated IS the one you mentioned. Look it up yourself. Go to B&H Photo Video. Then select Sony or L Mount. Both of those mirrorless lenses claim only 4 stops of stabilization. I don't know how it was done, but there is definitely a difference. The lenses and groups you can see must not be all that's involved in the lens making process.

[@christophmuller3511]

@@StevenT75 the difference in IS is just due to using the FF lens on the small sensor, they have a bit more freedom with the moveable element as more extreme deflections still cover the full sensor.

[@StevenT75]

@@christophmuller3511 Thank you for the explanation. It seems the lens just has added firmware for the extra 1 stop gained with Sync IS.

[@gordon3988]

Here is the funny thing…I’m always complaining that mft cameras these days are too big, but these changes to the OM1 has me considering it. I don’t see any issues with camera companies making continuous improvements and OM seems to have listened to their customers and made several great changes. Will I actually buy it? Probably not, only in that I have only Pan lenses and most work best on Pan bodies..and despite being a bit smaller than the G9ii, still a bit too big for my uses. As for the 150-600 lens, well at least the birders who need will fit in well with the FF folks in the fields. From what I have seen…it does work very well so I’m sure some wildlife folks will excited Btw your thumbnail has the lens at 300-600, not 150-600 though I think everyone understood.

[@tizio54]

It seems that OM-system, with its relatively small market share, doesn't have a huge R&D budget, compared to e.g. Canon or Sony, to develop a new camera from scratch. Even so, as you say, there is probably a big latent demand for a small MFT camera like a GX9 mark ii or a PEN-F mark ii. Just look at the popularity of Fujifilm X100V and the Ricoh GRiii. Such (fixed lens) cameras could be made even smaller with an MFT sensor instead of APS-C.

[@daysofgrace2934]

I think are trying to carve out a niche, x2 factor with the lens. To me it’s a niche lens. Travel lens i just use the pan-cake zoom and the 25mm Summilux with EM-10 mk1. I have the pro zooms and grips for landscaping

[@ianforber]

I have an Em5 mk2 in a cupboard somewhere. I bought it for the small size and ibis. I stopped using it because of the awful menus and user controls (haptics). Have those got any better? I still have the 17mm and 12-40 pro lenses, which are great, and also languishing in the cupboard but I won’t bother going back to m4/3 until they make the camera bodies nicer to use.

[@EdwardBartel]

You should go to a camera store and hold one for yourself. OMS has updated the menu system (from what I'm told it is similar to Nikon's), though I rarely need to make changes beyond the beyond easy Super Control Panel on the back of my cameras - a feature no other manufacturer has been able to adequately replicate from what I've seen. The OM-5 would be the current equivalent of your e-M5

[@AprilClayton]

I’m getting back into micro 4/3 just because of the weight of the Sigma 150-600 on Sony full frame. That lens tires my shoulder. Going through my favorite bird photos, the LUMIX 100-300 were the best. Blurred backgrounds look just as nice as full frame with telephoto in most cases.

[@veikop]

I bet that original sigma is lighter than this rebranded zuiko 150-600 😮‍💨

[@paristo]

Original sigma is ~200g lighter... But let's face the fact, FOV difference is huge. And let's face another fact... This sigma lens isn't good quality to begin with. DPR has gallery and it is soft lens.. like Sigma.. sorry. 150-400 f/5-6.3 is still very good by sharpness. Even with f/13 when using TC-20. (I have it, tested seriously it's sharpness). I don't hesitate at all to use TC-20 with it as long as I get away for shutter speed. We do not have real need for 600mm... I talk this by the 800mm experience. 300mm is already a lot, and if you can't succeed with 300mm, there is usually more effort needed to handle photography than more focal length in equipment.

[@StevenT75]

@@veikop The new OM lens is 35 grams lighter than the Sony mirrorless version. It is heaver than the old DSLR lens.

[@michaelgabes7574]

the big disappointment is not that they showed up with just a view numbers of Upgrades on the OM1 II. They where forced to release something to don't fall behind Panasonics G9 II which is equaly as good at the fotografy-side, but far better for Video. I'm realy pissed of, because in Germany they told us, that there will not comming a future Firmware for the existing OM1, since the quality of Eye-Fokus is far behind the competitors. The Olympus Comunity comes up with harsh complains here.

[@jamesmgreen15]

I see these releases having a place for birding or as an "affordable" safari-type setup. Hardly the last word, but a place. It's all looking incredibly niche at the moment.

[@kevinbourke4038]

I'll stay with my OMD EM 1 mk 3 and the f4 12 - 45 mm lens. Not into sport or wildlife photography. Price of these new cameras is beyond my budget anyway, and offer nothing that makes me want to upgrade. My other camera is the OM 1 mk2 - does a great job, and shares same battery type as the mk3

[@yunfeng413]

panasonic is not losing his way. G9 ii is a fantastic camera

[@jimofmarseille]

Totally agree with you. Opefuly I had a chance to send back the OM1 I just bought, I did it and gave up on Oly/OMSYS. How many years between G9 and G9II ?

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Announced Dec 2017 released early 2018 mkii announced in Sep 2023 so approx 6 years between with several major updates between

[@jimofmarseille]

@@ThatMicro43Guy Right, so that is a bit longer than the 2 years between the OM1 and the OM1 MKII with minor upgrades. The difference between the G9 and the G9II are huge. What I mean is that not all brands follow that rythm of new bodies, specially regarding their flagship. Don't know if Fuji does the same.

[@dunnymonster]

Some good points, well made Brian, some of which I agree and others I perhaps have to call devils advocate on. Firstly, there is no doubt that the OM1 mkII is basically a small improvement over the original mk I version. I don't own the OM1 but I'd have to receive a very generous discount to part exchange a mkI for the newer mkII. In fairness to OM system, part of why the improvements are relatively minor perhaps has more to do with their agreement to use the Olympus name on their cameras coming to an end. Two years isnt long enough from the original OM1 release to do enough R&D to make radical changes. The changes they have made however at least show that there has been some internal hardware improvements ( not that swapping out a memory chip with double the capacity is particularly difficult ). The rest of the " improvements " seem to be mostly software related. As such I can totally understand exsisting OM1 owners wanting those improvements ported over to their cameras by way of firmware update. Whilst we all know the cost of living has shot up in recent years we also have to address the price of the OM1 mkII. £2,200 here in the UK is a lot of money! You are well into FF entry level territory at this point. Yes, once you factor in lens weight of course M43 is still lighter and smaller overall but still, the lure of and advantages of a FF sensor might sway potential buyers from the OM1. Be aware, Nikons upcoming Z6III will likely be £2500 at launch and you can see what its up against. Even the OM1's nearest competitor the G9II is considerably cheaper. I accept this is partly down to not using a stacked sensor but it doesnt seem any worse for it and reviews of the G9II seem overwhelmingly positive. The OM1 mkII is likely to be a tough sell for new buyers or those thinking of upgrading who are already invested in the system, a real double whammy! Onto OM Digitals choice regards the new 150 to 600 now. This is a tough one to call. It makes total sense to seek a 3rd party to collaberate with in this instance. The sheer R&D required to design and manufacture, from scratch, a lens of this type is clearly way beyond OM Digital's capability. Lets not forget, OM digital bought into an already financially failing division and until OM digital as a business is well into the black, the financial resources simply are not there. That said, the old adage, you have to speculate to accumulate, rings true here. Having to seek a 3rd party to outsource your lenses is fine, but when you are basically remounting those lenses ( in effect adding an in built adapter ) to make lenses work on your system this is where it becomes a bit concerning. This doesn't exactly make potential investors in the OM system feel particularly positive about the future in my opinion. Now in all fairness we have seen Nikon doing similar such things with their Tamron rebadged lenses so why is it a problem that OM digital do the same? Well, its about compromises, the M43 system was all about being lighter and physically smaller. We've seen the bodies reach FF size but we always had smaller lenses to compensate. Now with the introduction of a lens like the 150 to 600 we have a FF size lens on a FF size body. Yes, but we get a 300 to 1200 equivalent so its not the same. Even the equivalency is moot now because I can crop my FF 600mm image from a 45.7MP image to one larger than the OM1's 20MP image anyway! In closing, what OM digital are doing here is giving more reasons why you should actually buy FF instead. That can only lead to one thing sadly, the end of M43 system altogether 🙁

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Excellent, well thought out points in my opinion. The thing is for me I don’t have an issue with 3rd party rebadging as long as the product gives the features and quality befitting the main brands ethos. However part of that ethos is low size and weight. Now I’m totally sure if Sigma were tasked by OM System to design a 150-600mm lens specifically for the smaller MFT sensor they would do an excellent job and it would be small and light. I like Sigma lenses. Thanks for the comments

[@judithkes7004]

That was well written. I bought Into the system because it's price plus the weight advantages. And the reach with the crop. But we are heading into price territory of FF. So I will keep my 1mrkii and mein pro Tele plus converter and will definitely consider going FF even though I will Miss the weight and size. I don't mind third Party lenses either. I use them frequently but for me it's the price. It's too close to the cheaper FF.

[@EdwardBartel]

This is a well thought out response and I can sympathize with your point of view. But I disagree on your conclusion. As you state early on, 2 years is not really enough time to come up with substantial hardware changes/improvements unless they had something big already in the works that they couldn't incorporate into the original OM-1. As the first version of the camera was pretty chock full of updates and upgrades, it makes sense that this version would only be iterative. As such, most camera buyers, even the most enthusiastic of brand adopters usually generation hop when buying a camera and many will wait 5 years or even more. This camera is likely targeted at the e-M1.3 and .2 owners that are more likely due for an update/upgrade. You are correct in stating that the OM-1 is priced well into FF territory. But the top-end Olympus models have been positioned that way for several years. This is a "pro-sumer" model targeting advanced amateurs and pros that have niche uses that would benefit from m43's strengths. Even still, there are not likely to be many, if any, FF cameras that can go toe-to-toe with the Olympus on its variety of features (Pro-capture, Live ND, Live Time/Bulb, Starry Sky Auto Focus, 120fps [50fps with constant AF], Hi-Res image stacking [including handheld stacking], and there is more...), let alone the substantial weight savings. Yes, you can say this new lens weighs as much as the Sport version of their FF 150-600 lens, but that isn't what the OMS consumer is getting here. They are getting a 300-1200mm f5-6.3 lens with 6 stops (7 with synch) stabilization that weighs 4 pounds and costs $2700. Please tell me what competitively priced, sized and featured FF lens is out there to compare that against. This is more than just a rebadged lens because the current FF version of this lens only has 4 stops of stabilization, plus this one has a closer focus distance and it appears that there is different optical coating involved. Lastly, I would argue that there is no equivalency of cropping a 45.7mp image to achieve the resolution of the 2x crop factor. Pixel density has a role to play in image quality. You will not get comparable quality doing the lazy man's zoom and cropping.

[@dunnymonster]

@@EdwardBartel Agreed, you would need to have an 80 MP FF sensor to have the same translational data from a 2 X crop to match what the OM1 has. With the exception of Lumix's newer 25MP M43 sensor we seem to be stuck at 20MP as the maximum resolution being offered by OM digital's offerings. With FF cameras now reaching 61MP with Sony's A7R series I'm sure it won't be long before we eventually have 80MP FF sensors. What will OM digital do then? We are also seeing more of the software features that were unique to M43 slowly being incorporated into more and more FF ( and APSC ) cameras these days, they are catching up fast!. The 150 to 600 is an exception to the rule in terms of size and weight and indeed I do concede that there is no direct equivalent in the FF world. It's worrying because does this mean OM will only be producing new lenses which are re badged APSC and FF designs going forward? If that is the case then the weight/size savings over FF will for sure be gone forever. What I am alluding to is that OM is going to struggle to justify it's offerings going forward. Hopefully Panasonic will keep making M43 specific lenses and not feel they have to adopt the same policy. Given their G9II and FF S5II have the exact same body doesn't give me much hope of that. 🙁

[@CaptChaos1960]

In body IBIS easier with M4/3 as sensor physically smaller / lower mass. I ♥️ my MK1

[@paristo]

Smaller sensor is lighter to move, but you need to be far more precise and tinier sensors don't help there. Why larger sensors are easier to stabilize. People praise Hasselblad IBIS best there is, it is as well largest sensor...

[@Yotengri]

Om/oly is awsome.I have nikon sony amd canom and oly/om ststem impress me so much!

[@serenadenphoto]

I'm afraid you are right. MFT doesn't give me high hopes for a bright future. A full frame lens rebranded as a MFT lens??? I have invested in MFT and I'm pleased with what I have. Even so, I would like see OM Systems releasing new gears to show it's not a dead end.

[@debasisroy7556]

The rebadged sigma appears to be a shade heavier than even its Nikon version as the original had to be padded with a speedbooster and IS.

[@JasonOdellPhoto]

The original Sigma for DSLR mount came in two versions: A lighter, non-weatherproof "Contemporary" model, and a more robust, weather-sealed "Sports" model (with a different optical formula). This lens is a reworking of the Sports lens for mirrorless, not the Contemporary model that's available in DSLR mounts.

[@53HB]

My om1 does all I need coupled with a 300f4 and 1.4 tc . Perfect birding set up . The new 150-600 sound good on paper but I await actual photos from ordinary toggers in the u.k not reviewers who obviously can’t give a proper summary.. I haven’t used a tripod in nearly 5 years of owning MFT gear and you have to add a tripod and gimbal to the lens weight

[@_cyclofob8990]

I think OM's capacity has been weakened after the spin-off from Olympus. And it is trying to drive development in the more profitable area (wildlife with the more expensive lenses). Olympus still has a unique selling point there thanks to its comparatively low weight and the best stabiliser. I hope that when OM has finally recovered from the spin-off, it will return to its other strengths.

[@luzr6613]

A lot probably depends on where we choose to set our baseline (like, IBIS came across from 4/3, not MFT). i shoot 4/3 and MFT. I still shoot 4/3 lenses like the 300 f/2.8 and the 90-250 f/2.8, and these don't strike me as uncommonly heavy at 3.3kg a piece. But balance - just as important as weight - depends what you shoot them on. They are fine on my E-1, E-5 and E-M1X - they are not so flash when you have a camera that you mount to a lens (rather than the other way around), like my E-M1. Two point two kilos and 24cm long is a big and heavy lens if you're used to a Pancake, but anyone who grew up shooting similar sized lenses on film (or 4/3) will be undeterred - a 500mm f/4.5 SMC Takumar is over 3.5kg (and there's no IBIS on the Spotmatic). I also find that the mass of a camera matters - part of why i'm shy on the smaller MFT things - mass counterbalances and mass can also reduce vibration.

[@listonheinz9103]

Spot on, Brian! I borrowed the 2.8 40-150 from my local camera shop once, I immediately felt it was too heavy for me and it’s only 880 grams. I would never, ever in a million years buy a 2000 gram lens, I’d rather use the 75-300 which of course is half the range as the new mammoth lens but it weighs a tiny 423 grams! Yes, the quality isn’t the best but who cares! I want them lenses to be silly lightweight, the rest is secondary.

[@pault151]

You might want to look at the 40-150mm f/4 PRO which is 382g or under half the listed weight of the 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO. I love the latter lens and with a 1.4 TC it suits my motorsports usage well. I often end up having to use a polarizer and/or neutral density filter to reduce the light to get shallower DOF effects, so as it turns out the f/4 would probably do what I want mostly. The f/2.8 model is satisfyingly sharp and the f/4 model is said to be comparable, so the latter might be able to give you comparable quality in final photo even after cropped to what the 75-300mm does. Also only USD$900. Unfortunately the f/4 cannot use the teleconverters. THESE lenses do have the classic M4/3 advantages of nice size and weight, while the 150-600mm does not. But some may be needing the reach for wildlife or other uses, and it IS 1/3 the price of the 150-400mm f/4.5 TC, and does have basic weather resistance.

[@brucegraner5901]

This Sigma adapted lens is supposed to have excellent center sharpness which is exactly where it would be most useful for an MFT camera, especially as a niche lens in the OM lineup. However, I understand your point. It's rather pointless for MFT to supersize in order to compete with larger sensor cameras by becoming nearly as large as those big sensor machines. On the other hand, 1,200mm's worth of reach without converters is no small thing for birders and wildlife photographers. A review between this and the 100-400mm zoom with a 1.4 converter would make for an interesting review. At least this shows OM Systems is still trying to innovate. As far as a new Pen-F camera is concerned, it might be considered retro but would it sell well in a world now populated by cellphone cameras? Could it be updated to compete for a competitive price? I think OM Systems (or Olympus) deserves a lot of credit for building the 40-150 f2.8 zoom. As for a light-weight telephoto with a long reach, I'd love to see what MFT could do designing a modern, catadioptric 600mm AF lens. If nothing else the bokeh would be interesting.

[@solar-e-bike-touring-europe]

Sticking with my 300 F4 Pro (combined with 1.4x and 2.0 Tc) - used to have the 150-600 on Nikon - left it for obvious reasons. This update om the OM1 is for 90% a software update - the mark 1 will possibly not get this update (which in fact is needed at least for the AF and tracking part) - so a system that you bought december 2023 will be left in the cold a month later). If only OM had combined this updated with the usage of 2 CF Express slots - that would have been great. What is next? Paid montly subscription for usage of the camera/software??? BTW I just bought a used Sony RX10 IV for daily usage (on my bicycle), bit more than 1 Kg, Zeis lens 24-600 F2.4-F4 (35mm equiv), 1 inch sensor, great picture quality, 26 Fps- so even more portability than M43 (also added the G9II for video work).

[@johnyutzey6504]

I felt just the slightest tremor underfoot as I walked outside today. I think it was Yoshihisa Maitani rolling over in his grave.

[@hveluwen]

Well the original OM System designed by Maitani also featured some very big and heavy super telephoto lenses. 250mm/F2, 350mm/F2.8, 600mm/F6.5 and 1000mm/F11. I’m not sure about the first two lenses, they were added in a later period, but the last two lenses were part of the original System Chart. The 1000mm weighs over 4 kilogram.

[@antonharefield8341]

Hi Brian, yes, we are desperately waiting for a PenF ii, but I bet it won't have a metal body, if it ever materialises. I do not see the point in micro four thirds if the lenses become equal in bulk to those of larger sensor cameras. In my opinion I will not go larger than my 75mm f1.8. as beyond that, the small portability is lost. As you say, nobody wants a bloater, when the OM boat comes in.

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

lol

[@chrismiller4863]

I agree that it is disappointing that they are using a FF lens. I have been hoping to see a resurgence in M43 but it probably takes a lot to develop something like this from scratch for M43. We would want sharp corner to corner performance which means it will probably cost what this one costs, and it would be a relatively niche lens. Glad people have an option but I fail to see why I wouldn’t just go with a full frame where I could crop in with these high MP options but have the flexibility of low light performance in a full frame. The camera size is not much different (which is fine) but the lens size could have put this in a very enviable position for some like me who would appreciate a lighter carry for my bad knees. Glad to see the other improvements. Shame they didn’t go with CF express for the speed and additional durability on what otherwise looks like a tank.

[@theuktoday4233]

What next> An OM system Full Frame>

[@douglasolsen1208]

Not so sure about the Sigma 150-600 zoom pricing. I bought the Sigma 150-600 sports zoom for my Nikon in my Nikon days for about $1700 or $1800. The thing was huge. Didn’t care if it was raining and turned in some very nice photos while I had it. This one at about $1000 more seems odd. Agree with your thoughts here, too, Brian. Photography seems to be going through some odd times lately though.

[@disjenmgn]

I bought 3 months ago the OM-1 and was very happy with it, now I am 100% dissatisfied because if I new the mark II was coming, I waited!!! The only thing I can hope for, is that Om system will give the OMI users a upgrade free or payed for a reasonable amount of money. For what the BIG and HEAVY lens cconcerns, youncan choose for it or leave it.I will leave it for sure. Happy with my 300mm f4 and the 1.4 converter. Thanks for your HONEST opinion SHOUTOUT for you!!!

[@zarrow50]

The first OM was developed by Olympus the MARK II wasn't and shows apparently

[@jarihuikari8921]

When I for the first time bought MFT-stuff I paid 300€ for Pen E-PL3 + 14-42mm lens + 40-150mm lens. E-PL3 was outgoing model back then in 2013 and very cheap. Small, light weight, affordable and with nice image quality. I have since then bought MFT-lenses and newer cameras of Pen Lite series. Price of every camera or lens I have bought has been between 100-350€. No more these cheaper alternatives can be found from OM System products. It would be nice to have some for my kind of hobby photographers. Of course there is used cameras and lenses available. When I next time upgrade my camera body (now E-PL8) I think OM-D E-M5 III would be good enough, and perhaps some of the cheaper pro lenses would be nice to have with it too. If camera or lens costs 1000+ euros, it's not for me.

[@ContraGrain]

So we’ve got an OM-1ii that should have been a firmware update. Human recognition? Firmware. Virtual ND? Absolutely firmware. 9-18mm lens is just a rebrand because Olympus license is up. 150-600 is an EF Sigma lens that’s 4x as expensive with a MFT mount. Realistically the entire launch is a rebrand. For the cost of an OM-1ii you could go buy yourself a Nikon Zf, a superb photography platform, and for the cost of the Sigmalympus 150-600 you could buy 1-2 low cost lens or one big nice zoom. Feels like OMDS doesn’t know how to innovate after this transfer.

[@christophmuller3511]

It’s not the EF version but the new E-Mount/L-Mount Sports version of the lens, costing about half for Sony.

[@ecosmidis]

I understand the concerns and myself hoped for more frequent and substantial innovation from both OM Systems and Panasonic Lumix. IMHO OM Systems and Panasonic properly focus on the well known strengths of the smaller sensor (reach, DOF, stabilization, computational etc). As far as OM1m2 vs m1 it seems they offer the same incremental but not jaw-dropping evolution we saw with E-M1 m1 > m2 > m3. Indeed the 150-600 is big and relatively heavy and more expensive than its sibling by Sigma, but it provides whopping reach and stabilization on MFT under manageable cost-weight. For example lets compare 150-600 on FF vs MFT: similar body+lens cost and weight, on FF you can crop to match longer reach on MFT, get lower noise, higher ISO, more bits/pixel, but missing high stabilization requires tripod (cost, weight, no good for hikes), much lower fps (or much more expensive with less Mpx), limited computational goodies useful for BIF and macro etc. And if you look at the cost and weight of kit with 1-2 bodies and 4-5 zooms, you can travel under 8-10Kg airline carry on limit with MFT but not with FF.

[@bhhbcc4573]

You are being gentle. The OM 150-600 is nearly twice the price of the Sigma for FF. The difference can easily be used for a mid range APS-C camera and then some. Disappointing for me. Give us a reasonably priced 150-300mm f4 and we'll be happy. Keep up the good work.

[@xmeda]

They could have integrated some nice speedbooster in that large FF 150-600, then it will be brutal lens.

[@torbjornelvius7564]

If you do not want the heavy 150-600 mm lens - just do not buy it! There are lots of other MFT lenses that are much smaller, but you do not get 600 mm with them! I am not so sure the 150-600 mm lens is a Sigma lens for full frame fitted to MFT. It seems to me, that the mechanical outer parts are very similar to the Sigma 150-600 mm Contemporary, but the glass inside looks rather different. So my guess is that the optical part is well designed for MFT and gives better, I hope much better, performance than the Sigma 150-600 mm Contemporary. Also remember that 600 mm is 600 mm regardless the size of the sensor behind.

[@christophmuller3511]

It’s not based on the contemporary, it’s derived from the newer E&L Mount sports version.

[@torbjornelvius7564]

@@christophmuller3511 Thank you! I checked only the older and much heavier Sports lenses. The glass arrangement inside looks very similar to the M.Zuiko lens. There will certainly come more detailed analyses soon.

[@gregsullivan7408]

Yes, it's a 600mm lens regardless of the sensor, but nevertheless, the photographic results do definitely change when the sensor size is changed.

[@stephenfinch4534]

I agree, Its a nice lens, (Yes I bought one!) I dont care who where its made only that it works!. So far so good! Om system make lighter stuff as well if thats your choice.

[@gregfeeler6910]

I always enjoy your videos, but I differ in my views on this one. First, although the MFT format did start as "small, light, cheap" it has, and must continue to grow to be a serious system capable of competing with FF if it's to survive. The "pocket" camera market that existed over 20 years ago when Four Thirds and then MFT started has been eliminated by smart phones as we all know. MFT must compete at the high end or it will go away, and only by being successful there will any smaller cameras be possible. We should all remember that the OM-1 two years ago did more to bring people to MFT than any other camera and it was because it could out perform other camera - true MFT innovation. Having now seen very detailed information about the improvements in the OM-1 Mk II I think it will set a whole new benchmark for AF performance for all cameras. The new IBIS is beyond any other competitor. The best products are never the first generation - it takes two or three generations to mature and refine and I think OMDS has done just that with the OM-1 Mk II. The new 150-600mm is a completely upgraded version of the base Sigma lens. There are more and better high end glass elements, the IS system is 5-axis with 7 stops of IS at the wide end and 6 at the tele end whereas the Sigma version is only 4 stops. The SyncIS adds another 1 to 1/2 stop of IS which is awesome for a 1,200mm lens. It accepts the MC-14 and MC-20 teleconverters for up to 2,400mm!! And, it's IPX1 weather rated. It's common these days for companies to share or license product designs or outsource products built to specifications, so I have no problem with the linage of this lens. No more then I would feel my Lexus was somehow "cheapened" because it had some parts that also fit a Corolla. But your real point was to ask if this lens is an example of "losing our way" because it was originally a FF design and that makes it "too big" relative to a "native" MFT lens of the same focal length. How much too big? How can we tell? Well, let's look at a real 1,200 FF lens, like the Canon RF 1200 f8.0 IS. In the US it sells for $19,999.00 - yes, $20k!! - weighs 3,340g and is 537mm long - that's 1,275g heavier, 272.6mm longer (over twice!), 3/4 stop slower, and US $17,299.01 more expensive than this new OM System 150-600mm lens. OM System has just put a tool into the hands of tens of thousands of MFT photographers they would never ever be able to afford if they were shooting FF. You could buy an entire OM-1 system with body, this lens, and other lenses for the same or less money than this Canon lens alone. If this isn't a laser clear example of the size, weight, and cost advantages of MFT over FF I don't know what would be. P.S. The longest OEM Nikon FF lens is 800mm for US $16,300, and the longest OEM Fuji lens is a 150-600mm for US $1,600. Canon lens USA link: www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/rf1200mm-f8-l-is-usm-lens?color=Black&type=New OM System 150-600mm lens link USA: explore.omsystem.com/us/en/m-zuiko-ed-150-600mm-f5-0-6-3-is#tech-specs

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Great reply, thank you. You make some very valid points. Best wishes, Brian

[@stevenbamford5245]

Price point for lenses and body why would someone not just invest in FF ? OM system were always going to do as little as possible for more reward by using existing designs. They have discontinued the OM-1 and I very much doubt it will get any of the firmware features of the mkii version, but there isn't really a great need to upgrade anyway. Going forward I have my doubts regarding OM system and their survival in the industry, but I don't think JiP will lose any sleep as they continue to look for other opportunities such as Toshiba.

[@kwok-penglooi799]

I agree that the 150-600 lens is way to big even for the EM1-3, and if I were to be lugging around that weight, I might as well be using a full frame body with the extra megapixels. But the 600mm (1,200mm FF) at F6.3 is attractive.

[@sophietucker1255]

I love the old but m43 should always be small and minuscule in size is hilarious. Olympus got that when they did the E-M1X too. The old but it is so big and not what m43 is all about. Designing a lens from the ground up is indeed a formidable task so I can understand why they went this route. It is a lens with a rather limited market. Better to put all that R&D into something that has a bigger market.

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

I'll defend the poor old EM-1x to a degree in as far as I've owned and used several cameras where the drip is integral with the camera, really useful if, like me you shot a huge amount of vertical portraits. I used professionally Canon 1D3, 1D3s & 1Dx along with 5D2, 5D3 & 7D with battery grips added. Yes the EM1x is big for an M43 but no bigger than a EM1/3 with a grip added and absolutely miniscule in comparison to the similar type of camera from Canon (& Nikon) mentioned above.

[@tonigenes5816]

Actually OMS realized it needs to cover a segment of users which a demanding longer lens (like 600mm). Using an existing lens like 150-600mm was an oportunity for OMS to build it quickly and to save developing costs. Even if it was designed for FF cameras, it is still a premiere for m4/3 format, offering an unique focal lenght in m4/3 world. And the weight is just 33% higher than 300mm+MC-20 which is a slower combo (F/8.0).

[@EdwardBartel]

I get your point of view here, but physics are physics. You aren't going to get a 1200mm (ff equivalent) lens with a reasonable brightness for smaller than this. If OM Systems wants to target birders and sport photographers, they need to have lenses with reach and this new product fills a niche nicely. Think of the size of the 150-400 in comparison with this and the pricepoint it is at. This lens is not a terrible option. Additionally, calling is simply a re-badged Sigma lens is a bit harsh. I'm certain this lens is from Sigma and it looks very similar to their 150-600 Sport lens. BUT, that lens has 4 stops of stabilization in lens while the OMS model has 6. AND it has synch IS to take it to 7 stops. You cannot get that by simply buying to L-Mount version of the lens and adding an adapter. Sigma has a business model that includes direct to consumer AND OEM manufacturing of lenses. I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't the first lens they make for Olympus/OMS. People need to let go of the pearls they are clutching and be happy that OMS is releasing new products fairly regularly and they have updated to roadmap to indicate future offerings as well. This is a good thing.

[@EdwardBartel]

My real hope with this news is that OMS will push out a firmware update to the original OM-1 to include some of these features. If this is largely an update necessitated by licensing concerns, then they should bring the still pretty new OM-1 up to date. 🤞🤞

[@taffeylewis]

I've already got a 5D Mk3 with a load of L series lenses. I bought my E-M5 Mk1 for a light camera that I can stuff in a bag at short notice. Even with a bunch of lenses. They both have a place in my life, but the attraction of the E-M5 is it's weight and size. If I was happy to lug a lump arround for the day, I'd already have decided to take the 5D. That lens is not for me I'm afraid. Not at that weight or price. Oh, and my 70-200 f4 IS with a 2x converter is less than half the weight of that lens.

[@AlpacoFilms]

Thank you for saying this! I agree completely! I made a video saying something similar! Have a great day!

[@Emerald_City_]

Hi, Brian, great to see you cut this topic again. Couldn't agree more. Ever since the E-M10 Mk IV (385 gram) and the G80 (505 gram), Oly (now OMS) and Pana haven't been making anything for us who buy stuff under 1k $/€. They seem to be selfishly unwilling to employ modern advanced sensors in such small camera's, without the bells and whistles of the top models. The same holds good for the lenses. Where are some more recent lenses such as tiny but strong Pana 15 mm f/1.7, or 20 mm f/1.7? But I fully disagree with you on the lens you showed. It's much smaller than anything you would expect from the same reach on full frame format or APS-C. I guess. Rebranding can't solve all those technical problems of compatibility.

[@darinl848]

yes, the 150-600 is too heavy and big. i returned mine and opted for the 150-400 (slightly smaller and lighter and sharper with Pro features). is OM Systems even designing any new Pro lenses or just revising previously made ones?

[@davidblack2632]

I got the OM-1 MkII on preorder and will most likely trade in my original OM-1. Flagship cameras are getting expensive. Look at the price of the Z9, newest R5 and the A9 MkIII. The OM-1.2 is the lowest price and smallest of these flagship cameras. The OM-1.2 should serve me very well for my serious camera. I am also happy to own the OM-5 for my social/family and non-serious camera with the 12-45/f4 and 20/f1.4.

[@pobreprofe]

I like to travel light, hike and do not feel like carrying a baby with me... Why don't they go for smaller lenses? I love for instance the 14-150 or the 75-300 and I'd love more of that. Also the 17 or 45mm not pro are great for the size. The new Macro is AGAIN too big and heavy, so I'll stick to the 60mm

[@richardwalker4518]

I'm leaning towards your point of view here Brian. I was hoping for the 50-250 f4 to drop, which to my thinking would really hit a sweet spot for an all around usable telephoto zoom, goldilocks stuff. I sort of get why they go for this rebadged Sigma, they can't afford to lose money, so if it translates to significant savings on R&D, quicker payback time and all of that. However, it strikes me as serving a somewhat limited market. An alternative to the 150 - 400 pro for those who cannot afford the sticker shock on that one perhaps. This thing reaches out to 1200mm equivalent and takes a 2x converter, but its quite challenging to keep the subject in the frame on an 800mm equivalent, so you have this 2kg monster chasing a moving subject potentially, I don't think it sounds like fun. That said, those who actually want one will probably love it.

[@pault151]

I had not seen the "future" 50-250 on the roadmap until you mentioned it, thanks! Yes, I'd be attracted to that range, if it gave comparable quality to the 40-150 f2.8 I have. Now that they have the new 'Bigma' though I suspect they will possibly ghost the 50-250. It may depend on sales of the larger zooms.

[@angeloplayforone]

Brian, if you are using this lens in Sony, Nikon and Canon for wildlife you can use FF or APS-C. The use of APS-C body is to get the crop factor. So using APS-C or smaller sensor cameras with FF-lens to get the crop factor and hence is something allready done. For wildlife users this is notting new. Also, maybe if OM System will design the lens completly new this can be smaller but it may be that the niche target is to small to make a profit for OM Systems. Look at the Pro lens and this costs €7500. As Peter Forsgarth said during the Rob Trek session manufactures of m43 needs to increase their profits. Canon is doing this by closing third party support into their R-mount system. Nikon is also semi-closed and only giving third parties space in segment that isnt profitable for them. Or Nikon is also rebadging Tamron lenses to give budget user a choice. Sony is limting functionality of the third party lens manufactures to high end function of their cameras. Regarding your comment in the video of Rob Trek that manufacters needs to try to get people from smartphone to dedicated camera is a strategy that allready failed. No manufacture is trying this as many times this has failed. Problem is that only people above 45 years wil buy a dedicated camera instead a smartphone that has better photo capabilities. Can you mention the avarage age of guests in Rob Trek video? Then case closed. The younger people are already into the capabilities of smartphones and dont need a dedicated camera for casual use. As Nikon said in one of their finacial reports. It is only enthusiast and professionals that are buying dedicated cameras. Because the starting point and reference is the smarthphone any new buyers will chose a system that has capabilties beyond the smartphone can give and also with easy use. Hence you dont see many camera models under the €1000. As Panasonic said it is simple not profitable any more. With the dropping price of Full Frame cameras, the APS-C cameras that used to be the stepping stone to FF for Canon and Nikon, is also in a danger zone. Only Canon is making cameras with new sensor and image processor for under €1000. Nikon offerings are all using old sensors and imageprocessors. Besides that Nikon has only 3 model using the same internals. Sony does not release any new models under the €1000 but let others old models occupy this space. The cheapest new camera the release is Sony A6700 costing €1600. Fuji is also not releasing anything under the €1000, but stil selling the old X-T30 mark II. Panasonic is even not releasing anything new under €1000,- This clearly points that under this price is it difficult to make a profit. The smartphone has won this battle. Hence OM Systems and Panasonic has released only GH6, G9II, OM-1 and OM-1 mark II The same applies for small cameras. The small camera is seen as s device to be used in casual situations, which now is covered by the smartphone. For the majority the quality of smartphone is sufficient for casual use. Hence there is no money to be made for small cameras. If that was the case then every manufacturer has introduced small cameras. This market situation is affecting m43 more then every other system but not FF. Using FF you have more lattitude when dealing with lowlight, exposure and high resultion, which are subjects that the smartphone cannot deal with it. This sitaution leaves m43 manufactures to specialize in video or wildlive which are situation the smartphone does not excell or where for pricing reasons the FF cannot compete. OM System has released a stack sensor OM-1 but Fuji has also released a stacked sensor X-H2s for under €2500. A price space that FF cannot provide a camere with fast readout speeds. The Fuji X-H2s combines the focus on video (compete with GH line of Panasonic) and on speed (competes on OM Systems OM-1). This is an example that Fuji APS-C is also feeling the heat and as answer focus on video and speed in this pricesegment. Panasonic saw this coming and went to FF. The Pana S5 plus 20 -60 lens is costing €1500 hence cheaper then the OM-5 with a pro lens. The Panasonic G9 II is using the body of the FF and particularly the image processor created by the L2 Alliance with Leica for FF L-mount bodies. OM Systems is only a one and a half camera company (OM-5 and OM-1) squeezed by smartphone and FF and seeing Fuji armies ready to attack them.

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Wow, what a reply. Thanks for taking so much time and effort to give such a reply. Appreciated. Unfortunately I’m going to give a fairly concise answer. I pretty much agree with most things you have said and even where I disagree (the bit about opening the market from phone to camera users) you are making very persuasive points. With regards to this 150-600 lens though you are absolutely right but I stand by what I said. I have no issues with the lens itself or its abilities. I do however feel that OM Systems are being somewhat misleading with their customers. If they were to say market it as an “OM System by Sigma” lens that would be less misleading I think. By making it a purely OM System lens it suggests it is a purely designed for MFT lens….which it is not. Yes, it’s Symantec’s but I don’t like feeling duped. Yes it is a niche lens but be up front and honest in the marketing rather than being “found out” on the rumours sites. Anyhow, once again thanks for a tremendous reply. Brian

[@trustbattlerat]

I'm a wildlife photographer, Currently shooting with the 300mm f4 pro which is only 500g lighter than the new 150-600mm, I often use the 300mm with the 2x teleconverter and sometimes if needing extra use the in body 2x crop converter, I also own the 100-400mm Panasonic leica and the 100-400 olympus which I purchased with both teleconverters, the Olympus 100-400 with 1.4x was OK ish but terrible with the 2x F13 with no ibis, the only problem have with the 150-600 is the price I was hoping it was going to be £1750 - £2000, still though if you compare the lens and camera to other systems like Nikon, Micro four thirds is cheaper, I got in to Micro four thirds because I used Panasonic bridge cameras and liked the features like pre-burst. A 1200mm F/6.3 lens is amazing, pair that with the 1.4x teleconverter and you have a usable 1680mm F/9 that may seem silly to a non wildlife photographer but to me I know of situation where I could use it, currently I also have the Nikon p1000 for very long shots but if I purchased the 150-600 then pair with the 1.4x teleconverter then use the in body 2x crop, I'd get equivalent of 3360mm F/9, obviously for Birds in flight that will be a struggle but a peregrine on a nestbox high up on a cliff face feeding it's chick's is going to look amazing.

[@gregm6894]

Something to keep in mind is that the new OM 150-600mm offer 'Synch IS' and 6 stops of IS at full zoom -- 1200mm equivalent FOV. If the claimed spec is accurate, one would be able to get sharp hand held shots at 1/30 @ a 1200mm FOV -- that is pretty impressive if true. I did see a video today where the photographer was getting very sharp hand held bird images at 1/100 Sec.

[@JACKnJESUS]

With a DOF of at least f/12.6 ...it limits images...because of the lack of separation.

[@gregm6894]

@@JACKnJESUS A a 1200mm equivalent FOV subject isolation is not a problem. When I photograph a bird, I don't generally want just his head in focus -- this is not a portrait lens.

[@JACKnJESUS]

@@gregm6894 I don't think you quite understand...everything is going to be in focus...everything...that's not separation. If you have any sort of background, the subject will not stand out. You do realize that's why low f stops have always been more desirable...right? The price is outrageous too...they are gouging.

[@gregm6894]

@@JACKnJESUS Are you new to photography? I have been a photographer for 40 yrs -- 0ver 30 years as a professional photographer, so yes I understand. What you clearly don't understand is that at a 1200mm FOV the subject will be isolated just fine with a f/12.6 equivalent aperture because at that magnification your are talking about extremely shallow DOF. "Everything" is not going to be in focus. I currently own the Olympus 100-400mm f/5-6.3 all kinds of images shot at f/6.3 @ full zoom with the background completely out of focus. You simply don't know what you are talking about, either because you lack experience, or your experience is completely limited to 35mm format cameras and you are making assumptions. I'm not going to debate this nonsense any longer, because I am fully aware of how my lens renders out of focus backgrounds, and it is only an 800mm equivalent FOV.

[@JACKnJESUS]

@@gregm6894 Ahem...DOF INCREASES the farther you shoot...not get shallower. At f/12...EVERYTHING will be in focus. It's an outrageous price for an F/12 lens..

[@palpacher1968]

I love Olympus and have 2 OM-1s with most pro lenses. This upgrade is a huge disappointment for me. Minor firmware improvements with increased buffer memory for considerably higher price. Most of these could be added by firmware upgrade to OM-1, which very likely will never happen after introduction of Mark II. I am not buying the argument that more RAM is essential for 10-15% focus improvements claimed by OM ambassadors. When they released a major firmware upgrade for Olympus M1 Mark II it put that camera into a different league based on the auto-focus performance without any hardware change. When they released M1X the auto-focus (subject detection) was added, which required a second CPU. They had to increase the RAM buffer size in OM-1 Mark II to remain competitive with Panasonic G9II. Not improving the video features is also a lost opportunity, particularly in light of the recently released G9 II, which looks like a great deal now for 500 US less price. The new 150-600 mm rebranded full frame Sigma lens for double of the price of the E or L mount versions is even more disappointing. The disappointment is not the use of the full frame lens, it is the price. You could buy a full frame Panasonic camera+the same lens for L mount for the price of the OM System lens.... To be honest, most of the pictures shown by OM System/ambassadors at the end of telephoto lens are very soft. It shows that OM SYSTEM is not doing any R&D and just wants to squeeze more money from the loyal customers. It is very sad. I really wish well to OM System and I invested lot in their professional lenses (including 300 mmF4 and 150-400 mm F4.5 TC), but starting to lose the patience and confidence in the new company. Most of the new releases until now were based on already existing Olympus developments/patents. To remain competitive and keep/regain the loyal customer's confidence they should do considerably more...

[@glennsak]

Agree with you 100%. However, OMS has discovered there are larger margins with the outdoor/wildlife crowd. Sadly, the market for small cameras/lenses has dried up as consumers are using their smart phones.

[@JACKnJESUS]

JIP, now OM-D did not buy Olympus to turn it around. They bought it on the cheap to let the name slip away with some honor. It's part of the Japanese culture, more than business principles. OM-D believes it can make enough profit with what was already in the pipeline and inventory. Why the sensor never changes. The recent lenses and the fairly early and marginal upgrade is indictive of what the OM mission is. To make as much profit without investing into R&D before folding the company. Micro might survive, but it will be Panasonic only.

[@peterbudd1803]

The lens has Synced IBIS. That would not happen on a Sigma only lens. There must have been a collaboration between Sigma and OMS Systems so it cannot be a totally Sigma Lens design. While I am unlikely to buy it ( I don't do enough birds etc to justify it) But It is a lot cheaper than the 150-400 f4.5. So I am fairly sure it will sell well to the wildlife shooters and maybe sports. It is heavy miind you. The IQ is supposedly very good even at the 600 end. ( quite a bit better than the 100-400 allegedly ) . I used to shoot Nikon and had the Sigma 150-600 S. It was a brilliant Lens so I expect the MFT one will be as good and at 1200mm . Yes I moved to Oly years ago to get lighter equipment, I don't think OM Systems have to only makes small lightweight cameras and lens . They are effectivly a new company with a different strategy to OLY. Give them another 5 years and see where they are then. I think OM Systems are moving away from the very small compact area from what I have heard. They have to make money, one reason Olympus sold it's photo/audio side was they were losing money. I undestand some peoples not likeing it, but Hey don't buy it. The have also a new 9-18 Mark II released. Small and light , not much mention of that though.

[@english_electric7125]

I think you've hit the nail on the head. The 150-600 is a niche lens, but the future viability of the camera industry in general is probably going to be tied to niche applications rather than lightweight basics, where phones are getting stronger with each generation. Phones have become good enough for the average consumer in multiple areas that traditionally required a dedicated device and all contained in a single, compact, convenient package. How do you compete with that and still make a profit?

[@jeffgermanich8105]

Yes a Pen-F mark Ii would have been nice. I’ve got a Pen epl10 and a Pen ep7. That’s about as large as I really want to go. 😊

[@EdwardBartel]

I agree with you on this! There are rumors that OMS has considered bringing out a PenF mk2, but nothing substantial. I hope they see how popular the Nikon zF is and reconsider their product planning.

[@jeffgermanich8105]

@@EdwardBartel I even have considered the Nikon Zf myself. I shoot low light a lot. This Zf with some primes would be great. Although if Olympus came out with some more primes with aperture rings, that could keep me around a while.

[@davidmantripp5312]

The Pen-F had very poor sales. Why would a Mk II be any different?

[@rogermuggleton8127]

For a start, 264 mm is not 2 feet, it's about 10 and a half inches. So it's about 4 inches longer than my 40 - 150 f/2.8. It's also shorter than the 15 - 400. Any 600 mm lens is going to be big. The only way to make a small lens with this reach is to use a smaller sensor, like some of the pocket superzoom cameras. Now it's not for me. But I guess it is for some people, which is why OM System has made this available. If the OM-1 is sold as a wildlife camera, then they need to produce this sort of lens. Now I shhot wildfire, but my subjects are small insects. Long lenses are useful for keeping your distance - on MFT I think about 300 mm is long enough, as long as I can focus as close as 1 metre at the most. What I would like is a 45 mm macro. I often find myself rolling on the ground getting low level shots of plants, and 30 mm is to close and 60 mm is too long, although the latter is still my most used MFT lens (I also have a soft spot for the 7 - 14 mm f/2.8). If you think a smaller 150 - 600 mm lens is possible, let's see your design. You needn't build the hardware, just show us the maths and physics. OK, lens design is a black art, which is why there is co-operation between manufacturers. The total market for this lens needs to cover development and manufacture costs. Sigma have been in this business since 1961 and build their lenses in Japan. I wonder where this new lens is manufactured? My Sigma 16 mm f/1.4 for APS-C is a fine lens at a good price. Where is the ON/Olympus 12 mm f/1.4?

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Yes, you are correct, in my head I screwed the calculation up. As for the last paragraph. No I am not going to come up with my own design, that’s what we are paying these companies to do. I am not knocking Sigmas design on this lens but it was designed by them for a FF sensor. I have no problem with Sigma putting a MFT mount on it and selling it as a MFT compatible lens like they have with the 16/30/56mm lenses. OM System are a MFT manufacturer, they should be producing native MFT lenses. You are correct too, physics does come into it and to produce a smaller lens the sensor does need to be smaller. Guess what? The MFT sensor IS smaller. Yes OM System do need to produce a lens like this for the market they are aiming their camera to but do it properly with a proper lens designed for their system not a rebadged version of someone else’s lens made for something different. It’s like taking a delivery van sticking a Ferrari badge on it and calling it a super car in my opinion (bit harsh but you get the point)

[@rogermuggleton8127]

@@ThatMicro43Guy Despite the sensor size, it's still a 600 mm lens at full stretch. The only way to make it much smaller is to reduce the maximum aperture to f/8 or even smaller. To reduce the length you'd have to fold the optical path, rather like the mirror lenses of a few decades ago. The 500 mm f/8 mirror lenses back then were fat, had fixed apertures and dubious optical quality. You can still get the 150 - 400 mm PRO lens which is also a big beast, and made for MFT. It's physics. But there still are good small MFT lenses and I have some. I can go out with my EM5 III in the smallest bag and a lens in each pocket, It's quite liberating. OM System could update some of these lenses, but with 2024 development and manufacturing costs they would cost twice as much for very little optical improvement. But today "full frame" cameras are being pushed and a great deal is made of their barely detectable improvement in image quality. But I expect more work has gone into this 150 - 600 mm than you think. It works with the Olympus teleconverters for a start, and few MFT lens do that. I think you should give them some slack.