Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

OM System/Olympus cameras, lens and news - and other Micro Four Thirds cameras

I could never ever justify buying one, but there is something awfully seductive about the Pen F

Thumbnail-Livia-1920x1223.jpg


 
I could never ever justify buying one, but there is something awfully seductive about the Pen F

Thumbnail-Livia-1920x1223.jpg


It got quite a slagging when it came out but it is actually quite a nice camera, and still goes for good prices, over £500 which is surprising given its age.
 
It got quite a slagging when it came out but it is actually quite a nice camera, and still goes for good prices, over £500 which is surprising given its age.
I'm just a sucker for its looks even though I'd never use that dial thing on the front.
 
Interesting to see Andy Rouse there, I went to one of his presentations perhaps 4-5 years ago and I could have sworn he was a Canon or Nikon shooter then.

I would definitely consider Oly, especially for the weather sealing aspect.
 
Interesting to see Andy Rouse there, I went to one of his presentations perhaps 4-5 years ago and I could have sworn he was a Canon or Nikon shooter then.
I imagine he switched fairly recently - his Instagram account has him as a Olympus E-M1X user.

After looking at the work of the photographers in that article, guess I've got no excuse for my pics coming out rubbish!
 
I also went to a presentation at my camera club about the M1X, it was a very slick presentation with lots of shooting examples showing off what it can do. Too expensive for me though, I am just a budget photographer :)

I wonder how many professionals will be using a M1X at the next Olympics?
 
I also went to a presentation at my camera club about the M1X, it was a very slick presentation with lots of shooting examples showing off what it can do. Too expensive for me though, I am just a budget photographer :)

I wonder how many professionals will be using a M1X at the next Olympics?
The cheaper OM-D EM1iii has almost all of the functionality of the M1X at a cheaper price. I'll probably do some more selling of gear and get the OM-d EM-5iii as my second camera at some point.

I know Sony FF cameras will generally produce images that will outgun the Olympus in some circumstances*, but I'm so happy to be back with a lighter camera.

(*and vice-versa in some!)
 
Video of drag racing taken with the Olympus 100-400mm F5-6.3 IS offering an outrageous 200mm-800mm equiv range in a package small enough to be handheld.

 
Interesting video, it does look compact that 100-400 and if it is sharp wide open then it is better than my 80-400 Nikon which needs to be stopped down. But smaller though it is, it looks all metal so I wonder how light it actually is.

My Nikon 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 AFD VR weighs 1340 g (2.95 lb)
Nikon AF Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR: Digital Photography Review from 1996 £1,400 app at launch.

And the Oly 100-400 F5.0-6.3 IS weighs 1120 g (2.47 lb)
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS: Digital Photography Review from 2020 £1,000

So a bit lighter.
 
Last edited:
Interesting video, it does look compact that 100-400 and if it is sharp wide open then it is better than my 80-400 Nikon which needs to be stopped down. But smaller though it is, it looks all metal so I wonder how light it actually is.

My Nikon 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 AFD VR weighs 1340 g (2.95 lb)

And the Oly 100-400 F5.0-6.3 IS weighs 1120 g (2.47 lb)

So a bit lighter.
What's the weight/size of your Nikon? You have to add that on too!

And don't forget the Olympus has a much, much longer range (200mm-800mm). It's relatively tiny given the range.
 
So My Nikon kit inc lens weighs 1000 + 1340 = 2340g

Oly EM-1 + 400mm lens weighs 580 + 1120 g = 1700g

So the Oly kit offers a weight saving of 2340 - 1700 = 640g
 
That's one of the heavier (if not the heaviest) m43 lens as well. Most of them are much lighter, which adds up if you carry more than one lens, which most people do.
 
Although it is quite slow, if it is sharp wide open it is going to be good value at that price point.
 
That's one of the heavier (if not the heaviest) m43 lens as well. Most of them are much lighter, which adds up if you carry more than one lens, which most people do.
Some of the fast prime lenses are ridiculously light compared to full frame/APS-C.

The 45mm 1.8 Olympus (equiv 90mm) weighs just 116g and is a bloody great lens and the bigger 75mm (150mm) is just 305g.
 
My Nikon 50mm f1.8 AFD weighs 155 g (0.34 lb) and is also tiny.

For me Oly is interesting at the telephoto end with its IBIS and IS combined and especially because of the decent weather-sealing and also for its silent operation.

A Nikon D500 also might be interesting, crop sensor goes for good prices used and had great focussing and speed etc. I am happy with my D800 for portraits landscapes and close up stuff - for the moment at least.
 
Last edited:
My Nikon 50mm f1.8 AFD weighs 155 g (0.34 lb) and is also tiny.

For me Oly is interesting at the telephoto end with its IBIS and IS combined and especially because of the decent weather-sealing and also for its silent operation.
Without going into a 'weigh-off' I should point out the comparable Olympus lens is even lighter at 136g and is a cracking performer too at a good price!


Everything is a trade off in photography but I'm still feeling very happy about getting rid of my heavy full frame gear.
 
Without going into a 'weigh-off' I should point out the comparable Olympus lens is even lighter at 136g and is a cracking performer too at a good price!

I know the FL of a 25mm MFT lens is equivalent to a 50mm FF lens, but I am not sure the dof is the same, what do you think? For example, my 50 1.8, shot for example at 2.8 on FF, has a very narrow dof, which is what I love it for.

With my 85mm f1.4 I can easily get this subject isolation (at f2):
DSC_0622w.jpg

Everything is a trade off in photography but I'm still feeling very happy about getting rid of my heavy full frame gear.
Well I am genuinely considering an Oly 100-400 and a body. I see some Oly bodies on MPB at prices that don't scare me too much. Don't know enough about them yet though.
 
Last edited:
I decided some time ago that my 80-400 would be traded in, it is ok but isn't a stellar lens, the question was what I replaced it with, an updated Nikon AFS version is an expensive option and larger than the original, a Sigma version also a possibility much cheaper but I am not sure, and now an Oly is also an option.

I don't do as much telephoto photography now, but whether that is because my lens makes it hard work or other reasons I am not sure. When I started out I did quite a lot of wildlife photography and there is the opportunity to do that here also.
 
Last edited:
I know the FL of a 25mm MFT lens is equivalent to a 50mm FF lens, but I am not sure the dof is the same, what do you think? For example, my 50 1.8, shot for example at 2.8 on FF, has a very narrow dof, which is what I love it for.

With my 85mm f1.4 I can easily get this subject isolation (at f2):
View attachment 231361


Well I am genuinely considering an Oly 100-400 and a body. I see some Oly bodies on MPB at prices that don't scare me too much. Don't know enough about them yet though.
The restrictions of a small sensor mean that the m43 system can't get that mega bokeh depth pf field but it can still be pretty good. This is the 90mm equiv f 1.8:

1600797271293.png

 
Yeah, I've never found depth of field a problem (super shallow DoF is more of a novelty thing IMO anyway, rarely practically useful and can be a liability). Long lenses also intrinsically provide low DoF. Here's one I shot at a rally in Trafalgar Square at 140mm (280 equiv) and f5.6 - lots of bokeh there.

P1120114.jpeg
 
An interesting article on Olympus from the Amateur Photographer, slightly critical.

 
I like these 'what's in the bag' videos. This guy goes off hiking in the wild and explains why he likes Olympus gear (in short: lightness).

 
I'm never ever going to buy - or most likely even touch - this lens but it seems to be a winner for very deep pocketed pros

So, how to sum-up one of Olympus' most impressive lenses? If you're a serious wildlife photographer and can afford it, get it.

Price aside, the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 IS Pro is an incredible lens for nature and wildlife photographers. The image quality is fantastic, offering tack-sharp performance across the zoom range, with or without its built-in teleconverter. AF is also spot on and very fast, and the incredible close-focusing distance provides even more versatility, allowing for nice close-up performance that's atypical of super-telephoto lenses.

In terms of the overall build quality, the lens is, as expected, built like a tank, even if it is surprisingly light. The lens feels incredibly solid and very well built, as one would expect from a $7,500 piece of optical equipment.

In the end, yes, the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 IS Pro very expensive in and of itself, but it's also very, very good. Lenses for serious wildlife photography are often quite pricey and are a serious investment, and the Olympus 150-400mm is no exception. However, when compared to several of its full-frame counterparts, the 150-400mm Pro is both reasonably priced and incredibly versatile. If you want to slim-down your wildlife gear, and free yourself from tripods and monopods, the lightweight Olympus 150-400mm Pro lens is worth serious consideration.


 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom