f4.5 150-400

[Cederic]

Am I wrong to be getting all excited about the announced Olympus 150-400mm f4.5 pro zoom with built in 1.25 TC?

I know it'll be too big and too expensive and too heavy and just not sufficiently better than my four year old Panny 100-300 to justify buying it but until the size and price and weight are announced and people have reviewed it.. Excited anticipation!

 

[mary]

I hope you're a patient man..it's a year away.

 

[Hendrik]

That's OK, I'm willing to wait just as long as it doesn't do a D400 and take on the role of Godot. Or Guffman, for that matter.

 

[Bushboy]

The build quality, will make your 100-400 feel like a cheap $150 kit zoom.
It will be rather expensive, but it’s only money...
Well out of my league, but that’s ok, I won’t need one.

 

[wjiang]

The build quality, will make your 100-400 feel like a cheap $150 kit zoom.
It will be rather expensive, but it’s only money...
Well out of my league, but that’s ok, I won’t need one.

100-300 actually, but point taken. The 100-300 feels like a kit zoom all by itself, albeit an oversized and heavy one.

 

[Ross the fiddler]

The Olympus 150-400mm f4.5 pro zoom with built in 1.25 TC will be a lovely lens, when it comes, but one would really only use it on the E-M1X, since both would be priced for the same category. It should work fine on an E-M1 Mk II (with HLD-9 grip) but should be better on the E-M1X with an extra stop of stabilisation. I've seen the mock up prototype (in its enclosed case) & wonder how close it will be to the final product with five slide switches on the left side etc.

 

[Tool Crazy]

I'm sure most of us here will only dream about it. Possibly maybe phocal might be the only one to get one among very few to get one.
But for those privileged enough to afford and get it will love it. I have two Olympus pro zooms (12-40 40-150) and they are spectacular and I'm sure the
150-400 will be as well.
I have the Panasonic 100-300ii and am not crazy about it. It's soft and f5.6 on the long end. I'd much rather use the 40-150 with tc1.4 when I don't need extreme reach. The Leica 100-400 version is way better build quality but from what I've heard and seen, only a bit sharper but still soft and it's f6.3 on the long end.

 

[Lcrunyon]

I am very interested in this lens for wildlife and birds in particular. I don’t know how expensive it will be, but optically I expect it to be stellar; and for the aperture, range and build quality, the fact that it will still be hand holdable is very important.

I see little point in spending so much on a lens without a body that can do it justice, so to me, this lens is tied to the E-M1X or the next E-M1 MkIII. I’ll be checking out the E-M1X this Friday, and see if it wows me enough. With its overpriced launch (or so I feel from the reviews) and the onset of larger format mirrorless with better (or at least similar) performance at cheaper prices, I’ve been questioning the value proposition of m4/3 as much as anyone. Given my priorities, I don’t see the grass so greener on the other side that I am making any changes yet, but this lens - along with the body situation next year — could still be a major factor in whether I decide to start looking elsewhere or at least at a second system.

 

[Ross the fiddler]

Here's a FB photo showing all the Pro lenses with the 150-400, but of course, the hood (not in this image) when on will make it look very large.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Cederic]

That's distressingly large then - not that f4.5 at 400mm was going to be anything else.

Then again I just spent three months travelling and used my 100-300 almost as much as my 12-40, and my 30-100 was only on the camera once (for a few minutes) all trip. So maybe I can ditch two lenses to make room for one awesome one.

It's not just the wildlife (but there was a lot of that), I'm basically too lazy to walk 2km to get a wide angle shot

 

[Phocal]

I'm sure most of us here will only dream about it. Possibly maybe phocal might be the only one to get one among very few to get one.

Honestly I am not really interested in this lens. I think it's amazing Olympus is making it and if I was still shooting sports professionally I would be all in, I do prefer zooms for sports. It really does make sense for a sport shooter where having a zoom that can cover a long range is nice to have since you are really limited in where you stand vs where the action is/can be. This lens paired with the 40-150 on a 2nd body and the 12-40 on a 3rd body would be about all I would need to cover any sport. Well, with the occasional fisheye or 7-14 shot. It really would work out to an amazing setup for sports. But I have pretty much stopped shooting sports for money, only shoot sports for the occasional local paper assignment.

I know a lot of people talk about this being such an amazing wildlife lens but for me it is not what I am after for wildlife. When it comes to wildlife I look for the best IQ I can get for a given focal length and you just can't get that from a zoom, even from the amazing Olympus zooms. I much prefer primes for wildlife because they do provide much better IQ and I honestly don't find shooting with them a limitation. I am not after a one lens for all my wildlife photography solution because to get that it would have to be super super huge to provide the best possible IQ for every focal length. I also seldom need more reach than my 300/4 can provide and rarely use it with the MC-14. I very much doubt this lens will be beat my 150/2 at 150mm or my 300/4 at 300mm. I would even wager that my 150/2 w/ EC-14 will be equal at 210mm. All this lens would provide me is 2/3 stops faster aperture at 400mm, that is a lot of lens to carry around to sacrifice IQ at my current focal lengths for 2/3 stop at 400mm, which is a focal length I seldom need/use. I would find 500mm @ f5.6 (with built in TC) intriguing for a number of things and that's why I wish they had made a 500mm prime. If Olympus were to make a 400mm f4.0 or 500mm f5.6 I would be very interested in that lens. While I would love a 500mm f4.0, I am not sure I really want to carry that big of a lens around anymore and it wouldn't be something I could throw in the backpack for that occasional use where a 500mm f5.6 would be.

Now the EM1X, that is something I am seriously interested in.

 

[Reflector]

Smaller and lighter than my adapted Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 on the front end and only 1/3 of a stop slower when the Sigma has a TC on it. I'd take it for a long end lens if I could afford it, the Sigma needs to be stopped down to f/5.0-5.6 to be sharp anyways at 420mm.