วีดีโอ

Finally a gallery of lovely images from the OM-5. You've convinced me to buy one, and you've gained a subscriber!

Great review! I'm struggling between the OM 1 mk1 and Lumix GH9 mkii. The Oly is down to HK$900 and the Lumix is HSK1200. I can't decide if I need the extra resolution of the Lumix or the better build quality of the OM

I'd like to get this lens. I don't mind that it is a rebranded Sigma but I do mind that it's, effectively, a rebranded Sigma with a $1000 OM System adapter. Did it really cost that much extra to modify the lens to fit the OM cameras?

is there ONE REVIEWER out there showing the camera in action without talk and WITHOUT MUSIC :)

I still have my NX1. The video quality is ridiculously good. Still holds up in 2024 and will last for another few years for sure. I mostly use it as B or C camera for weddings shoot. Indeed the camera was way ahead of its time!

Not sure if this is legit but I have previously read that the external recording was 4k 422 10Bit. If so it would be great. If you have one maybe you can test it.

Good video for this lens I own one myself and am very satisfied with it.

Great video😊

I think if they had made a full frame camera to compete with the Sony A7 they would still be making cameras today. The apsc pro camera market is small, smaller than that of the full frame one, it is likely samsung expected to sell as many units as a full frame camera, not an apsc one. With how good the NX1 was a full frame samsung would have likley been even better and could, with the right marketing, have been a true competitor to the Sony A7 line

OM should do a 200-500mm and try to cut down the weight,. I agree that if you are a serious birds photographer then this focus length is definitely a plus, weight is acceptable for this purpose, 100-400 may be a bit short,

Hi, would you say the video af (tracking especially) is it far better then em1 mark ii/iii? Thank you!

A very beautiful trip, the photos and videos are absolutely magnificent.

Its not worth the upgrade cost from the OM1.1 given the advancements in processing software or by using HDR1 on the OM1. Lastly its the sky you want to effect and not the subject these days the only filter that is required is a polarizing. Id skip this camera and wait a couple of years for the next with more realistic cost benefits. (I have an OM1.1, EM1MKIII and EM10MKIII WITH A BAG FULL OF LENSES)

Lovely photos. I'm thinking about an OM-5 so I'm looking at a lot of examples and reviews, so this has been helpful. I like a little more contrast in my photos, but I guess that's just down to how we choose to process them. Thank you!

The reason I moved from full frame to M43 is so that I didn't have to lug my Sigma 150-600 around. So I sold it and got an OM-1 and the Panasonic Leica 100-400 (faster and lighter than the OM Systems equivalent). I'm not going to start carrying that weight again.

I've just sold my Olympus 100-400 to get this lens. Been using it for slightly more than a month. Its sharp, the AF is fast, and the extra zoom range is very noticeable. The only problem is the extra 1kg is also noticeable. Will need some time to get used to this new weight, but I do find that its quite balance. Also, I found that switching from a neck strap to a sling strap helps a lot to avoid neck aches.

“Game changer.” ? Uh, OK. Not seeing it here, but OK. Price is astronomical.

Good one 👍

Very professional video. Thanks for be sharing. Mac

Thanks that is very helpful!

Good 👍 ❤

I have been using m4/3 system for about 6 months now and so love the smaller size. But at the end of the day full frame still wins out in overal image quality. Not slickly due to the bigger sensor but more the bigger pixels. I wish the manufacturers would stop the silly megapixel race. It’s ridiculous at this point. I use the lumix G9II and with 25mp on a sensor that is literally 4x smaller than a full frame system. The images are not at the same level of my Sonys or nikons with the same 24mp on full frame. Size of those pixels makes a bigger difference than the number of them. I wish I could get a 12mp m4/3 sensor with more dynamic range. But I know that will never happen due to the marketing hype of having to keep up with the jones when it comes to megapixels. But for what I use my m4/3 system for most video it is good enough for now. Plus the G9II has features that only the flagship 6k Nikons and Sonys are just barely getting around to putting on them. Pre burst shooting is a game changer for shooting birds and other fast moving skittish creatures. Shots I would miss due to not having the reaction time required is a thing of the past with pre burst

Thanks for making that review. I have been looking at getting a good used kit for wildlife photography. I’ve been all over the map for months in terms of sensor size and brand. However, when I look at the FF lens size and weight compared to your MFT system I’m back thinking about a lumix G9 or an Oly mod em1 mii. Do you feel like you’re missing out on anything with your MFT system? Thank you!

I really don't understand why Olympus/OM System seem to attract so much negativity with everything they do, and yet they have always innovated and set standards that other camera makers copy but rarely equal. When Leitz first introduced their 35mm cameras and then the Japanese companies adopted the format too, 35mm was ridiculed as being too small for real photographers, and yet Leica are now considered the most prestigious and desirable cameras, a 35mm became the standard for film, which was then emulated in digital. When Maitani introduced the Olymps Pen half frame camera it was ridiculed by "serious" photographers but sold well. When he made the iconic OM-1 SLR it too was ridiculed as being a toy and too small to be a real professional system, and yet it had a much larger viewfinder than any other camera, and many other features and lenses that made it unique. It wasn't long before Pentax, Canon and Nikon were all producing much smaller SLRs. When digital came along, Olympus stuck to its philosophy of making smaller, innovative cameras firstly with the Four Thirds DSLRs, then with Micro Four Thirds mirrorless system that was years ahead of what other manufacturers were making, and their IBIS is still market leading. Olympus understood that digital sensors worked differently to film so didn't need to match the frame size of film. Yes, low light performance was not as good, but it wasn't great on larger sensors either in those early days. And how many photographers today have actually tried pushing ISO 200 film to 1600 or 3200? The results, especially with colour, aren't what you would call great. When Olympus got caught in a financial scandal it sold off its loss-making camera and audio division to JIP. Everyone started shouting about the end of the system and MFT. Then the new OM-1 came out, and they couldn't make them fast enough. However this was a camera that was already in development at Olympus. There was a new company formed (OMDS) with the existing R&D team, but new management who had to not only make sure they kept the business and manufacturing going, but also do it without the financial backing of Olympus's hugely successful and profitable medical division. OMDS also had to start rebranding their cameras and lenses because they could no longer use the Olympus brand after the initial release of the OM-1. However, they could use OM System, which was always part of the branding of the Olympus SLRs (OM being Olympus Maitani). So, although OMDS is a relatively new company, which has managed to take the failing imaging division into profit, it is still attracting masses of negativity, particularly from TH-cam "experts". Developing new cameras and lenses takes time and money. OMDS has managed to stay in business and become profitable, but they also needed to keep releasing new products so that they didn't get accused of doing nothing. They also needed to rebrand all their gear to OM System, because they were no longer part of Olympus Corporation. That meant releasing minor upgrades to existing cameras, and lenses that were already in development, all with the new branding. Collaborating with Sigma on the 150-600mm was a smart business decision. OMDS has committed their marketing and branding towards nature and wildlife and releasing a super telephoto made good sense, but why reinvent the wheel? Their M4/3 partner Panasonic has had a longtime partnership with Leica for lens design, and both have partnered with Sigma in the L-Mount Alliance for "full frame" lenses. Tamron has been making new Nikkor branded lenses for Nikon, a company that has always been renowned for its glass. Sony, another electronics company like Panasonic, partnered with Zeiss for lenses from the outset, as well as opening their mounts to all third-party lens makers, which is a major contributor to Sony's success in digital cameras. So why shouldn't OMDS get Sigma to customise one of their existing design to meet their requirements and specifications, and make a far better lens that perfectly suits the OM digital cameras? This leaves the OMDS R&D department free to work on other new designs. When it comes to the 150-600, it fits perfectly between the 100-400mm and the white 150-400 pro beast, in terms of price, weight and features. As far as I can gather from people who actually need and use such a lens, it delivers the goods, and the size and price aren't really an issue. And let's face it, there's no shame or anything wrong with using a tripod or monopod if it helps. Back in the late '70s/early '80s I was using an 800mm f/8 lens on my OM-1 body, and there was no way I was going to try handholding that bazooka. If you don't want to buy or use the lens, then don't, but please stop all the bloody whinging in the comments. It doesn't help anyone and makes you look like a bit of dick. Nice balanced review though. And apologies for the length of the comment, all the negative comments were pissing me off.

I've just upgraded from r50 to r6 as I'm beginner is this a good choice to gradually move up

Put a UV filter on it? Geez, use a lens hood.

OM System has very good colors rendering. But with your post processing its looks like old fashion color grading which is doesn't show all beauty of that sensor...

I bought the NX1 on its launch and was so dissappointed when it was discontinued. I even contacted Samsung to express my concern that they were making a big mistake. Over the past four years I invested in Sony gear but now on retirement I have returned to my first love, the NX1 and buying everything back via ebay. It is still as good as I remember. No regrets and I particularly do not miss Sony's menu system.

OM need to improve the sensor not gimmicks nobody really needs

Awesome camera. I use mine as well as the NX11 regularly. Fantastic video especially the Full HD 120 fps. I wish they had continued making cameras, would have given much competition for the other large brands..

Can lumix gh6 beat the Samsung nx1 50-150? In videos 4k??? Thanks

I think you are spot on. Is it for everyone? Nope. Is is large? Depends on your perspective. If you are a street photographer with an M5 and regularly use the compact and amazing f4 pro lenses then this isn't for you. And that's okay. Don't buy it. However, for a 1200mm reach in a super zoom, it is compact & reasonably priced. Which coincidentally does maintain a main attraction of the mft format. I can't afford the otherworldly big white 150-400 but this unique lens is possible and exciting for me. I am glad we have another choice added to the wide range of mft lenses.

Thank you I have 2 Samsung cameras Samsung Nx1 and Samsung Nx500 I'm happy

I use om, but I would not buy this Sigma. How does it change wildlife photography? It has been available from sigma in other mounts for ages AND it is cheaper!!

Good video. As you so rightly say, no other cameras have done this.

A great review! A bit off topic, but how do you feel about the OM5. It appeals to me largely for its size and weight. I do a lot,of hiking and do about 60% video. OM1 would be overkill, though tempting…especially now that the version ii is out and you may see some OM1s for sale as a result.

I’ve used this for a friend and thought its additional bulk (including the extra battery handle) was an improvement…sometimes a camera can be too small. That said, not keen on the ‘recording on a stick’, but that’s likely subjective. Just prefer a camera body. This seems to produce some great results!

Nice! Rare you see folks talk about the OM1”s video strengths, often seen simply as a great camera. Well done!

I am convinced that most smaller camera systems will die out in the next 5 to 15 years because of ever-improving smartphone cameras. The development can already be seen, as the sales areas for camera systems are already becoming smaller and smaller in many technic-markets. What will probably remain for a longer time are extremely expensive and high-quality full and medium format systems for professional photographers.

Hi - an interesting thing that brings up some questions for me. The longest native lenses I shoot - on E-1, E-5, E-M1 and E-M1X - are both original 4/3 lenses - the 300 f/2.8 and the 90-250 f/2.8. These are magnificent constructions that work well for me. At five and six hundred FF equivalent, they are plenty long, and at constant f/2.8, fast as. TC1.4 is very usable on both and TC2.0 works for magnifying mid range targets. Both weigh over 3.3 kg but on all but the E-M1 feel well balanced. To get the same reach/framing as this 150-600, I have to halve the distance to subject. When I halve the distance, I'm shooting through a lot less atmosphere. A lot less atmosphere equals a lot less potential for atmospheric disturbance messing with IQ. I can see this lens making it much easier to fill the frame, but if you're willing to do the work to get physically close with a 300 instead, is this lens (forgetting aperture differences) likely to deliver the same quality? If it does, it's miraculous, and if not, is it better getting dirty and wet? What do you think?

I managed to get one from ebay and don't regret the decision

Spending double the price of the original Sigma 150-600....and folks buying this. So OM-System knows they can charge whatever they want. Crazy.

I bought the NX1 when it was first released and ended up getting 2 bodies and most of their lenses. Ended up selling everything and switched to Panasonic. Here I am 10 years later and over the last 2-3 years, I bought everything back. I have had Sony, Lumix, Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Sigma and the Samsung is the only one I have ever bought back. The best.

its not 'that' great. it is not real time, it stacks and processes in 5 sec. it randomly decides on any movement, sometimes it freezes, sometimes it blurs. ie swaying trees and birds flying by could be deleted on its whim. also, you cant change exposure settings on the fly as the dials are locked out. only EV can be changed but the biggest hit is the trees dont get cut out from the background from the GND. ie you get darkened trunk halfway down the tree. on can do that on a PC. So for a clear sky, the ND transition is too obvious. cloudy sky can hide the change of brightness.

I think that this application is the one area where micro four thirds has a genuine advantage over bigger formats. The weight is no problem for a large person, but smaller people might need a gimbal. Canon has 1200mm prime which has the same reach, but it's f8 and twenty thousand dollars. Also about twice as heavy. Sure, the bokeh of a lens that long will be better on full frame, and the depth of field will be smaller. But who cares about bokeh balls on specular highlights and razor thin depth of field for wildlife? Thinner depth of field is a big disadvantage. We want the whole mallard duck in focus, not just the nostril openings on his beak. I have heard people complain that the lens is too heavy or too expensive. I shoot mostly full frame so I laugh at those remarks.

A nice feature but not worth upgrading. Especially at the price they want for the camera. As has been said this feature is not new. Disappointing it’s not in a firmware upgrade 😢

Nice demo - perfect situation for ND, blown out clouds but dim ground. Very challenging to salvage that kind of photo once you've hit the dynamic range limit. Looks like it works!

I'm sure the answer is "no," but did you test if the "Live ND" and the "Live GND" features are stackable?

For several of your sequences of increasing GND filtration, it seems the ambient exposure of the foreground was also changing making it difficult to judge the GND effect. Were you manually choosing the foreground exposure?

Thanks for an informative video. Doess the GND work in Bulb mode for long exposure photography?