Love my OM-1 and the 300mm f4. I bought an excellent used copy. It blew me away the first time I used it. Sharpest lens I've ever used. I photographed a stone wall across the street. Pixel peeping in the image I was stunned by the details. Excellent build quality and engineering. I hope OMDS has the ability to create another masterpiece like this in another focal length.
This and the 40-150 F2.8 Pro paired with the 1.4x teleconverter is my favorite lens for wildlife photography. I’m in total amazement every time I use them. With the use AI software like Topaz, noise is no longer an issue. Like you, I’m blown away with how sharp it is.
Last year I switched from the Sony A7r3 and the 200-600mm lens to the OM-1, 300mm f4, and 1.4x teleconverter for wildlife photography. My primary reason for the change was size and weight. I like to do most of my shooting without a tripod, and I found the Sony lens uncomfortably heavy. Overall. I’ve been happy with the new setup. It’s much more pleasant to carry for long shoots and the 840mm equivalent focal length gets me close enough in most instances. In addition, the OM-1’s ProCapture feature helps me to take better “action” shots than I took previously. Because of the increased noise, I do rely on Topaz DeNoize AI for more of my photos. And, I miss having all the extra megapixels that came with the Sony when I need to crop. However, overall I think the switch was worth it.
I moved to Olympus for wildlife about 3 months ago purchasing the OM-1 and a Zuiko 100-400. Then I acquired the 300f4. Wow! What a lens. Truly remarkable. This is the benefit of m43rds. It isn't just the weight/portability, it is that in low light I have a bright f4 lens which is sharp wide open. Amazing!
@@peterjohnson1845 I rarely use the 100-400 now but it is such a good lens I am not prepared to trade it in or sell it. I do miss the ability to zoom out (more than in) on occasion when I am photographing birds.
@@peterjohnson1845 No, I haven't. I was thinking about trading in the 100-400 for the 40-150 especially as I own both TCs but I am still reluctant to do so. I think it is because the 100-400 is such good value for money for what it is, I feel I can justify waiting until I can afford to add the 40-150, as well.
I use the 300mm Pro with the 1.4 TC all the time. I get sharp pictures at 1/40 s, if the subject is still. With the 2.0 TC I don't have that many keepers (roughly 20/80 compared to 80/20 for the 1.4). I object a bit to the "equivalent" comment; yes, 300 F4 micro4/3 is as a 600 F8 when you consider reach and depth of field, however, it is still a F4 for the exposure/needed shutter speed/iso. The closest focusing distance does not change when you add a TC, only the magnification. It is perfect for dragonflies, but there is a drawback; the tele lens compression is, IMHO, disturbing sometimes. But all in all, you seem to have found the advantages of the MFT system, less weight for the same reach. Since there are no solutions, only trade-offs [T Sowell] everything is about to weigh them against each other and choose the best for yourself.
not quite the full story with the “equivalent” comment. 300mm f/4 on M4/3 is equivalent to a 600mm f/8 on a full frame in every regard photo wise. the photo will look darker on the full frame if the shutter speed and ISO is the same, but it’s worth noting that there will be the same amount of noise in the image. if you were to brighten the image by 2 stops in post (with an ISO invariant sensor), or shoot with an ISO 2 stops higher in the moment with the full frame so that the images are exposed the same, there will be no difference between the images in terms of field of view, depth of field, and noise/required shutter speed. the entrance pupil of both lenses are 75mm, so the same amount of light is entering both lenses no matter what. the full frame equivalent would look darker because that same amount of light is spread over a larger sensor, but the amount of noise will be the same.
@@gabewrsewellUnfortunately, that is not the case. I do not get any magic speed boost by adapting full frame lenses to MFT either. A 300mm f/4 lens will always behave the same optically regarding exposure and depth of field, adapted or not. MFT just gives you a crop of the image circle. So theoretically adapting this 300mm F/4 lens would give you the same exposure and depth of field on a full frame body, just the angle of view would be equivalent to a 150mm lens on MFT - ie.e just the normal 300mm angle of view on full frame … and the image circle of the lens would probably be to small for the sensor, producing a round image. If our imaginary full frame sensor had the same pixel density as the MFT sensor, just more pixel, you could theoretically crop that rounded picture to a quite equivalent 4:3 ratio 21mpx image in post. Even regarding the noise.
I just bought a used version of this lens and i LOVE it. I was using the Panasonic Leica 100-400 before or the Sony 200-600. I hesitated for a long time about buying a prime telephoto lens but i realized that 99% of the time, I was shooting my Sony 200-600 at 600mm focal length, so i decided to get this lens for portability. I will keep the Sony 200-600, to use with a monopod because i can use it with a FF camera, but this Olympus 300mm is a gem. Enjoy!
Hi Micael. Great videos. I have used this lens for insects in decent light, as it has really close focusing and agree that you should get some great photographs of butterflies and larger bugs later in the year. It is however, a great birding lens in my opinion. Keep up the good work.
The 300 F4 Pro is my workhorse, I use it with both the 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverters - bought all 3 used - I barely take the 40-150 2.8 with me anymore - have it always hanging beside me on a sling (on the lensfoot where I added a Leofoto Arca Swiss QD plate - so I do not carry it via the camera body as you do in the video) - I sold the Olympus 100-400 for it - never regretted it.
Great video! Thanks … A couple of thoughts: you can’t really compare ISO of m43 with ISO of a full frame. ISO 400 on m43 is not equivalent to ISO 400 on full frame. And the 300 f4 is equivalent to a 600 f8 in that the m43 has the same DOF at F4. You can always use a pro level Olympus lens wide open. So, at the same shutter speed and matching DOF, you shouldn’t see more noise in the m43 image. You have to consider all of the factors and not try to compare 1-to-1
I bought a used 75-300 to get me started with m4/3. I'm also finding 300mm short in a lot of situations so far. I switched from an R7 / 100-400 combo which felt like plenty for most of my needs. I did not think about cropping in after the shot. I will say most of my pixel peeping is to ID birds that I can't get close to. I'm leaning towards a used Oly 100-400 as spring is approaching and the 300 would take far longer to save for.
Sounds like a neat lens. My budget's an order of magnitude lower than an equivalent OM kit would be, but as someone mostly interested in macro who dabbles in larger animal photos, my Pentax A* 300/f4 has suited me so far. No autofocus, but it's about the same size as my Laowa 100mm/2.8 (wider at the end but lighter), and I can fit all the lenses I like to use (35mm, 50mm, 60mm, 100mm, 300mm) in a shoulder sling bag.
Omg a video on my dream lens haha edit: can you also try it with the 2x tc? I have heard online a lot that it can use it to no significant loss to sharpness but never seen examples.
I think the biggest problem with the 2x is the darkness it produces, and that at 1200mm you start running into problems with the athmosphere blurring your photos etc. I think 1.4x is probably the sweet spot.
I have the Panasonic Leica 2.8 and a 1.4x teleconverter I got on a really good deal used ($980). I pair it with my EM-1 Mark II. It's also an incredibly sharp lens and it is also a fantastic video lens. I have it with my 40-150 2.8 and am covered for most everything .
The close focus of the Olympus 300mm 4.0 is 1.4 meters which gives 0.24x magnification which will be better with a 1.4x teleconverter. You cannot focus any closer with a teleconverter, but the magnification is larger.
One of the best combo for bird action photography. Easy to handhold and combined with Procapture technology, we can amazing shots. Mc-14 is necessary to get the reach for birds. And the result is still sharp with mc14.
The magnification of a lens does not depends on sensor size; on FF camera with the same pixel density as the MFT sensor, a 300mm lens allows you to have the same size as pixels/target area, or pixels/height of the subject.
Yes in theory you can of course buy the most expensive high resolution full frame camera along with a big full frame 300mm f/4 lens, and crop out the middle of the image to get similar results. I wonder what the point would be though.
Olympus makes great lens, my 75-300 is also sharp throughout the entire focal length. My collection includes macro, portrait, and so on all very sharp. like you said the sensor is a compromise. Need good lighting.
Having grown up using film a little bit of grain or "noise" doesn't really bother me. With software like Topaz now available I don't think it's an issue if it seems bothersome.
I agree that noise is less of an issue these days. Even the latest version of Lightroom has a great noise reduction tool which gives mindblowing results.
Well, this lens is still pretty long and heavy. But I found it completely possible and pretty comfortable to use it with one hand on my OM-1, even though it is of course a bit front heavy.
I don't like the handling of those Sony APS-C bodies for supertelephoto lenses. The handling is terrible. On an A7IV, RV, or L mount FF it makes way more sense.
If you don’t turn the lens hood so much it will still keep in place and is very easy to unscrew. There is an unnecessary amount of turns possible and at the end of that the hood is really to tightly fastened. Just go easy on it and everything is fine.
I love your videos but i feel the need to say this: crop factor does not affect the amount of light getting through the lens to the sensor. So it is in fact a 600mm f4 lens. It would be an f8 lens if you'd put the 2X on it as that actually costs you 2 stops of light to double your focal length
No doubt OM has great af tracking but for the same $ I’d prob go for the Nikon 400mm f4.5 which is 0.5 lbs lighter. For extra reach (when needed) add 1.4x tele, slap it on APSC body, or just crop high res sensor… still have better background separation & cleaner images.
Strange…I just ordered a second hand Olympus 300mmF4. So don’t have it right now…and getting even more impatient to have it in my hands after watching your excellent review. I’m also having the Sony 200-600 for my Sony body’s but yes compared to Olympus it is a huge and big lens for the same reach. The IS is also very good combined to an OM1, much better than the Sony combo’s...7-8 stops. And considering sharpness it seems to be very sharp indeed, so a TC1.4 will not affect to much the final IQ result. See the Lenstip review, they tested it with the TC1.4 Before Sony I was a Canon user and had also the FF 300mmf4 IS and it is also a very good lens. This lens is about the same size and even a little lighter (only 1190gr). But I think I will be very happy with this lens…impatience is even growing while writing these sentences…hihi So this lens combined with 0.5 magnification (macro), good TC 1.4, procapture, 60-120 fps and good performing IS will be my Swiss army knife for wildlife and macro (bigger insects)...
I had the Sony 200-600mm 5.6-6.3 G Lens, it was too big and too heavy to go hiking with that Lens, it has also issues with the IBIS on Sony A7R series Cameras, so I just bought the new Sigma 500mm 5.6 DG DN Sports Lens, which is excellent, very easy to use with great image quality, I can very highly recommend the Sigma 500mm 5.6 DG DN Sports !
@@MicaelWidell You should try the new Sigma 500mm (before buying the Olympus 300mm !), you can only use teleconverter on Sigma with manual focusing, but that does not bother me, I use Sony A7RIVA, so in APSC mode I still have 26 megapixels and equivalent to a 750mm full frame Lens and there are still some to crop from the 26 megapixels ! Although I had seen several videos with the new Sigma 500mm Lens, I was still very surprised when I got it in my hands, it is very compact and light weight for a 500mm Lens, I can very highly recommend it !
Gone om1 boujee with that lens😅. At least you didn't pop out the 150-400mm one. It's only 7k. You got this! I'll be getting a telephoto in the fall to avoid another boring winter lol
While an impressive lens, Olympus has a history of making crazy glass like the 14-35 f/2.0...I wish they had taken a chance and made is something like a 300mm f/2.8, given its relatively small size they really could have pushed the envelope or even made it and f/2.0, which would have given it effectively equivalent light gathering as a full frame 600 f/4...
Yes, it's amazing small for being a primer. Personally I prefer zoom lenses. More flexible and I usually only need to bring one lens with me. But I am actually consider to switch to M43 as it's more versatile than FF or APS-C and being on Canon RF system empties my wallet.
@@MicaelWidell Agreed, I plan to switch from Canon R6 to OM-5 mainly because of my core interest in macro photography and the much lighter OM-5. If I understand it correctly the OM-5 also has focus bracketing 🙂
@@dennismwallentin296 Thinking about doing this as well. I'll keep my canon stuff but maybe buy OM stuff. Intrigued by focus bracketing and the light weight but most importantly the cost. Canon RF is so expensive even for classic focal lengths.
It´s not ridiculous small: Nikon has got a 300/4 PF with nearly the same specs and the same sharpnes but with almost half the weight. and much lesser in dimensions. If there was an adapter from Nikon to Canon i would get even better better magnifikation with my EOR R7. Luckily i have the RF100-400 (half the weight) and the 100-500 (nearlry the same weight) wich, both give me the same close-up abillities as the Olympus 300/4+1,4 extender. By the way you get an R7 + a RF 100-400 for less than the Olympus 300/4!!! But it´s a very fine lens to pair it with the OM-1 (I´ve got it but I get better result with R7+100-400 because i have to use the extender with the OL 300/4 if i want the same magnification and then i don´t get the same sharpness as with the R7-combo)
You are right Nikon 300/4 PF is lighter and half the price. Also it’s a full frame lens. The close focus distance is really good for Olympus 300/4 but but it’s a personal choice whether one wants to pay more than double the amount for close focusing ability. Olympus gear is great for macro photography with all the greatest in camera options. Smaller sensors are good for macro.. just an observation.. Thanks you !
Micael Widell - Ridiculously small. me - yeah, sure, it's a lens for M4/3 mirrorless cameras and it is slightly thicker and longer than the 1997 Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM which is for FF DSLRs... I think the expression you were looking for was "ridiculously big"
You can't compare a DSLR lens with a mirrorless one due to different flange distance. If I were to put that Canon lens on a modern camera I would need an adapter that makes it several cm longer.
My brother in Christ. Don‘t let the lens just dangle off the camera, it’s in the manual. You weight of the system has to carried by the foot you removed, don’t complain when you rip out the camera mount from the body.
Thanks for watching! Please also visit my... 🐞 favorite gear: micaelwidell.com/#gear 🐛 lens guide: lensguide.micaelwidell.com 🪳 monthly newsletter: micaelwidell.com 🐜 instagram: instagram.com/mwroll
Love my OM-1 and the 300mm f4. I bought an excellent used copy. It blew me away the first time I used it. Sharpest lens I've ever used. I photographed a stone wall across the street. Pixel peeping in the image I was stunned by the details.
Excellent build quality and engineering. I hope OMDS has the ability to create another masterpiece like this in another focal length.
A 400mm f/4 would be incredible.
This and the 40-150 F2.8 Pro paired with the 1.4x teleconverter is my favorite lens for wildlife photography. I’m in total amazement every time I use them. With the use AI software like Topaz, noise is no longer an issue. Like you, I’m blown away with how sharp it is.
Last year I switched from the Sony A7r3 and the 200-600mm lens to the OM-1, 300mm f4, and 1.4x teleconverter for wildlife photography. My primary reason for the change was size and weight. I like to do most of my shooting without a tripod, and I found the Sony lens uncomfortably heavy. Overall. I’ve been happy with the new setup. It’s much more pleasant to carry for long shoots and the 840mm equivalent focal length gets me close enough in most instances. In addition, the OM-1’s ProCapture feature helps me to take better “action” shots than I took previously. Because of the increased noise, I do rely on Topaz DeNoize AI for more of my photos. And, I miss having all the extra megapixels that came with the Sony when I need to crop. However, overall I think the switch was worth it.
Nice to hear!
I moved to Olympus for wildlife about 3 months ago purchasing the OM-1 and a Zuiko 100-400. Then I acquired the 300f4. Wow! What a lens. Truly remarkable. This is the benefit of m43rds. It isn't just the weight/portability, it is that in low light I have a bright f4 lens which is sharp wide open. Amazing!
How much better is the 300mm over the 100-400?
@@peterjohnson1845 I rarely use the 100-400 now but it is such a good lens I am not prepared to trade it in or sell it. I do miss the ability to zoom out (more than in) on occasion when I am photographing birds.
@@enigmabletchley6936 Thanks for the reply, have you ever tried the 40-150 f2.8 with the 1.4 and 2.0 TC? would this also be an option?
@@peterjohnson1845 No, I haven't. I was thinking about trading in the 100-400 for the 40-150 especially as I own both TCs but I am still reluctant to do so. I think it is because the 100-400 is such good value for money for what it is, I feel I can justify waiting until I can afford to add the 40-150, as well.
That's a really nice lens! I've got the 40-150 F2.8 Pro and use it with the 1.4x teleconverter and it's extremely sharp.
The M.Zuiko 300f/4 is one of the sharpest lenses I've ever seen. You can't go wrong with it.
Nice to see you do some wildlife. I've gone The other way.. From wildlife to now adding some macro. Keep up the The good work.
It's cheaper doing that
I use the 300mm Pro with the 1.4 TC all the time.
I get sharp pictures at 1/40 s, if the subject is still.
With the 2.0 TC I don't have that many keepers (roughly 20/80 compared to 80/20 for the 1.4).
I object a bit to the "equivalent" comment; yes, 300 F4 micro4/3 is as a 600 F8 when you consider reach and depth of field, however, it is still a F4 for the exposure/needed shutter speed/iso.
The closest focusing distance does not change when you add a TC, only the magnification. It is perfect for dragonflies, but there is a drawback; the tele lens compression is, IMHO, disturbing sometimes.
But all in all, you seem to have found the advantages of the MFT system, less weight for the same reach. Since there are no solutions, only trade-offs [T Sowell] everything is about to weigh them against each other and choose the best for yourself.
not quite the full story with the “equivalent” comment. 300mm f/4 on M4/3 is equivalent to a 600mm f/8 on a full frame in every regard photo wise. the photo will look darker on the full frame if the shutter speed and ISO is the same, but it’s worth noting that there will be the same amount of noise in the image. if you were to brighten the image by 2 stops in post (with an ISO invariant sensor), or shoot with an ISO 2 stops higher in the moment with the full frame so that the images are exposed the same, there will be no difference between the images in terms of field of view, depth of field, and noise/required shutter speed. the entrance pupil of both lenses are 75mm, so the same amount of light is entering both lenses no matter what. the full frame equivalent would look darker because that same amount of light is spread over a larger sensor, but the amount of noise will be the same.
@@gabewrsewellUnfortunately, that is not the case. I do not get any magic speed boost by adapting full frame lenses to MFT either. A 300mm f/4 lens will always behave the same optically regarding exposure and depth of field, adapted or not. MFT just gives you a crop of the image circle. So theoretically adapting this 300mm F/4 lens would give you the same exposure and depth of field on a full frame body, just the angle of view would be equivalent to a 150mm lens on MFT - ie.e just the normal 300mm angle of view on full frame … and the image circle of the lens would probably be to small for the sensor, producing a round image. If our imaginary full frame sensor had the same pixel density as the MFT sensor, just more pixel, you could theoretically crop that rounded picture to a quite equivalent 4:3 ratio 21mpx image in post. Even regarding the noise.
Thanks
Thank you so much for the donation. Appreciated! 🙏
I just bought a used version of this lens and i LOVE it. I was using the Panasonic Leica 100-400 before or the Sony 200-600. I hesitated for a long time about buying a prime telephoto lens but i realized that 99% of the time, I was shooting my Sony 200-600 at 600mm focal length, so i decided to get this lens for portability. I will keep the Sony 200-600, to use with a monopod because i can use it with a FF camera, but this Olympus 300mm is a gem. Enjoy!
Yeah I also realized that I was using the 200-600 almost always at 600. That made me consider getting a prime.
Hi Micael. Great videos. I have used this lens for insects in decent light, as it has really close focusing and agree that you should get some great photographs of butterflies and larger bugs later in the year. It is however, a great birding lens in my opinion. Keep up the good work.
Own it, love it on my OM-1. Use it often with 1.4x extender
The 300 F4 Pro is my workhorse, I use it with both the 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverters - bought all 3 used - I barely take the 40-150 2.8 with me anymore - have it always hanging beside me on a sling (on the lensfoot where I added a Leofoto Arca Swiss QD plate - so I do not carry it via the camera body as you do in the video) - I sold the Olympus 100-400 for it - never regretted it.
Great video! Thanks … A couple of thoughts: you can’t really compare ISO of m43 with ISO of a full frame. ISO 400 on m43 is not equivalent to ISO 400 on full frame. And the 300 f4 is equivalent to a 600 f8 in that the m43 has the same DOF at F4. You can always use a pro level Olympus lens wide open. So, at the same shutter speed and matching DOF, you shouldn’t see more noise in the m43 image. You have to consider all of the factors and not try to compare 1-to-1
Thank you!!! Fantastic Lens. It is F8 ONLY in terms of DOF. In all other ways, it is F4.
First time I see something that could truly compete in ease of use with my Sony RX10. It's really a relevant video, Micael, thanks.
I bought a used 75-300 to get me started with m4/3. I'm also finding 300mm short in a lot of situations so far. I switched from an R7 / 100-400 combo which felt like plenty for most of my needs. I did not think about cropping in after the shot. I will say most of my pixel peeping is to ID birds that I can't get close to. I'm leaning towards a used Oly 100-400 as spring is approaching and the 300 would take far longer to save for.
Also, the 1.4 TC is around 30 % better than cropping…way better results than most TC I have used.
Try DxO to extract maximum sharpness from the M43 format.
Sounds like a neat lens. My budget's an order of magnitude lower than an equivalent OM kit would be, but as someone mostly interested in macro who dabbles in larger animal photos, my Pentax A* 300/f4 has suited me so far. No autofocus, but it's about the same size as my Laowa 100mm/2.8 (wider at the end but lighter), and I can fit all the lenses I like to use (35mm, 50mm, 60mm, 100mm, 300mm) in a shoulder sling bag.
Omg a video on my dream lens haha edit: can you also try it with the 2x tc? I have heard online a lot that it can use it to no significant loss to sharpness but never seen examples.
I think the biggest problem with the 2x is the darkness it produces, and that at 1200mm you start running into problems with the athmosphere blurring your photos etc. I think 1.4x is probably the sweet spot.
I have the Panasonic Leica 2.8 and a 1.4x teleconverter I got on a really good deal used ($980). I pair it with my EM-1 Mark II. It's also an incredibly sharp lens and it is also a fantastic video lens. I have it with my 40-150 2.8 and am covered for most everything .
The close focus of the Olympus 300mm 4.0 is 1.4 meters which gives 0.24x magnification which will be better with a 1.4x teleconverter. You cannot focus any closer with a teleconverter, but the magnification is larger.
One of the best combo for bird action photography. Easy to handhold and combined with Procapture technology, we can amazing shots. Mc-14 is necessary to get the reach for birds. And the result is still sharp with mc14.
What about x2.0 tc? Does it work still at least good?
@@pentagramyt417 Mc20 works very well in situations there are good light and air quality is good.
Any update? Did you switch? Also can you do side by side comparison of them with same subject? Might be easier with static subject
The magnification of a lens does not depends on sensor size; on FF camera with the same pixel density as the MFT sensor, a 300mm lens allows you to have the same size as pixels/target area, or pixels/height of the subject.
Yes in theory you can of course buy the most expensive high resolution full frame camera along with a big full frame 300mm f/4 lens, and crop out the middle of the image to get similar results. I wonder what the point would be though.
For sure, it is a matter of the optics. The advantage of the 4/3 ratio is it allows easier and cheaper production of high-quality lenses.
@MicaelWidell Nikon AF-S 300mm f/4 E PF ED VR is FF, lighter and smaller than Olympus 300mm f/4. I like OM Systems, I have OM-1, but...
@@gabrielion7045 To crop and have equivalent pixels on target, you'd need an 80mp FF.
And the Olympus is better glass...
Olympus makes great lens, my 75-300 is also sharp throughout the entire focal length. My collection includes macro, portrait, and so on all very sharp. like you said the sensor is a compromise. Need good lighting.
Having grown up using film a little bit of grain or "noise" doesn't really bother me. With software like Topaz now available I don't think it's an issue if it seems bothersome.
I agree that noise is less of an issue these days. Even the latest version of Lightroom has a great noise reduction tool which gives mindblowing results.
I'm looking for this lens too, but, will it balance with my camera, the OM-5?
Well, this lens is still pretty long and heavy. But I found it completely possible and pretty comfortable to use it with one hand on my OM-1, even though it is of course a bit front heavy.
Since the lens has a tripod collar it should be ok, but handholding would be extremely exhausting. I would get the Olympus hand grip accessory.
I think sigma 500 5.6 on an a6700 would be a better small and light wildlife kit
Yes...but no procapture, no focus bracketing, no 8 stops IS,....
I don't like the handling of those Sony APS-C bodies for supertelephoto lenses. The handling is terrible. On an A7IV, RV, or L mount FF it makes way more sense.
Try OM System 300mm with a NISI close up lens 😊
strong combination.
For the hood you need to twist it to unlock it so that it can be retracted.
It still gets stuck. He is right it’s the only downside of the lens. It’s a real pain
@@simpedros4766 Mine is perfectly fine. Maybe there is a quality control issue going on idk
If you don’t turn the lens hood so much it will still keep in place and is very easy to unscrew. There is an unnecessary amount of turns possible and at the end of that the hood is really to tightly fastened. Just go easy on it and everything is fine.
I remember the first time I used the OM-1 for wildlife and like you was surprised by the subject AF acquisition.
My preconception was probably formed by using lousy Lumix autofocus for years
You are overdoing the hood retraction. It's just a slight twist and pull back. Very subtle.
Yeah probably it takes some practice to get it right
My Sony E70-350 weighs 625 grams/22 ounces - I'm off out before the sun rises at 6.47am! Keep well, Micael
Hahaha watching you struggle with the lens hood was me last night with mine 😂 So glad it's not just me
I love your videos but i feel the need to say this: crop factor does not affect the amount of light getting through the lens to the sensor. So it is in fact a 600mm f4 lens. It would be an f8 lens if you'd put the 2X on it as that actually costs you 2 stops of light to double your focal length
For the things I care about, which are noise and depth of field, it is a 600mm f/8 lens.
No doubt OM has great af tracking but for the same $ I’d prob go for the Nikon 400mm f4.5 which is 0.5 lbs lighter. For extra reach (when needed) add 1.4x tele, slap it on APSC body, or just crop high res sensor… still have better background separation & cleaner images.
Yeah there are many great similar alternatives for APS-C
Wonderful vídeo. Amazing Edition and Great Pictures! For my hiking and climbing adventures the OM-1 + 300mm f4 + 40-150mm + TCs is the perfect combo!
Thank you 🙏
Strange…I just ordered a second hand Olympus 300mmF4. So don’t have it right now…and getting even more impatient to have it in my hands after watching your excellent review.
I’m also having the Sony 200-600 for my Sony body’s but yes compared to Olympus it is a huge and big lens for the same reach.
The IS is also very good combined to an OM1, much better than the Sony combo’s...7-8 stops.
And considering sharpness it seems to be very sharp indeed, so a TC1.4 will not affect to much the final IQ result. See the Lenstip review, they tested it with the TC1.4 Before Sony I was a Canon user and had also the FF 300mmf4 IS and it is also a very good lens.
This lens is about the same size and even a little lighter (only 1190gr).
But I think I will be very happy with this lens…impatience is even growing while writing these sentences…hihi
So this lens combined with 0.5 magnification (macro), good TC 1.4, procapture, 60-120 fps and good performing IS will be my Swiss army knife for wildlife and macro (bigger insects)...
I just switched from Canon to Olympus and this is the sharpest lens i have ever used.
I had the Sony 200-600mm 5.6-6.3 G Lens, it was too big and too heavy to go hiking with that Lens, it has also issues with the IBIS on Sony A7R series Cameras, so I just bought the new Sigma 500mm 5.6 DG DN Sports Lens, which is excellent, very easy to use with great image quality, I can very highly recommend the Sigma 500mm 5.6 DG DN Sports !
Yeah the Sigma indeed looks very nice and compact. I bet it does well with a teleconverter as well.
@@MicaelWidell You should try the new Sigma 500mm (before buying the Olympus 300mm !), you can only use teleconverter on Sigma with manual focusing, but that does not bother me, I use Sony A7RIVA, so in APSC mode I still have 26 megapixels and equivalent to a 750mm full frame Lens and there are still some to crop from the 26 megapixels ! Although I had seen several videos with the new Sigma 500mm Lens, I was still very surprised when I got it in my hands, it is very compact and light weight for a 500mm Lens, I can very highly recommend it !
Gone om1 boujee with that lens😅. At least you didn't pop out the 150-400mm one. It's only 7k. You got this! I'll be getting a telephoto in the fall to avoid another boring winter lol
The pricetag on the 150-400 is a bit steep haha. Also, not finding myself too attracted to such a big and heavy lens.
You have to grab the Lenshood not too hard. Then it’s fine every time.
Sharp video!
The Pentax SMC DA 300 F4 is even lighter and smaller, same min. distance.
Yeah but that’s a DSLR lens with longer flange distance, so a bit unfair comparison
Still I used to use it as a pseudo macro. Very useful. Now with Canon and using an R5, no comparison, won't switch back.
While an impressive lens, Olympus has a history of making crazy glass like the 14-35 f/2.0...I wish they had taken a chance and made is something like a 300mm f/2.8, given its relatively small size they really could have pushed the envelope or even made it and f/2.0, which would have given it effectively equivalent light gathering as a full frame 600 f/4...
I have one of these. It's good.
the sky in the beginning of this video looks like simon stålenhag art
I love his art, so your comment is a big compliment!
If you point the lens up, it's easier to retract the hood.
Yes, it's amazing small for being a primer. Personally I prefer zoom lenses. More flexible and I usually only need to bring one lens with me. But I am actually consider to switch to M43 as it's more versatile than FF or APS-C and being on Canon RF system empties my wallet.
The OM system is really interesting if you do macro and wildlife
@@MicaelWidell Agreed, I plan to switch from Canon R6 to OM-5 mainly because of my core interest in macro photography and the much lighter OM-5. If I understand it correctly the OM-5 also has focus bracketing 🙂
@@dennismwallentin296 Thinking about doing this as well. I'll keep my canon stuff but maybe buy OM stuff. Intrigued by focus bracketing and the light weight but most importantly the cost. Canon RF is so expensive even for classic focal lengths.
It´s not ridiculous small: Nikon has got a 300/4 PF with nearly the same specs and the same sharpnes but with almost half the weight. and much lesser in dimensions. If there was an adapter from Nikon to Canon i would get even better better magnifikation with my EOR R7. Luckily i have the RF100-400 (half the weight) and the 100-500 (nearlry the same weight) wich, both give me the same close-up abillities as the Olympus 300/4+1,4 extender. By the way you get an R7 + a RF 100-400 for less than the Olympus 300/4!!! But it´s a very fine lens to pair it with the OM-1 (I´ve got it but I get better result with R7+100-400 because i have to use the extender with the OL 300/4 if i want the same magnification and then i don´t get the same sharpness as with the R7-combo)
You are right Nikon 300/4 PF is lighter and half the price. Also it’s a full frame lens.
The close focus distance is really good for Olympus 300/4 but but it’s a personal choice whether one wants to pay more than double the amount for close focusing ability.
Olympus gear is great for macro photography with all the greatest in camera options. Smaller sensors are good for macro.. just an observation.. Thanks you !
Micael Widell - Ridiculously small.
me - yeah, sure, it's a lens for M4/3 mirrorless cameras and it is slightly thicker and longer than the 1997 Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM which is for FF DSLRs... I think the expression you were looking for was "ridiculously big"
You can't compare a DSLR lens with a mirrorless one due to different flange distance. If I were to put that Canon lens on a modern camera I would need an adapter that makes it several cm longer.
I don't like the bokeh on it. Much better with ff lenses like your sony. I don't like the noise also
But it is fine for many people😊
Is just as big or small as any other 300mm f4.
My brother in Christ. Don‘t let the lens just dangle off the camera, it’s in the manual.
You weight of the system has to carried by the foot you removed, don’t complain when you rip out the camera mount from the body.
I’ve dangled far longer and heavier lenses lol
I highly recommend every macro shooter this 2nd episode from the National Geography docu series Photographer, which is available on Hulu