The Big White Beast Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 Pro IS TCx1.25 Thread

[Jeroen1969]

I can't complain about my current gear set-up (see below). Both bodies and all of my lenses work miracles and are a real pleasure to use. I get most pleasure from doing telephoto shooting. To that extend I make use of my 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro, my 300mm f/4.0 Pro IS and my MC14 teleconverter that I can put on both of these two. I typically walk about with both bodies, the 40-150/2.8 on my OM1.1 and the 300/4.0 on my OM1.2 (as the latter has one more step IS and slightly better bird recognition that the OM1.1). The MC14 mostly spends time on the 40-150/2.8 but does swap position from time to time to give my 300/4 a bit more reach. So that gives me quite a range: from 40mm all the way up to 420mm.

And yet, there have been occasions where I wished I had a bit more flexibility in the further (beyond 150mm) range. So this 150-400mm f/4.5 Pro zoom lens has kept me awake for a couple of nights already. Because this lens, by definition, offers flexibility beyond 150mm. And. It can also take the MC14 (and MC20, I'm still pondering on getting that one or not), producing even larger flexible ranges. Obviously, it will have more flexibility than my 300/4 with or without MC14 and/or MC20 because of the zoom range of the Big White Beast (that can also work with both teleconverters).

The performance of the 150-400mm BIg White Beast is probably breath taking, based on what I've seen on YouTube so far. Yet so is it's price.... That lens alone costs more than my entire gear together (got my lenses second hand). I can already hear my wife if it ever comes to me buying such an expensive piece of camera gear.....

So I would love to learn more about this lens before spending a kidney on it (and a marital dispute).

Ideally, folk that have had the privilege of having this lens at their disposal for a while, share their experience.

• Does the lens live up to your expectations?
• If you had the 300/4 before you bought the Big White Beast, did you sell it afterwards or did you keep it? If you kept it: why did you keep it?
• Can you share some of your most impressive shots taken with The Big White Beast?
• If you have them, can you share comparison shots with other tele(zoom)lenses that you have?
• What is your favorite MFT tele(zoom)lens?

Thank you very much in advance for all your contributions to this thread. I've got this feeling that I'm not alone in this curiosity.....

 

[Vinh29]

Hey !

Thanks for this thread ! I hope it to be successful !

I do have the 300 F4 and the 150-400. (bodys : EM-1mk3 and OM-1)

I made 2 other posts with some bird pictures of the 150-400

I don't think there is a real answer. I asked myself the same questions, here are some of my personnal answers...



- I am lucky enough to be able to afford the lens without compromising my expenses for my family

- But I work alot, the weather conditions are quite bad where I live. So everytime I get out and everytime I get to see the marvels of nature, I like knowing the fact that I have the best lens for the best rendering (then I rely on honing my skills, my knowledge of the birds and pushing my luck !)

- I don't think my wife approves this expense but I think she gave up on the matter with all my hobbies... She does think that everything (cheap or expensive) that brings you joy when you use it, is worth having. I do feel alot of joy handling this lens, and it doesn't seem to get old

- It's quite heavy, I have the shoulder strap from peak design but holding the lens in Procap mode while waiting for a kingfisher dive for example can be very hard, and it can make you miss the shot. Although, in those conditions (without a tripod), with a 300 F4 you could be tired too !

- I can't tell if it's sharper than the 300 f4. The background rendering might be better (but you can do so much in post processing nowadays that you could get the same results with a blur layer on photoshop I guess).

Check out all the post from Marko finland from this forum, I don't think he needs a 150-400 to take your breath away !

- Speaking of masters of the craft, I also really like Peter Bambousek, he loved the lens, but in his first review, but he said that
1. for the price, he could pay for a wonderful trip and get to see marvellous exotic birds
2. animal portraits are nice, but some environnemental shots can make you stand out. So he said he was keeping the panaleica 200 2.8 + extender.
But recently I do think he went for the 150-400 anyway

- Maybe the last thing to ponder is once you get this lens, it would be pretty hard (impossible ?) to get out of the system. I hope Olympus or Panasonic push the limits of M43 but Sony, Canon and Nikon made huge stride in mirrorless in wildlife photography (much faster than Olympus that didn't really improve since the EM-1 mk.2)

The lens cost more than one of those godly bodies like the Nikon Z8, Sony a9 a9ii, even the a1


There are plenty of comparisons out there for birding, no definitive answers, but sometimes I think that it would have been nice to have a huge Full Frame body for nightscape photography/milky way...

I'm eager to read other opinions !

Cheers

 

[CarlosU]

• Does the lens live up to your expectations?

yes

• If you had the 300/4 before you bought the Big White Beast, did you sell it afterwards or did you keep it? If you kept it: why did you keep it?

I had the 300 for a shorter time, but I sold it because it was too short for me. That was before the 150-400 was announced.

• Can you share some of your most impressive shots taken with The Big White Beast

I don't do "impressive shots", but share here two I like.

• If you have them, can you share comparison shots with other tele(zoom)lenses that you have?
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

• What is your favorite MFT tele(zoom)lens?

150-400 - the dual ibis is fantastic

--

https://500px.com/p/cango?view=photos

 

[vcxz]

I got the 150-400 used for a total of $5500 with tax. That took a bit of the bite out.

Generally, the 150-400 is better for challenging situations with bad light. It's my favorite lens for getting warblers in bad light. With good light, I've personally been very happy with the 100-400.

The only thing with the 100-400 is the dual sync IBIS doesn't really work, you have to rely on the body stabilization. Combined with the higher aperture, you need a much faster shutter. I get sharp photos with the 150-400 going down to 1/160, but I stay at 1/400 with the 100-400. I kind of wish OM just took the lens stabilization out and made it lighter, or made dual sync work. Right now it seems like the worst of both worlds.

I found I needed the 100-400 in addition to the 150-400 because there are some times I want to minimize weight. I would recommend buying that first, then seeing if you get enough light for it or if you're satisfied with denoising results.

I have the 300 F4 too but I never really "bonded" with that lens. It didn't feel that much lighter than the 150-400 since the 150-400 balances so well. I have it as a backup in case I need to send the 150-400 in for repairs.


150-400 with TC


150-400 with TC


150-400 with bad light


100-400


100-400


100-400


100-400

--
https://vcxz.myportfolio.com/

 

[jjbinx]

an easier option may be to try the MC-20 with the 300mm f/4.
Ask here for comment on the 300/4 x2 performance

I’ve never used either lens

jj

 

[Rupert the bear]

I have both and I really like both, I'm never selling either.

I take the 300 when I'm travelling with a drone and doing mainly landscapes and I get the 300 out when I see something unusual I want to record like this (I've exported all images at 4MB so lost some quality):







I take the 150-400 when I'm specifically aiming for wildlife on a trip, it is extremely versatile. So here are two snaps of Condors in very different environments, the first at the side of the road, the second from well over a mile away









IQ is very good with both, not as good as FF, but I'm never going to be able to carry wildlife gear, a drone and landscape lenses all at the same time and put it in the overhead locker on a plane if it's FF. So I'm happy with the M3 trade offs, I always have an appropriate lens in my bag for whatever comes up.

The 150-400 is super flexible and in our minimum PP crop M43 system the zoom is perfect. The 300 is super fast to lock onto the subject, brilliant for birds but a bit more restrictive as a prime.

 

[Jeroen1969]

• Does the lens live up to your expectations?

yes

• If you had the 300/4 before you bought the Big White Beast, did you sell it afterwards or did you keep it? If you kept it: why did you keep it?

I had the 300 for a shorter time, but I sold it because it was too short for me. That was before the 150-400 was announced.

• Can you share some of your most impressive shots taken with The Big White Beast

I don't do "impressive shots", but share here two I like.

• If you have them, can you share comparison shots with other tele(zoom)lenses that you have?
• 
  
  

• What is your favorite MFT tele(zoom)lens?

150-400 - the dual ibis is fantastic

Thanks a Million! Exactly the sort of information I was hoping to get from this thread. Breathtaking shots by the way!

--
Never too old to learn.

 

[HicHic]

• Does the lens live up to your expectations?

No, not even close.

• If you had the 300/4 before you bought the Big White Beast, did you sell it afterwards or did you keep it? If you kept it: why did you keep it?
• Can you share some of your most impressive shots taken with The Big White Beast?
• If you have them, can you share comparison shots with other tele(zoom)lenses that you have?
• What is your favorite MFT tele(zoom)lens?

Thank you very much in advance for all your contributions to this thread. I've got this feeling that I'm not alone in this curiosity.....

Kept the 300/4. Sharper, smaller, faster. Swinging the 300/4 to chase BIFs is much easier and nimble. The 150-400 is much heavier to swing around to chase fast birds.

 

[Woody Meristem]

Mike Lane compared the 100-400mm and the 150-400mm --

Given his conclusions and the use of my photos, there's just no way I could justify buying the 150-400mm -- it's much too expensive and too heavy for me. It's apparently a great lens, but at less than a fifth of the price I'll take the weather sealed, lighter, smaller and actually a bit more versatile 100-400mm. I'm quite happy with my Olympus 100-400mm and Thomas Stirr seemed happy with his until he got the 150-600mm for its extra reach; it's even larger and heavier than the 150-400mm -- https://smallsensorphotography.com/m-zuiko-100-400-review#comments

 

[Bast Hotep]

Thanks a Million! Exactly the sort of information I was hoping to get from this thread. Breathtaking shots by the way!

This last one is very impressive at 1400mm (35mm film equivalent)!

 

[the bluesman]

I can't complain about my current gear set-up (see below). Both bodies and all of my lenses work miracles and are a real pleasure to use. I get most pleasure from doing telephoto shooting. To that extend I make use of my 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro, my 300mm f/4.0 Pro IS and my MC14 teleconverter that I can put on both of these two. I typically walk about with both bodies, the 40-150/2.8 on my OM1.1 and the 300/4.0 on my OM1.2 (as the latter has one more step IS and slightly better bird recognition that the OM1.1). The MC14 mostly spends time on the 40-150/2.8 but does swap position from time to time to give my 300/4 a bit more reach. So that gives me quite a range: from 40mm all the way up to 420mm.

And yet, there have been occasions where I wished I had a bit more flexibility in the further (beyond 150mm) range. So this 150-400mm f/4.5 Pro zoom lens has kept me awake for a couple of nights already. Because this lens, by definition, offers flexibility beyond 150mm. And. It can also take the MC14 (and MC20, I'm still pondering on getting that one or not), producing even larger flexible ranges. Obviously, it will have more flexibility than my 300/4 with or without MC14 and/or MC20 because of the zoom range of the Big White Beast (that can also work with both teleconverters).

The performance of the 150-400mm BIg White Beast is probably breath taking, based on what I've seen on YouTube so far. Yet so is it's price.... That lens alone costs more than my entire gear together (got my lenses second hand). I can already hear my wife if it ever comes to me buying such an expensive piece of camera gear.....

So I would love to learn more about this lens before spending a kidney on it (and a marital dispute).

Ideally, folk that have had the privilege of having this lens at their disposal for a while, share their experience.

• Does the lens live up to your expectations?
• If you had the 300/4 before you bought the Big White Beast, did you sell it afterwards or did you keep it? If you kept it: why did you keep it?
• Can you share some of your most impressive shots taken with The Big White Beast?
• If you have them, can you share comparison shots with other tele(zoom)lenses that you have?
• What is your favorite MFT tele(zoom)lens?

Thank you very much in advance for all your contributions to this thread. I've got this feeling that I'm not alone in this curiosity.....

Yes own both the 300mm f4 and the 150-400mm f4.5, the 300mm hasn't had much use ever since I got the 150-400mm but I don't want to sell it as it's a beautiful Lens

The 150-400mm exceeds my expectations, I think it's the best Lens in the world, it practically lives on my OM-1 Mark 2, I find it very light (I had the 150-600mm for a while) with great handling. A pleasure to carry around and I can very highly recommend it

These aren't my best shots just a few random ones

 

[lokatz]

• Does the lens live up to your expectations?

No. It far exceeds them.

• If you had the 300/4 before you bought the Big White Beast, did you sell it afterwards or did you keep it? If you kept it: why did you keep it?

I had it and sold it. The 150-400 is just as good and way more flexible, not to mention the much better reach.

• Can you share some of your most impressive shots taken with The Big White Beast?

I am not comfortable with sharing shots at full resolution, so you may not get out of these examples what you are looking for, but here are two:


@400mm


@500mm (TC engaged)

• If you have them, can you share comparison shots with other tele(zoom)lenses that you have?

I own or owned, and have shot with, the Nikon 500 PF, Z800, Canon 100-500 and 200-800. I could share comparison shots but think you are asking the wrong question.

The lens is much better sharpness-wise than the Canons, and almost on par with the Nikons, which is a feat for a zoom lens. Its real advantage lies in the fact that it is a zoom lens with a performance that matches prime lenses. It performs extremely well in good light and, owing to its wide aperture, still performs well in low light. Its focus is very fast and it is much lighter than comparable alternatives. Well, to be truthful, there ARE no comparable alternatives.

• What is your favorite MFT tele(zoom)lens?

The 150-400.

 

[CarlosU]

Thanks a Million! Exactly the sort of information I was hoping to get from this thread. Breathtaking shots by the way!

This last one is very impressive at 1400mm (35mm film equivalent)!

thank you

--

https://500px.com/p/cango?view=photos

 

[Skeeterbytes]

Was pondering one and setting aside funds for a possible buy. Then I found a new shiny thing and reset the fun budget to 0. Still not ruling one out--it's singular among super-tele zooms and one that can create its own mission. Primarily, I foresee it giving me zoomability in situations my 300 has me hemmed in. To that end, while I see it primarily used for birding and wildlife, there's a vast swath of other subjects and in my case, sports to deploy it for.

View attachment e381d884b4fd4c7889f58cd0bab2ab41.jpg
Shiny Thing

Cheers,

Rick

 

[Art_P]

Unless you are a dedicated border or professional wildlife photographer, you're not going to be using this lens every day.

Why not just rent the lens for the couple times a year you really need it?

 

[Jeroen1969]

Unless you are a dedicated border or professional wildlife photographer, you're not going to be using this lens every day.

Why not just rent the lens for the couple times a year you really need it?

I explored rental options but can’t seem to find one around here.

I won’t be using it daily but as regularly as weekly for sure. Which is pretty much the frequency I’m using my current 300/4.

But I’ll keep looking out for a rental one. That way I can figure out what I can do with it and if my skills justify such a massive investment in a hobby.

 

[Skeeterbytes]

Unless you are a dedicated border or professional wildlife photographer, you're not going to be using this lens every day.

Why not just rent the lens for the couple times a year you really need it?

I explored rental options but can’t seem to find one around here.

I won’t be using it daily but as regularly as weekly for sure. Which is pretty much the frequency I’m using my current 300/4.

But I’ll keep looking out for a rental one. That way I can figure out what I can do with it and if my skills justify such a massive investment in a hobby.

Where do you live?

In the States we have lensrentals.com who ship anywhere. IDK if they do so internationally. IIUC one can apply their rental $ to a purchase if they decide they Must Have it. 1 week of the 150-400 is $360, 5% of a purchase.

Rick

 

[Jeroen1969]

Hey !

Thanks for this thread ! I hope it to be

Check out all the post from Marko finland from this forum, I don't think he needs a 150-400 to take your breath away !

I will! Thanks!

- Speaking of masters of the craft, I also really like Peter Bambousek, he loved the lens, but in his first review, but he said that
1. for the price, he could pay for a wonderful trip and get to see marvellous exotic birds
2. animal portraits are nice, but some environnemental shots can make you stand out. So he said he was keeping the panaleica 200 2.8 + extender.
But recently I do think he went for the 150-400 anyway

That last addition says a lot..

- Maybe the last thing to ponder is once you get this lens, it would be pretty hard (impossible ?) to get out of the system. I hope Olympus or Panasonic push the limits of M43 but Sony, Canon and Nikon made huge stride in mirrorless in wildlife photography (much faster than Olympus that didn't really improve since the EM-1 mk.2)

This contemplation did cross my mind as well. However, not too long ago I upgraded my previous set-up (2x OM-D E-M10 Mk. III, 2x pancake, 25mm f/1.8, 40-150mm Magic Plastic, a fun fish-eye body cap and, finally a 300mm f/4.0 Pro IS) to my current one. The only three components of my previous gear that stayed were the 25mm and 300mm primes and the fun pancake. If there had been an opportunity to leave the MFT format and step-up to a FF set-up, it was there and then. I stuck to the MFT deliberately because, despite great improvements in portability in the FF format, overall MFT lenses are still generally (just) a bit smaller and lighter. On top of that, the crop factor has it’s disadvantages (less pixels, less DoF, more vulnerable to noise) but also a great advantage: effectively double the range on the same focal length. And, even though the White Beast is relatively on the Very Expensive side in the MFT lenses line-up, getting a FF equivalent with the same range (excluding the use of either the MC-14 or MC-20), one would have to look at 300-1000mm (the latter has the built in TC 1.25x engaged). Finding one that has similar IS performance for around $7.500 new might prove to be very very challenging.





Up there is a screen shot from a relatively old YouTube review/comparison video. On the top a Canon R6 FF 20MP with a Canon 800mm lens (that doesn’t have a built in TC). It weighs 4.5 kg.





In that same video, some other FF alternatives were thrown in for comparing prices (2021..):





That sort of summarises why I’m inclined to stick to the MFT system (apart from not wanting to drag along a tripod)

The lens cost more than one of those godly bodies like the Nikon Z8, Sony a9 a9ii, even the a1

Getting a mouth watering body is only half of the story… One would also need some good (Pro grade) glass…

There are plenty of comparisons out there for birding, no definitive answers, but sometimes I think that it would have been nice to have a huge Full Frame body for nightscape photography/milky way...

Getting an astro-photography moving tri-pod combined with the Bulb Function might produce stunning results. Anyways, as I’m not getting in to astro-photography in the short/medium term, I’m inclined to stick to my MFT gear.

I'm eager to read other opinions !

Cheers

--
Never too old to learn.

 

[Jeroen1969]

Unless you are a dedicated border or professional wildlife photographer, you're not going to be using this lens every day.

Why not just rent the lens for the couple times a year you really need it?

I explored rental options but can’t seem to find one around here.

I won’t be using it daily but as regularly as weekly for sure. Which is pretty much the frequency I’m using my current 300/4.

But I’ll keep looking out for a rental one. That way I can figure out what I can do with it and if my skills justify such a massive investment in a hobby.

Where do you live?

The Netherlands, Europe. Too small a country for a dutchlensrentals.com. Would be nice if Europe was somewhat more federate, like the US, so we could have a lensrentals.eu…

In the States we have lensrentals.com who ship anywhere. IDK if they do so internationally. IIUC one can apply their rental $ to a purchase if they decide they Must Have it. 1 week of the 150-400 is $360, 5% of a purchase.

Rick

 

[the bluesman]

Unless you are a dedicated border or professional wildlife photographer, you're not going to be using this lens every day.

Why not just rent the lens for the couple times a year you really need it?

I explored rental options but can’t seem to find one around here.

I won’t be using it daily but as regularly as weekly for sure. Which is pretty much the frequency I’m using my current 300/4.

But I’ll keep looking out for a rental one. That way I can figure out what I can do with it and if my skills justify such a massive investment in a hobby.

Where do you live?

The Netherlands, Europe. Too small a country for a dutchlensrentals.com. Would be nice if Europe was somewhat more federate, like the US, so we could have a lensrentals.eu…

In the States we have lensrentals.com who ship anywhere. IDK if they do so internationally. IIUC one can apply their rental $ to a purchase if they decide they Must Have it. 1 week of the 150-400 is $360, 5% of a purchase.

Rick

The 150-400mm is the kind of Lens once you have it in the kit it will most likely become your most used Lens and you will find you will go out taking pictures more often than not, it's my most used Lens as it makes me wanna go out, it is very versatile as well at lots of genres.

Sure it's not the kind of lens you take out for dinner or to a concert etc but it's the kind of Lens that you just want with you when you can as you feel lost without it in many situations, I wanted this Lens real bad so I got it, end of the day after the money hit it just don't matter as it's only money, the Lens is pure enjoyment.