For years, I’ve heard the identical argument repeated time and again: micro 4 thirds cameras simply aren’t skilled sufficient. The shallow depth of subject cannot compete, the picture high quality falls quick, and critical photographers ought to keep on with full body sensors. Actually, I did not know if this declare was true or simply web chatter. So once I obtained my palms on the model new OM System 50-200mm f/2.8 lens and determined to check it towards my Sony a7 IV with the huge Sigma 300-600mm f/4 lens, I knew this was going to be an eye-opening expertise.
The OM System 50-200mm f/2.8: A Telephoto That Would not Break Your Again
Let me begin by saying this factor is surprisingly manageable. The brand new OM System 50-200mm f/2.8 (previously Olympus earlier than the model transition) weighs simply 2.4 kilos and feels remarkably comparable in measurement to a full body 70-200mm f/2.8, which occurs to be my private favourite lens of all time.
Whenever you account for the 2x crop issue on micro 4 thirds sensors, this 50-200mm lens provides you an equal subject of view of 100-400mm on full body. That is some critical attain in a package deal that will not destroy your shoulders after an hour of capturing.
Listed below are the important thing specs that caught my consideration:
OM System 50-200mm f/2.8 Key Options
Equal focal size: 100-400mm (full body)
Most aperture: f/2.8 fixed
Weight: 2.4 lbs
Minimal focusing distance: 30 inches all through whole zoom vary
Picture stabilization: As much as 7 stops when paired with OM-1 physique
Climate sealing: IP53 rated
Filter measurement: 77mm
Consists of Arca-Swiss suitable tripod foot
The lens encompasses a easy guide focus ring towards the entrance and a zoom ring nearer to the physique. There’s additionally a spotlight limiter swap that allows you to limit the focusing vary, which is tremendous useful whenever you’re monitoring distant wildlife and don’t need the lens looking all the best way from shut focus to infinity.
What actually impressed me was the minimal focusing distance of simply 30 inches. This lens can get near-macro stage magnification, which turned an enormous benefit throughout my testing (extra on that later).
Setting Up a Honest Comparability
Now, evaluating totally different sensor sizes is not as easy as simply pointing each cameras on the similar topic. There are 4 vital elements I needed to account for:
Area of View: A 100mm lens on micro 4 thirds seems to be extra “zoomed in” than the identical lens on full body as a result of smaller sensor. To match the framing, I needed to multiply the micro 4 thirds focal size by 2x. So I shot at 200mm on the OM lens and locked the Sigma at 400mm on the Sony.
Depth of Area: That is the place issues get complicated for lots of people. To match the depth of subject between sensors, you additionally want to use the crop issue to the aperture. An f/2.8 lens on micro 4 thirds produces roughly the identical background blur as an f/5.6 lens on full body. This is not about brightness. It is about the truth that you are utilizing a bodily shorter focal size to attain the identical framing, and shorter focal lengths naturally have extra depth of subject.
ISO Efficiency: Bigger sensors sometimes deal with noise higher. Full body cameras typically have a couple of two-stop benefit in high-ISO conditions, although it is extra sophisticated than that whenever you think about pixel pitch and trendy sensor expertise.
Digital camera Place: I needed to shoot from the very same spot with each cameras. Transferring nearer or farther modifications perspective fully, and I needed to eradicate that variable.
For this check, I shot the OM System 50-200mm vast open at f/2.8 and the Sigma 300-600mm at its native f/4.0 aperture at 400mm. I additionally used an “older” pro-level digicam (the Sony a7 IV) to make the comparability extra real looking for photographers who would possibly already personal a barely older full body physique.
The Publicity Drawback I Did not Anticipate
Earlier than diving into the outcomes, I would like to deal with one thing that drove me completely loopy throughout this two-week check: sustaining constant exposures between these two methods was a nightmare.
On paper, I believed it will be easy. The Sony with the f/4 lens ought to at all times be one cease darker than the OM digicam with the f/2.8 lens when utilizing an identical ISO and shutter velocity settings. And more often than not, that is precisely what occurred. I would both enhance the Sony information by one cease in Lightroom or improve the ISO/gradual the shutter by one cease within the subject.
However then, in sure conditions, notably in low gentle with excessive ISO settings like through the pickleball shoot, each cameras would someway produce an identical exposures with the identical settings. What provides?
It seems each the Sony a7 IV and the OM-1 Mark II use twin native ISO sensor expertise. These sensors swap to totally different acquire algorithms as soon as the ISO passes sure thresholds. In contrast to older cameras the place boosting ISO merely degraded the picture in predictable methods, these trendy sensors can really produce cleaner shadows and higher dynamic vary once they flip to that secondary acquire stage.
I attempt to level this out as we take a look at the pictures within the video above, however simply know that getting comparable exposures in each state of affairs was extraordinarily irritating as a result of the 2 sensor methods do not behave identically.
Bokeh and Depth of Area: The Full Body Benefit
Let’s handle the elephant within the room first: sure, the complete body digicam completely produces extra background blur and shallower depth of subject. That is most likely the place you will see the largest distinction between these methods and why there’s such heated debate about picture high quality.
Wanting by my flower pictures, the palm leaves nearer to the digicam have been noticeably extra out of deal with the Sony system. Background components like these out-of-focus highlights and transitions between colours, positively appeared softer and extra summary on the complete body sensor.
Nevertheless, the distinction wasn’t at all times dramatic. When capturing at 400mm equal, it turned surprisingly troublesome to differentiate which digicam produced which picture. Sure, in the event you research the pictures carefully, the complete body sensor wins each time. However relying in your composition and the way far background components are out of your topic, the distinction will not be as pronounced as you’d anticipate.
For wildlife photographers who obsess about separating their topics from distracting backgrounds, this issues. The total body system positively blurs backgrounds extra, giving that creamy, dreamy look. However there’s an unintended consequence: when you may have such shallow depth of subject, you would possibly get a fowl’s foot in excellent focus whereas the opposite foot simply inches away is totally delicate.
On the micro 4 thirds digicam, I discovered each ft stayed sharp. So you must ask your self: what’s extra essential? Absolutely the creamiest background, even when elements of your topic fall out of focus? Or having extra of your topic acceptably sharp, even when the background is not fairly as buttery easy?
The Macro Focusing Benefit No person Talks About
Here is the place the OM system completely destroyed the complete body setup: shut focusing capacity.
I did not take note of the specs earlier than heading out to shoot, however the distinction is staggering. The Sigma 300-600mm has a minimal focusing distance of 9 ft at 300mm, and you must step all the best way again to fifteen ft at 600mm. The OM 50-200mm? Simply 30 inches all through the complete zoom vary.
There have been a number of conditions the place I may seize near-macro stage photos of flowers with the micro 4 thirds digicam, solely to find I needed to again up 8 ft earlier than the Sigma would even obtain focus. This is not essentially a sensor measurement situation; it is simply how unbelievable this OM lens is. However for photographers who need versatility in a single lens, it is a large benefit.
Wildlife and Sports activities: The place Issues Get Fascinating
I am going to admit upfront: I am not a wildlife or sports activities photographer. However I do know these are the genres the place lenses like these shine, so I spent two weeks capturing the whole lot from birds and my canine Gibson to golf, tennis, and even late-night pickleball beneath synthetic lighting.
For distant topics, like golfers 50 to 100 yards away, the bokeh variations between the 2 cameras have been minimal. I am really shocked at how comparable these photos look. I am unable to think about a writer or regular viewer would have a lot desire between them. Even the tennis pictures seemed 90% an identical to my eyes.
The total body digicam did produce barely sharper photos with extra element once I pixel-peeped, however you actually need to be obsessing over picture high quality to care in regards to the variations in these sports activities pictures.
The Low Mild Problem
Capturing pickleball at night time beneath synthetic lighting could be on essentially the most demanding conditions for any digicam system. You want quick shutter speeds to freeze movement, insanely excessive ISOs as a result of the sunshine high quality is poor, lengthy lenses to achieve the motion, and quick apertures to collect sufficient gentle. It is a recipe for catastrophe.
I wound up capturing at 1/1,000th of a second with the OM-1 at f/2.8 and ISO 12,800, whereas the Sony wanted even larger ISO at f/4.0. These are extraordinarily excessive ISO settings, however I did not wish to compromise on shutter velocity once I wanted to freeze the motion.
The outcomes? Each cameras dealt with the noise extremely nicely. The element was surprisingly good, and the auto white stability on each methods did a exceptional job beneath these horrible stadium lights. It is actually exhausting for me to say one seems to be wildly superior to the opposite. I may get completely acceptable pictures with each methods.
The Weight Issue: A Actuality Examine
Here is one thing I have not talked about but: the Sony a7 IV with the Sigma 300-600mm weighs 10.2 kilos. The OM-1 with the 50-200mm? Simply 3.7 kilos.
That is nearly a 3x distinction in weight.
Throughout a two-hour pickleball session, I reached a degree the place I merely didn’t wish to carry the Sony setup anymore. And not using a monopod, it utterly sucked the enjoyment out of pictures. I skilled hints of this fatigue all through the two-week testing interval, however nothing drove the purpose residence like capturing repeatedly for 2 hours.
For context, I shot weddings for 15 years, usually holding a 70-200mm f/2.8 for 8+ hours at a time. That by no means bothered me as a result of it is roughly the identical measurement and weight as this OM system. However this large Sigma lens? After holding it for simply 5 minutes whereas speaking, my arms would already begin feeling it.
Autofocus Efficiency: The Shock Winner
I’ve at all times praised Sony’s autofocus as the most effective available on the market. I genuinely believed that going into this check. However through the pickleball shoot, I’ve to confess: I missed way more pictures with the Sony than I anticipated.
The OM-1 Mark II? The autofocus was unbelievable. Just about each shot was completely in focus. It was extraordinarily uncommon for the main target to rack incorrectly or latch onto the fallacious participant.
I do not know if it is due to the low-light state of affairs or the problem of getting 4 gamers shut collectively, however the OM-1 nailed focus in a manner I wasn’t ready for. Many instances I believed I would missed focus, solely to overview the pictures on my pc and uncover the complete sequence was completely sharp.
The OM-1 additionally shoots a fully staggering 50 to 120 frames per second. I unintentionally enabled this midway by the match and simply blasted by 4,500 photos as a result of the digicam was firing so quickly. On one hand, this let me choose absolutely the excellent second. Alternatively, culling turned a problem once I had so many practically an identical frames to select from.
The Sony, by comparability, shoots 10 frames per second, which I believed can be a lot for sports activities, however I positively missed extra decisive moments in comparison with what I captured on the OM-1.
My Last Ideas: Enjoyable vs. Final High quality
After two weeks of intensive capturing, this is my largest takeaway: having enjoyable whereas capturing and being nimble issues extra to me than I noticed.
I sometimes do not even carry an expert digicam on trip as a result of the burden and bulk wreck the expertise. Throughout this check, I little doubt had extra enjoyable capturing the OM digicam with the 50-200mm lens. I felt excited to leap in a golf cart, discover, spot a shot, and run 100 yards to get a brand new perspective.
With the complete body system, I consistently discovered myself desirous to child the tools. It is costly, so I apprehensive about scratching it. Once I noticed a possible shot within the distance, I would suppose, “Do I actually wish to carry this factor all the best way over there?” Even once I obtained nice pictures and set the digicam down for a break, I needed to coerce myself to select it again up once more.
The OM system looks like a traditional 70-200mm lens, one thing I am utterly used to after 15 years of marriage ceremony pictures. I can casually maintain all of it day with out feeling cumbersome or drained. The Sony setup? After simply 5 minutes of holding it whereas speaking, my arms can be screaming.
Are the Full Body Images That A lot Higher?
There is not any doubt the complete body digicam system produced higher picture high quality than the micro 4 thirds setup. Was it night time and day higher? I do not suppose so. Was it noticeable? Sure, in the event you take a look at them aspect by aspect, you may see variations. Would anybody who is not a photographer be capable of inform and even care? Completely not.
In case you’re viewing these photos on a pc display or printing them at 8×10 measurement, I genuinely do not suppose the picture high quality distinction issues a lot. In case you’re an expert photographer making critical cash capturing sports activities and wildlife, then sure, the complete body system is a no brainer. You need the most effective of the most effective.
However what about hobbyist photographers?
On one hand, in the event you obsess about element and having the very best tools, and also you’re by no means actually glad proudly owning one thing barely beneath the most recent flagship providing, I do not suppose the OM-1 system will curb your lust for the cream of the crop. And that is nice. I am like that with guitars. I get it. If that is you with pictures, go for the very best. Take pleasure in your passion. There’s nothing fallacious with that.
Nevertheless, if pictures is a passion however you continue to wish to seize wildlife and sports activities, and also you’re nice with picture high quality that reaches 80-90% of what the highest cameras produce, and you do not wish to be slowed down by sheer weight, I believe the OM-1 and this 50-200mm lens can be excellent.
If I needed to shoot a golf match, obtained entry to a live performance, or booked a safari to Africa, there is not any doubt I would seize the OM system. It is lighter, I may pack my bag with different lenses and simply different photographic choices. Carrying this factor round, I imply, I am unable to think about taking this on a airplane. I am unable to think about carrying this on a safari. It simply looks like I might by no means wish to go away the home even coping with this if it is only for enjoyable and it is only for a passion or even when I am being paid for it if it is not one thing that I am doing day in and time out on a regular basis. It has been an actual eye-opening expertise capturing with a lens like this.
It is the identical motive that I seize my Panasonic GH5 digicam anytime I’ve to take video. I simply take pleasure in utilizing a smaller digicam and I really feel like for many viewers, even for myself, the picture high quality is simply not that totally different. I type of really feel like we have hit that peak level of diminishing returns, and so, having a giant full body digicam with all of the grip and lighting and the gimbal and like, I do not wish to take care of it. And I do that stuff professionally. So, I believe there’s a place for each of those digicam methods. I believe each of those as I simply proven produced unbelievable photos.
The Value Distinction Is Vital
Earlier than wrapping up, let me reveal the price distinction, one thing I deliberately averted till now.
The Sony a7 IV physique prices $2,500, and the Sigma 300-600mm lens runs $6,600, for a complete system value of $9,100.
The OM-1 Mark II physique prices $2,100 (not that less expensive), and the 50-200mm f/2.8 lens is $3,700, for a complete of $5,800.
If my math is appropriate, the micro 4 thirds system prices about 40% lower than the complete body equal.
In fact, you additionally need to think about what you already personal. In case you’ve invested closely in Sony, Nikon, or Canon lenses, it would make sense to pony up for the $6,600 lens and add it to your arsenal. However in the event you do not personal a bunch of lenses or need a single light-weight system solely for capturing tremendous telephoto photos, the OM-1 and the 50-200mm f/2.8 is totally a system it is best to think about.
And this is one thing else to think about: the OM System additionally affords teleconverters just like the MC-14 1.4x and MC-20 2.0x that work with this lens. With the MC-14, you’d remodel this right into a 140-560mm equal at f/4, or with the MC-20, a loopy 200-800mm equal at f/5.6. That type of attain in such a conveyable package deal is one thing the complete body system cannot match with out spending much more cash and including much more weight.
Conclusion
I believe there’s a spot for each of those digicam methods. Each produced unbelievable photos. Sure, the complete body digicam produces technically higher photos, I am going to completely say that. However I do not know if it is as large a deal as individuals make it out to be on the web. Perhaps it was 10 years in the past, but it surely actually is not now.
We have hit that time of diminishing returns the place the expertise of capturing—the enjoyment of it, the portability, the enjoyable—would possibly matter greater than squeezing out that final 10-20% of theoretical picture high quality. Not less than for me, and possibly for you too.
Whether or not you go together with the OM-1 Mark II and 50-200mm f/2.8 or keep on with a full body system just like the Sony a7 IV, Nikon Z8, or Canon EOS R5 with their respective telephoto lenses, ensure you’re selecting the system that matches your capturing type and never simply chasing specs on paper.
Watch the complete video above to see all of the side-by-side comparisons and decide for your self. And if in case you have expertise capturing micro 4 thirds or full body telephoto lenses, I would love to listen to your ideas within the feedback beneath.
