ULTIMATE WILDLIFE ZOOM REVIEW! Canon Sony Nikon Olympus Fuji Panasonic
Get the best prices with a warranty at SDP.io/BUY + 5% coupon TNC
Micro Four Thirds wildlife lenses: SDP.io/WLMFT
Canon wildlife lenses: SDP.io/WLC
Sony wildlife lenses: SDP.io/WLS
Nikon wildlife lenses: SDP.io/WLN
Fuji wildlife lenses: SDP.io/KEHF600
Spreadsheet with all the data: SDP.io/WLZData
Sample images: SDP.io/WLZ2023Pics
Professional wildlife photographers Tony & Chelsea Northrup test ALL the wildlife zooms from EVERY camera manufacturer making mirrorless wildlife gear right now: Canon, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic, Olympus & Fujifilm! This comprehensive wildlife photography review tests everything the pros care about: Price, Size, Weight, Design, Autofocus, Stabilization, Sharpness (for distant subjects when you have to crop), Sharpness (when you can fill the frame with a subject), low-light performance and background separation.
0:00 Introduction
1:05 Panasonic 100-400 Intro
2:02 Olympus 100-400 Intro
2:41 Nikon 180-600 Intro
3:31 Fujifilm 150-600 Intro
4:35 Sony 200-600 Intro
5:25 Canon 100-500 Intro
6:40 Olympus 150-400 TC Intro
8:32 Sharpness
10:30 Autofocus
12:24 Stabilization
13:24 Equivalent f/stop, background blur & light gathering
16:18 Summary
Get 5% more for your gear! Sell to our sponsor KEH: SDP.io/SELL code NORTHRUP-SELL Get the best prices with a warranty at SDP.io/BUY + 5% coupon NORTHRUP-1 Micro Four Thirds wildlife lenses: SDP.io/WLMFT Canon wildlife lenses: SDP.io/WLC Sony wildlife lenses: SDP.io/WLS Nikon wildlife lenses: SDP.io/WLN Fuji wildlife lenses: SDP.io/KEHF600 Spreadsheet with all the data: SDP.io/WLZData Sample images: SDP.io/WLZ2023Pics
I got myself a Sony G 200 - 600mm Lens.......I love it, it's amazing, especially at the zoo.
WOW!; Tony you and your daughter Chelsea have chemistry; I'm gonna have to view more of your videos when I get time which isn't often 👍
@@PSYCHIC_PSYCHOwait, Tony is her father? I thought he's her husband. 😅 He looks young.
@@zurgmuckerberg Are you being serious?, he's her husband?; he doesn't look young to me, he looks like he's in his mid 50's, while she looks like in her late 20's early 30's
@@PSYCHIC_PSYCHO apart from his gray hair, he looked like he's in his 40s for me. There are a lot of men who lost hair pigmentation early, so I thought that's the case here too (I still think that's the case).
Would have been awesome to see the newer Sigma 60-600 in this comparison. As well as the Canon budget 100-400 which is super cheap but still allows a teleconverter. Finally the Tamron 150-500 should have been thrown into the mix. Lastly, similar to the Olympus, Nikon has some sweet “budget” telephoto primes.
Ditto on Nikon. The 500 PF fits in this price range, and the 800PF squeaks in also. I currently shoot with the 500PF and with the exception of some occasional abstract looking background, it can be a wonderful performer.
@@tc6912 both the Nikon 400 and 800 primes looks fantastic and still below 10k
I tested the Sigma 60-600 on Sony bodies for three weeks. I found the Sony 200-600mm much sharper on the long end and sent the Sigma back. I loved the wide 60mm but just couldn't sacrifice the sharpness at 600mm. 📸
@@CameraRay I have the 200-600 but that 10x capability is super impressive. I can definitely understand there always has to be sacrifices with lenses that have so much versatility. I guess the sharpness on the long end is expected given everything it offers
@sneakergearz I would've loved to see the sigma 60-600 here ....
I'm an Olympus user and always carry in my backpack the M Zuiko 75-300 mm II (150-600 equivalent). Is a light lens with an amazing image quality, and is a bargain. The autofocus with the OM1 is fast and accurate and it delivers sharp images from corner to corner. For bird photography is a great lens. Thank you for this excellent video!!
I use this lens with the Lumix G9, great results.
It's funny because I have that lens and the 40-150mm with the teleconverters. The 40-150 with the teleconverter can be very sharp but I had a set a photos I really thought it was from that lens and when I checked the meta data, it was the 75-300. It shocks me how sharp it can be.
I use the canon RF100-400. I've been amazed by its image quality and close focus capabilities. For the price it's a bargain!
I bought an rf100-400 AND a 500 F4 for cheaper than the 100-500. Great combo!
Same here. I use the Rf 100-400 with the canon RP. Budget birding. Sometimes I put the camera in 1.6 crop mode for reach. I want the 100-500 but I’m waiting for the right price.
Adam, what have you been using before, that you are so amazed? No trolling, honest question.
@@pawelmod3292 you won't find any 400mm that is that lightweight, that cheap and that good all at once. The OIS and AF in particular are definitely, objectively, completely amazing. IQ is pretty good as long as you use without TC. I prefer it for most bugs in the field over my RF100mm macro, since 0.5x is often more than enough and 400mm provides much better working distance. In the field you'd be stopping down to f8 anyway for DOF. It's even great for video too! Yes it's f8, but if you shoot with it within the usable range of shooting conditions, the images it delivers are superb. Worth adding that with the high fps of modern bodies and the amazing OIS, you can now use shutter speeds that were considered way too slow for wildlife before, pushing the boundaries of what is considered "usable conditions" at f8 (for stills only, as for action nothing beats more aperture). Personally even the f11 primes are too dark for me, but f8 is still more than usable. Like I said, I got that lens and a 500 f4 for cheaper than an RF100-500. So whenever I do need aperture I'm covered! Yes it's only 400mm and 600mm lenses render more detail at long distances, but for a 400mm, it's pretty amazing. Since you're asking, here are the other telephoto lenses which I've personally tried, owned or had extensive use with: EFS 55-250, EF70-300 USM ii, EF70-200L mk ii, EF Sigma 150-600C, RF100-500 (rented), rf600 f11 (tried once), sigma 120-300 F2.8, EF500 F4L mki. The RF100-400 is pretty much on par AF and OIS wise with the 100-500 and beats all the others. As far as sharpness goes, it's more than good enough for me. It needs to be hammered down how ridiculously lightweight it is for such a package. 635 grams!!!! How??
Thank you for including the OM-1 and the 150-400!
Our pleasure! We had to pay to rent it but I was really surprised by how well it performed with the OM-1.
@TonyAndChelsea it shouldn't be a surprise at that price. I hope they can bring it down to like 5k or so but they prob won't
I'd go with the Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 pro over the 100-400 from either them or Panasonic. I say this having done just that. There was a deal last year where it was going for the same $1499 but came with the 2x tc. The sharpness and ability to resolve, at least with the OM-1's 20mp sensor, works out pretty well with the 2x tc. It's not as easy to go from the 100-300mm range as it is for the 100-400, considering you have to add the tc. So that's a drawback. It also ends up at f/5.6 instead of the 100-400's f/6.3. Of course, that's at 300mm. I only prefer it for its 2.8 aperture when used without the tc, along with the excellent sharpness. I suppose if you need the extra reach, the Panasonic 100-400 has got you there. I do wish it were able to use its IS with OMDS bodies. The lack of inter-compatibility, as far as sync or dual IS, is a con here. If I had infinite money, I'd go with the Olympus 150-400. Saying that, at such a high price, I'd sell off my M43 equipment and go to FF if I had that kind of money to spend.
This video is awesome! My favorite of the ones I've seen from you both. These lenses are the most relevant zooms to me for wildlife. The different detailed sections were a real eye opener. Thank you for your hard work. It really shows.
This video was terrible lol
Nice review but have to point out that quoting MP has to be done in relation to sensor size. The Oly is "low" MP only because the sensor is ¼ the size of FF. If you scaled the Oly sensor up to FF it would be ca. 80MP, beating all bodies reviewed. It's all about pixel density, not absolute MP.
exactly, pixel density matters a lot
Wow! Very extensive review. Clearly a lot of effort and time was dedicated to making it. Thank you both. Really appreciate the insight it provides
OM1 + 150-400mm 4.5 TC user here. Outstanding combo. Also use the Nikon Z8 + 500mm 5.6 pf combo. The 500 is still a great lens, even though not a zoom. Never use a tripod with either combo but sometimes use a monopod when using pro-capture with the Oly combo, just so I don’t have to hold the unit for minutes at a time while waiting for action.
I have to ask, how good is the OM-1 ISO capability ?
@@pierrevilley6675 it’s a valid question, the overall image quality is less and the noise more when using the OM1 than with my Z8 or, previously, my D850. However, less than you might think and when I have a deeper crop on my Nikons for birds or wildlife using the - shorter - long lens, the difference diminishes a lot. Using Topaz or now LR Denoise, my raw shots with the OM1 clean up very well. I’ve got good shots off of it as high as ISO 12800, although it’s unusual to go that high. The secret with the OM1 is to actually overexpose slightly, favouring a slightly slower shutter or higher ISO than necessary, then adjust the exposure back toward center when processing.
I've shot m43 for a decade. The IQ loss is not worth it. Post cannot being it up to what other formats can do SOOC. I no longer recommend m43.
I really love the review you did on the iPhone 15 pro max and how that zoom not really worth it. You both do a great job of getting us to be better photographers
You made that comfortable, and you made making that comfortable look easy, true pros.
I've used the original Panasonic Leica 100-400mm, the Olympus 100-400mm, and the Olympus 300mm f4 PRO. They're all great, but what I actually own is the 40-150mm f2.8 PRO with the MC-20 2X teleconverter. It gives me a 600mm equivalent at f5.6. Those other lenses are better for wildlife because they have more reach (the new Panasonic 100-400mm II and all of those Olympus lenses can take teleconverters), but what I have is a pretty decent kit. And, when I take the teleconverter off my 40-150mm, I have an 80-300mm equivalent at f2.8...which is still a lot better than a 70-200mm f2.8 like so many full-frame cameras use.
I have 40-150 2.8 Pro and 300mm F4 Pro and I rarely pick up the 40-150mm. With 1.4tc it's not close enough, totally zoomed in stabilisation is suffering and AF performance drops. For bird fotography you need reach and light. 40-150 just doesn't cut it.
Except it has the same bokeh as an F/5,6 Lens (F/11 with 2x TC), and if you take into account the fact that MFT ISO capability is around 2 stop worse than FF, that combo is really the equivalent of a 80-300 F/5,6. 160-600 F/11 with TC. So basically you get with your 40-150 2.8 the exact same results as a full frame user with a 70-300 F4,5-5,6 with the only advantages of weight and build quality but for more than twice the price.
@@pierrevilley6675OM marketing at work. Equivalent reach, but not equivalent f-stop.
I've pretty much tried all of your combos listed here except the OM1 + 150-400mm. I currently own both the Nikon Z9 with the 180-600 and the Sony A1 with the 200-600. Both of these systems are my favorites and if I were choosing a system just for still photography, the A1 with the 200-600 would win. The A1 does not stick on the background as much as the Z9. BUT... I do more video work nowadays than stills and for that, the Z9 wins hands-down over the A1. Maybe if the A1 ever gets a meaningful firmware update, that may change but without bird-eye detect and the ridiculous way in which I have to tap the back of the screen to engage tracking on the A1 in video mode, the Z9 wins for autofocus, tracking and 60fps raw in 8k will knock your socks off. Maybe consider doing a wildlife video mode review some day?
Yeah true Sony needs to launch bodies with that dynamic stab of ZV E1 and eight stops hybrid stab of a7R5 in their new a9iii and a1ii. Uptil then for videos other cameras are better. Also, possibly upgrade 200-600 its been more than four years now.
Don’t agree at all, A1 has a better Af than Z9, for me.
Nikon for video is a crazy to think! 5 years ago you would have been laughed at!
Very timely review covering several lenses that sell well. Much appreciated.
Amazing comparison, thank you, it looks like it has taken a huge amount of effort to put together!
I’ve been listening to and watching you for years. I think this video might be my favorite review you’ve ever done. Nice work! Thank you.
I’m using the Canon RF100-500 with R5, you can add a 2x extender to reach 1000mm. You lose a bit in sharpness but in daylight this is still very good knowing how sharp is the 100-500mm. Furthermore by wildlife, you need to be more specific. For birds, a very long lens is important but for a safari, you need to be able to go back to 100mm for bigger subjects such as elephants for example. A 200-600mm will not help much if you want to get the whole animal. To me to have 100mm option is very helpful. I just keep my extender 2x in my pocket if I really need to get 1000mm. So it all depends on what you really need and what you are trying to achieve.
Thanks for a great review! As a very satisfied Sony 200-600 user (going on two years now), it has been a reliable companion on my quest to become a decent bird photographer. For anyone who owns one or wants to buy one, here's my top tip (inspired by a T&C video): get some extension tubing (I use 26mm) for your lens, as it makes a massive difference on closeup work, like with passerine birds.
I love mine too! ❤
I think the majority of micro 4/3 users want to see a All new 34 megapixel of resolution with an all new stacked sensor, that is truly groundbreaking, Realistically right now, I think the most megapixels we could expect with the next camera from OM systems will have no more than 26 megapixels of resolution with a half a stop up low light improvement and a half a stop of dynamic range improvement over the current sensor, which is used in the current OM-1 Professional camera from OM systems. No camera system is perfect. I rather take a micro for thirds system on a long hike, then end up leaving heavier system at home or in the car because it is too heavy and unwilling to bring on a long hike. The Best camera you have is the one with you.
Check out the Canon R7 + 100-400 if you're interested in a light-weight rig.
@@TonyAndChelsea Please maka a video comparing this combo and OM Systems OM-1 with their 2 lenses using Precapture, Buffer size, AF speed, subject recognition, subject tracking to check if whe can debunk OM System claims.
Great video showing that the wildlife is the market that camera can get more better.
Thank you Tony/Chelsea for such a comprehensive video, much time and effort went into it, I thought you were going to pick the new Nikon lens , and boy i am glad i was wrong, and for that reason alone is why i love my Sony a74 and my Sony 200-600mm lens combo, i bought them on you recommendations back in 2021 along with the endorsements of many other photographers and have never had any issues even shooting in minus 25-35 weather here in Central Canada, 👍
If you use Panasonic Lumix 100-400 ii, I believe that it is equivalent to 200-800 for full-frame. It can use 2X Tele-Converter, too. Therefore, its maximum zooming capability would be 400-1600 equivalently for full-frame.
.. and I would also argue the image stablisation is the best in the business if you are partnering it with the G9 ii, it is definitely not mid tier scoring just 5/10 in this review LOL.
Just heard Canon is coming out with a RF 200-800mm. I hope you'll review that one and let us know where it fits in here...
G9 has: Leica DG 100-400mm Leica DG 200mm + 1.4 TC (280mm) Lumix 100-300mm Lumix 45-175mm Lumix 45-200mm + ofc Oly lenses (they actually work great). Why is that only 2/10? Missing a "super pro" white zoom with Panasonic brand?
Panasonic discontinued the Leica DG 200mm in 2022 and there's been no announcement of a replacement.
Excellent video! The only thing that I'd have liked to have seen added would have been tele-macro considerations (i.e. minimum focus distance and maximum magnification) and TC availability. The Canon 100-500 is fantastic for that and the Fuji, despite it not having a great MFD, has excellent max magnification (0.25x) at the long end -- it adds quite a bit to their versatility.
Yes on minimum focus distance (reproduction ratio)
Stunning comprehensive review, brilliantly presented with factual and concise dialog. Cheers
What a wonderful review. I am in the Olympus and Nikon camps. I had the Panasonic 100-400mm lens and there is no doubt that it was sharp. AF was fair with the OM-D EM-1 MkII but I was never satisfied with the results with either focus or in-use sharpness which were both in the "meh" category. In the end, i would just as happily use an ancient Sigma 150-500mm lens with an FTZ adaptor on a Nikon Zfc or Nikon Z5. Build quality on the Panasonic was outstanding and it was nice and compact but you need more than that for a good lens. Thanks
It would be great if you could include the most promising third-party lenses in the ranking. I would love to see how they hold up against the camera manufacturers' lenses.
Thank you to both of you for doing this comparison, this was VERY helpful. I've been thinking of getting a longer lens for wildlife photography, I shoot with A7R5/A7c cameras, with the APSC 70-350 mm lens, great sharp lens, but it can only go so far. Your comparison test really helped me think seriously about the Sony 200-600mm lens. I was thinking about getting the Fuji camera and lens, but your comments about focus was very helpful. Thank you again, really appreciate you taking the time to do these videos, they are so informative.
Also look at the 150-500 tamron. It's about half the price of a 200-600 and it is much better than the 70-350. I've had some very mixed results but I've only owned it for a few days so I'm sure it has been a lot of user error.
Get the 200-600mm Sony. Superb value and great handling especially as a first big lens. Doesn't extend when you zoom, focus throw is just right. I'm very happy with mine. Look for deals around Black Friday or used lenses in excellent condition 👍🏾👍🏾
Thank you! I like the portability of the 70-350, but finding there are more times than not that I wish I had a longer focal length. I'll look into it. @@gamebuster800
Thank you, good advice! I like the portability of the smaller lens, but realize if I want further reach, I'm going to have to put up with the heavier weight and longer lens. It looks like Tony and Chelsea thought the 200-600 was the best overall telezoom, I also like the fact it has a short zoom throw and as you noted, the advantages of internal zoom, that is a big positive. Thank you!@@thewiseoldbird
Great timing, I need a new lens so I can get into wildlife photography. Thanks!
You missed to compare the Oly super zoom on the G9 II because of the higher megapixel count, the biggest of all the cameras showed
Great video. That what I was searching yesterday. Just on time 👌
What about a Panasonic S5II and a Sigma tele zoom (150-600, 60-600, 100-400)??? The L Mount needs more love. It's a perfectly capable camera and lens combo at great price
I love the Pentax 150-450mm DFA. It’s a great piece of kit and weather sealed.
I just saw that the Panasonic pictures where taken with ISO100 and most of the time with 1/200s while the others used all kinds of ISO and much shorter exposure for most images. This explains the bad results for example at 1:22.
yep, i see it also (linked Sample images) Maybe ''user-error''? Also some of the Sony shots shown in video appear to be ''enhanced+NR'' (DSC03045-Enhanced-NR.jpg)? Maybe this video should be updated? This doesn't reflect good on reviewer...
For some reason I use the 100-400 on my Em1.2. Seems to do really well with wildlife. It does seem that the OSPDAF works like with every other lens. So to me it seems I can use this lens not just on the G9mkII but on every mFT cam with OSPDAF. Or has something changed with th MKII?? Otherwise pretty Northtruppy to just mention the G9 MarkII.
I remember back in the day of film, Nikon and Canon offered huge 1200mm telephotos! Nikon even had a 2000mm mirror telephoto. A real beast that resembled an astronomical telescope.
Thanks for the update and the samples. Tony (I presume its you) Can you put the raw files in the sample directories? I'd like to have the exifs etc
Wonderful review T&C! I own the Sony A7iv and 200-600 combo and also the Olympus EM1mk ii with the 300 F4. Your observations are spot on and I just can't love the Sony more!! I would like to see a Prime lens shoot out for wildlife photography if you guys can do it.
I have an OM1 both the PL100-400 and the Oly 100-400. I most often shoot BIF, and I have been unhappy with Oly 100-400. I find the PL100-400 delivers sharper images more consistently than the Oly. Since the OM lens seems as good or better on static targets, I think it comes down to the faster AF motors in the PL lens. In any case the Oly lens stays home all the time. I also got the Oly 1.4 TC but frankly the Oly lens is not really sharp enough to hold up to that. My dream is the Oly releases a Mk2 lens that is much improved, or even a mid-range lens between the 100-400f6.3 and the 150-400f4.5. I would love to get 150-400 but really can't justify the price for a hobby.
I use the 300mm all the time. It’s super sharp . I got mine secondhand and it’s never been off my om1 since. Compared to the 100-400 it’s amazing. I too want a mid price 100-400 as currently the 100-400 is not a good lens and the 150-400 way out of a lot of our price ranges
Love this review!
Make no mistake, though, I still get great shots with my X-H2S + 150-600. I'm curious if your autofocus ratings would've differed had you used the X-H2S instead of the X-H2. Also, I'm curious which firmware version your X-H2 has. The V3 of the firmware included noticeable autofocus improvements.
I have X-T5 with latest firmware, the AF should be the same withX-H2 and X-H2S, I cannot recommend the Fujifilm system for wildlife photography. Fujifilm AF is not that great compare to the other 3 brands. I also shoot with Canon R5 by the way.
Huh, I wonder how I'm still able to get great images with my Fuji system. FWIW, the X-H2S uses a stacked image sensor (similar to Alpha a1, EOS R3 and Z9), which is not insignificantly faster than the Bayer sensor on the X-T5 (which is the same as on the X-H2.) @@epsonc882009
Yeah, I “still got great shots” with my XT-3 + 70-300 & Tamron 150-500… the problem is how many even greater shots do you still miss?? Sold all my Fuji gear probably switching to Nikon. The “infrastructure” score they gave was wild. Nikon has much better selection of affordable fast(ish) Z mount tele primes than Sony… and when you factor in the deep roster of legacy F mount glass, forget about it. They’re a 10 in that department.
I very much appreciate all of the hard work both you put into your videos. I have learned a lot over the past several years watching them. Although there are obvious differences between the various lenses you tested and the camera systems they connect to, the bottom line is if you own a Sony, you buy Sony lenses, if you own Nikon (I have a Z9) you buy the Nikon glass, etc. Once we are heavily invested in a camera system, we are basically married to its native glass. I agree that some of the tested lenses and cameras have advantages over others, but I am just going to use what I have and try to capture special moments and then share with family and friends. I do own the 180-600 Nikon zoom. I like the lens but I also have the new z 400 and Z 800 mm primes. The Nikon zoom is helpful when I need to quickly change focal lengths but it can’t match the primes. I would guess that this is pretty much the case with all of the zooms you tested. Thanks again for all that you do to help passionate photographers improve their skills.
Thank you for the video. I own two of the lenses on your list. The Sony 200-600 I use mostly on my A1 but have had it since my A9 and A9 II. The other is the Canon 100-500 on my EOS R5? Do wish they had a stack sensor at at least 42-45 Mpixels. Tries the Nikon but at that time the 180-600 and Z8 were not out yet. Thanks for the review.
Interesting video! The rumor has always been that the Olympus 100-400 is built by Sigma. This might explain the relatively poor stabilization performance. Examples seem to be very inconsistent as well. The same was true of the previous version of the Panasonic. I still have one of those and use it for traveling when I might need a longer lens but birding or wildlife is not the focus of the trip. I moved on from Canon after a number of years because they simply refuse to build a crop body camera that doesn’t annoy me. I was one of the first OT get and R7 and one of the first OT sell my R7. Electronic shutter is rarely useable and the mechanical shutter sounds like trolls hammering away. The AF is sometimes good in really good light but sometimes bad. You cannot count on it. I got some lovely images with the R7 but probably missed more than I got. The only reasonably sized lens is the awesome 100-500 but it is too short for full frame. I tried it for a year with my R6 and then an R5 which kept freezing at the most inopportune times. I would come back to Canon if they would build a pro leaning crop sensor camera that would be great with the 100-500. I doubt that will happen any time soon though. For me the step down in performance to the R7 was unacceptable. Give it a better EVF, passable buffer and a stacked sensor with fast readout and I would be willing to to pay $3000 for it. But since that doesn’t exist I primarily shoot with an OM-1 with the 300mm F4 often with one of the TCs. I find that noise and megapixels aren’t nearly as large of an issue as they used to be. I really enjoy shooting at 50fps and having RAW Pro Capture at crazy speeds. Really my only issue with the OM-1 is the lack of animal eye detection in video. Otherwise I really enjoy it.
Om-1 has Bird detect in video, must hav animal to then? But you must be in video mode. You can’t just press the red buttom, that just a quick auto thing.
Good episode. I wish you do one more of this on "budget" tele option too.
Oh wow, i thought you guys were going to pick #1 as #7 lol. It was my first and currently only lens I use for birding at the lake. On a tripod/monopod, gimble, and a7r v, it's been amazing here in Florida. Now, I've also thrown on the Sony 2x teleconverter. On a bright sunny Florida day, it's absolutely amazing! I'm glad you guys picked it as #1.. actually, I think Chelsea talked me into it back when I picked the 200-600 back in January. As a funny note, well kinda funny, I lost the lens hood when i took it off and accidentally kicked the hood off of a dock :( it costs $75 for a new one which is always out of stock at Sony. I then saw what the 600 f4 lens hood cost and laughed, it's $950. I ended up buying a metal lens hood on ebay for like $30; Those looking for a replacement, do not buy that if you're replacing the original as it uses the threads on the lens' filter. I learned the hard way when i realized i couldn't put on the hood and CPL filter while at the lake.
This is a very good test. Nice work!
I hope this time they put on subject detection “birds” on the Panasonic and also shot on the afc mode. In the review the didn’t so it’s not really objective. Also I swear the g9II will have the best stabilization of all the cameras listed.
I would love to see a comparison of the new Nikon 180-600 vs the sigma 150-600 contemporary (using the ftz adapter). I got this lens used a few years back and was wondering if this new Nikon lens is worth the upgrade
What about close focusing distance? With my Pana 100-400 I can take pictures of dragon- and butterflies and it fits into my handlebar bag. On my long bike trips or moutain hikes the better and bigger 200-600mm zooms are not an option.
I was surprised that you did not credit Nikon with a higher infrastructure score as the company has produced a wonderful variety of long lens in the 400mm+ area. Nikon users are spoilt for choice.
Excellent breakdown! I would also like to know about the minimum focus distance and maximum magnification of each lens. It would also be good to know if the reported focal lengths are in fact accurate and if there's any effect of focus breathing on focal length up close.
yes, the Sony does NOT hit 600mm at closest focusing distance. And the RF100-500 smokes the competition when it comes to closest focusing distance too. The Sony is more like a 200-500 at closest focusing distance due to the focus breathing design issues. Does the Canon have some focus breathing? Sure, but nowhere near the extent of the Sony 200-600. Caveat - I do NOT own a RF100-500 lens and I shoot Canon (R3 with mark 1 500f4 prime).
@@davepastern well that's important, especially since they rate the Sony number one. I just read that the Nikon 180-600's maximum magnification is .25 while the Sony's is .20. And it has minimal focus breathing so close to 600 mm at minimum focus distance. Perhaps if we consider these additional parameters, the Sony is no longer number one.
@@lsaideOK I would concur . I think the Nikon 180-600 is a better option, and #1 with the RF100-500 2nd and the Sony 200-600 3rd. Size and weight are important factors and not to be ignored. A lens that is too heavy and hardly used isn't a good lens, no? A lens that is used frequently, and happily, is a good lens. I have no horse in this race. I have no beef with Sony, no love for Canon. I like Nikon products - their lens lineup for their MLC range is the best of the 3 main marques imho. I love my R3 (other than the 24mp limit, but I am getting around that by using gigapixel to pretty good effect). I like Tony and Chelsea, and have defended them in the past - they cop a lot of flack from fellow photographers, but in this rating, I think they got it wrong.
@@davepastern Olympus 300mm f4 with MC-14 Teleconverter has a 35mm equivalent 840mm with a 1.4 metre minimum focus distance.
@@tdunster2011 that sounds right. Edit - the drawback is at higher ISOs the OM-1 falls behind the full frame cameras. And noise really destroys feather detail.
Do you have the 200-600 with the lens software upgrade? I bought the lens last year to use with my a-1, but many forums said not to update the software on the lens. Any thoughts or help???
Wondering if the auto focus result would change if it was the Fujifilm X-H2s.
Maybe, but the sharpness results would be significantly worse. It's too bad they don't offer a high-megapixel camera with great AF like the a1/r5/Z8/Z9.
Sharpness has nothing to do with mp count, If you crop the image to match that of a 60mp file of course it will degrade,but sharpness doesnt work like that@@TonyAndChelsea
It would have been cool to include Sigma's and Tamron's lens (that are really good) for the Sony, but I understand the extra work that would have given to you ! :) Good video :)
Tony, what is the Ecosystem score for the Canon R5 ? Their mirrorless cameras are available for any budget. Please let me know.
Would love to see a comparison with third party lenses like Tamron and Sigma.
Great review 👍. Very informative. Please please do a review on the Sony 100-400 GM for wildlife
When I upgraded to the Canon R7 for birds and wildlife, I sold my EF Sigma 150-600C and Tamron 100-400 Di VC to buy Canon's RF 100-500, which is L glass. And I have no regrets despite the cost, which also benefitted from a 20% discount in a cross-Canada sale last fall. The lens is lighter than the lenses I replaced, the OIS works well with the R7 IBIS, the dual focus motors are accurate and responsive, and the image quality is simply spectacular. If you can manage the price, this is an exceptional set-up for birds and wildlife.
This was one of your best videos and probably took a VERY long time to prepare. Thanks so much for the spreadsheet, since the video info goes by quite fast! Did you weigh the lenses yourself? Some of the weights differ from the manufacture's data (e.g. Sony 200-600 spec is 2115 g, you show 2245 g). It would have been great to include the camera body weight and cost in the score, as well.
Such small spec differences could be due to weighing with-or-without lens hood? tripod collar? front lid?
Excellent Video on real world performance instead of a lecture on specs and prices. 👍👍
You always test effective focal length but didn’t here and I think we know why. Lol couldnt let the Nikon top the 200-530mm Sony :)
Cope
@@Yupthereitism “cope” *when they give you 530mm after paying for 600mm*
@@siddharthsriram2685 In Steve Perry’s experience the 400 and 500 are sharper and the 180-600 is about the same but sharper on edge of frame.
@@siddharthsriram2685 the worst telephoto performing perfectly in those scenarios isn’t true. If that was the case then you wouldn’t see any differences with his tests. outdoors you are dealing with atmospherics, temperature influences, heat haze, changing light conditions etc. at the end of the day I’m not concerned about a tiny bit of sharpness here or there. I have 180-600 and used to own the 200-600 and like you say bokeh is better with the 180-600, I’ll add that it’s much better balanced and not front heavy so it’s easy to handle and handhold for an extended period of time, VR is much better, and you actually get around 600mm.
@@siddharthsriram2685 lmao that’s cap I also have the 500pf and it’s sharper than the zooms. Google “Nikon 500PF vs Sony 200-600” there a topic on DPR about the matter, it’s a bunch of Sony users and they all agree the 500pf is sharper.
Excellent review @tonyandchelsea. I love my Sony 200-600, but man it's heavy. One hole I see in the market right now, is a lack of fast prosumer primes, something like the Nikon PF lenses, and the Olympus 300 f4. Those are really the only two brands that offer middle grade primes which sacrifice 1-2 stops compared to the big boys, but are still very light, handy and sharp. I would happily pay an extra $1,000 for a 3 lb Sony f6.3 600 mm prime. I love the zoom lens, but it's kind of big and bulky. Frankly after hiking with it for 10 miles it sucks to hold.
I agree, but I think we have a better shot of getting that 600, f5.6 or 6.3 from Nikon.
@@tc6912I know. I'm seriously considering buying the Z8 just for the 500 f5.6. That's why I'd love for a popular KZhead channel to encourage Sony to make one. ;-)
@@RG-rm9jt I am currently shooting the Z8 and 500PF. It's a nice combo, but if I was buying new, I would look closely at the 400 4.5 and a TC before buying.
You really should mention that the Panasonic G9 II was pre-production without any firmware updates. Also, I didn't notice you mentioning ISO for each camera. It would be good to revisit it after the first firmware update.
I believe that M4/3 systems have several advantages when it comes to wildlife photography: 1. One of the great things about M4/3 is its pre/pro capture modes, which enable you to capture moments that might be missed with other systems. 2. At high frame rates, like 50fps and 60fps, losing focus occasionally has little impact, resulting in more usable shots. 3. The weather sealing on the high end OM Systems and Lumix cameras and lenses is excellent. 4. New A.I.-based noise reduction software from companies like O.M. Systems, Topaz, and DXO, mitigates high ISO noise. 5. Unlike heavier gear, M4/3 systems encourage wildlife photographers to explore remote areas thanks to their compact and lightweight design. 6. It is much easier to transport a M4/3 in carry on luggage on long distance trips. In summary M4/3 systems showcase their prowess in wildlife photography through their unique combination of innovative features.
And you get better perfomance (compared to the 100-400) when using the 300 mm (at a still reasonable price).
M 4/3 is not really that lightweight. 150-400 has similar weight to ff 200-600 lenses. Fuji 150-600 is even lighter. For lightweight set-up, nikon is the best with their compact primes (600mm and 400mm).
I've shot m43 for about a decade and, no, it's not worth the IQ loss. No amount of parlor tricks can mitigate IQ loss. I shoot with other formats and with photographers who use other formats. If you lack skills and budget m43 may work for you.
Curious about why you would test with an XH2 instead of an XH2s with a stacked sensor that's made to perform better with wildlife
My best guess is bias - with the exception of Olympus (with a $7,500 lens no one can afford) the results point us all to the largest, heaviest, and most expensive (FF) cameras and lenses with the least reach and best "near subject detail" lol. Basically the opposite of what I'd be looking for in a wildlife setup. The Fuji setup got the "best bang for the buck" nod, which seems accurate as it combined longest reach, most MP "at distance", excellent OIS etc. AF issues are obviously a bummer, but are also a software, not hardware problem at this point. In any case, "bad" in this group of high performers is still "very good" overall most of the time. Lets adjust the rankings together. Personally, I wouldn't consider OM-1 because the future of the company is now unclear. So they're out. Nikon is also out because IMO the Z8 is too pricey, overall, even if the lens is good (plus - where is the D500 replacement?). Their lesser bodies don't clearly beat Fuji overall, or enough to matter. Ditch the silly aperture "equivalent" and "infrastructure" penalties (who the hell that could afford a 600m f/4 lens is even looking at these, really?), and Fuji lands in 3rd place, after Sony and Canon. But then both of those are out because of high cost + less reach, forcing you to crop to get any closer. Now Fuji wins. BTW calling the lens "plasticky" as if a negative was odd, and not only because other 1st party companies make plastic "L" or "S" or "pro" lenses. I own the lens and it is light, well balanced, and handles amazingly well. Awesome tripod foot/strap eyelets + white paint legit keeps it way cooler/warmer outside than the typical black paint on metal of the other red badges, which can get crazy hot in direct sunlight. It is a superb lens, made in Japan, and super high quality like essentially every other Fuji lens I've ever tried. It is a great performer. Paired with the XT3/4, btw, it is an even cheaper setup, and still smoking fast and effective overall if you work at it. I saw a review of the Sony 200-600 on an APS-C body and the optics didn't seem to like the pixel density @24mp / 61mp "equivalent" - images were less impressive for sure. It showed the value of engineering lenses for a given sensor size. Fuji's 40mp sensor is like a 90-100mp FF sensor, btw, making the optics of the 150-600mm even more impressive, IMO. That said, to each their own. All of these setups would be fun to have.
The lower resolution of the XH2 would have caused significantly lower scores in the sharpness tests. Unfortunately Fuji currently lacks a good AF, high-megapixel combo like the R5/a1/Z8/Z9.
I love my Sony 200-600mm. I’m wondering if Sony will upgrade it anytime soon or just launching something in the $7000 mark for those that wanna be a bit closer to the 600mm F4
they dont.. thats why i sold my 200-600 A1 combo.. and kept Canon R3 and the NIKON Z9
i have the canon 70-200 f2.8 III all i need now is a nice TC for it and i'm set lol after watching this. i agree with a lot of the points.. but imo the best "value" on the table is my own personal bias.. the canon. the 100-500 versatility cant be overstated, coupled with the absolute abundance of well priced used bodies from the 5dIII up to 7dII's etc... and even some of the newer R line of cameras keeps the budget quite acceptable. id pick up the 100--500 myself but until then.. TC for the 70-200 will be my next purchase for sure.
Could you also review the tameron 150 to 500 lens as well as sigma 150 or 600 lens. How does these 2 lens fit into the group that you just tested. I was looking into the tameron lens to go with my Sony a6600.
Great vid. What is causing the vertical lines in 19:09 ?
What camera was 8:30 filmed on? The wobbles are driving me crazy
For the price of A1, you can buy a Z8 plus the 180-600 zoom. still have cash in your pocket, not to mention the video eye auto focus and super expensive type A cards. Lens is not the only thing. A7R5 or A6700 with AI chip, sounds cool, however, 8 frame/sec or 10frame/sec is not good enough in 2023....
And you’ll still have lesser of a camera. The A1 being almost three years old is still a better camera than the rest, price aside. Until Canon releases the R1 and or Sony releases the A1 II I don’t see that changing any time soon. Unless of course Nikon offers another firmware update to enhance underperforming features 😏
@@deebee68 It's great that nowadays we can have so many choices. Less or more is all depends on perspectives: if you take pictures only not videos for wildlife, you comment is valid. A1 only takes CFE-A cards, which only have half of the speed vs type B, not to mention the prices. Many of my friends own A1 & AS3, oh boy they are happy about firmware upgrades😂... for my Sony glasses, good news is there are E to Z adaptors
Nikon focus is still not there yet though
@@sports_car_enthusiast none of the other cameras have better auto-focus. Let’s also add the auto-focus in the A1 is almost three years old. Try again.
Video about lens 200-600 very nice lens
Selling my 500mm f/4 and going with the OM-1 and 300mm f/4 was the best thing I've done in a long time, easier the travel with and something the big 3 can not handle is rain, OM-1 along with the lenses are IP53 rated.... that's a big win!
What are your opinion after that time? :)
I got that Fuji for $1500 used. It’s a little slow but still delivers a nice picture.
I just need to add that Sony 200-600 could bought for 1499€ in Europe (including all taxes). Still, it is quite large and heavy lens, but because of internal zooming and focusing it is very solid. In terms of IQ produced by the lens I trust that all lenses from the video could deliver quality results.
Has anyone else picked up that the lenses rated lowest - Panasonic and Olympus showed slightly blurry bif, but the lenses rated better/best showed results of perched birds, or non moving raccoons! Hardly a fair comparison guys 🤔
The sample pictures are not related to the scoring.
@@TonyAndChelsea So the sampled pictures are not from the lens/ camera combo reviewed?
Panasonic number 1, because I no longer lift weights nor take HGH. Chelsea forgot to mention the teleconverter 2x which allows for some grouth and non of the others were longer then 800mm? Maybe I am wrong, wont be the first time.
Also room for growth with Panasonic’s wonderful 200mm f2.8 which takes the same teleconverters. Many consider this to be one of the best tele lenses out there, mft, full frame, apsc
Amazing... I was just headed into the backyard to test a whole set of lenses. I know how hard this is and really appreciate the effort. Quick question... in the Oly 150-400 test, you mentioned the camera lack of resolution. Yet the lens goes to 1000mm. So comparing the 1000mm image with the 600mm lenses, wouldn't you need to crop the 600 by almost 50% to get the same field of view as the Oly? And the Oly at 1000mm is a f/5.6! I just compared the Oly to the Nikon 800mm f/6.3. Honestly, the differences were minimal, even at 100% comparison in Lightroom.
Yeah that's what the Distant sharpness test showed. The Oly matched detail with the 60MP Sony when you had to crop.
I actually have a Nikon Z9 and an OM-1 with the 150-400 f4.5 pro lens. If shooting mostly perched birds , the Om-1 would be better with that 1000 mm reach but for bird in flight, it is very difficult to put the bird into frame when you zoom all the way to 1000 mm so you are most likely zoom out to 600-800mm which you will lose the advantage of being able to fill the frame. But a z9 doing the same bird in flight , I can shoot at 500mm and still retain a decent size bird cropping in because of its high resolution sensor so both systems have its advantages and disadvantages.
@@ryantang8146 Ryan, that is a wonderful explanation. Thank-you. Makes a ton of sense. For me and my shooting, I think the OM1 and 150-400 is a better fit. Most of my subjects tend to be slower moving where 1000mm will be very helpful to fill the image. Being able to go to 1400mm with the 1.4 TC is another bonus. Thanks for your response.
Thank you very much for this detailed video. Would you mind telling where the lens cover you are using for the Sony 200-600 comes from?
Have the OM-1/150-400 and A1/200-600 combos. So difficult to choose between them. OM combo is a pound lighter and the lens weight is more towards the back end. Much easier to hand hold on long days or for extended periods. The 1000mm equivalent with the built in TC often produces great results. Plus the IBIS is much better than Sony's. Reportedly the OM gear has much better water resistance also. However the Sony a1 does much better in low light and the files are often much cleaner. And being able to use zebras to nail subject exposure is extremely helpful.
You can setup Olympus and OM System cameras to show overexposed and underexposed areas as orange and blue respectively.
Which lens have shortest focus distance and what about magnification? I shoot birds but also insects.
What is your opinion about the configuration: Nikon Z9 + Nikon Z 800mm 6.3 (and additionally Nikon Z TC 1.4) ?
We haven't yet tested the Nikon 800, but I'd expect good results. I'll say with the TC you're going to be at 1100mm f/8.8 which is a really challenging setup. I'd definitely leave off the TC and just crop if you need more reach.
What camera/lens combo are you using for the video? Shallow depth of field with excellent focus - I'm very curious
Sony a7S III and a 24mm f/1.4 or 35mm f/1.4.
@@TonyAndChelseait was struggling
Wow excellent review. Thank you. Next,I want see 3rd party lenses
Tony & Chelsea, thank you for a fine review of all the major name brand zooms. :) I would be interested to see the same review specific for video instead of photos. Would the results be the same or would the worst to best order shift around a bit?
Thank you brilliant video. only what is the problem with picture on 8:50?
I have now a very good copy of the 100-400mm PL, it is as sharp at 300mm (600mm FF) as my Sigma 150-600mm DG DN at 600mm. There is a lot of sample variation with the 100-400mm PL, but when you have a good copy, it's one of the better choice, because you have very good sharpness till 360mm, good AF with G9II, the lens is lightweight, you also have very good stabilization. I never use my FF Sigma, the Panasonic is much nicer to use for the same result, exept for bokeh.
Comprehensive comparison, more videos like this please!
Thank you!
Great comparison and fair. Only thing I would have given the Olympus lens 3rd over the Canon.
Oly 150-400 what’s the winner if you don’t put in the price, best lens ever 👍
OM1 pixel pitch: 3.36µm G9II = 2.99µm Sony A7RV: 3.76µm IOW, there's hardly any more room for MFT to increase its pixel density without getting much more noisy.
My Nikon Z 180-600 just arrived today, now I can finally sell my Fuji X-H2. Only shot a grey heron today, but every shot was perfectly sharp. With the Fuji, 70% would be soft and only a couple really sharp. Maybe the X-H2s is better, but the 40 mp X-H2 is pretty bad for wildlife.
Why its bad? What lens you used with X-H2? Soft because of bad autofocus, diffraction, bad lowlight or weak stabilization?
@@PatrickWithCamera Because of bad AF. Constantly goes back and forth even on static subjects. Had the XF 100-400 and the Tamron 150-500, both identical in terms of AF, but the stabilization on the Fuji lens is much better.
@@cy9nvs Really XF 100-400 is much better stabe than tammy? I've got tamron 150-500 and my sony 200-600 or 70-350 are not even close to tamron 150-500 in terms of stabilization...
@@PatrickWithCamera I heard that it's pretty good on Sony, I feel like it isn't working together with Fuji's IBIS. It is terrible. The XF 100-400 is super stable while the tamron lens is shaky in every mode, even jumping around sometimes, distorting the image if you're shooting in electronic shutter.
@@cy9nvs or maybe Sony IBIS and OSS is so bad that the Tamron seems so good to me... :D
Will you review the GFX 100ii soon?
Looking forward to getting my Nikon Z 180-600mm. Seriously thinking about selling my Z 100-400
I will be making a similar decision soon. Although the close focus distance on the 100-400 is a nice feature.
The Nikon Z9 firmware update 4.10 adds bird and airplane subject detection options.
All those example shots with the PanaLeica were shot using a teleconverter, weren't they?
Thanks to you both for another great review - entertaining ! I think the biggest challenge in wildlife photography is warblers, the tiny beautiful songbirds that are super-fast moving and often in the shade. Even for us birders, they tough to get in the binoculars. I'd like to see you do a video on that challenge - at the Greatest Week in American Birding! I've seen the serious warbler photographers use 800mm prime lenses, tripods and large mounted flash units with reflectors to get shots. How would you compare with a hand-held mirrorless with a 600mm compare?
Advantages of micro 4/3 system, cameras Because the lenses are smaller and lighter generally a lot easier to carry around along hikes and much easier to carry around when going on smaller aircraft when travelling being that the whole kit fits in a smaller bag, and because the image stabilization generally works a lot better than full frame system cameras do currently you generally do not need to carry a tripod with you when going on a long hike, which can be a A bit unwieldy , The lenses are usually for the equivalent angle of view And with professional grade weather ceiling and professional grade optical quality for the equivalent angle of you are generally $800 cheaper then they full frame, counterpart and a lot lighter and easier to carry around compared to a full frame and medium format system, Of course, bigger sensor, such as a medium format, camera sensor will give you better image quality, but at the same time, not practical and easy to carry around as a micro third system camera The micro 4/3 sensor is still four times or five times the size or bigger than a cell phone sensor giving a lot better image quality than a smart phone. Yes it is quarter the size of the full frame sensor and still gives excellent image quality. Let’s speak honestly, there is no perfect camera system what truly makes a difference is the person behind the camera not the camera system they choose to use.
Yeah, this is the MFT marketing line, but in the real world you can get more really light-weight rigs with similar or better image quality and bigger sensors. For example, if we were focused on light weight, we could have combined a Canon R7 (1.6X with 33MP) with Canon's 100-400 and had a lighter weight rig that stills crops to 800mm with 21 megapixels of detail... and it would be less expensive, too.
@@TonyAndChelsea Great point and I wanted a video comparing entry level wildlife, action and sports photography. I mean cameras that costs between USD 1000 and USD2500 with lenses between USD1500 to USD 3000. Something combined is lower then USD 5500. This can debunkt all MFT marketing as OM Systems has now 1. No lower priced body for wildlife 2. a lens 100-400 priced around USD1500 and another lens priced USD7500 without anything between this prices like 75-300 or 100-400 in their PRO line. So on the long run OM System focus on wildlife will get very tought competition from Fuji, Nikon, Sony and Canon. Even Panasonic is moving into that direction in the lower priced section.