In my recent OM System 50-200mm F2.8 review, I gave the pro telephoto zoom a best-in-class five-star rating. I loved my week with the lens, and I hope that one day I’ll buy my own. So what’s so special about it?
For one, it has incredible features. It’s OM System’s second pro ‘white’ lens, with an equivalent 100-400mm focal length and a maximum f/2.8 aperture across that versatile range, which is a world-first.
It can also pair with teleconverters: add a 1.4x teleconverter and you get a lens with a maximum 560mm reach and f/4 maximum aperture, or add a 2x teleconverter for 800mm f/5.6. Wow.
This impressive reach and bright aperture are complemented by superb optical quality, decent macro skills, and delivered in a (relatively) lightweight and rugged IP53-rated design.
It’s clearly an excellent lens in its own right, but the picture is way bigger than that – it shows just how the Micro Four Thirds system is a top choice for wildlife and sports over other popular formats, such as full-frame.
Furthermore, the OM System 50-200mm doubles down on a photography frontier that smartphones haven’t properly touched yet – it’s a lens that you’ll actually use. Let me explain.
A full-frame beating combo
I tested the 50-200mm F2.8 – full name OM System M.Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm F2.8 IS Pro – with the OM System OM-1 II – and the first thing to note is the excellent balance between the rugged IP53-rated weather resistance pairing.
The lens weighs 38oz / 1,075g – which is much lighter and smaller than full-frame alternatives – and with the OM1-II, the combination weighs 59oz / 1,674g. I easily carried the combo over long wildlife photography outings.
For context, Nikon’s Nikkor Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S almost weighs that much by itself, and a 400mm f/2.8 full-frame prime is a whole other level at around 3 times the weight.
OM System has fine-tuned its subject detection autofocus for excellent wildlife tracking skills, especially for bird photography. I’d say autofocus performance for such purposes equals that of the best full-frame rivals.
The lens can also support the camera’s maximum 50fps burst shooting speeds with continuous autofocus – handy for capturing the moment during fast action.
Macro photography is another big win here. With a close-focusing distance of as little as 0.78m at any focal length, you get a 0.5x (full-frame equivalent) maximum reproduction ratio. In other words, half life size.
The lens’s optical stabilization combines with the camera’s in-body image stabilization for incredible performance – quoted up to 7.5EV and the real deal – helping you get sharp macro and telephoto wildlife shots.
Detail is pin-sharp even at f/2.8, although I found bokeh a little fussy in some scenarios, such as backlit macro photos of a spider and its web. For the most part, though, bokeh is smooth.
Above all, it’s that maximum aperture and focal length combo that shines. True, being Micro Four Thirds, it has an equivalent depth of field to an f/5.6 full-frame lens, like the Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S.
However, when shooting at any of those focal lengths, depth of field is shallow enough for pro-looking blurry backgrounds. It’s the additional light intake that truly wins. The f/2.8 aperture unleashes fast shutter speeds to freeze action, be it bright daylight or as the light fades, which is a crucial component for a lot of wildlife photography and sports.
Micro Four Thirds has image-quality drawbacks compared to full-frame. However, OM System’s 50-200mm F2.8 lens wipes those away, and it’s a much lighter package.
For me, high-performing telephoto lenses for the likes of wildlife and sports photography are one of the last remaining frontiers for ‘proper’ camera gear over the best cameraphones, and the OM System 50-200mm F2.8 is one of the best examples available.
I’m much more likely to head out with a telephoto lens like this over, say, a wide-angle prime, when I’ve got such a good smartphone camera.
It’s such a shame, then, that the OM System 50-200mm F2.8 costs $3,699 / £2,999 / AU$4,999. That’s much pricier than the OM System 40-150mm F2.8, and pricier than the Nikon 100-400mm, even if it’s much cheaper than a 400mm f/2.8 pro prime.
Still, it’s a lens I know I’d use regularly, for genres of photography that bring me so much happiness. I’d better get saving.
