Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 100-400mm f/5.0-6.3 IS : Specifications and Opinions

Reviews

What do you think?

Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 259000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.

Rhoken

sent on 22 Dicembre 2025

Pros: Price (used), build quality, weather seal, autofocus, 200-800 mm equivalent in the size of a 70-200, sharpness up to 300 mm, macro, multiplyable

Cons: The sharpness drops physiologically to 400 mm, if you multiply it you can only use it at noon in summer, the stabilization is pitiful, it has a minimum of play

Opinion: Lens mistreated since it was announced but honestly those who mistreat it strongly have probably not understood WHO this lens is aimed at. It is not a lens aimed at professionals and those looking for the highest quality, defects are common for a consumer lens and the price from new was not low but even there where is a cheap 200-800 mm? That said, the lens does what it promises very well: to offer a fairly affordable birdlife lens for those who want to attend this genre but without spending a mortgage offering more than good performance even if not at the level of a PRO lens. Up to 300 you have a very good quality while at 400 mm at long distances you can see a certain physiological drop in sharpness while at short distances it remains stable even at 400. The AF is precise and does not seem to slow down the OM-1, the build quality is solid with a fluid dial although I notice that my sample has a minimum of play on the bayonet. The stabilization is really pitiful and it is better to use the IBIS and surprisingly it is multipliable, but since it is already dark on its own (f/6.3) multiplying it makes it usable only at noon. In terms of price, honestly it is worth taking it only if you can find it for less than 800 € beyond that figure it is better to take the II version which has a considerably better stabilizer

Esse

sent on 10 Febbraio 2025

Pros: Focal ratio. Robustness. Minimum distance of maf. Weight and dimensions with respect to angle of view eq in ff. Adequate AF (with light. But so much without it is not very usable). Once you understand how to use it, you take home great images in practice. Used price (between 800-900eur). Multipliable (more theoretical than practical advantage)

Cons: Little contrast compared to pro lenses. Maybe that's why beyond a certain distance it gets worse. Zoom a bit hard. Less pleasant to use than other pro lenses. Stabilization. In the photographic field I have more consistent results and it seems better to me using only the ibis of the camera body

Opinion: I've been using this lens for almost a year now. The results are very very good up to 10 meters. The closer you are, the more satisfactory the yield. over 10 meters it gets a little worse in my opinion. In general, there is a little less contrast than pro lenses, which requires a little more careful post production. In good light conditions, however, the situation improves. My sample has a better yield at 400mm than at 300mm. AF is quite fast

Loriga Ivan

sent on 16 Maggio 2024

Pros: Very good focal range, great robustness, good lens hood and adapter ring

Cons: Weight, zoom ring a bit hard and with few degrees of rotation, not optimal sharpness, stabilization

Opinion: I have owned this lens for a year now I also had the 100 400 panalaica which I was more than satisfied with and which I sold reluctantly, after about a year I bought this one which is perhaps slightly more contrasted but with a less pleasant blur and less intense colors, the sharpness in this lens is not the best at least my specimen, The stabilization of the lens is almost useless always deactivated since the one on the sensor is clearly superior, a good advantage is to be able to use it with multipliers but on the other hand it loses sharpness further, even the focusing speed is not great my vote is a 7

Emanuele Lucchetti

sent on 23 Novembre 2022

Pros: Build quality - Light weight - Compatible with 1.4x and 2x teleconverters.

Cons: AF good but not bright, suffers in low light - With teleconverters should only be used in emergency... Acceptable photos.

Opinion: I had this lens for over a year and used it on the Olympus E-M1 Mk3. I can not say that it is a bad goal, indeed I found it well done (excellent construction) and comfortable in use as well as being light and cheap. The photo quality is excellent in the right light conditions. The same goes for AF, with low light it trudges on the contrary during a sunny day the AF is very reactive. For close and stationary subjects it is excellent with very good results (sharp and color-rich photos), for those in flight it is good. It makes little sense to compare the M.Zuiko 100-400 to the 300 f/4 as it represents two different optics and born for a different audience. Even the price range is different, the 100-400 in the used market can be purchased for less than a thousand euros and for this price I believe that it is an excellent telephoto lens compared to the good photographic result that returns.

user210403

sent on 24 Aprile 2022

Pros: Difficult to find merits

Cons: Stabilization,zoom ring hardness, non-bright autofocus

Opinion: Do I say so? but yes... It is one of the 100-400 most "ugly" I have had... Optically it is not at the level of the other 100-400 for ff and apsc.. But you could also turn a blind eye to this... Up to 300mm all in all it is not evil, then at the top it loses a little and "tarnishes" a little ... However, if the light is good and the short distance brings out some beautiful photos already at full aperture. But the real downside is the dislike you feel in using it... "Serious" thing in the micro 4/3 house where generally it is the pleasure of taking a strong point .. Lens stabilization not compatible with that of the camera (they do not add up, you have to use one or the other). The stabilization on the optics is poor, weak... I always keep it off. Fortunately, the stabilization of the camera puts a piece of cloth on it... But it is an uncomfortable and unpleasant mechanism to use on such a long telephoto lens... The zoom ring is very hard and woody... This creates considerable problems when you have to zoom in sports photography or in photo hunting, because it causes you to lose stability while working and shooting. The autofocus without infamy and without praise.... It's certainly not as accurate as the 300 Pro and is not compatible with the 25-50 FPS of the OM1. The problem at olympus is to fill the gap between the 40-150 Pro and the 300 Pro... this 100-400 does not... The 40-150 PRO optically with the tc could fill this void, especially with the 1.4x is very valid, but unfortunately it does not make it on the continuous autofocus side, with the multipliers it loses a lot. So the problem remains.. It would take a 50-250 F4

Kamik64

sent on 10 Maggio 2021

Pros: Construction, AF precision, relatively light and un cumbersome for the equivalent focal, multiplied

Cons: Sharpening not at the top, the stabilizer does not interface with the one in the chamber

Opinion: A well-built zoom, apart from the very delicate and, risking detachable easily. Considering that it is an equivalent 200-800 in the FF format; all in all, it makes, together with the camera, the system light and compact. The stabilizer unfortunately does not interface with that present in the Olympus machine bodies so, via used alone, disabling that of the camera; however, it works excellently allowing the freehand use of the optics. The AF (used on OM-D-M1 MkII) is also excellent. As for sharpness, however, it has disappointed my expectations a little; although good even without closing the diaphragm, it is safely overcome by a crop of images taken with a 40-150 PRO + MC14 so, in the end, if one has this goal, in my opinion, it makes no sense to buy the 100-400; at the limit, better add the excellent MC20 duplicator. Speaking of duplicers, I tried to mount the MC14 and, I have to say, it has a good yield anyway.