Great video Roger. Us Canon users are still dreaming of a 100-400mm 2.8, it will cost us our liver. Beautiful photos as always.

That was useful.  Thank you.

A good honest review. Look forward to the next one.

I've had the 50-200mm f2.8 for a few months now, and I sold the 40-150mm and 100-400mm mk2 to get it. At first, I thought it was a bit of an extravagance, but now I think it is the best lens I've ever owned. My journey to it, was the 100-400mm mk2, was a nice lens, but I was getting some weird bokeh, just behind the plane of focus, and thought I'll have to get the 300mm f4 Pro. I looked around at secondhand prices, they seemed to have gone up. Then I got thinking after seeing tests, that the 50-200mm with the 1.4x converter, was at 280mm f4, nearly the 300mm. Slap the 2x on, and you've got 100-400mm f5.6. All I can say, is that it is beyond my expectations. I had got a Canon system, but sold it and got the 150-600mm, which I prefer to the RF 200-800mm. But it is a chunky boy, and I can go out with the 50-200mm and the 2 converters, with no focal length anxiety, and it is nice and light to carry. I also got the Nisi 77mm which screws right in, and turns it into an actual macro lens. I often only carry that lens now. I only say all this, because I had convinced myself that the 40-150mm 2.8 could cover it. But there's a lot of difference between 210mm and 280mm with the 1.4x. 280mm nearly matches the 40-150mm with the 2x. Yes, I'd love the 150-400mm f4.5 and will get it eventually, but it is a big lens to carry around for a long time, and 150mm is not 50mm. Carry only one lens, and you're going to find 150mm a bit too long at times. Add the 40-150mm f2.8, and it is quite a bit to carry around, and swap around. Just my opinion. Great video as usual.

I am envious of the one at 8:28. That one is such a keeper. Gratz on that capture.

I have waited a while for someone who would.compare both so this is a great help. I will stick with my 40-150 with convertor. Great job and thank you.

Very interesting vid Roger. Many thanks for taking the time to make it for us.

Thank you, Roger ! I enjoyed your video, like all of your videos.

I have owned my 50 - 200mm f2.8 from the day of release in the UK. I don't often shoot birds these days, concentrating on macro instead. With the MC20 attached, this lens produces 1:1 macro images, the beauty of this is that should a bird of interest pop up, I can immediately switch from 1:1 macro to capturing a bird in flight (the same goes for dragonflies). I have never been able to do that with any other lens. I also use it without either the MC14/MC20 for capturing close up shots of birds in flight at a local feeding station, where I am able to stand 3 metres away from my subjects. The f2.8 allows for really fast shutter speeds and though it weighs more than my old 40 - 150mm f2.8, it is far more versatile.

I've waited a long time for an Oly lens of this spec and quality - can't wait to get started with it.

Shots still look amazing with 2x on, Very impressed

Thanks Roger, a good report, always good to see your images. I will stick with the 40-150 and big white one thanks.

Another nice video Roger. I think, as others do, that there is too much of a price difference between the two lenses to justify the gains with extra reach and image stabilisation over the 40-150. I held a 50-200 today and it is quite a bit bigger and heavier compared to my 40-150, making it less comfortable to carry about too. Because the 40-150 is so good and works really well even with the 1.4 converter it's hard to make a case for the bigger lens unless the price was reduced significantly to around 2k

Hi Roger,

That’s an interesting comparison. I’ve been using the 2.8/40-150mm with both teleconverters ever since the days when it was still an Olympus lens; I sold it at one point and later bought it again with the OM1 Mark II. It embodies the mFT philosophy very well in terms of size, price, and weight. The image quality is excellent, with the exception of the bokeh against certain backgrounds. A late photography friend of mine who did train spotting could tell you a thing or two about this with the overhead power lines. Depending on the background, the bokeh in my photos ranges from very good to poor. The new 50-200mm is appealing, with 50mm more focal length and in-lens image stabilization. However, it’s much more expensive, heavier, and larger. I’d also have to check whether it would still fit height-wise in my Wotancraft shoulder bag. And whether the bokeh is better with all possible backgrounds?
Another question is whether the 140-400mm might not be an even better complement to the 40-150mm for sports and wildlife, even if it’s larger and heavier. However, that would double the investment yet again, putting you in price ranges typically associated with full-frame telephoto lenses.
It would also be interesting to know how the 50-200mm works with my OM1, which I’ve converted to 700nm—where the 40-150mm has its limitations but often performs well?

A great and useful video.  Wonderful shots, Roger, well done!

Like I've just said to Mike's new vlog. Great 👍. Your are both premier league photographers 👏👏

Fantastic video Roger. Super stills and video. The 2x converter video footage is amazing. Thanks for sharing your experience. 👍

Thank you for a very informative video Roger

Awesome video! That 50-200mm f/2.8 really looks like an incredible glass for bird photography. Big LIKE from Singapore! 🇸🇬👍

Nice review Roger, and an honest one, yes it's a great lens and delivers the quality, but it comes in quite expensive