OM System
M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS
Micro Four Thirds Mount
300–1200mm-equiv. super-tele zoom with 0.7× magnification at 56 cm, Sync IS, and 2060 g body.
$1,999
Launch priceReleased Jun 2024
OM System
M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO
Micro Four Thirds Mount
600mm-equiv. F4 super-telephoto with Sync IS (6 stops), 1475g weight, removable rotating tripod collar, and PRO weather sealing.
$3,499
Launch priceReleased Feb 2016
M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS is 8.3 years newer.
Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, Cameraegg earns from qualifying purchases. Cameraegg may also earn commission from B&H links, at no extra cost to you.
Wins
M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS
Wins
M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO
Which would you choose?
TL;DR — Key differences
- AM.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS has higher Max magnification (0.7 × vs 0.24 ×)
- AM.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS has lower Min focus distance (56 cm vs 140 cm)
- BM.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO has lower Max aperture (Tele) (f/4 vs f/6.3)
- BM.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO has lower Weight (1475 g vs 2060 g)
- BM.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO has lower Max aperture (Wide) (f/4 vs f/5)
Key specs at a glance
Size and weight, to scale
📸 Snap this lens size diff to share
M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS
⌀109 × 264 mm
2060 g (4.54 lb / 72.66 oz)
Credit card
85.6 × 54 mm
for scale
M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO
⌀93 × 227 mm
1475 g (3.25 lb / 52.03 oz)
M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS is 37mm longer and 17mm wider than M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO.
M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS is 585 g heavier than M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO.
Diameter (⌀) is the maximum barrel width; length is measured from the mount to the front of the lens.
Use-case scoring
Which one for what?
Algorithmic scores from verified specs · 10 = best in class
Why pick one over the other
Reasons to choose the M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 4 Super ED, 2 ED, 1 Aspherical
- ✓
Min focus distance
56 cm vs 140 cm — lower is better
- ✓
Max magnification
0.7 × vs 0.24 × — higher is better
- ✓
OIS effectiveness
5 stops vs 4 stops — higher is better
Reasons to choose the M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 3 Super ED, 3 HR, 1 E-HR
- ✓
Max aperture (Tele)
f/4 vs f/6.3 — lower is better
- ✓
Weight
1475 g vs 2060 g — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Wide)
f/4 vs f/5 — lower is better
- ✓
Diameter
92.5 mm vs 109.4 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Length
227 mm vs 264.4 mm — lower is better
Shared specifications
Internal focus
Both support internal focus
Optical stabilization
Both support optical stabilization
Weather sealing
Both support weather sealing
Control ring
Both support control ring
Custom function button
Both support custom function button
Pros & cons at a glance
Editorially curated highlights and trade-offs.
M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS
Pros
- ✓Versatile zoom range covers multiple focal lengths in one lens
- ✓Built-in optical image stabilization
- ✓Weather-sealed construction for outdoor shooting
Cons
- –Relatively heavy for extended handheld use
- –Slower maximum aperture limits low-light performance
M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO
Pros
- ✓Prime design typically delivers strong sharpness and lighter weight
- ✓Built-in optical image stabilization
- ✓Weather-sealed construction for outdoor shooting
Cons
- –Premium price point
- –Relatively heavy for extended handheld use
- –Slower maximum aperture limits low-light performance
Decided which one is right for you?
Compare live prices for the M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS and M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO at major authorized retailers.
OM System M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F5.0-6.3 IS
OM System M.Zuiko Digital ED 300mm F4 IS PRO
Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, Cameraegg earns from qualifying purchases. Cameraegg may also earn commission from B&H links, at no extra cost to you.
Full specifications
✓ = category winner
Specs sourced from manufacturer data. Use-case scores algorithmically derived. Last reviewed June 2026.