Is anyone exploring the Olympus OM-1 for birds and wildlife?

Only a few of the Olympus lenses will provide additive optical stabilization with their cameras. The 40-150mm f/2.8 is one of those lenses and the constant aperture f/2.8 greatly increases the light entering the camera and its autofocus sensors.

The 60mm macro is a great lens with the FOV of a 120mm lens on a full frame camera. The 90mm macro announced will be close to the Nikon DSLR oonly 200mm micro lens and a great addition or replacement for the 60mm macro lens. After I added the 200mm macro lens to my kit I stopped using my 60mm and 105mm macro lenses entirely.

Calson said:

Only a few of the Olympus lenses will provide additive optical stabilization with their cameras. The 40-150mm f/2.8 is one of those lenses and the constant aperture f/2.8 greatly increases the light entering the camera and its autofocus sensors.

The 60mm macro is a great lens with the FOV of a 120mm lens on a full frame camera. The 90mm macro announced will be close to the Nikon DSLR oonly 200mm micro lens and a great addition or replacement for the 60mm macro lens. After I added the 200mm macro lens to my kit I stopped using my 60mm and 105mm macro lenses entirely.

Click to expand...

The 40-150 f2.8 doesn't have IS

The only 3 lenses that have sync IS I believe are the 12-100 Pro, 300 Pro and 150-400 Pro

Edit.. and now the 90mm macro, so 4 lenses

My OM-1 arrived this afternoon. I got the kit with the 12-40, as well as the 100-400 with the free TC 2.0. It's only my second non-Nikon camera ever (about 10 years ago I had the Sony Alpha 66 with the translucent mirror, but went back to Nikon when Sony discontinued that tech and lens mount and Nikon came out with the D500.) I have to say, it feels a little weird. The rear dial is tucked in a above a ridge that makes it a bit hard to find, and the buttons and overall ergonomics seem slightly inferior to my Nikons, although I wouldn't say it feels cheap. Just slightly less premium. I'm sure I'll get used to it soon enough.

First thing I did after charging the battery was peruse the menus and do some initial setup. There are a lot of options though, and many are unfamiliar either because they're functions my Z7 and Z9 don't have, or are named differently and it's not apparent what they do. Clearly, I need a good user guide. There's one for download on the OM Systems website but usually the manufacturer's manuals aren't that useful. Anyone got a suggestion for a comprehensive but clear and user-friendly guide to the OM-1 that I should look for?

If you shoot wildlife my setup is on the Micro 4/3 forum of FM. Or I can email it to you.

Tom

Ben C said:

My OM-1 arrived this afternoon. I got the kit with the 12-40, as well as the 100-400 with the free TC 2.0. It's only my second non-Nikon camera ever (about 10 years ago I had the Sony Alpha 66 with the translucent mirror, but went back to Nikon when Sony discontinued that tech and lens mount and Nikon came out with the D500.) I have to say, it feels a little weird. The rear dial is tucked in a above a ridge that makes it a bit hard to find, and the buttons and overall ergonomics seem slightly inferior to my Nikons, although I wouldn't say it feels cheap. Just slightly less premium. I'm sure I'll get used to it soon enough.

First thing I did after charging the battery was peruse the menus and do some initial setup. There are a lot of options though, and many are unfamiliar either because they're functions my Z7 and Z9 don't have, or are named differently and it's not apparent what they do. Clearly, I need a good user guide. There's one for download on the OM Systems website but usually the manufacturer's manuals aren't that useful. Anyone got a suggestion for a comprehensive but clear and user-friendly guide to the OM-1 that I should look for?

Click to expand...

I found teh buttons hard to use and press while rotate almost impossible so I setup the OM-1 to not need to press-hold-rotate

Palmor said:

The 40-150 f2.8 doesn't have IS

The only 3 lenses that have sync IS I believe are the 12-100 Pro, 300 Pro and 150-400 Pro

Edit.. and now the 90mm macro, so 4 lenses

Click to expand...

The 100-400 has IS, but not sync IS. Still gives you two options (body or lens).

So I received my OM-1 a couple weeks ago and I've been trying it out the past two weekends. Last weekend I was visiting friends in Boulder, CO so I brought it as my travel camera and did some landscape shooting in Rocky Mountain National Park. Yesterday I brought it with me as I walked my dog around a local park here in Texas. In both cases, the light weight and portability of it proved to be exactly as hoped. It was much easier to travel with and walk around with than my Z9. I must say the feel of the camera in hand is not as premium or refined as my Nikons, but I am extremely impressed with its capabilities, and with the sharpness of the M.Zuiko lenses. Here are a couple of images to illustrate. Note that the landscape image has been processed with Topaz DeNoise for minor noise reduction and sharpening, but the owl photo just has some exposure and color adjustment in Lightroom but NO added sharpening either in LR or Topaz other than export sharpening for screen - it was that sharp straight out of camera. I do see some color fringing around the moss that I haven't even attempted to correct yet but overall I am very happy with the quality. Most of my other bird photos from yesterday's walk seem to be equally sharp. I look forward to continuing to shooting with this camera and taking advantage of all it can do. As it is, I am still learning my way around the basic controls and settings.

I saw a used 150-400 and decided to take the plunge. Lens came today so I took it out in the backyard for a quick test. It's lighter than I thought it would be (and well balanced), having used the Sony 200-600 at one time I expected similiar but it is much lighter. AF seemed faster than the 300F4 +TC and IS seemed better to. Background is rendered nicely, even with the the needles of the tree I was shooting into. Never had a lens with a built-in TC and it is nice I have to say.

Not the greatest shots (cut-off tail on the Dark-eyed Junco) but good enough for testing. I did laugh at myself, I'm so used to shooting primes the first set of photos I took I forgot to zoom all the way in

Palmor said:

I saw a used 150-400 and decided to take the plunge. Lens came today so I took it out in the backyard for a quick test. It's lighter than I thought it would be (and well balanced), having used the Sony 200-600 at one time I expected similiar but it is much lighter. AF seemed faster than the 300F4 +TC and IS seemed better to. Background is rendered nicely, even with the the needles of the tree I was shooting into. Never had a lens with a built-in TC and it is nice I have to say.

Not the greatest shots (cut-off tail on the Dark-eyed Junco) but good enough for testing. I did laugh at myself, I'm so used to shooting primes the first set of photos I took I forgot to zoom all the way in

Click to expand...

Congrats on the 150-400. This is such a fun combo to shoot!

Mitesh said:

Congrats on the 150-400. This is such a fun combo to shoot!

Click to expand...

I think it will be! Great photos btw, I saw them over on Fredmiranda as well!

While I'm planning for my trip to Iceland this summer I've been debating on taking M43 vs FF and went through an exercise of putting together a few options with weights to see how much less I'd be carrying around with M43. These don't include an extra body or other items but I thought it might be interesting for people.

Anyway, I've decided to take the M43 kit (in green). Partly because of the quality-to-weight ratio, but also for things like live ND so I don't have to fool around with ND filters (this is not a photo specific trip and I won't spend hours).

The Sony kit I would have taken is also highlighted in green. Of course there are other lenses in both ecosystems but I was choosing what I had available to me or wanted to commit to purchasing.

Palmor said:

While I'm planning for my trip to Iceland this summer I've been debating on taking M43 vs FF and went through an exercise of putting together a few options with weights to see how much less I'd be carrying around with M43. These don't include an extra body or other items but I thought it might be interesting for people.

Anyway, I've decided to take the M43 kit (in green). Partly because of the quality-to-weight ratio, but also for things like live ND so I don't have to fool around with ND filters (this is not a photo specific trip and I won't spend hours).

The Sony kit I would have taken is also highlighted in green. Of course there are other lenses in both ecosystems but I was choosing what I had available to me or wanted to commit to purchasing.


View attachment 55816

Click to expand...

Thanks for the extensive analysis. I am surprised that there really isn't that huge a difference in weights. As someone who only has one system (and can't imagine juggling two different systems), I find it easier to just remove extra gear to lower the weight I carry. Have a great time!

For the sake of argument , the M43 system 1 is a lot more capable than the lighter weight Sony system Kit 1. It includes a faster zoom for wildlife and more choices for scenery photos, including some overlap in focal length. Were he to substitute (for example) the Olympus 12-40mm Pro for the 12-100, 180 grams would be saved, and the Panasonic 15mm f1.7 is kind of a "luxury" (for the sake of having a faster medium wideangle lens). Also, the alternative Olympus 100-400mm lens weighs 1120 grams, another possible saving, and that resulting kit is quite a bit more compact than any of the others. To carry any kit involving a 600mm f4 lens requires a larger (and heavier) bag, period. I also would argue (putting flame suit on) that the Tamron 28-200 is definitely a compromise optically, so that particular rig might not be a first choice.

One strategy for saving size/weight that I have come to use is to substitute (even) smaller format cameras for general travel photography. The Sony RX100VII takes excellent photos, has an equivalent 24-200 zoom, fits in a pocket, and weighs only 302 grams.

But overall, I actually am impressed at how lightweight a lot of the Sony gear is.

GrandNagus50 said:

For the sake of argument , the M43 system 1 is a lot more capable than the lighter weight Sony system Kit 1. It includes a faster zoom for wildlife and more choices for scenery photos, including some overlap in focal length. Were he to substitute (for example) the Olympus 12-40mm Pro for the 12-100, 180 grams would be saved, and the Panasonic 15mm f1.7 is kind of a "luxury" (for the sake of having a faster medium wideangle lens). Also, the alternative Olympus 100-400mm lens weighs 1120 grams, another possible saving, and that resulting kit is quite a bit more compact than any of the others. To carry any kit involving a 600mm f4 lens requires a larger (and heavier) bag, period. I also would argue (putting flame suit on) that the Tamron 28-200 is definitely a compromise optically, so that particular rig might not be a first choice.

One strategy for saving size/weight that I have come to use is to substitute (even) smaller format cameras for general travel photography. The Sony RX100VII takes excellent photos, has an equivalent 24-200 zoom, fits in a pocket, and weighs only 302 grams.

But overall, I actually am impressed at how lightweight a lot of the Sony gear is.

Click to expand...

There are other options to make both kits lighter, but like I mentioned it was about what I either already own or wanted to commit to purchasing . The Pany 15 and 20 are two lenses that are so small and light I just automatically throw them into the bag. I have a GX850 that pairs nicely with them when I want to have something as small as possible.

But in general I agree, the M43 kit has more overlap and if I decide to take a couple of backup lenses (in case something bad happens) it won't weigh the bag down that much (ie the Pany 14-140). When I throw in a 2nd body in the mix the difference will be a little greater as well (probably a 2nd OM-1 vs another A7x or A1 body).

In regards to the Tamron, it really punches way above its weight class (at least my copy) so it's not as much as a comprise optically as you'd think. My issue with it for a trip like this is that I'd rather have my primary lens start at 24mm vs 28mm. When I went back to the photos I took last time I was there and what focal lengths I used having 24m as the starting point made a lot of sense. At that time I was shooting Nikon and I had the Z6 and D500 with the 14-30z F4, 24-70z F4, 70-300 and 500PF.

When you look at this distribution the the Oly 12-100 will cover the vast majority of my non-wildlife photos. I also determined anything I took at 22-23mm I could take at 24mm (luxury of being their before and using LR to analyze it). Some focal lengths below are obviously based on the D500 and it's 1.5x crop factor.



Another thing to note is that going to Iceland in early June you don't need fast FF f2.8 glass since it's light out for close to 24 hours.

I would take a second body long before I would take so many specialty lenses.

Tom Reynolds said:

I would take a second body long before I would take so many specialty lenses.

Click to expand...

2nd body is coming with me for sure

Different subject: Super macro with the 90mm 3.5 and the OM-1

As I wait for what seems eternity for this lens (800PF lens and Z-8 Nikon body waiters take a good laugh here) I am doing research on what is possible with this camera/lens combination. Based on what I see what early recipients of this lens have shown, I think the following is possible:

1-I can walk around with the OM-1/90 F/3.5 and can take super macro shots hand-held. What is limiting is the light. A higher F/stop will get me more depth of field but at some point I won't have enough light to get the shot.
2-If I use a flash, I can take excellent shots up to F/16 and maybe higher. However, ring flashes may produce hot spots. The indicated favorite is an OM Systems FL-700 or FL-900. Essentially this duplicated what I did underwater back in 2011. Still, I will get a ring flash also because I am used to the flash right next to the lens.
------
3-I can focus stack hand-held with ambient light. The limiting factor is how steady I can hold the camera during multiple shots. The OM-1 shoots 20 f/s so a 15 stack (maximum) sequence would take 3/4 sec. I need to test my technique to see if that is possible. However, most are stacking 3-5 shots and increasing the F/Stop and the size of the steeps between shots hand held. I have (usually) lots of ambient light in SoCal.
4-The Fl-900 will shoot 10 f/s so a 3-4 stack should be less than 1/2 second and the f/stop can be high. My next wildlife shot might be a well placed bug on a Lantana flower.

Regards,

Tom

Downy Woodpecker and Dark-eyed Junco in the yesterday's snow storm

Beautiful photos, John - I especially like #s 1 and 3.
cheers, Alex

My interest is piqued on the OM-1 + 150-400. Looking more into it.

AlexY said:

Beautiful photos, John - I especially like #s 1 and 3.
cheers, Alex

Click to expand...

Thanks! #1 was my favorite out of the bunch. Just something different

MatthewK said:

My interest is piqued on the OM-1 + 150-400. Looking more into it.

Click to expand...

The 150-400 is an awesome lens, possibly the best zoom ever, but it is hard to get. In the meantime, the 100-400 is almost as good, far cheaper and lighter.

Tom

I'm ok with the size/weight of the 150-400, as I'm currently shooting a Z9 + 800PF It's the ultimate small birding setup, but the bulk/weight is a thing, I sorely miss my D500 + 500PF. At this time I'm just at the exploratory phase, seeing how the OM-1 compares to the Z9. Lots of reading to do!

MatthewK said:

I'm ok with the size/weight of the 150-400, as I'm currently shooting a Z9 + 800PF It's the ultimate small birding setup, but the bulk/weight is a thing, I sorely miss my D500 + 500PF. At this time I'm just at the exploratory phase, seeing how the OM-1 compares to the Z9. Lots of reading to do!

Click to expand...

I agree that the Z-9 is the ultimate small bird setup as long as you can hand-hold it. I can not, so it was not an option for me.

I can tell you how the OM-1 compares to the D-500/500pf because that is what I switched from. More compact, lighter, more flexible (zoom) and I really like wysiwyg EVF and Subject ID: bird. I carry it on a Black Rapids strap and it is a joy to walk around with. The smaller size, less weight and compactness of the OM-1/100-400 adds to the maneuverability of the rig and allows me to get on the bird faster so I get BIF shots pretty easily compared to the D-500/500pf (I suspect that the Z-9/800pf would be even worse in this department).

The OM-1 is a modern DSI stacked sensor and does everything a Z-9 or A1 does pretty much as well.

However.........

The 2.0 crop sensor gets to a relatively high effective F/stop pretty quickly so the incredible subject separation of a F4 prime on a FF camera is not there. Sometimes that hurts.

If you want to try an OM-1 you could neet us at the alligator farm (St. Augustine) in early April. Ginnie and I shoot the same rig and carry a complete spare. We could loan it to you. The Alligator Farm is one of those places wher you can use a zoom because the birds might be @ 800mm or "right there".

Tom

Tom Reynolds said:

I agree that the Z-9 is the ultimate small bird setup as long as you can hand-hold it. I can not, so it was not an option for me.

I can tell you how the OM-1 compares to the D-500/500pf because that is what I switched from. More compact, lighter, more flexible (zoom) and I really like wysiwyg EVF and Subject ID: bird. I carry it on a Black Rapids strap and it is a joy to walk around with. The smaller size, less weight and compactness of the OM-1/100-400 adds to the maneuverability of the rig and allows me to get on the bird faster so I get BIF shots pretty easily compared to the D-500/500pf (I suspect that the Z-9/800pf would be even worse in this department).

The OM-1 is a modern DSI stacked sensor and does everything a Z-9 or A1 does pretty much as well.

However.........

The 2.0 crop sensor gets to a relatively high effective F/stop pretty quickly so the incredible subject separation of a F4 prime on a FF camera is not there. Sometimes that hurts.

If you want to try an OM-1 you could neet us at the alligator farm (St. Augustine) in early April. Ginnie and I shoot the same rig and carry a complete spare. We could loan it to you. The Alligator Farm is one of those places wher you can use a zoom because the birds might be @ 800mm or "right there".

Tom

Click to expand...

That's such an amazing invitation, Tom, my sincerest thanks Florida would be so amazing, what are the dates? Not saying that I can make it, as it's tough/almost impossible to break away from parent duties w/ a 2 and 4 year old, but I'll see what I can do.