Gear choice upgrade for birds

[O]

Hello! I’m exclusively shooting small birds, hand held. I need to upgrade from current set up: Nikon D700 + Tamron 160-600 G2. Currently I have no eye tracking, back button focus stopped working, and shutter malfunctions at 1/8000. It’s also heavy. So want something lighter that will help with getting a much better ratio of great shots. Usually focus, lack of sharpness are the issues. ** I’m open to a new lens as well as a new camera for sure. **
One young new owner of a local camera store repair owner said Olympus is hands down the best for birds and he doesn’t carry Olympus in his shop (Previous owner let some brands lapse). Yet I most often read about Canon and Nikon used for birds. What do you all recommend??! Specifics oils be appreciated. Ready to upgrade asap. Thank you!!

For me, i would be asking myself the following.........

What do you feel your skill sets are like. Compositionally, technically.
Is $5000 you full budget or can you stretch it. I mean a Z8 on a 200-500 would be a tolerable compromise financially ?
Is it you are taking shots for fine art printing, collecting species record shots, commercial needs like calendar companies etc, club competitions or open competitions, just enjoying for fun. Instagram, your own web site social media viewed on phones mostly.
Are you a member of a bird watching club, or camera club.
Are you very good with LR PS etc
Sharpness comes more from you rather than the gear.
90% of what you achieve comes from you not just the gear.
For small birds you need to be agile and have fast focus acquisition at least 10 fps on average and good glass.
Are you using all hand held, mono pod tripod.
Are you open to renting before buying.
I get breathtaking results on a D4s 150-500 Sigma, D850 on 300 2.8 VR II, Z9 on a 200-500, the 200-500 is used as a push pull.

On a consideration list lenses 500 pf 300 f4, 150-600 Tamron Sigma, 200-500 Nikon, Sony 200-600,
Cameras D4s, D5 D850 ..........D500 all fit the budget

I currently own a D850 Z9.

Only an opinion

 

[MikeInMI]

If you are already invested in Nikon, I'm not sure why you wouldn't get a Z8. I'm a former Nikon owner who went to a Sony A1 for birds. But if the Z8 had been out, I probably would have done that.

 

[orangecafe]

M43 sensor is a much smaller sensor. The factor is 2x (ignoring the differences between the 4:3 ratio of M43 and the 3:2 ratio of most other systems). You are currently shooting a FF 12MP camera. OM-1 is a 20MP M43 sensor. Pixel density would be similar to an 80MP FF sensor!!

The FOV of a given lens is 2x what it is on your D700. You currently have up to a 600mm FOV with your lens. You would get that same 600mm FOV with a 300mm lens on the M43 system. However, there is no free lunch. The resulting DOF for a given aperture also has to be adjusted by 2 stops. So if you put the 300 f/4 lens on the OM-1 that would give you a similar image to a 600 f/8 lens on your D700. Currently you have 600 f/6.3 out of your Tamron lens. So a little more DOF and a little less subject isolation compared to what you ahve now. Also the OM-1 is letting in 2x less light so even though you are at f/4 for light gathering your noise performance would be ~2stops worse than f/4 on FF...but you are already using 1 1/3 stops worse so you aren't too far off. The much more modern sensor of the OM-1 would probably offset some of that noise performance anyways.

I think the OM-1 with 300/4 lens (or the 100-400) maybe with 1.4TC would be a really good option. OM-1 has excellent AF and Subject detection...probably as good as any of the other big FF cameras like A1, R5, Z9.

Wow. I’m re-reading this. The update is I purchased the OM-1 with 100-400mm and it is really great. However, for me, in lower light I notice a couple of things. I can fix grain and exposure in post. However, the quite amazing AI in Photoshop, while addressing the grain, also removes detail leaving feathers looking pretty smooth. A trade off that is worthwhile. BUT, I’d love to have it both ways: be able to shoot in lower light without losing that detail. I handhold and just recently started using a monopod. I think the real test may be just to use support and see how sharp and detailed the images will be. The question I have is, at this point, what gear might solve for this. I’m open to a new system. The OM-1 will still be great to have for reasons above and because it’s lightweight and easy to travel with. So what would improve IQ or is this a matter of using a tripod.

 

[Cameron T]

Well, the only way to get less noise (with the same sensor) is lower ISO. So you have to shoot at a wider aperture, or lower shutter speed to compensate. There is still no free lunch, just ways to kinda cheat for discounts on it.

 

[orangecafe]

This is true. I would add however that with modern denoise software this has become less of a concern.

It is also affordable to buy the faster M4/3 primes when compared to the full frame equivalents. Most people can't afford or don't want the size and weight of a FF 600F4 so they buy the 200-600 type zooms that are F6.3. For similar cost you can buy the 300F4 (600 FF equivalent) OM lens which is faster, smaller and lighter. This offsets a lot of the iso disadvantage of the smaller sensor. Pair that with software and the difference becomes less.

Now I will say for my above comments this applies to nice lighting that we would have for quality wildlife pictures. I don't shoot subjects in heavy shadows or poor light that isn't going to render an appealing image. However, if shooting astro or night scenes the FF sensor and even better is a medium format sensor has a major advantage. I would also say for landscape type images where you want details the FF and medium format is a big advantage. Fill the frame of say a bird with both systems and I doubt most could actually tell the difference. Shoot the milky way and most likely could.

I purchased the OM-1 with 100-400mm. It’s great. But for even better IQ in low light would a prime lens be redundant or would it improve IQ.

 

[Nimi]

Wow. I’m re-reading this. The update is I purchased the OM-1 with 100-400mm and it is really great. However, for me, in lower light I notice a couple of things. I can fix grain and exposure in post. However, the quite amazing AI in Photoshop, while addressing the grain, also removes detail leaving feathers looking pretty smooth. A trade off that is worthwhile. BUT, I’d love to have it both ways: be able to shoot in lower light without losing that detail. I handhold and just recently started using a monopod. I think the real test may be just to use support and see how sharp and detailed the images will be. The question I have is, at this point, what gear might solve for this. I’m open to a new system. The OM-1 will still be great to have for reasons above and because it’s lightweight and easy to travel with. So what would improve IQ or is this a matter of using a tripod.

Lower MP full frame like the Nikon Zf or Z6ii or even APS-C from Fuji. You're witnessing the main drawback of a tiny sensor, ie low dynamic range, and while noise reduction is possible in post (and in OM's case in camera), "no free lunch."

 

[orangecafe]

Lower MP full frame like the Nikon Zf or Z6ii or even APS-C from Fuji. You're witnessing the main drawback of a tiny sensor, ie low dynamic range, and while noise reduction is possible in post (and in OM's case in camera), "no free lunch."

So Zf Z6ii would improve my experience? The drawbacks?

 

[Ken Miracle]

As noted earlier I photograph a lot of small birds in all light and conditions. I use a Z9 with a Z800 PF well over your budget. Many times I do not use any noise reduction. I process images in Light Room Classic and nothing else. If noise if really bad I use LRC Denoise AI adustment radial in LRC develop panels ... and dropped Topaz photo AI and Denoise with LRC came out with that.

I had a Z6II my wife took it and traded it in on a Z7II I did take some nice low light images with the Z6II but view finder black out, rolling shutter at high shutter speeds, not great AF on fast moving birds ie. birds in flight etc.. Z9 all around better.

 

[Cameron T]

So Zf Z6ii would improve my experience? The drawbacks?

different af, more expensive lenses, different body styles. The z8+180-600 and 1.4x tc would do just fine for you as well, and be less noisy.

Or go all in on the expensive primes.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

I would, I did, purchase an 300f4 used on Fred Miranda. It will produce better image quality than the 100-400 and is not much heavier. I purchased my 300f4 on FM for $2K. I did take some time. If you can't wait the lens is $2799 on Amazon.

In addition to a prime, larger aperture, the Lenses image stabilization works with the camera's image stabilization to produce something like 8 stops of advantage so a monopod will not be necessary. For perched birds you can sometimes use insanely low shutter speeds.

If you need more reach the lens takes a 1.4 TC very well and you will still get better shots than with the 100-400 although not as good as without the TC.

In my case, when I can have two cameras available, as on a boat or in a car or blind, the 300f4 pictures are always the best.

Regards,
Tom

 

[Tom Reynolds]

In my view, any Nikon other than a Z-8/600pf would have inferior IQ to an OM-1/300f4. I upgrades from a D-500/500pf and the OM-1/300F4 has better IQ while the OM-1/100-400 has inferior IQ.

However, if you have the budget for a Z-8/600pf and can handle the weight, it is one sweet setup. The FF sensor will give you better dynamic range, more cropping ability and a larger aperture. It is, IMHO, the best birding setup out there aside of the weight and cost.

I would NOT get any lesser Nikon camera and definitely NOT a DX camera. The issue is that shooting a f/6.3 lens in crop mode yields a 9.45 equivalent F/stop. The resultant image is the same 2Omp as the OM-1 and the equivalent f/stop for the 300f4 is F/8. In other words, you lose the advantage of FF in two areas. To shoot in DX mode you really need an F4 lens to get an advantage over the OM Systems 300f4.

Regards,

Tom

 

[orangecafe]

I would, I did, purchase an 300f4 used on Fred Miranda. It will produce better image quality than the 100-400 and is not much heavier. I purchased my 300f4 on FM for $2K. I did take some time. If you can't wait the lens is $2799 on Amazon.

In addition to a prime, larger aperture, the Lenses image stabilization works with the camera's image stabilization to produce something like 8 stops of advantage so a monopod will not be necessary. For perched birds you can sometimes use insanely low shutter speeds.

If you need more reach the lens takes a 1.4 TC very well and you will still get better shots than with the 100-400 although not as good as without the TC.

In my case, when I can have two cameras available, as on a boat or in a car or blind, the 300f4 pictures are always the best.

Regards,
Tom

Thanks. Which brand?

 

[Tom Reynolds]

Thanks. Which brand?

OM Systems, sorry.

On Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/Olympus-M-Zuiko-Digital-300mm-Black/dp/B01950SVHY/ref=asc_df_B01950SVHY&mcid=1c2398dc9be13d42b350fad18a69dd92?tag=bingshoppinga-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=80607997944565&hvnetw=o&hvqmt=e&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=&hvtargid=pla-4584207577468100&th=1

I have this lens and I have two OM-1 camera bodies. My yellow camera has a 100-400 which rarely comes off. My white camera has a 300f4 and sometimes a 1.4 or 2.0 TC.

 

[orangecafe]

In my view, any Nikon other than a Z-8/600pf would have inferior IQ to an OM-1/300f4. I upgrades from a D-500/500pf and the OM-1/300F4 has better IQ while the OM-1/100-400 has inferior IQ.

However, if you have the budget for a Z-8/600pf and can handle the weight, it is one sweet setup. The FF sensor will give you better dynamic range, more cropping ability and a larger aperture. It is, IMHO, the best birding setup out there aside of the weight and cost.

I would NOT get any lesser Nikon camera and definitely NOT a DX camera. The issue is that shooting a f/6.3 lens in crop mode yields a 9.45 equivalent F/stop. The resultant image is the same 2Omp as the OM-1 and the equivalent f/stop for the 300f4 is F/8. In other words, you lose the advantage of FF in two areas. To shoot in DX mode you really need an F4 lens to get an advantage over the OM Systems 300f4.

Regards,

Tom

Thank you. This seems to make sense to me. To be honest, some of the technical terminology and physics is beyond me.

 

[orangecafe]

Thank you. This seems to make sense to me. To be honest, some of the technical terminology and physics is beyond me.

Considering the Z8. Seems hand held might be out of the question.

 

[ricardo00]

Considering the Z8. Seems hand held might be out of the question.

You might try renting the 300mm f/4 Zuiko or the 150-400mm Zuiko before jumping to the Z8 and see if you can get the results you want? Both have a wider aperture (ie. let in more light) than the OM systems 100-400mm that you are using.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

Considering the Z8. Seems hand held might be out of the question.

For some, hand holding the Z-8/600pf is just fine but not for me, else I would have the combo on order. I fully understand the advantage of a FF sensor with more than double the megapixels of the OM-1. The weigh isn't bad, a bit less than 6#. I just can't handle it.

It is, of course an $8500 investment. The alternative in that weight class is the $7500 OM Systems 150-400 F 4.5 Zoom.

 

[BrianSmall]

Get the Sony A1 and their 200-600 and you're done! You'll have the best gear on the market for what you want to do.

 

[orangecafe]

For me, i would be asking myself the following.........

What do you feel your skill sets are like. Compositionally, technically.
Is $5000 you full budget or can you stretch it. I mean a Z8 on a 200-500 would be a tolerable compromise financially ?
Is it you are taking shots for fine art printing, collecting species record shots, commercial needs like calendar companies etc, club competitions or open competitions, just enjoying for fun. Instagram, your own web site social media viewed on phones mostly.
Are you a member of a bird watching club, or camera club.
Are you very good with LR PS etc
Sharpness comes more from you rather than the gear.
90% of what you achieve comes from you not just the gear.
For small birds you need to be agile and have fast focus acquisition at least 10 fps on average and good glass.
Are you using all hand held, mono pod tripod.
Are you open to renting before buying.
I get breathtaking results on a D4s 150-500 Sigma, D850 on 300 2.8 VR II, Z9 on a 200-500, the 200-500 is used as a push pull.

On a consideration list lenses 500 pf 300 f4, 150-600 Tamron Sigma, 200-500 Nikon, Sony 200-600,
Cameras D4s, D5 D850 ..........D500 all fit the budget

I currently own a D850 Z9.

Only an opinion

Thank you. These seem like great points and questions. I’m very agile good with PS but my weakness probably lies in settings to achieve fast focus, I’m guessing. Also the shots I see that I admire that could raise my game seem all to be shot with support vs hand held. With the OM-1 shooting in lowish light requires high enough ISO that PS AI smoothes out the image as it removes grain. This is great,. but I miss the high level of detail Eg feathers vs smooth surface that occurs.

 

[Woody Meristem]

You seem all too ready to jump from one system to another before you've mastered the first one. As an Olympus user who's very happy with the system (even with older cameras than the OM-1) I'd highly recommend that you take some time to master your new camera and lens before spending a lot of money on yet another camera and lens. I don't use PS or Lightroom but I'm very happy with using Topaz DeNoise on my images; it's possible to lose detail by reducing noise too much, but with Topaz you have almost infinite degrees of noise removal vs. detail retention. Having used film cameras for far longer than I've used digital cameras a little noise (grain in film) has never bothered me but I still reduce noise on many photos.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

You seem all too ready to jump from one system to another before you've mastered the first one. As an Olympus user who's very happy with the system (even with older cameras than the OM-1) I'd highly recommend that you take some time to master your new camera and lens before spending a lot of money on yet another camera and lens.

I agree. That's why my recommendation is the 300f4 mounted on the OM-1 currently owned. Attached is a shots taken with theOM-1/300f4. In my view it is as sharp as it gets. Hard to see online I know but obvious on my wall printer @ 300DPI/ 11'x14"/ on glossy metal by Bay photo.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[StefanSC]

The update is I purchased the OM-1 with 100-400mm and it is really great. However, for me, in lower light I notice a couple of things. I can fix grain and exposure in post. However, the quite amazing AI in Photoshop, while addressing the grain, also removes detail leaving feathers looking pretty smooth. A trade off that is worthwhile. BUT, I’d love to have it both ways: be able to shoot in lower light without losing that detail.

There are multiple ways to approach this.

First off, try to shoot in better light.
If the light is poor (like dark overcast winter days), even the biggest sensor with the best lens will struggle to produce good shots.

Second, check how you use the AI Denoise.
I find that using it at full 100 setting leads to overly aggressive NR and a plasticky look to images. Dial it down to less values.
Also, I'm finding that for many images the classic NR works quite well if the ISO < 3200.

Third, check other NR tools.
For example DXOs Pure Raw 3 integrates with Lightroom as a plug-in these days and can output some decent results, in some cases better than Adobe's AI Denoise.

Fourth, look at a better, faster lens.
After all, the AI Denoise is just a piece of software so the better the input, the better the output, right?
And, while not a bad lens, the Olympus 100-400 is not the greatest lens ever, and at f6.3 is would be considered a slow lens for FF cameras...

As others have said above, the Olympus/OMDS 300mm f4 is the prime choice. Not only it will be much sharper than your 100-400 but it's 1.3 stops faster, so you'll go from ISO 3200 to ISO1250 for the same shutter speed.

Btw, here's how an OM1 with the 300mm f4 @ f4, ISO3200, 1/750s looks like, before and after Adobe AI Denoise at 50%:

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Also, same shot denoised with DXO PureRAW 3 (left) vs Adobe AI Denoise (right)

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Finally, there is the option to moving to a larger sensor.

Be it APS-C from Fuji, Sony or Canon or FF from Nikon, Sony or Canon.

The issue here is that depending on what camera and what lens you choose, you might end up either with worse capability than going for step 4 (faster lens for m43rds) or paying a lot more for not much better results when compared to step 4.

Roughly, any move to a larger sensor that it's getting you less than ~24Mpx at 600mm-equivalent field of view with an aperture of f5.6 or faster and it costs you 3000$ USD or more is wasted money over just getting an OMDS 300mm f4.

 

[Palmor]

Thank you. These seem like great points and questions. I’m very agile good with PS but my weakness probably lies in settings to achieve fast focus, I’m guessing. Also the shots I see that I admire that could raise my game seem all to be shot with support vs hand held. With the OM-1 shooting in lowish light requires high enough ISO that PS AI smoothes out the image as it removes grain. This is great,. but I miss the high level of detail Eg feathers vs smooth surface that occurs.

So my trick to denoise software is to selectively apply it. What I mean is that most feather detail will hide noise very well and you really only need the NR on other parts of the image to make the overall appearance less Noisy. You say you use PS for Noise reduction, try creating a layer of just your subject then only apply NR to the background layer. Then if you want to apply NR to your subject layer apply it at a much lower level because you really won't need it.

 

[orangecafe]

Interesting. The birds I shoot are large in the frame. So the NR does need to be applied to them.

 

[O]

I photograph small birds for ID for the vast majority of my photography. I am a run and gun photographer in all types of habitat and terrain and hand held 99.9% over the last 2 years. I use my photos primarily for E bird, facebook birding posts, donate a lot for use by non profit conservation oriented entities, sell a few prints occasionally and win a contest now and then like the Outdoor Idaho Monthly photo contest (the image below won last months contest).

I used everything form Fuji, Canon and Nikon bridge cameras, to first a Canon and then a range of Nikon DSLR's. I have friends who do great work with Olympus, Pentax and Sony mirrorless.

I used/owned Nikon D300s, D7100, D4s, D500, D850 and D6. Favorite birding lenses included Tamron 150-600 G2, Sigma 150-600 and 60-600 Sport and Nikon 600 mm f/4E.

I no longer own any DLSR's or f mount lenses.

Out of all the cameras and lenses I have used for birding and photography my current favorite is my Nikon Z9 and Nikon Z800mm pf.
My second camera is another Z9 and usually it has a Z100-400 on it.
I have a standing order with the small brick and mortar store I use the most for a Nikon Z200-600 if it ever gets released.

View attachment 62544

Lovely colours