"big 3" wildlife setups at differing budget levels

[StefanSC]

What does everyone think? Is there any one setup at each bracket that is a clear winner? Is it a matter of choosing priorities? AF vs FPS vs glass?

The OM-1 (Mk. 2) with the Olympus 300mm f4 and 1.4x TC is so far ahead for wildlife of anything in the sub 5k USD section that by buying anything else in this price range, the photographer is making a mistake.

It's AF is on par, the lens is much better not to mention that at f4 it mostly negates any light gathering abilities that the larger sensors might have except in the best of light/low ISO and it out-fpses, out-buffers and out-features all the competition.

And I think it can be had new in the budget.

 

[Calson]

Neither Canon or Sony have lenses like the 300mm PF, 600mm PF, and 800mm PF. For wildlife photography the PF lenses are why when moving to mirrorless I bought the Z9.

 

[FB101]

The perfect wildlife setup would be the canon R1 body and canon R1 ibis, with the Sony A1 sensor, AF from either Sony A9iii or canon R1, and prime lenses from Nikon (PF or TC primes have no match). Knowing that it doesn’t exist, pick what you are the most comfortable sacrificing and move on. Of course, that’s for an unlimited budget. If you constrain $ spent, then it gets more tricky, especially if you dial in used prices or system weight.
in the end, you need to know what the priorities are, what’s nice to have, and what isn’t a criteria. Otherwise you can’t pick. All brands have strengths and weaknesses, you need to know what’s non negotiable to rule some out.

 

[MrFotoFool]

Neither Canon or Sony have lenses like the 300mm PF, 600mm PF, and 800mm PF. For wildlife photography the PF lenses are why when moving to mirrorless I bought the Z9.

Nikon Z system does not have a 300PF either.

 

[fcotterill]

There are collectively almost 100 F-mount Nikkors (G and E type) that focus with the FTZ adapter on Z cameras. The shortcomings of its 125g weight and 8cm length are 1st world problems, although some users avoid the extra bayonet mount.

Autofocus performance is improved using the FTZ, with no more AFFT corrections, and a significant benefit of the Z AF system for wildlife photographers is the snappy, sharper focus with the F-mount Teleconverters at f8 and higher fStops. Excellent results with the 500 f5.6E PF and TC14 are often shared online.

Here's a graphic comparing the collective F and Z options for telephotos:

"Which Nikon telephoto(s)?" for Wildlife Genres: Updated

This question involves an interesting set of factors. The answer(s) depend on one's personal needs, and budget obviously, besides the diversity of subjects and respective conditions. Here's an attempt to sketch out the challenges, and outline where to find resources to help settling final...

bcgforums.com

 

[Doug Herr]

Add up the total weight of each of these packages' components.

 

[nmerc_photos]

The OM-1 (Mk. 2) with the Olympus 300mm f4 and 1.4x TC is so far ahead for wildlife of anything in the sub 5k USD section that by buying anything else in this price range, the photographer is making a mistake.

It's AF is on par, the lens is much better not to mention that at f4 it mostly negates any light gathering abilities that the larger sensors might have except in the best of light/low ISO and it out-fpses, out-buffers and out-features all the competition.

And I think it can be had new in the budget.

Is there anyone else that agrees with this?

In my experience trying the high end OM gear (OM-1 MK II + 150-400) the results were not better than a Z8 / 180-600.

Not sure how the lesser 300mm f4 would be better than their top lens offering.

I absolutely wouldn't say any of the Olympus gear is "so far ahead for wildlife" lol, especially in the budget area.

Add up the total weight of each of these packages' components.

this is a great idea! it'll take some time, but I'll go back in and do that

 

[arbitrage]

The perfect wildlife setup would be the canon R1 body and canon R1 ibis, with the Sony A1 sensor, AF from either Sony A9iii or canon R1, and prime lenses from Nikon (PF or TC primes have no match). Knowing that it doesn’t exist, pick what you are the most comfortable sacrificing and move on. Of course, that’s for an unlimited budget. If you constrain $ spent, then it gets more tricky, especially if you dial in used prices or system weight.
in the end, you need to know what the priorities are, what’s nice to have, and what isn’t a criteria. Otherwise you can’t pick. All brands have strengths and weaknesses, you need to know what’s non negotiable to rule some out.

Yes...that would be the dream amalgamation of systems. Wish one of the three could bring it all together and we could just shut down all the forums as there would be nothing left to argue about....LOL

 

[Anjin San]

The perfect wildlife setup would be the canon R1 body and canon R1 ibis, with the Sony A1 sensor, AF from either Sony A9iii or canon R1, and prime lenses from Nikon (PF or TC primes have no match). Knowing that it doesn’t exist, pick what you are the most comfortable sacrificing and move on. Of course, that’s for an unlimited budget. If you constrain $ spent, then it gets more tricky, especially if you dial in used prices or system weight.
in the end, you need to know what the priorities are, what’s nice to have, and what isn’t a criteria. Otherwise you can’t pick. All brands have strengths and weaknesses, you need to know what’s non negotiable to rule some out.

There ya go…injecting common sense into the decision. Shame on ya.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

Not sure how the lesser 300mm f4 would be better than their top lens offering.

I absolutely wouldn't say any of the Olympus gear is "so far ahead for wildlife" lol, especially in the budget

The 300f4 and the 150-400 are about equal in IQ according to most OM Systems photographers. The difference is that the setup with a MC14 is about $5000 while a Z-8/180-600 is well above $5000. It is, of course lighter with greater reach but with a smaller sensor. It does have pre-capture @ 50 f/s with a 200 frame buffer. I would not say "so far ahead" but a "wize choice if you like the tradeoff"

In my view it is in the $3000 price range and the sub 4 pound weight category that OM-Systems shines. The OM-1/100-400 gives up a bit of IQ and sensor size but is equal in every other way.

 

[Ken Miracle]

I have only shot Nikon so offer no opinion on the other two.

For Nikon I prefer the combination of the 400mm f4.5 and the 800mm PF.

I would graciously accept switching the 800mm pf for the 600mm f4.

After making the switch from 800mm f/6.3 to the 600 f/4TC for a crazed birder/bird ID photographer it was worth the switch for my most likely only big splurge in the Z world. At 76 there are fewer splurge days left I co led a birding trip in horrible light and high winds this week and the focus speed and extra stops of light were appreciated. It is amazingly well balanced and even though heavier than the Z800 it does not feel that way when I am shooting it.

The Z600 f/6.3 is the light weight champ in the 600mm range and I kept it to go with my Z6III.

 

[Marsha Jane]

Be sure to consider how much weight he wants to carry. While inexpensive, the super zooms are often heavier than something like a Nikon Z 100-400 + 1.4 tele.

Can you be more specific regarding subjects. Small birds, BIFs, dogs/cats, mammals or ???

Will be often be shooting in good light, cloudy or dark situations?

Will he be shooting raw or jpg? If raw, what software and how much processing is he willing to learn and do?

What will he do with the images? Share on the internet, occasional medium-sized print for home, competitions or ?

Neither Canon or Sony have lenses like the 300mm PF, 600mm PF, and 800mm PF. For wildlife photography the PF lenses are why when moving to mirrorless I bought the Z9.

agree- the lens choices available in Nikon were the deciding factor for me.

 

[Ken Miracle]

The perfect wildlife setup would be the canon R1 body and canon R1 ibis, with the Sony A1 sensor, AF from either Sony A9iii or canon R1, and prime lenses from Nikon (PF or TC primes have no match). Knowing that it doesn’t exist, pick what you are the most comfortable sacrificing and move on. Of course, that’s for an unlimited budget. If you constrain $ spent, then it gets more tricky, especially if you dial in used prices or system weight.
in the end, you need to know what the priorities are, what’s nice to have, and what isn’t a criteria. Otherwise you can’t pick. All brands have strengths and weaknesses, you need to know what’s non negotiable to rule some out.

I have not used a Canon since the early digital rebel I had was traded for a D300s. But I have friends that love them. I also have never used Sony, no particular reason, just have not. However @Steve prefers the Sony A1 to the Nikon Z's but as you noted he also is in the camp of no comparable glass to the Z600 f/4 TC etc..

 

[Doug Herr]

The perfect wildlife setup would be the canon R1 body and canon R1 ibis, with the Sony A1 sensor, AF from either Sony A9iii or canon R1, and prime lenses from Nikon (PF or TC primes have no match). Knowing that it doesn’t exist, pick what you are the most comfortable sacrificing and move on. Of course, that’s for an unlimited budget. If you constrain $ spent, then it gets more tricky, especially if you dial in used prices or system weight.
in the end, you need to know what the priorities are, what’s nice to have, and what isn’t a criteria. Otherwise you can’t pick. All brands have strengths and weaknesses, you need to know what’s non negotiable to rule some out.

Ugh!

A firm NO on the R1's bulk & 24MP sensor. NO NO NO NO NO

I was envious of the Nikon lens selection until the 300 GM's performance with TCs was known.

YMMV.

 

[Jamshid987]

May I suggest that your uncle picks two of these cameras and rents them for a couple of days to see which one he likes better! Then gradually adds lenses in to his inventory!

 

[pnbarne]

Since cost seems to have taken a backseat in this debate, I am going to come down on the side of those advocating for weight as a key decision point. I used to go out with two or three lenses, a couple of bodies and a tripod. Now, I usually carry a Z800 on a QD strap, a Z8 and a monopod. Time takes its toll. Your physical capabilities and limitations have a lot to do with enjoying a really pleasant outing or a miserable experience not to be repeated. In essence, toss the gear at the back of the closet never to be seen again.

 

[RichF]

You are implying without saying explicitly that cost is a key factor. Is that true (cost is a key factor)?

 

[Doug Herr]

You are implying without saying explicitly that cost is a key factor. Is that true (cost is a key factor)?

for myself at this stage of life (YMMV) weight and performance are top priorities, cost is secondary. It wasn't always so, for more years than I care to remember cost was a higher priority than weight.

Performance includes image quality and versatility; my sweet spot at this time is a1 + 300 GM + both TCs. Less weight than z8 + 600 PF, focal length versatility, IQ nearly equal to the 600 GM, a 2 meter MFD and easily hand-holdable.

 

[Mark Garfinkel]

With all said, I'll only say one word, NIKON.

 

[Doug Herr]

With all said, I'll only say one word, NIKON.

We're a pluralistic group. All are welcome here, your experience and preferences are not universal.

 

[Ralph]

To address the original question, my answer would be glass. That should be the number one priority. You can’t compensate for the quality of glass. But you can compensate for the AF performance.

 

[realspeed]

I can't see the logic in sticking to FF or just the "big 3" quote. Having changed from Nikon which I used for many years going to Panasonic four thirds has been a real eye opener. Surely it is better to to consider other makes as well, which may have features in the menu more suited to needs. I have to say I am blown away with the Panasonic G9ii having already owned the G9 original. Huge advantage in changing makes. The weight difference alone should be high on the "what to buy" list. Personally I can see no difference in picture quality between FF and M43 maybe other can ? lens size alone is often overlooked the M43 being a lot shorter and lighter. I don't want to lug around heavly lenses weighing several lbs

 

[RichF]

for myself at this stage of life (YMMV) weight and performance are top priorities, cost is secondary. It wasn't always so, for more years than I care to remember cost was a higher priority than weight.

Performance includes image quality and versatility; my sweet spot at this time is a1 + 300 GM + both TCs. Less weight than z8 + 600 PF, focal length versatility, IQ nearly equal to the 600 GM, a 2 meter MFD and easily hand-holdable.

I am with you. Retired and comfortable. When I started out I taught in the evening and was able to add modestly priced a lens each term.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

As I have previously written, if weight and cost are the issues an M43 camera is the answer. For birds I believe the OM Systems OM-1/100-400 is best, a $3K new price, while if you want a more general-purpose camera and video, then the G9/Panasonic 100-400 is best.

BEST NOW.

BUT.......

As I read the Canon announcement on the R7-2, it implies that Canon is going to get serious about its 1.6 cropped sensor and upgrade the R7 to a stacked sensor. I also see that Nikon has a very competitive ($900) DX camera that could be combined with one of Nikon's pf lenses to create an interesting lightweight combo.

My concern for my beloved OM-1 Mark 2 is that the M43 format may be at the near end of its developmental life. Yes, the OM-1 currently has several computational capabilities that the big 3 don't, including pre-capture in RAW, but the big 3 are catching up. Ultimately the inherent limitations of the m43 size will restrict continued development and one or more of the big 3's cropped sensor offerings may eclipse any future m43.

This argues for marrying the glass and one would do with a Nikon 600pf or a Canon 100-500 and waiting for a better cropped sensor to pair it with.

 

[Ken Miracle]

As I have previously written, if weight and cost are the issues an M43 camera is the answer. For birds I believe the OM Systems OM-1/100-400 is best, a $3K new price, while if you want a more general-purpose camera and video, then the G9/Panasonic 100-400 is best.

BEST NOW.

BUT.......

As I read the Canon announcement on the R7-2, it implies that Canon is going to get serious about its 1.6 cropped sensor and upgrade the R7 to a stacked sensor. I also see that Nikon has a very competitive ($900) DX camera that could be combined with one of Nikon's pf lenses to create an interesting lightweight combo.

My concern for my beloved OM-1 Mark 2 is that the M43 format may be at the near end of its developmental life. Yes, the OM-1 currently has several computational capabilities that the big 3 don't, including pre-capture in RAW, but the big 3 are catching up. Ultimately the inherent limitations of the m43 size will restrict continued development and one or more of the big 3's cropped sensor offerings may eclipse any future m43.

This argues for marrying the glass and one would do with a Nikon 600pf or a Canon 100-500 and waiting for a better cropped sensor to pair it with.

I am guessing the Nikon you are referring to is the Z50II it has some of the features from the Z6III in a smaller DX package it could be interesting. My wife had a Z50 but ended up going to a Z7II and cropping as needed but the Z50II is a whole other animal and may be a good match with her favorite lens the Z28-400. My Z6III with or without the MB-N14 Power Battery Pack is a great partner with my Z600 f/6.3 in a surprisingly light weight combo at 4.72 lbs w/o the MB-N14 or 5.38 lbs with it.