vulpess
Active member
There is a massive difference between walking in the mountains (as any other hiker would do) and take a photo of a bird when it flies up, and repeatedly and deliberately flushing the same bird back and forth.
Improvement in keeper rate with the Sony a1 vs Nikon D850 for these BIF conditions?
- Thread starter santiago
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
DaveR
Active member
Indeed and I don't think anyone has suggested doing such a thing. The OP is using a pointer dog to flush grouse on moorland.
faunagraphy
Active member
@santiago and others: I watched this video yesterday, which you might find insightful.
Somewhat contrary to the title, this isn't a head-to-head comparison of the OM-1 vs the A1, which is what I was hoping for. However, it shows some nice burst sequences. Long story short, he is basically saying what Fsi, me and others have said here - the OM-1's AF is not as good as that of the A1, but it acquires focus much faster and gives more keepers thanks to its stunning burst rate.
I watched it at 1.5x speed since I do not have the patience for long videos.
Somewhat contrary to the title, this isn't a head-to-head comparison of the OM-1 vs the A1, which is what I was hoping for. However, it shows some nice burst sequences. Long story short, he is basically saying what Fsi, me and others have said here - the OM-1's AF is not as good as that of the A1, but it acquires focus much faster and gives more keepers thanks to its stunning burst rate.
I watched it at 1.5x speed since I do not have the patience for long videos.
Interesting, but he never says whether he's using tracking or not on the OM-1.@santiago and others: I watched this video yesterday, which you might find insightful.
Somewhat contrary to the title, this isn't a head-to-head comparison of the OM-1 vs the A1, which is what I was hoping for. However, it shows some nice burst sequences. Long story short, he is basically saying what Fsi, me and others have said here - the OM-1's AF is not as good as that of the A1, but it acquires focus much faster and gives more keepers thanks to its stunning burst rate.
I watched it at 1.5x speed since I do not have the patience for long videos.
santiago
Active member
That was incredibly helpful!!! Thank you very much @faunagraphy. It does seem to prove that you might do better with the A1 (slower initial focus but better tracking) or the OM-1 (the opposite), depending on the circumstances. Which has indeed been what I understood @fsi22 and you have said all along.@santiago and others: I watched this video yesterday, which you might find insightful.
Somewhat contrary to the title, this isn't a head-to-head comparison of the OM-1 vs the A1, which is what I was hoping for. However, it shows some nice burst sequences. Long story short, he is basically saying what Fsi, me and others have said here - the OM-1's AF is not as good as that of the A1, but it acquires focus much faster and gives more keepers thanks to its stunning burst rate.
I watched it at 1.5x speed since I do not have the patience for long videos.
I wanted to summarise here again my conclusions because I have learnt a lot from this thread and perhaps this can be useful for others. I really want to thank again everybody who took the time to share their views and help me and you among them @faunagraphy for drawing my attention to many new ideas such as the dot sight for instance. And thank you as well for pointing me in the direction of this video… he also has a very interesting one on red grouse in flight… with the A1 by the way:
MEDIA=youtube]fbjgU_l-RxM[/MEDIA]
I have concluded that for my photography, the OM-1 is worth a try (I have already tested the A1).
My hope is that in my case I will capture the very difficult initial take-off or bird in close range more often than with the A1, while I will lose other shots because of worse tracking and not being able to crop to the same degree. The idea is to gain more keepers with the former than you lose with the latter!
For me weight and handheld maneuverability were also important factors, and there the OM-1 is also strong (but this might not matter for many other types of photography). Another aspect that I liked (again for my needs) is the EE-1 dot sight which would seem to work better with the OM-1 and might not even work at all with big primes (?).
santiago
Active member
I got the impression that he was tracking as he recommended -2 for the AF-C sensitivity setting?
He seems very experienced and mentioned that he tried different techniques to improve on the results as well?
And although I have not watched other videos other than the red grouse one, he is a big fan of the A1 as well which is interesting. He in fact seems to be a big fan of both cameras!
faunagraphy
Active member
Hi @santiago, thanks for the update, and apologies to you and Barbara for the delayed response. I'm glad you're going to give the OM-1 a try, and for me personally, as someone who does not make money from photography, it's hard to argue against a $2200 camera that competes well with a $6500 one. I also went through some of my swallow photos taken last week and have been very pleased with the results. Not perfect, but a huge improvement over my older cameras for sure, including the D500. I'll post some examples when I connect my camera to this laptop next.
Anyway, I logged on to share this article with you. Matheiu Gasquet at MirrorlessComparisons has posted this review of the OM-1 after characteristically thorough testing. I had been looking forward to this for a while, and the article goes into the many pros and cons of using this camera for BIFs and getting the most out of it.
OM System OM-1 Review for Bird Photography / Birds in Flight - Mirrorless Comparison
Over the years, Olympus has built a very interesting system for wildlife and bird photographers, with reduced size and weight being the primary appeal for those tired of carrying heavy gear around. But despite the excellent portability, the unrivalled stabilisation and the impressive shooting...
mirrorlesscomparison.com
Regarding the EE-1 dot sight, it is system agnostic and will work on any camera. If mounted on the hot shoe, its red dot will be around 2.5 inches above the viewfinder, so if your lens's front element does not block that, you shouldn't have any problem. Of course, you can also mount it at any other convenient place, such as on the lens itself.
For a while, I used it next to my EVF (with my right eye over the EVF and left over the dot sight) using a cold shoe arm like this one: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07CWS619X/?tag=backcogaller-20
I screwed it into the tripod mount of the camera body so that the arm extended to the left, and mounted the EE-1 dot sight on top of the cold shoe. It was a cumbersome setup but it worked okay. But I'm used to aiming long focal lengths now so do not use it as much anymore.
ricardo00
Well-known member
Hi Santiago,
Sorry don't have the patience to read through all the responses. However was curious whether you ever rented the OM-1, Z9 or the Sony a1 and found that they were far superior in grabbing focus for a rapidly moving bird that appeared out of nowhere?
Sorry don't have the patience to read through all the responses. However was curious whether you ever rented the OM-1, Z9 or the Sony a1 and found that they were far superior in grabbing focus for a rapidly moving bird that appeared out of nowhere?
Roy
Well-known member
I tried the A1 last year and found my keeper rate about the same as the D850.
Thats probably because I only had the Sony for a couple of days and I was still getting used to it.
Autofocus is about half the camera and half the lens.
My Z9 keeper rate is great now that i'm familiar with its focusing system but it wasn't at first...
santiago
Active member
Hi,
I have not tested the Z9, so I cannot comment. The reason I did not test it was that I was pointed in the direction of the A1 (first) and the OM-1 (a bit later) with reasons that were convincing for me.
I rented the A1 (twice for two days each time) and I now own an OM-1. Here are my summary thoughts:
- Both the A1 and the OM-1 have a better AF and noticeably higher keeper rate for this type of BIF than the D850
- If (a) cost difference is not a major concern, (b) you shoot mostly with a tripod (A1 rig much heavier) and (c) you do not only shoot the BIF that appears out of nowhere (OM-1 better), I would go for the A1 because of the superb tracking and the higher MP which helps with reframing
- Because of not meeting any of the conditions above, I went for the OM-1. I think however both systems are great and you cannot go wrong with either of them... the more you narrow your photographic interests, the easier it is to pick one versus the other one.
I hope this helps
ricardo00
Well-known member
Thank you very much Santiago for the thorough summary! I definitely have on the list to rent and try the OM-1, will move it to the top after reading of your experience. I much prefer not using a tripod. Can I ask what lens you used in the Olympus system? Was it the 300mm f/4?
santiago
Active member
You are most welcome.
Yes, I have only bought the 300mm f/4. The quality is superb. I sometimes find myself too close to the action though, so I am learning to deal with that!
You can shoot the A1 handheld too, but if you are hiking anything more than 20 minutes from a vehicle, the difference in weight and manouverability with the OM-1 system is substantial in my view.
Yes, I have only bought the 300mm f/4. The quality is superb. I sometimes find myself too close to the action though, so I am learning to deal with that!
You can shoot the A1 handheld too, but if you are hiking anything more than 20 minutes from a vehicle, the difference in weight and manouverability with the OM-1 system is substantial in my view.
I have an OM-1, the 300f4 and the 100-400 f5-6-3. I also have a Dot sight. (I think that the Dot Sight would have really helped my tracking when I had the D-500/500pf using GRP AF.)
What is not part of this discussion is ProCapture. (The Z-9 and the Canon R-7 have this also). I am just at the beginning of learning to shoot using ProCapture.
I typically hand hold my OM-1 but use a monopod/monogimble and am sitting down on a walkstool when using ProCapture. (This gives me the strength and stability to stay on the bird until it takes off.)
Generally, if I can get a white focusing box around the bird while perched, I will have focused images as the bird takes off. (I am shooting in focus priority.)
Tom
What is not part of this discussion is ProCapture. (The Z-9 and the Canon R-7 have this also). I am just at the beginning of learning to shoot using ProCapture.
I typically hand hold my OM-1 but use a monopod/monogimble and am sitting down on a walkstool when using ProCapture. (This gives me the strength and stability to stay on the bird until it takes off.)
Generally, if I can get a white focusing box around the bird while perched, I will have focused images as the bird takes off. (I am shooting in focus priority.)
Tom
These days every system has a high end camera with great AF. It applies to very fast action - erratic fast movement like fast birds in flight. fast sports, etc. Just keep in mind that those are flagship models with corresponding cost using top lenses for the respective system. Pick the system and you can get the results. Using a different camera body without the latest AF system, you'll probably get 90-95% of the results but may struggle with the most demanding subjects. Most of these companies will be delivering future non-flagship bodies within the next 6 months or so delivering 95% of the functionality at 60% of the cost. As Thom Hogan put it, there is no need to switch camera systems to get the performance you need.
Eric-
I am afraid that I can't agree with you or Thom Hoagan. I switched from Nikon because there was no D-500/D-850 lightweight camera on the horizon and no lightweight Zoom lens with 750MM+ FF equivalent either.
-Tom
OK so I have almost 1 million exposures on my pair of Z9 (owned since Jan and March) -vs- only a hundred thousand on the pair of D850 bodies.
There have been lots of words about what Nikon did to tune the sensor processing to tune the camera towards action and sports -- which is why the choice of ISO 64 as the base was so surprising. I believe this choice is a bad compromise and Nikon would have been better served giving us the 2/3rd of a stop low light advantage of other Base ISO 100 bodies.
The Z9 is in my view less of a studio/landscape camera than the D850 is at ISO settings below 320. But not materialy so - and one can hardly see the difference once images are processed using DxO Pure RAW 2 Deep prime and Topaz DeNoise AI.
However - and this is big - the vastly improved AF outweighs everything else. Eye/Face Tracking and 3-d tracking is exceptional and vastly improves the shooting experience in studio and in the field. Then we get to shooting action and wildlife - when I will requote my experience - I have obtained 10 times the number of keepers using the Z9 that I was able to achieve with the D850 or D5. 20fps allows one to almost guarantee getting a useable wing position with the subject in focus. Shooting with eye/face tracking and having to shoot without it (like I currently have to do on my new X2D 100c) is such a different and far easier/better experience. Thank you Nikon for giving us this capability and I hope that further improvements come to the Z9 via firmware updates and YES you bring such capabilities to smaller and cheaper mode bodies soon as well.