@arbitrage Did you ever end up getting a review from your friend? Ever end up using his for a while?
Is anyone exploring the Olympus OM-1 for birds and wildlife?
- Thread starter Mitch56
- 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).
jmurthy
Well-known member
I have been a long time MFT shooter, but started shooting Nikon again for fast action/ BIF / wildlife.
I have the OM-1, 40-150 f/2.8, 300 f/4 for BIF and wildlife and a 12-100 f/4 as a walk around lens which is fantastic for one lens one camera solution while climbing mountains.
In comparison to my Z9, it complements it very well for wildlife as well as when using it as a light weight brother for non action shots. In fact, for static subjects I isually land up shooting OM-1 even as low as 0.5 sec handheld exposures with 12-100 mm at 100mm at base ISO to avoid noise.
CAFocus is very good in tracking birds in flight. I dont see any loss while shooting Z9 or OM-1.
My reservations and why i might choose Z9 at times:
1. future of OM- 1 is sketchy. I am not convinced they will survive. I love the glass so much that I sold my EM1 MII and bought the OM1 with the idea that i will shoot with my lenses until the camera dies, even if OM system does not survive. This is the main reason why I held off investing in their elusive 150-400 f/4 tele zoom that costs $7000+
2. Low resolution and the need to crop some in wildlife photography makes me lean towards Z9 depending on situation
3. Noise profile- though touted in many forums is a non issue for me with DXO photolab and topaz denoise. in fact, it may be similar to the z9 given that they have equivalent densities of photosensors. I have not compared the noise cause this is not an issue for me.
3. video specs of Z9 - this is a monster video cam.. Om-1 comes second.
I would choose OM1 over Z9
1. this is the big one- size and weight considerations for equivalent performance
2. Procapture in OM1- that outputs raw images unlike Z9 that outputs jpegs only as of this writing
3. has fine walk around lens solution 12-100 that is so good and so sharp.
4. Z9 IS is good, OM-1 is other worldly
It was a while until I understood the allure of the 150-400 zoom lens. That was because as a Nikon shooter I was into primes. I loved my D-500/500pf and if it wasn't so d@mn heavy I would have purchased a Z-9/800pf.
But I also wanted a zoom. In that case a Sony A1 and a 200-600 5.6-6.3 zoom was the overwhelming recommendation. Interestingly, the OM-1/150-400 F/4.5 is a pound lighter and about the same price. The Sony equivalent F-stop is lower (f/6.3 versus F/8) and the sensor is much larger, but the OM-1 combo has more reach which often effectively negates those advantages.
What I came to understand, however, is how valuable 50 f/s is when shooting ProCapture. The 25 f/s of my 100-400 or the 30 f/s of the Canon R7 really only yield a few frames of a bird taking off. With 50 f/s you get far more choices.
I have the 300f4 and that is great when that is all the reach I need.
Tom
But I also wanted a zoom. In that case a Sony A1 and a 200-600 5.6-6.3 zoom was the overwhelming recommendation. Interestingly, the OM-1/150-400 F/4.5 is a pound lighter and about the same price. The Sony equivalent F-stop is lower (f/6.3 versus F/8) and the sensor is much larger, but the OM-1 combo has more reach which often effectively negates those advantages.
What I came to understand, however, is how valuable 50 f/s is when shooting ProCapture. The 25 f/s of my 100-400 or the 30 f/s of the Canon R7 really only yield a few frames of a bird taking off. With 50 f/s you get far more choices.
I have the 300f4 and that is great when that is all the reach I need.
Tom
jmurthy
Well-known member
do you also have 150-400 f/4.5?
Pauhana
New member
Been using OM-1 for a couple of months. And yes 12-100 is outstanding. I use for walk around, grandkids and dabble in landscape. If I wasn’t a bird shooter probably would never come off camera. Went with 100-400 and looking to add 300 F4 by first of year. Not missing my Canon gear. Some concerns too if OMD will make it. Will see what they come up with next after OM5 just released and future lenses
I think they are at the end of the products that came with the acquisition, and they are now losing the brand name. Given that and where the economy is, exchange rates and the general (declining) segment they occupy, as well as the relative strengths of the other four brands, they are toast.
No. The 150-400 is more than 1.5 pounds heavier than the 100-400. I doubt I will ever purchase one.
Last edited:
arbitrage
Well-known member
Yes I got to shoot with my friend's OM1 but only had the 50-150/2.8 to use so that was a little challenging getting enough reach for the birds at the lagoon. None the less, I found the subject and bird/eye detect to work really well. Very quick acquisition.
If I was looking for a lighter setup I'd seriously consider an OM1 with 150-400 or 300/4.
In terms of the camera's capabilities, the OM-1 is the equal, or better of the big-three's flagship offering. The real problem is, "Is the m4/3 sensor size at the end of its life?"
I watched a video by a sensor guru. He indicated that OM Systems could do more with this sensor and there are better sensors in the works than the sensor the OM-1 uses now. That means that an OM-2 could be on the horizon. There are enough m43 users to make an OM-1 a profitable offering and the OM-1 is currently selling very well.
The problem is how far can the m43 or any cropped sensor go in competition with full-frame sensors that are 50MP or more. Canon's mirrorless APS-C offerings are targeted for the low end of the camera purchasing public and Nikon has, so far, made no offering in an APS-C mirrorless camera.
In reality, a M43/APS-C camera really needs an M43/APS-C (DX in Nikon terms) optimized lens. We are not seeing that from Canon/Nikon.
So, my conclusion is that the m43 format has a limited development future but that does not mean that OM-1 is toast. My situation is typical. At 81, overweight and out of shape, a less than 5# rig that has sufficient reach for bird photography is a requirement, not an option. Some may get there earlier than I, some later and some not at all but the compact, lightweight niche exists and is not being filled by the big 3. Bird/wildlife photography is an obvious geriatric advocation.
Thanks for the input. I'm possibly considering the 300 f4 and 200 2.8. If I go A1 it will take me a few years to save up for their 400 2.8. How did it track against busy backgrounds compared to your A1 or the R5 you've shot? I don't typically shoot frame filling shots and I'm finding the R5 plus 400 f4 II doesn't track well when the bird is smaller in the frame in an "environmental" type shot, which is more often my style. The om-1 tracking looks very promising for smaller birds.
I didn't say OM-1 is toast. I said the company is toast. Olympus got rid of them because they haven't made money in ages, and it's hard to imagine they are doing better now. Under former ownership the camera line was subsidized by their profitable division (medical). Now they are on their own, owned by a private equity group that paid close to nothing for it and has no strategic reason to keep it alive if it doesn't carry its weight. My point is, they have all odds against them ever carrying their own weight.
Nothing against the cameras, never owned one and know nothing about them.
jmurthy
Well-known member
I worry that their most recent EM5 released was a repackaged camera, maybe just done to bring uniformity to the names of their current camera line. I am seriously praying that , the repackaging is not an omnious sign of impending death of OM systems. If the company did well, I would sell my 300f/4 and get 150-400 f/4.5
I agree, not about cameras or about my personal situation.
I did not know that the profitability results of the Olympus camera decision were public or the terms of sale of the spinoff were public knowledge either. Taking what you say at face value, I expect that OM-Systems will milk the installed base on Olympus users to maximize profits and will minimize expensive research. Therefore, I expect other brands will catch up to some of the features that Olympus has had leadership while OM Systems will only make incremental improvements to the OM-1. Thus, current edges that the OM-1 has in areas like Pro-Capture and Computational Modes will quickly go away at the big three add them to their offerings
OK, given that, why should anybody with a current OM-1 or considering purchasing an OM-1 care?
The lens selection for the m43 format is pretty well established. I do not see much development in lenses or the need thereof. I do not see a need for a better zoom than the 150-400 of for a better low-cost zoom than the 100-400. I do not see a need for another shorter zoom than the ones that exist. It is not like Canon/Nikon/Sony who are bringing out new mirrorless lenses. Neither is there need nor profitability in a new lens. If you have or plan to purchase an OM-1, the lens you need already exists and ultimately will be available-maybe even cheaper as 150-400 demand abates.
What about the camera? Why did/does anybody buy an OM-1? I think it is not the computational modes or procapture. Rather, it is size and weight of the combined camera/lens configuration. I think that point-and-shoot camera face extinction due to competition from smart phones, but the OM-1 line will continue.
Tom
The one gap I see is a pro level 100-300 zoom, around f/4 constant aperture. More reach than the 40-150 f/2.8, but still relatively small and light.
StefanSC
Well-known member
That 100-300 pro level zoom is partially covered by the Panasonic Leica 50-200 and TC1.4x(which is a bit of a PITA to get a hold of, unfortunately).
Pauhana
New member
Roadmap show a 50-300 (or there about) pro lens in future. When that may be who knows. Seems OMDS is looking to update some lens like the did with 12-40 2.8. OMDS won’t be able to compete directly with likes of Canon, etc. but they seemed to be focusing on the outdoor photography market In order to play to their strengths. Don’t feel Olympus did that. Time will tell if this works. Me I am just going to enjoy shooting my OM-1 on a daily basis and see how things work out for the brand
Figured I'd add in some photos to this thread every once in a while.
GBH in the late afternoon.
OM-1, 300F4 + 1.4x TC
GBH in the late afternoon.
OM-1, 300F4 + 1.4x TC
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Well, I just bought an om-1 used off ebay. Added a used 100-400 and a 300mm f4 pro. The reason I did this was because my Sony a1 does not have pro capture or bracketed focusing. Figured I'd use it as a second camera. That is not the way it went down. I am selling A1 and my Sony glass. Reason for this is the 200-600 is too heavy for me, the 100-400 is a beautiful lens, I either have to put a 2X on it or shoot APSC to get the reach I want. So it's a glass issue, not a camera body issue. With the 300mm f4 pro with 1.4X added, I get 840mm at f5.6. Truly love the A1 and will be sad to see it go. That said, the OM-1 is very fast, stays on flying birds just as well as the A1, focuses on them a bit faster and it has pro capture and focus stacking. Will try to score the 150-400 which seems an impossible task.
Stacked sensors rock!
Stacked sensors rock!
Calson
Well-known member
Most photographers are not using high resolution DSLR or mirrorless cameras but APS-C or MFT or smartphones. The kit lenses used are f/5.6 lenses and so higher ISO settings are needed. I have read countless posts by people agonizing over which lenses to take on a trip as they are concerned about the weight of their gear. With MFT that is never an issue.
At least with my wife's E-M1 Mark III cameras the optical stabilization with many Olympus lenses is as good and often better than what I have with my Z9 cameras and S lenses. With the Z9 the heaviest lens I can hand hold for any length of time is the 800mm PF at 5 lbs. The 600mm f/4 at 7.1 lbs is significantly heavier whereas the Olympus MFT 300mm f/4 provides the angle of view of a 600mm full frame lens and weighs only 3.25 lb or less than half as much. Noise is greater with the MFT size sensor but Olympus wisely used a moderate 20MP pixel count to have larger photosites.
I could shoot at a 4x higher ISO setting with my APS-C 24MP D7200 than I could with my 12MP full frame D3 camera. Improvements in sensors and AD processing has improved tremendously over the past 10 years. At print sizes of 20x30 or greater the full frame cameras have an edge but how many prints of this size are every actually made and hung for display?
At least with my wife's E-M1 Mark III cameras the optical stabilization with many Olympus lenses is as good and often better than what I have with my Z9 cameras and S lenses. With the Z9 the heaviest lens I can hand hold for any length of time is the 800mm PF at 5 lbs. The 600mm f/4 at 7.1 lbs is significantly heavier whereas the Olympus MFT 300mm f/4 provides the angle of view of a 600mm full frame lens and weighs only 3.25 lb or less than half as much. Noise is greater with the MFT size sensor but Olympus wisely used a moderate 20MP pixel count to have larger photosites.
I could shoot at a 4x higher ISO setting with my APS-C 24MP D7200 than I could with my 12MP full frame D3 camera. Improvements in sensors and AD processing has improved tremendously over the past 10 years. At print sizes of 20x30 or greater the full frame cameras have an edge but how many prints of this size are every actually made and hung for display?
faunagraphy
Active member
Well, this makes me very happy to hear it because I love my OM-1 and an A1 is out of my budget. For years I waited for a body with AF comparable to the A9 series ... like you I found the 200-600 to be too heavy (front-heavy, to be specific) with iffy weather-sealing, and the A9 lacked reach whereas the A7Riv lacked reliable AF for birds.Well, I just bought an om-1 used off ebay. Added a used 100-400 and a 300mm f4 pro. The reason I did this was because my Sony a1 does not have pro capture or bracketed focusing. Figured I'd use it as a second camera. That is not the way it went down. I am selling A1 and my Sony glass. Reason for this is the 200-600 is too heavy for me, the 100-400 is a beautiful lens, I either have to put a 2X on it or shoot APSC to get the reach I want. So it's a glass issue, not a camera body issue. With the 300mm f4 pro with 1.4X added, I get 840mm at f5.6. Truly love the A1 and will be sad to see it go. That said, the OM-1 is very fast, stays on flying birds just as well as the A1, focuses on them a bit faster and it has pro capture and focus stacking. Will try to score the 150-400 which seems an impossible task.
Stacked sensors rock!
Anyway I sold all my Nikon gear when the OM-1 came out and have no regrets. Haven't tried the Olympus 100-400 but everyone who uses it loves it. I used to own the Panasonic 100-400 but never bonded with it. Since you like your 100-400 you might want to get the MC-20 for the 300mm Pro - that way you have 600mm for perched birds and the 100-400 for BIFs / other wildlife.
Did some whalewatching tours recently and the ability to zoom would have been a great help.
I had the pleasure to listen to an OM Systems corporate vid. One thing that struck me was that one thing they said that in a poll of current Olympus users was that more megapixels was not desired. The result seems to be that the Olympus users got whatever else that they wanted when the OM-1 was released. Of interest is that the OM Engineers specifically stated that the X-cross-pixel design of the OM-1's sensor is uses exclusively for autofocus, not additional resolution.
So, the knock by non-OM-1 users that the m4/3 sensor does not have enough MPs is not shared by experienced M43 users.
Tom
So, the knock by non-OM-1 users that the m4/3 sensor does not have enough MPs is not shared by experienced M43 users.
Tom
Today I scored a 150-400 used on eBay. I am beyond excited because when I first heard about this lens I wanted it. A little heavy, but much lighter than 200-600, tho about the same physical size. Figure if I don't like it, won't have a problem selling it, they're scarce as hens teeth!
Chris K
Well-known member
Wow! Congrats on the 150-400!
I have to say, if I had an OM1+150-400 and my Z9+500PF in my hands right now, I'd probably choose the OM1. I used to shoot Olympus and was happy except for the continuous AF. Right now it's too much of a cash outlay in the face of my new GFX adventure.
I have to say, if I had an OM1+150-400 and my Z9+500PF in my hands right now, I'd probably choose the OM1. I used to shoot Olympus and was happy except for the continuous AF. Right now it's too much of a cash outlay in the face of my new GFX adventure.
Some more OM-1 samples. All with the 300F4 and 1.4x TC
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
The 150-400 is a wonderful lens. Am really enjoying shooting in my dark yard using it in my dark yard and shooting at f4.5 or f5.6 (800mm or 1000 mm). And it isn't too heavy to walk around with using a cotton carrier. The 300 f4 is an amazing lens. Will sell the olympus 100-400. Nice lens, but doesn't hold a candle to the two pro lenses.