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

[Nimi]

I had the OM-1 and the 150-400 for a couple months But I also kept my Canon R3 and Nikon Z9 but eventually sold my Z9 and a couple lenses to fund the OM System, I ended up selling the OM-1 and 150-400 as I like the IQ from my R3 much better also focus tracking was better on the R3, And from what I seen is my RF 800 f11 was about as sharp as the M. Zuiko 150-400. I sold the 150-400 for 5500.00 2k less than I bought it 2 months before so with the money I bought the Z8 and will be buying the Z 180-600. Keep what you got and only spend money on that system, I get it though we're a bunch of gear whores and the grass always looks better on the other side but it ain't so trust me.

Me? Fully committed to Nikon and Sony, and on the waitlist for an R1

 

[geoawelch]

The OM-1/150-400 combination offers you great flexibility in a light package. While it may be true that the weight of the combo is near Z8 and various prime combos, it’s a disingenuous reply because the the zoom provides you with an equivalent focal length range of 300 to over 1000 mm. That for me is the true benefit.

Where things differ for me is the IQ out of camera is definitely not on a par with full frame sensors. I had the A1, A9 and A7RIV from Sony. Still have the A9/200-600.

Most if not all of my images go through denoising - DXO, Topaz or the new denoise in LR. But to be fair, I also used to run many of the Sony files through the same thing.

I do know that my travel bag is much lighter than when shooting full frame.

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.

 

[Pauhana]

Switched from Canon to OM-1 about a year ago. Me personally have been very pleased. Use om-1 100-400 and 12-100 primarily along with several other Oly/penny lens. Highly agree with renting before you buy. For me was glad to be carrying the OM-1 oly 100-400 when I did the hike for Colima Warbler at Big Bend back in April vs prior Canon gear

 

[Ever]

Can I expect this level of IQ from a OM-1 + 100-400?

1. Example
2. Example
3. Example
4. Example

The photos are from a D500 + Sigma 150-600 C (by a different user). I love the detail/sharpness/low-noise/vibrance.

I'm basically new here, and I've reached a point where I'm going in circles with research. I'm close to pulling the trigger on the MFT kit, however I don't have any reference when it comes to the real-world IQ tradeoffs be between it and an ASP-C / FF setup. I've read I can expect noisier photos from ~6k ISO, but I lack the experience to know if it bothers me.

Instead, it seems easiest to just use those photos as a reference for what speaks to me. I love the IQ, and they're similar to my style: portrait (close-up) shots of stationary birds.

I'm not as interested in BIF or birds-in-landscape. I'll mainly be shooting hand-held on day hikes. I'm drawn to the Olympus kit for portability followed by the modern tech. It would be the best of both worlds if it could produce those kinds of shots. However if that's questionable, I'd feel drawn to the D500 setup and just toughing things with the added weight.

I've seen photos from the Olympus kit that I love. For example, here's (screenshots) that originally drew me to the OM-1. I love the sharpness and vibrance. Worth noting is they're using the 40-150 instead of the 100-400 which was surprising given how tight they are. On the flipside, I've also seen some that were nowhere near as polished as the ones above, and the authors seemed to be proud of them

Budget is ~$2,500. I've found a used version of the OM-1 + 100-400 kit for ~$2,600. Plenty of the D500 kits to be found. A local shop has both available to rent for a week (sans the 100-400 - they only have the 40-150).

 

[Tom Reynolds]

You will get roughly equivalent sharpness and vibrance with a D-500/150-600C sigma. I had both. With the OM-1 you will need to pay more attention to proper exposure, but you get many other benefits.

Tom

 

[Palmor]

Can I expect this level of IQ from a OM-1 + 100-400?

1. Example
2. Example
3. Example
4. Example

The photos are from a D500 + Sigma 150-600 C. I love the detail/sharpness/low-noise/vibrance.

I'm basically new here, and I've reached a point where I'm going in circles with research. I'm close to pulling the trigger on the MFT kit, however I don't have any reference when it comes to the real-world IQ tradeoffs be between it and an ASP-C / FF setup. I've read I can expect noisier photos from ~6k ISO, but I lack the experience to know if it bothers me.

Instead, it seems easiest to just use those photos as a reference for what speaks to me. I love the IQ, and they're similar to my style: portrait (close-up) shots of stationary birds.

I'm not as interested in BIF or birds-in-landscape. I'll mainly be shooting hand-held on day hikes. I'm drawn to the Olympus kit for portability followed by the modern tech. It would be the best of both worlds if it could produce those kinds of shots. However if that's questionable, I'd feel drawn to the D500 setup and just toughing things with the added weight.

I've seen photos from the Olympus kit that I love. For example, here's (screenshots) that originally drew me to the OM-1. I love the sharpness and vibrance. Worth noting is they're using the 40-150 instead of the 100-400 which was surprising given how tight they are. On the flipside, I've also seen some that were nowhere near as polished as the ones above, and the authors seemed to be proud of them

Budget is ~$2,500. I've found a used version of the OM-1 kit for ~$2,600. Plenty of the D500 kits to be found. A local shop has both available to rent for a week (sans the 100-400 - they only have the 40-150).

I believe you'l be able to achieve very similar results. Your D500 combo will be about 1 stop better in terms of ISO IQ but you'll have much better IBS on the OM-1 allowing lower shutter speeds (and hence lower ISO). So in the end its probably a wash in terms of high ISO IQ.

I used to have the D500 and Tamron 150-600 combo and if I had to choose I'd pick the Oly combo. The benefits (silent shooting, live exposure, subject recognition etc) of mirrorless with a stacked sensor out-weigh any slight differences in IQ.

There other places you can rent from (lensrental etc) depending on what country you are in.

 

[Icarus]

The OM-1 is a great camera. I shoot it with 40-150 f2.8 using 2x converter giving me 600mm at f5.6, so low light isn't a huge issue. Have shot it up to 8000 ISO and noise was easily corrected in Topaz Dnoise. Also use the 300 f4 with a 1.4x converter giving me 840mm at f5.6 with the option to use 300mm alone at f4 for 600mm at f4. I love the camera and would take it any day over the D500, for the tech and the weight.

 

[AlfC]

I think only you can ultimately be the judge of the images you get. I used to use the D500 with 500PF and the Sigma 500 F/4. My results with the OM1 and 300 F/4 (with or without TCs) are better but slightly more noise at high ISO (which I can deal with sufficiently up to 12800 using Topaz). I also have the PanaLeica 100-400 which is less sharp than the 300 F/4 but really pretty good up to 350mm or so. At 400mm I would sharpen using Topaz. If I ever go back to Nikon (Z8) it will be because it would effectively give me FF or APS-C (at 19MP) whereas the OM1 is limited to 20MP. Image quality with the lenses I have for either system would not be the decider, but that is with the 300F/4 on the OM1; I don't think I would be fully happy with the 100-400.

 

[StefanSC]

Can I expect this level of IQ from a OM-1 + 100-400?

1. Example
2. Example
3. Example
4. Example

The photos are from a D500 + Sigma 150-600 C (by a different user). I love the detail/sharpness/low-noise/vibrance.

Most likely yes...

That being said, those images are over-processed (especially oversharpened). Some people like it as they pop in web size... The Sigma 150-600mm C is capable of delivering much crispier images that require less PP than those.

I've found that a D500 + Sigma 150-600mm will provide clearly better image quality over any m43rds and either the two 100-400mm lenses available for that system.

That being said, it's much easier to get consistent results with an OM-1 and 100-400mm due to better image stabilization, an AF system that is more user-friendly and more features.

And the weight difference can be really felt on a longer hike.

Btw, a good budget compromise that keeps the weight low, if you don't want to shoot BiF's a lot, could be a used Nikon D7200 and a Sigma 100-400 C (afaik, the Olympus 100-400 is derived from that Sigma).

 

[Ever]

Most likely yes...

That being said, those images are over-processed (especially oversharpened). Some people like it as they pop in web size... The Sigma 150-600mm C is capable of delivering much crispier images that require less PP than those.

I've found that a D500 + Sigma 150-600mm will provide clearly better image quality over any m43rds and either the two 100-400mm lenses available for that system.

That being said, it's much easier to get consistent results with an OM-1 and 100-400mm due to better image stabilization, an AF system that is more user-friendly and more features.

And the weight difference can be really felt on a longer hike.

Btw, a good budget compromise that keeps the weight low, if you don't want to shoot BiF's a lot, could be a used Nikon D7200 and a Sigma 100-400 C (afaik, the Olympus 100-400 is derived from that Sigma).

Thanks Stefan and the rest of the members above. And good to know about the processing.

I think I have what I need and will see if I can try both before I buy. It's possible the weight/size of the Nikon setup winds up being a factor/non-factor, and that alone could change everything since I'll be hiking and shooting hand-held. If it's not that much of an issue, it seems it might be a worthwhile upgrade path to pay my dues with the DSLR while saving some money, and to upgrade to the MFT when my time comes.

Will report back with findings.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

OK, I have on my wall, printed in metal by Bay Photo the following:
1-A Kestral landing taken by a D-7200/150-600c Sigma and redone with modern processing prior to printing.
2-A Cardinal and Green Jay taken with a D-500/500pf
3-A Great Egret landing taken by an OM-1/100-400
5-A Kiskadee and two juvenile Redwing Blackbirds taken by an OM-1/300f4.

In my estimation the sharpest shot was the Kiskadee taken by the OM-1/300f4 slightly better than the two D-500/500pf shots. Both were taken under very similar conditions, sitting on a perch at Laguna Seca Ranch.

The Kestral, taken by the D-7200/150-600C Sigma and the Great Egret, taken by the OM-1/100-400 were essentially the same and almost as good as the D-500/500pf and OM-1/300f4 but the conditions were considerably different. The Great Egret (OM-1/100-400) and the Kestral (D-7200/150-600c Sigma) were at a considerably greater distance than the Cardinal, Green Jay, Blackbirds and Kiskadee taken at Laguna Seca Ranch.

I had to get close to make this determination. From normal viewing distance they all looked the same. The prints are 11x14 except the two Blackbirds, 16x20.

So I conclude that IQ is not the determining criteria between choosing between an OM-1/100-400 and a D-500/150-600C Sigma.

Tom

 

[MarkG]

Can I expect this level of IQ from a OM-1 + 100-400?

1. Example
2. Example
3. Example
4. Example

The photos are from a D500 + Sigma 150-600 C (by a different user). I love the detail/sharpness/low-noise/vibrance.

I'm basically new here, and I've reached a point where I'm going in circles with research. I'm close to pulling the trigger on the MFT kit, however I don't have any reference when it comes to the real-world IQ tradeoffs be between it and an ASP-C / FF setup. I've read I can expect noisier photos from ~6k ISO, but I lack the experience to know if it bothers me.

Instead, it seems easiest to just use those photos as a reference for what speaks to me. I love the IQ, and they're similar to my style: portrait (close-up) shots of stationary birds.

I'm not as interested in BIF or birds-in-landscape. I'll mainly be shooting hand-held on day hikes. I'm drawn to the Olympus kit for portability followed by the modern tech. It would be the best of both worlds if it could produce those kinds of shots. However if that's questionable, I'd feel drawn to the D500 setup and just toughing things with the added weight.

I've seen photos from the Olympus kit that I love. For example, here's (screenshots) that originally drew me to the OM-1. I love the sharpness and vibrance. Worth noting is they're using the 40-150 instead of the 100-400 which was surprising given how tight they are. On the flipside, I've also seen some that were nowhere near as polished as the ones above, and the authors seemed to be proud of them

Budget is ~$2,500. I've found a used version of the OM-1 + 100-400 kit for ~$2,600. Plenty of the D500 kits to be found. A local shop has both available to rent for a week (sans the 100-400 - they only have the 40-150).

I have a1/200-600 and OM-1/100-400 and can comment on the question of IQ. If you can view this Google Photos link, this is a slightly cropped photo taken with OM-1/100-400 at 400mm. https://photos.app.goo.gl/Q4CPrDb6BVE8bfE3A. I think the sensor on OM-1 is pretty good, and according to DxO pretty close to a6400/6600 APS-C sensor, which is great despite its age. It's probably close to D500's sensor. The 100-400 is quite sharp. The OM-1 body is beautifully made, controls are for the most part excellent and the body/lens combo handles really well overall. I shoot up to ISO 6400 without any issues, with Topaz. With a1 up to 12800.

 

[Ben C]

I used to shoot a D500 with a Tamron 150-600 and now have an OM-1 with a 100-400. In my view there are so many variables that affect the image quality of any particular photo (lighting, exposure, focus, subject motion, etc) that you will never be able to look at a photo and say "that would have been better with my D500". Rather, what's important is which camera allows you to maximize your ability to get a high quality image. In my view, the OM-1 is the clear winner in that department. As a mirrorless, being able to see exposure in real time in your viewfinder helps ensure proper exposure far more often than a DSLR. The focus tracking abilities help ensure sharp focus where you want it on the eye far more reliably than a D500. And so on. I liked the ergonomics and hand feel of the D500 better, but the size, weight and overall portability of the OM-1 system is vastly better - especially when compared with a big lens like the 150-600. Give it a try first if you can, but I think once you get used to it you will really appreciate the advantages the OM-1 system offers.

I also have a Z8 and Z9 and I do prefer those overall to my OM-1 due to the larger sensor and ergonomics, but the difference is not vast and when I travel for anything other than a dedicated photo trip, those get left home. I can fit my entire OM-1 kit with four lenses and flash in a small camera cube inside a backpack. Can beat that.

 

[Calson]

The Olympus E-m1 Mark III retails for only $1300 new and provides all the performance of the OM-1 camera except for the subject detection aspect which is not quite as good. My wife has shot alongside me with her MFT cameras and lenses and unless the ISO needs to be above ISO 6400 the images from these cameras are on par with those from my full frame cameras.

She saved 50% on the cost of her kit and has half the weight to carry in the field as with my full frame Nikon kit. She never has to leave lenses at home to keep the weight down of her backpack.

 

[Icarus]

The Olympus E-m1 Mark III retails for only $1300 new and provides all the performance of the OM-1 camera except for the subject detection aspect which is not quite as good. My wife has shot alongside me with her MFT cameras and lenses and unless the ISO needs to be above ISO 6400 the images from these cameras are on par with those from my full frame cameras.

She saved 50% on the cost of her kit and has half the weight to carry in the field as with my full frame Nikon kit. She never has to leave lenses at home to keep the weight down of her backpack.

Does the #-m1 Mark III have a stacked sensor??

 

[Ever]

The OM-1 + 100-400 arrived! Was able to do some shooting this weekend.

As a beginner, what are some basic, must-set settings when it comes to trying to see how I like it? For example, I just got home and noticed the camera defaulted to JPG instead of RAW.

I've seen a few OM-1-specific guides online, but they seem to be for certain kinds of shooting (eg BIF). I'm mainly looking for some quick wins when it comes to shooting perched birds/wildlife in general conditions.

Will be comparing to the D500 + 150-600 later this week.

Thanks for any guidance.

As a side note, here's a quick unedited album of some of early snaps. I like the IQ of the first three. The rest at times feel a bit soft / purple fringe'y (if that's still a thing). I wonder if it's due to higher ISO on those? If so, what's a quick way to make up for that? These were shot mid-day in what seems like pretty good light.

 

[Mitesh]

The OM-1 + 100-400 arrived! Was able to do some shooting this weekend.

As a beginner, what are some basic, must-set settings when it comes to trying to see how I like it? For example, I just got home and noticed the camera defaulted to JPG instead of RAW.

I've seen a few OM-1-specific guides online, but they seem to be for certain kinds of shooting (eg BIF). I'm mainly looking for some quick wins when it comes to shooting perched birds/wildlife in general conditions.

Will be comparing to the D500 + 150-600 later this week.

Thanks for any guidance.

As a side note, here's a quick unedited album of some of early snaps. I like the IQ of the first three. The rest at times feel a bit soft / purple fringe'y (if that's still a thing). I wonder if it's due to higher ISO on those? If so, what's a quick way to make up for that? These were shot mid-day in what seems like pretty good light.

For the initial setup, I suggest just making sure you are comfortable with how you've mapped the key features you are likely to use most: AF modes, subject detection, and drive modes. The OM-1 is a pretty easy to use camera, even with all the technology it makes available. Other features that you may not use as often are usually easy to find in the SCP (Super Control Panel). I found that for typical shooting, I almost never needed to use even the SCP, let alone go menu diving.

My comments on your sample images are not meant as a critique of your output; I am only commenting on the technical aspects that you asked about. From the EXIF I saw, your ISOs were very high (10,000 and higher). That's going to be a challenge for m4/3. Not to say that you can't or that the resulting images won't be good – I've posted quite a few in this thread. You can address high ISO issues at time of image capture and also in post processing with judicious use of noise reduction software.

At time of capture, expose to the right of the histogram as much as possible (use highlight/shadow alert and learn the practical threshold of how much you can recover in PP), ensure your capture technique is good (accurate focus, stable platform, appropriate Av/Tv), and minimize cropping as much as possible. A number of the sample images may appear soft due to missed focus on the eye, which I am sure you noticed and will be able to correct as you learn the AF system + subject detection. For best results, the light should ideally be more direct onto the subject. You have a mix of sun and shadow, with the subjects mostly in shadow. Not only is that a difficult scene to capture properly due to the variance in exposure values for the light and dark areas, but lower light levels affect AF speed and accuracy as well as the rendering of fine detail like animal fur or feathers.

Hope that gets you pointed in the right direction. Keep at it. The OM-1 is a powerful camera packed with more features than most of us will ever make use of.

 

[Ever]

Thanks Mitesh.

One quick follow-up question is regarding the high ISO observed in those photos. Is there a setting which adds a ceiling for max ISO? Or is that something that's mainly achieved through hands-on techniques (like the ones you mentioned)?

(I tried to send this as a PM, but it said I need more posts to access that).

 

[Palmor]

Thanks Mitesh.

One quick follow-up question is regarding the high ISO observed in those photos. Is there a setting which adds a ceiling for max ISO? Or is that something that's mainly achieved through hands-on techniques (like the ones you mentioned)?

(I tried to send this as a PM, but it said I need more posts to access that).

Yes you can.. I don't have my camera in front of me so a quick google showed this: https://www.e-group.uk.net/forum/fo...-1/898578-om-1-setting-iso-range-for-auto-iso

 

[Calson]

Does the #-m1 Mark III have a stacked sensor??

The IQ is roughly the same it is the increase in shooting rate, video rates, and subject detection that the OM-1 performs better. The stacking is to increase the rate at which data can be moved off the sensor and processed. For stills and most wildlife photography the E-M1 Mark III performs as well as the OM-Quite a few comparisons of the two cameras on the Web covering still and video shooting with them.

Shooting video and birds in flight is where the OM-1 provides gains for the shooter.

A great deal of the time my wife is using the 300mm along with teleconverters. The in-camera optical stabilization is a little bit better than I find with the Z9 camera. The Olympus 300mm is the size and weight of a full frame 70-200mm f/2.8 zoom lens. I was amazed when I put this lens on the camera and shot a lizard at a distance of 6 feet at 1/10s that was razor sharp with zero motion blur.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

I understand the point Calson is making about the E-m1 Mark III being about equal for taking still shots to the OM-1 but I would spend the additional $700-$1000 for an OM-1 if at all possible.

Calson correctly points out that the OM-1 shines taking BIF shots due to better AF, more f/s and subject ID.

I think, however, that stationary bird shots are enhanced by the OM-1 Subject ID that focuses on the eye automatically. True, using SP with the E-m1 Mark III can do the same thing but the OM-1 makes taking stationary shots at long range much easier.

Tom

 

[Ever]

The OM-1 + 100-400 arrived! Was able to do some shooting this weekend.

As a beginner, what are some basic, must-set settings when it comes to trying to see how I like it? For example, I just got home and noticed the camera defaulted to JPG instead of RAW.

I've seen a few OM-1-specific guides online, but they seem to be for certain kinds of shooting (eg BIF). I'm mainly looking for some quick wins when it comes to shooting perched birds/wildlife in general conditions.

Will be comparing to the D500 + 150-600 later this week.

Thanks for any guidance.

As a side note, here's a quick unedited album of some of early snaps. I like the IQ of the first three. The rest at times feel a bit soft / purple fringe'y (if that's still a thing). I wonder if it's due to higher ISO on those? If so, what's a quick way to make up for that? These were shot mid-day in what seems like pretty good light.

Hey friends. Thought I'd circle back with an update.

Those photos were basically my first time shooting wildlife with something other than a smart phone. They were using default settings, and I was just kind of point-and-shooting.

I just finished my next attempt after watching some tutorials about the camera, as well as some technique (ETTR, Manual+Auto-ISO, etc). I ran things through Lightroom afterwards for basic corrections and de-noise, and it was neat seeing how much that helps.

Overall I'm pleased with the results. Especially since they were snapped pretty quickly. It gives me a better idea of what to expect, and I'm excited to switch over to this D500 to see if I can start understanding the tradeoffs. I think I'll miss the live screen/histogram, eye-tracking, etc. We'll see.

Album with additional photos. Samples below. Open to feedback (Note: I'm new to photo-posting etiquette. Think I'm supposed to mention that they're all pretty large crops. Not sure why some have EXIF and some don't, they're all from the same export).

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.

 

[kirkil]

Hey friends. Thought I'd circle back with an update.

Those photos were basically my first time shooting wildlife with something other than a smart phone. They were using default settings, and I was just kind of point-and-shooting.

I just finished my next attempt after watching some tutorials about the camera, as well as some technique (ETTR, Manual+Auto-ISO, etc). I ran things through Lightroom afterwards for basic corrections and de-noise, and it was neat seeing how much that helps.

Overall I'm pleased with the results. Especially since they were snapped pretty quickly. It gives me a better idea of what to expect, and I'm excited to switch over to this D500 to see if I can start understanding the tradeoffs. I think I'll miss the live screen/histogram, eye-tracking, etc. We'll see.

Album with additional photos. Samples below. Open to feedback (Note: I'm new to photo-posting etiquette. Think I'm supposed to mention that they're all pretty large crops. Not sure why some have EXIF and some don't, they're all from the same export).

View attachment 67115

View attachment 67116

View attachment 67117

View attachment 67118

View attachment 67119

Hello Ever and folks,
I'm new with Olympus, could you help me recommending any tutorial or book for configuring the camera? I've seen than Spen Helland, Rob Trek, Phil Norton, ... have something but I don´t know which to buy, maybe, there is something free.

I'd like to buy Steve Perry book or video but he hasn't anything about Olympus, right?

Regards,

 

[Tom Reynolds]

Hello Ever and folks,
I'm new with Olympus, could you help me recommending any tutorial or book for configuring the camera? I've seen than Spen Helland, Rob Trek, Phil Norton, ... have something but I don´t know which to buy, maybe, there is something free.

I'd like to buy Steve Perry book or video but he hasn't anything about Olympus, right?

Regards,

I have a setup manual that I wrote. Pm with your email if you want it.

 

[Chris Weller]

I was really tempted to purchase an OM-1 with the OLY 100-400 using their new promotion for $400 off plus trade-in of old gear....but...I realized that the Oly zoom lenses zoom the opposite way of my Nikon and Sony zoom lenses. It may sound crazy, but I think it's a deal breaker for me and that system. I have the OM-5 and OM-10, but I've only really used prime lenses. I've used Panasonic Zooms (they turn the same way as Nikon and Sony), but Ultimately I'd really want the Oly 100-400 or the 150-400 for their compatibility with Oly body and the Price of the 100-400.

I just don't want to mess up my muscle memory.