Lightweight combination for bird/nature photography

[Lee R]

The top one is actually the iPhone!

To be fair to the ILC cameras like the Zf, the iPhone will lose if you break out the tripod in low light. There’s just that sweet spot as you illustrated in very low light where night mode can outperform it handheld, and only for slow subjects with the 3 seconds it takes for it to complete. But it beats a high iso single shot from either my Zf or my Z8. II have the iPhone 14 Pro Max.

The lidar autofocus is also very impressive in the dark.

For bright conditions the full frames capture more detail but the iPhone holds up really well even for large prints when using ProRaw. But it’s limited by the fixed lenses, action, wildlife and a bunch of other things. But I’m glad we have them as an option because you always have a good camera with you.

And the biggest most severe downside of the iPhone is not the image quality at all but the interface and shooting experience which is boring for me personally.

 

[AlanB313]

One "quick fix" would be to substitute the 300mm PF f/4 lens for your Sigma 100-400mm. This would shave a pound off your current set up and allow you to shoot at f/4. It is a great lens and has short minimum focussing distance. Switching to a Nikon Z6 miii would lose pixels on your subject. It is possible that Nikon will bring out the D500 in a mirrorless version but, as a former D500 shooter, don't think there is a Nikon mirrorless equivalent.
Switching the the Canon R5ii as suggested by David is a nice way to go, though more expensive and would require learning the Canon controls.

I shoot with a d500 and a 300mm f4 pf and have a tc14III that brings it to 420mm at f5.6. A little short for birds but still very nice. It could be a lot lighter than the Sigma, I don't know. It would use the body you have and be cheaper. But the z6iii will have better performance.

I did get a 500mm pf as well. It's pretty light.

 

[ricardo00]

I shoot with a d500 and a 300mm f4 pf and have a tc14III that brings it to 420mm at f5.6. A little short for birds but still very nice. It could be a lot lighter than the Sigma, I don't know. It would use the body you have and be cheaper. But the z6iii will have better performance.

I did get a 500mm pf as well. It's pretty light.

The advantage of the D500 plus 300mm f/4 (plus or minus a TC) over the Z6ii is the greater number of pixels you have on the subject. Personally, the Z8 is not that much heavier than the Z6iii (about 5 ounces more) so went for that to have the greater pixel density. Yep it is a slippery slope, trying to get the best photos. More cost, more weight etc. I was happy getting the 300mm PF and then the 500mm PF to replace my 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 and using them on the D500. Had hoped that my first mirrorless camera would be lighter but the Z8 still is for me the best wildlife mirrorless Nikon and happy with it. The 300mm PF and 500mm PF both work great on it, with or without a TC.

 

[geoawelch]

OM is the wrong choice for high ISO shots. You'll be "advised" that the noise can be cleaned up, but in fact You'll end up with "plasticy" photos once you run it through denoise.

Your best bet is a lightweight FF sensor like the Z6iii in the Nikon ecosystem.

Or not…ISO 25,600 on the OM-1/150-400

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

 

[AlanB313]

The advantage of the D500 plus 300mm f/4 (plus or minus a TC) over the Z6ii is the greater number of pixels you have on the subject. Personally, the Z8 is not that much heavier than the Z6iii (about 5 ounces more) so went for that to have the greater pixel density. Yep it is a slippery slope, trying to get the best photos. More cost, more weight etc. I was happy getting the 300mm PF and then the 500mm PF to replace my 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 and using them on the D500. Had hoped that my first mirrorless camera would be lighter but the Z8 still is for me the best wildlife mirrorless Nikon and happy with it. The 300mm PF and 500mm PF both work great on it, with or without a TC.

You've taken the steps I most likely will take as well. I'm looking at a z8, but will consider a z6iii. But not for a while, other family expenses come first. I'm glad to hear you are liking the 300mm PF and 500mm pf with the z8.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

I do not think that a 24mp FF camera is really in the running compared to the OM-1 mk2 or the Canon R7. In my view it is the 45mp Z-8 that is the runaway winner in FF for bird photography. The main advantage is the ability to crop 45mp more dramatically than the 20mp OM-1 or the 32mp R7. I don't think high ISO is much of an issue these days.

I think that the first question is "what is the weight you can enjoy"? I remember back in DSLR days Steve saying that the 500pf was his "most enjoyable lens" even as he showed videos of him marching down the trail with a 600f4 and camera attached to a tripod slung over his shoulder.

I can say from experience that even a small bit of weight can make a big difference.

So, if a Z-8/600pf is something can enjoy ten that is #1 in my book. Interestingly, in my view that tops an OM-1 mk 2 with a 150-400 lens as the Nikon rig is marginally lighter and no more expensive. You do get more reach with the Om-1/150-400 but in my view, the crop ability of the 45mp image makes the Z-8/600pf the winner in the 5-6 pound class.

In the sub 4 pound class is the OM-1 mk 2 with a 100-400 OM Systems zoom. The rig has enough reach that you will not need to crop as much as a FF Z-6iii-600pf and is both lighter and cheaper.

In the sub 3 pound class is the Canon R-7/rf 100-400. The 1.6 crop factor gets the effective the FF effective reach to 640mm and the 32mp sensor allows more cropping that the 20mp OM-1 or 24mp Z-6iii