Nikon Newbie looking for advice - OM-1 + 150-400 Pro zoom - system swap to Z9 or A1

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).

W

wildlife_62

Member
Member's gallery
Hi Steve and members
I currently have the OM-1 with 150-400 Pro zoom and I am seriously looking at moving to Nikon Z9. I'm loving the reviews and all the chatter on here about the Z9 and A1, but its quite a move and I am looking for comparisons between the systems. I shoot wildlife only, birds and mammals and I am not concerned about camera weight despite using the OM-1.

So advice about making the system change would be great and I thought this would be the best place to come

Thanks
Nigel
 
Member's gallery
Welcome to the forum, Nigel. I think you'll find theses friendly, helpful and very informational...I know I have over the past six to eight weeks since I joined.

I've made a jump between systems once before - from Canon to Nikon - and considered making a second one recently (but only briefly) when I was considering making the move to mirrorless (I ended up staying with Nikon). For what it's worth:

  • What do you hope to gain by switching? What limitations does your current system impose? Is it the sensor size? Is it the lenses available? Is it the desire for a better AF system? I ask because if you trade in your current equipment, you're going to take a loss financially, so you want to have solid reasons for making the leap. If you can, you may even want to consider hanging on to your current system as a backup initially.
  • While I invested in the Z9, you can't go wrong with either system, really. Both are going to be able to deliver excellent results once you get your head wrapped around the changes in setup, menus, etc. to suit your style of shooting. You many want to consider either renting a Z9 and/or an A1 for a weekend just to get the feel of each camera; better yet, if you belong to a local camera club or have a friend that shoots one of the bodies, ask if they would consider going out on a shoot with you to let you get a feel for the body and answer questions on how to use it.
  • Which ecosystem - Nikon or Sony - has the lenses you want to invest in? The lenses I already owned in an F-mount, and could use with the FTZ-II, made my choice easier - I could retain some of the investment I've already made in Nikon. If you're switching systems, what lenses are offered in each camp that fit your shooting needs/styles? How readily available are those lenses?
  • This thread may also be of help to you: https://bcgforums.com/index.php?threads/a1-z9-does-anyone-shoot-both.20523/#post-231077 - it's a discussion about the systems from photographers that have used both. It's an interesting read.
Again, welcome to the forum and good luck with your choice...you really can't go wrong either way.
 
Member's gallery
Welcome Nigel!
I am curious why the change? Also, you mentioned two solid bodies as options but what about lenses? Steve will tell you he over all likes the a1 better mostly driven by its customization. Now that the Z9 has newer firmware it is close to the A1 but still not all the way there.

To me when making a switch to one brand to another it comes down to a few things. Lenses, body design and overall customization that you may need. For long glass Nikon has some great choices and some are more affordable than others by Sony. For big primes Nikon has included teleconverters like your Olympus which is great but comes at a rather large price with no used market. Sony big primes have been around just long enough you can begin finding some nice used copies at a little savings.

If looking for the smaller more affordable zooms I would say it is a tie. Nikon doesn't have their 200-600 out yet but I suspect it this year and would think it would be just as great as their other glass that has recently come out.

Now there is the speed of the camera shooting in RAW. Currently Sony is winning the FPS when shooting RAW. I would say Nikon is winning by having faster lower cost CFE cards. Nikon is a larger camera but cheaper than the a1. I would suspect we will see an a1MKII this year which would incorporate new tech similar to what we have seen in their recent offerings. I would think Nikon is a couple years from a MKII Z9 but for years now a rumored Z8 is coming but with no details as to what it will be.

Sony wins by having smaller bodies, lighter lenses and smaller lenses which is nice especially for travel. The ability to remove a grip if wanted. Nikon has focus stacking, the a1 currently does not.

We could go further into what one has and what one doesn't have but at the end of the day I think it starts to come down to lenses and how you want to be able to customize the camera. Those two things in my opinion would lead you one way over the other.
 
Member's gallery
wildlife_62 said:
Hi Steve and members
I currently have the OM-1 with 150-400 Pro zoom and I am seriously looking at moving to Nikon Z9. I'm loving the reviews and all the chatter on here about the Z9 and A1, but its quite a move and I am looking for comparisons between the systems. I shoot wildlife only, birds and mammals and I am not concerned about camera weight despite using the OM-1.

So advice about making the system change would be great and I thought this would be the best place to come

Thanks
Nigel
Click to expand...
Too bad you live on "the other side of the pond". I would be interested in swapping my Z9 plus lenses for your OM-1 plus 150-400mm for a week or two since I occasionally contemplate switching to that. Seriously, what about the OM System makes you consider switching?
 
Member's gallery
wildlife_62 said:
...I am looking for comparisons between the systems. I shoot wildlife only, birds and mammals and I am not concerned about camera weight despite using the OM-1...
Click to expand...
I shoot both Z9 and A1. First off as others have said above you would be well advised to study the two systems and make a decision based on that not only on the camera body. Second, the difference in the two bodies is way more than weight. Due to the difference in size and design/placement of the controls the two camera have a completely different feel. It's a big deal for some people and not for others. I was already used to shooting a large Nikon body and placement/style of Nikon controls. But I also still had multiple bodies including a small DX body. I added the A1/200-600mm about eight months ago. For me the transition wasn't a big deal. When I first got it I thought is was WAY superior to the Z9 in AF performance and customization options. With the firmware upgrades that's no longer the case. There are still differences but now it's more a matter of preferences than functional capability. I've been shooting BIF with both of them on alternating days for the past 10 days and IMO the AF systems are on par. Different, but on par.

One caveat to my comments about controls/customization. I am NOT a "super user" who uses multiple shooting banks based on subject matter etc. I use the camera and figure out which function I want on which buttons and use that configuration regardless of what I'm shooting. If you are a super user and that's important to you I highly recommend downloading the manuals for both cameras as well as watching some videos.

The good news is that either camera and either system is excellent. Unbelievably so. You can't really make a bad decision. Choosing between the two is not a bad problem to have.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I also shoot both A1 & Z9
I bought A1 six months after it’s release & Z9 after FW 2
A1 evolved after A9 & A9 ii
Nikon could not get its act together with Z6 & Z7 series & struggled to get Z9 after number of FW updates ( it seemed to have released Z8 under market pressure )
I am sure Nikons Z8 ( or what ever it is called) would be a well rounded camera on its release & would be worth waiting for
Nikon has certainly better lenses than Sony for wild life though it’s delivery schedule is nothing to write about. How ever it has still not releases a much wanted 200 600 mm which is really a bummer. Z9 s video is outstanding
Sony has a nasty habit of crippling its cameras for reasons best known to it ( A1s video is below par with A7 Iv & its FPS in A7 Iv & A7 Rv are no good for wild life )
By end 2023 we would have much better information about the way forward
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
wildlife_62 said:
So advice about making the system change would be great and I thought this would be the best place to come
Click to expand...
One thing to consider is the jump from a crop factor 2.0 camera to a full frame camera will require a lot more lens than you're used to. IOW, if you rely on the 400mm end of your zoom a lot then you'll want an 800mm lens in a full frame camera to work similar sized subjects from similar distances at least if you want to fill similar areas of the frame with your subjects.

That's easily supported by Nikon's 800mm PF lens but it's definitely something I'd take into consideration.
 
Member's gallery
I would look at lenses and base it on that. Sony has the worst lens selection for wildlife. You can either spend 2k and only shoot in bright light which is not what you want, or 12k. I recently switched to the a1 knowing this, and I'm kinda hoping they release something in between while I'm saving for the 400 2.8 so I don't have to shell out that much. Nikon on the other hand has a lot of great 5.6 and faster glass. The z9 does however weigh twice as much as the a1, and if you ended up getting a big prime, that 1.5 pounds might be the tipping point between handheld and tripod required 100% of the time.
 
Member's gallery
As it stands today, the overall performance between the two camera bodies is very comparable with each slightly bettering the other in different areas. There are a few things I appreciate with the Z9, such as its video capabilities, better ibis, cfe B cards, cheaper. A few things I like about the A1 better are smaller size, ability to use SD cards, and a bit more customizable. I don’t think I’d base a decision off bodies alone but rather the complete system. Look at the available lenses today and decide which one would best fit your needs. Also consider the body ergonomics. Some people prefer the Sony others the Nikon. If you can’t find an A1 or Z9 to hold, try the A7iv or Z7ii as they are are pretty similar. For me, the Nikon feels better than any camera I’ve used. It might be the opposite for you. I also have the need for small lenses as I do some traveling that really limits what I bring and Nikon has an advantage there with some great choices.
 
Member's gallery
We are getting close to what we called "catalog ware" back in the day when I was exclusively and underwater photographer. The difference between the A1 and Z9 is small and primarily dependent if you want a top-of-the-line zoom which Sony has and Nikon does not-yet.

As zooms go, the OM 150-400 is a good as it gets so I would decline to trade in your rig for a Sony. Nikon, OTOH, has an 800pf which would make a sweet setup for what you are doing assuming that you accept the prime limitations.

With either the A1 or Z9, you would have a significantly larger image size and a lower equivalent F-stop with the FF sensor but AF with the OM-1 is comparable to the Sony A1 or Nikon Z-9
 
Member's gallery
Some good advice here. I would say start by looking at the lenses. As others have said Sony is lacking for choice in this department while Nikon now has many wildlife lenses to choose from depending on your budget. I have the Z800mm and can honestly say it's the best lens for wildlife I have ever used. The new Z600mm with the built in TC looks to be an awesome lens if it's in your price range.
 
Member's gallery
DaveR said:
Some good advice here. I would say start by looking at the lenses. As others have said Sony is lacking for choice in this department while Nikon now has many wildlife lenses to choose from depending on your budget. I have the Z800mm and can honestly say it's the best lens for wildlife I have ever used. The new Z600mm with the built in TC looks to be an awesome lens if it's in your price range.
Click to expand...
Agree with you and @coachjohn57 ... Considering how well the high end camera of each system performs generaly, the lens options are far larger a factor in a system than its respective cameras. The camera tech iterates faster than the lenses; particularly the telephotos if it's wildlife photography. Firmware updates can also improve the current features in a camera.
I see the priority factors in choosing your camera(s) are image quality (how large you plan to print vs online), cropping flexibility, lowlight etc
Autofocus
Haptics including Customization
Weather Sealing

Thus I'm delighted with results using a Z9 and D6 in a mixed lens system, but this has taken years of experience and more importantly saving to get together this gear, with upgrades as the technology evolves. And I plan to rely on adapted lenses together with Z Nikkors designed to leverage on the optical advantages of the Z-mount architecture.

The primary mount systems continue to build out their range of Mirrorless optics. We can expect this rate to slow down in a year or two probably.
However, in April 2022 Nikon stated to its Investors their plan to extend the Z9 Advanced features into new cameras as well as have 50+ new lenses in total released. Announcement of these new cameras is overdue.
We can expect these Nikon MILCs to cost less and weigh less than the Z9. Their availability should also free up more affordable Used Z9's :D
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Thanks so much all. I'm overwhelmed by your detailed responses. Lens selection seems key to me, which I will look at more closely. The info on the internet seems very sketchy after reading the above advice. Always good to ask the right people (?with nothing to gain)
I'm leaning towards the Z9 with the 500 f5.6 PF as a starting point with the addition of a 1.4 converter. Are there any OM-1 shooters in the forum that may have advice?
Keep sending your thoughts, it's helping me to focus

Thanks all
 
Member's gallery
wildlife_62 said:
Thanks so much all. I'm overwhelmed by your detailed responses. Lens selection seems key to me, which I will look at more closely. The info on the internet seems very sketchy after reading the above advice. Always good to ask the right people (?with nothing to gain)
I'm leaning towards the Z9 with the 500 f5.6 PF as a starting point with the addition of a 1.4 converter. Are there any OM-1 shooters in the forum that may have advice?
Keep sending your thoughts, it's helping me to focus

Thanks all
Click to expand...
If you decide to go the Z9 + 500mm, I would recommend looking at the used market for the lens as the used prices have really dropped on them now that people are moving to Z mount from F mount. It works just as well with the FTZ adapter as it did on DSLR and even better with the 1.4x TC. My only complaint is having to use the FTZ adapter adds a couple inches of length to the lens. It is quite minor, but as size of the 500mm PF is one of the key selling points, it’s worth noting. While shorter focal length, you might also want to check out the 400mm 4.5S lens which is native Z mount. It seems very comparable to the 500mm PF in many ways.
 
Member's gallery
abc123brian said:
....My only complaint is having to use the FTZ adapter adds a couple inches of length to the lens. It is quite minor, but as size of the 500mm PF is one of the key selling points..
Click to expand...
I see this mentioned quite often in forum discussions. While it's true that adding the FTZ makes the lens seem longer the overall length of camera/lens combo is not any longer than the same lens mounted on a DSLR. The FTZ simply replicates the distance between the flange and the sensor which is shorter on a Z body. So no net difference in overall length comparing DSLR+lens versus Z+FTZ+lens.
 
Member's gallery
wildlife_62 said:
Thanks so much all. I'm overwhelmed by your detailed responses. Lens selection seems key to me, which I will look at more closely. The info on the internet seems very sketchy after reading the above advice. Always good to ask the right people (?with nothing to gain)
I'm leaning towards the Z9 with the 500 f5.6 PF as a starting point with the addition of a 1.4 converter. Are there any OM-1 shooters in the forum that may have advice?
Keep sending your thoughts, it's helping me to focus

Thanks all
Click to expand...

I have an OM-1/300F4 and Sony A1 600F4 (and 200-600). I used to have a D500/Z6 and 500PF as well. I have never owned the 150-400 but all reports say it's on par with the 300F4 for pure IQ. I'm mentioning that because straight IQ is not different enough between any of these lenses to switch systems over.

I would not trade the OM-1/150-400 for the Z9/500PF+TC. When it all boils down you aren't gaining anything by switching over (very equivalent at the end of the day, minus zoom vs prime) . If you were thinking of a more exotic lens (800PF, 400 2.8 or 600F4) I would agree it would make sense.
 
Member's gallery
NorthernFocus said:
I see this mentioned quite often in forum discussions. While it's true that adding the FTZ makes the lens seem longer the overall length of camera/lens combo is not any longer than the same lens mounted on a DSLR. The FTZ simply replicates the distance between the flange and the sensor which is shorter on a Z body. So no net difference in overall length comparing DSLR+lens versus Z+FTZ+lens.
Click to expand...
That’s true, and why I say it’s minor, but with a DSLR the bulk is built into the body where as in mirrorless the length is extending from the lens. Every time I mount the 500mm to my Z camera, I wish I didn’t have to use the adapter as it feels like it could be more compact. The larger the lens, the less it‘s an issue. I would not want to use the adapter with a 50mm 1.8 or even 24-70mm but with the long telephotos it really isn’t a big deal.
 
Member's gallery
DavidT said:
Welcome Nigel!
I am curious why the change? Also, you mentioned two solid bodies as options but what about lenses? Steve will tell you he over all likes the a1 better mostly driven by its customization. Now that the Z9 has newer firmware it is close to the A1 but still not all the way there.

To me when making a switch to one brand to another it comes down to a few things. Lenses, body design and overall customization that you may need. For long glass Nikon has some great choices and some are more affordable than others by Sony. For big primes Nikon has included teleconverters like your Olympus which is great but comes at a rather large price with no used market. Sony big primes have been around just long enough you can begin finding some nice used copies at a little savings.

If looking for the smaller more affordable zooms I would say it is a tie. Nikon doesn't have their 200-600 out yet but I suspect it this year and would think it would be just as great as their other glass that has recently come out.

Now there is the speed of the camera shooting in RAW. Currently Sony is winning the FPS when shooting RAW. I would say Nikon is winning by having faster lower cost CFE cards. Nikon is a larger camera but cheaper than the a1. I would suspect we will see an a1MKII this year which would incorporate new tech similar to what we have seen in their recent offerings. I would think Nikon is a couple years from a MKII Z9 but for years now a rumored Z8 is coming but with no details as to what it will be.

Sony wins by having smaller bodies, lighter lenses and smaller lenses which is nice especially for travel. The ability to remove a grip if wanted. Nikon has focus stacking, the a1 currently does not.

We could go further into what one has and what one doesn't have but at the end of the day I think it starts to come down to lenses and how you want to be able to customize the camera. Those two things in my opinion would lead you one way over the other.
Click to expand...
Hi David
Thanks for your thoughts. You asked why I was thinking of changing systems. I shoot a lot of fox and badger and some woodland birds, woodpeckers etc all of which hang out in low light quite a bit of the time. The OM-1+ 150-400 combo is great but it does struggle with some of the light situations I find my self in. The foxes and badgers are very wary so reach is important (the OM-1 2x's crop factor equivalent helps with that) and therefore I would like the option of greater pixel numbers so I can crop.Image quality is important to me I do like a detailed image. I have uploaded some of my fox images taken with the OM-1 combo.
I shot with a Nikon D850 and 400 f2.8 some time ago which I had to sell, so I know how good Nikon can be
P6270170.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
wildlife_62 said:
Hi David
Thanks for your thoughts. You asked why I was thinking of changing systems. I shoot a lot of fox and badger and some woodland birds, woodpeckers etc all of which hang out in low light quite a bit of the time. The OM-1+ 150-400 combo is great but it does struggle with some of the light situations I find my self in. The foxes and badgers are very wary so reach is important (the OM-1 2x's crop factor equivalent helps with that) and therefore I would like the option of greater pixel numbers so I can crop.Image quality is important to me I do like a detailed image. I have uploaded some of my fox images taken with the OM-1 combo.
I shot with a Nikon D850 and 400 f2.8 some time ago which I had to sell, so I know how good Nikon can be
Click to expand...

I don’t want to turn this into an equivalence discussion but it may be important based on what you said. The OM-1+150/400 F4.5 will have very similar IQ (in terms of noise performance) to a Z9 + 500PF + 1.4xTC. Maybe 1/3 stop advantage to the Z9 combo (probably not enough to notice). Of course you will have more pixels with the Z9 combo so you can crop, but cropping does come at the cost of more visible noise. At the same time you can use the built in TC on the Oly and again you’ll be fairly close. The Z9 and bare 500PF will get you about 1 1/3 stop advantage.

If the 500PF and 1.4x combo is the typical focal length you’ll need than the 800PF or 600F4+1.4x TC may make more sense to gain noticeable improvements in noise IQ.
 
Member's gallery
Palmor said:
I don’t want to turn this into an equivalence discussion but it may be important based on what you said. The OM-1+150/400 F4.5 will have very similar IQ (in terms of noise performance) to a Z9 + 500PF + 1.4xTC. Maybe 1/3 stop advantage to the Z9 combo (probably not enough to notice). Of course you will have more pixels with the Z9 combo so you can crop, but cropping does come at the cost of more visible noise. At the same time you can use the built in TC on the Oly and again you’ll be fairly close. The Z9 and bare 500PF will get you about 1 1/3 stop advantage.

If the 500PF and 1.4x combo is the typical focal length you’ll need than the 800PF or 600F4+1.4x TC may make more sense to gain noticeable improvements in noise IQ.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I guess things do come down to comparison and equivalence sometimes. You guys shoot with the cameras and lenses i'm interested in, so I feel that I am asking the experts not a youtube video, and I really appreciate all the input. It looks like longer lenses will be necessary and considering which manufacturer offers the best for my photography.
 
Member's gallery
I am currently an OM-1 shooter. Previously I shot Nikon for 20 years with my last rig being a D-500/500pf and 300pf.

The OM/100-400 F4.5 with the built in TC has more reach than anything without a TC in either the Nikon or Sony line. I think that to do what you want you would need the new Nikon F4 with the built in TC. That is an expensive and heavy solution but if you are ok with the weight and money then it will allow significantly more cropping.

I don't think the 500PF can do what you want. Maybe an 800pf + a TC can.

Tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top