It is and MUCH lighter and CHEAPER
Nikon Newbie looking for advice - OM-1 + 150-400 Pro zoom - system swap to Z9 or A1
- Thread starter wildlife_62
- 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).
Roy
Well-known member
The Sony A1 with 200-600 zoom is probably the best capability to versatility BIF combo but I'm not attracted to variable aperture lenses.
The Nikon Z9 is more of a handful to use both in weight and complexity but I do like those Nikon lenses.
Unless you shoot tiny birds or long distance I'd also consider the Z9 with 400mm f4.5 or 400mm f2.8 TC ...
ricardo00
Well-known member
And easier to get!
Roy
Well-known member
Z9 stocks are finally everywhere but the A1 has had a lot more time to reach the shops...
ricardo00
Well-known member
Here’s an updated list from my prev post in this thread that now includes the Z8, R5, and R3. Please let me know if I messed it up. I used camera weights that include card + batteries.
REACH, WEIGHT, PRICE
800mm reach equivalents
OM-1 + 300 f4 + 1.4x = 4.9 lbs | $5550
= 840 f5.6
Following are compared to above, from lightest to heaviest with 800mm as the minimum focal length
Z8 + 400 f4.5 + TC2.0 = 5.3 lbs | $7600
= 800 f9, +0.4lbs, +$2050
OM-1 + 150-400mm TC1.25 = 5.4 lbs | $9700
= 800 f4.5 / TC1000mm f5.6, +0.5lbs, +$4150
A1 + 200-600 f5.6-6.3 + 1.4x = 6.6 lbs | $8950
= 840 f9, +1.7lbs, +$3400
Z8 + 800 f6.3 = 7.2 lbs | $10,500
= 800 f6.3, +2.3lbs, +$4950
R5 + 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 + TC2.0 = 7.6 lbs | $6700
= 1000 f14, +2.7lbs, +$1150
Z9 + 800 f6.3 = 8.1 lbs | $12,000
= 800 f6.3, +3.2lbs, +$6450
R3 + 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 + TC2.0 = 8.2 lbs | $8800
= 1000 f14, +3.3lbs, +$3250
A1 + 600 f4 + 1.4x = 8.6 lbs | $20,050
= 840 f5.6, +3.7lbs, +$14,550
R5 + 600 f4 + TC1.4 = 8.9 lbs | $16,900
= 840 f5.6, +4.0lbs, +$11,350
Z8 + 600 f4 TC1.4 = 9.2 lbs | $19,500
= 840 f5.6, +4.3lbs, +$13,950
R3 + 600 f4 + TC1.4 = 9.5 lbs | $19,000
= 840 f5.6, +4.6lbs, +$13,450
Z9 + 600 f4 TC1.4 = 10.1 lbs | $21,000
= 840 f5.6, +5.2lbs, +$15,450
Edit: attached a little chart I found somewhere (can’t remember) that helps me visually compare f-stops. I get confused with stuff like “How many stops are between f6.3 and f9?”
REACH, WEIGHT, PRICE
800mm reach equivalents
OM-1 + 300 f4 + 1.4x = 4.9 lbs | $5550
= 840 f5.6
Following are compared to above, from lightest to heaviest with 800mm as the minimum focal length
Z8 + 400 f4.5 + TC2.0 = 5.3 lbs | $7600
= 800 f9, +0.4lbs, +$2050
OM-1 + 150-400mm TC1.25 = 5.4 lbs | $9700
= 800 f4.5 / TC1000mm f5.6, +0.5lbs, +$4150
A1 + 200-600 f5.6-6.3 + 1.4x = 6.6 lbs | $8950
= 840 f9, +1.7lbs, +$3400
Z8 + 800 f6.3 = 7.2 lbs | $10,500
= 800 f6.3, +2.3lbs, +$4950
R5 + 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 + TC2.0 = 7.6 lbs | $6700
= 1000 f14, +2.7lbs, +$1150
Z9 + 800 f6.3 = 8.1 lbs | $12,000
= 800 f6.3, +3.2lbs, +$6450
R3 + 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 + TC2.0 = 8.2 lbs | $8800
= 1000 f14, +3.3lbs, +$3250
A1 + 600 f4 + 1.4x = 8.6 lbs | $20,050
= 840 f5.6, +3.7lbs, +$14,550
R5 + 600 f4 + TC1.4 = 8.9 lbs | $16,900
= 840 f5.6, +4.0lbs, +$11,350
Z8 + 600 f4 TC1.4 = 9.2 lbs | $19,500
= 840 f5.6, +4.3lbs, +$13,950
R3 + 600 f4 + TC1.4 = 9.5 lbs | $19,000
= 840 f5.6, +4.6lbs, +$13,450
Z9 + 600 f4 TC1.4 = 10.1 lbs | $21,000
= 840 f5.6, +5.2lbs, +$15,450
Edit: attached a little chart I found somewhere (can’t remember) that helps me visually compare f-stops. I get confused with stuff like “How many stops are between f6.3 and f9?”
Last edited:
Added a little f-stop cheat sheet to the above post, cheers.
ricardo00
Well-known member
It would be interesting to see/hear a comparison of f-stop equivalents for micro 4/3 versus full frame sensors? And effect on noise/low light photography?
jmurthy
Well-known member
I shoot with Om-1 and 300 pro f/4 in conjunction with Z9 500 pf , 800pf , and nikkor z 100-400
A little bit of hx: i was primarily a microfour thirds shooter; got the d500/ d850 and 500pf for wildlife BIF photography. Ever since,
I stayed with nikon mainly due to the pf lenses which has given me some fantastic lightweight options with excellent without sacrificing quality to a large degree.
I was still shooting MFT em1 m2 for everything else. I didnt make the jump to any other mirrorless system for the promise of improved AF cause i love the pf lenses; ultimately moved to Z9.
I then got the OM-1 because the 300 pro is a fantastic lens and the CAF on OM-1 is leaps and bounds better than em-1 . I was still waiting for 150 -400 which you have, a killer combo especially when paired with OM-1.
I use OM-1 with my Z9 and i do need a third body for 3 camera/ lens combo on the field all interchangeable for different focal lenths/ stills and video without futzing with lens changes etc.
I lost faith that i will at some point get olympus 150-400 f/4.5 and have pre ordered Z8 as my third body/ lens combo.
My 2c is that- go with the system that offers you a killer lens selection and stick to it. you already have a top class combo.
The only thing I worry about is the viability of OM systems and i pray that i am being unnecessarily paranoid in this regard.
Whatever you choose, marry the optics. Cameras will come and go.
Best,
Jay
ricardo00
Well-known member
Interesting comment on the 150-400mm. Could you clarify how long ago you ordered? Many of the photos people post are using this lens and, if I had decided to switch, would be my "dream" lens.
I’m not wading into the the noise/low light arena (Steve made a video about it, I’ve forgotten the points), but as far as f-stops: I could be wrong, but when people talk about that subject they usually neglect to mention they are talking about depth of field and not the amount of light that your meter reads.
As far as I understand, if a scene meters f4.5 in FF, the same framing of the scene in m43 will also meter f4.5 but will have greater apparent DOF.
arbitrage
Well-known member
Basically M43 is 2x over FF. The FOV of lenses are 2x their marked focal length compared to the FOV on FF for the same marked focal length. So 300/4 lens is FOV of 600mm lens on FF.
But the DOF/aperture has to also be 2x. So that 300/4 lens on M43 looks like a 600 f/8 lens on FF...not a 600/4. As far as DOF goes.
It is true that the exposure will still follow the aperture on the lens. So the 300/4 at f/4 will give you the same ISO and SS as you'd get with the 600/4 on FF.
BUT, the M43 is gathering less light onto the actual sensor (because the sensor is small) so ISO performance is 2 stops worse, give or take.
jmurthy
Well-known member
7 months ago
Woody Meristem
Well-known member
Save yourself a load of cash, buy an Olympus 100-400mm, get it now and get images that are almost indistinguishable from those taken by the 150-400mm. You won't have a built in TC but otherwise there's not a hell of a lot of difference.
jmurthy
Well-known member
I did consider the 100-400; but i have the 300 prime on om-1 and with a 100-400 or 500pf on nikon z9; I am now very happy with telephoto choices i have. i mentioned that because i worry about the viability OMD . But I think they will be fine given the supply chain issues etc
abc123brian
Well-known member
Considering some of the options here have quite poor apertures for shooting wildlife and others are quite expensive, have you considered adding a Z8 + 400mm F/4.5 S + 2x TC to the list? It seems most are of the opinion that using the lens with the 1.4x TC and cropping provides similar results as the 2x, but it seems like a reasonable way to get to 800mm in Nikon the lightest possible way. I think it might even be reasonable to consider Canon‘s 800mm F/11 with the R5 for a cheap alternative over the 100-500mm with 2x TC.
ricardo00
Well-known member
Thanks for the info! Funny one doesn't hear people mention this when touting the OM system. Guess that is why people buy this lens used.
ricardo00
Well-known member
Would love to see a comparison of the OM-1 and 300mm f/4 shot in low light (ISO 12,000 or above) versus a full frame camera (Sony A1 for example) plus the 600mm f/4 without any noise correction software applied. Is there a review with such examples?
I did some back-to-back but only at ~ISO3200 here: https://bcgforums.com/index.php?thr...-birds-and-wildlife.13925/page-13#post-229339
Edit: for some reason the link brings you up a few posts from mine.. if it does just look for the snowy owl photos on that page.
Generaly you are going to have ~2 stop worse ISO performance between the two, so if you shoot FF now shoot 2 stops higher ISO and that will give you a sense for what you’ll get.
ricardo00
Well-known member
Thanks I did see those comparisons (even commented on your post). Unfortunately our owls don't become active till later so was looking for some lower light comparisons (ie. higher ISO).
arbitrage
Well-known member
You could get some idea by using the DPR test scene comparison tool. Load in your cameras of choice at ISO of choice and see how the shadows and noise compare. But as Palmor mentions, if you currently shoot FF and currently use say 6400ISO then set the FF to 25,600 and that would give you some idea of what the M43 would look like at 6400ISO. Of course if you are shooting static subjects at dusk you may be able to lower the ISO on the M43 due to better image stabilization for a given shutter speed. That may help level the playing field if the subject is relatively static and you are handholding.
Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
www.dpreview.com
So I was basically deciding between the A1 and the OM-1 because for health reasons I need a very light kit (at least for some time). Here are some links that helped me decide.
Everybody’s biased in some way or another, but here you get to see some anti-Fro-knows-photos sort of dudes and their thoughts.
My head was spinning around with the whole noise thing and Mike Lane put my mind at ease about that, for my purposes anyway (first vid). De-noising software, I hear, also helps quite a bit. Not saying it will eliminate the noise differential! Keep in mind I am no expert and have barely shot an OM-1, so all of my info comes from these two gents, above.
What really is the deciding factor, in my view, is DOF. That can be a biggie, sometimes, but also can be mitigated in many cases. I think it’s the top issue I had to decide on.
If I made my living shooting sports, then FF is would be with a 400mm 2.8. But I’m shooting perched birds and BIF for kicks, so I’ll see how it goes.
Btw Mike Lane’s acronym FRPS stands for Fellow of the Royal Photographic Society. That was a head scratcher.
Last edited:
I forgot to mention that I was concerned at the many blurry and crummy OM-1 pics that I saw scattered over the web from various posters. But then I’d see some stunning pics from the same camera. I chalk it up to processing skill, mainly. Perhaps I’m wrong and they are futzes with the camera as well.
I’m sure for ultimate quality, FF at 45+mp is the way to go. Certainly for large prints or for lots of cropping. But FF stuff is heavier annd more expensive. Everything is a trade off.
Anyway, hope some of this helps.
I’m sure for ultimate quality, FF at 45+mp is the way to go. Certainly for large prints or for lots of cropping. But FF stuff is heavier annd more expensive. Everything is a trade off.
Anyway, hope some of this helps.
ChrisM
Well-known member
My take on it, and yes, I was at a crossroads between OM1+150-400 and A1+600GM some 5 months ago, is that the Olympus combo excells at closer to short medium distance, and the A1+600GM excells at short medium to longer distance.
The Olympus lens has phenomenal clarity, but due to the 2x crop factor, is f9 wide open at 400mm (800mm), and f11 at 500mm (1000mmm) when speaking in full frame terms. The A1+600GM+1.4TC is f5.6 at 840mm, that is a big difference.
From what I have seen in the wide variety of images posted from the Olympus combo, is that the clarity helps for songbirds at smaller distances, but does not really contribute to getting attractive images at larger distances, as it tends to enhance the business of surroundings and backgrounds, which is already fairly prominent due to the high minimal f-stop at 500mm (with 1.4TC engaged). This is all relative to the Sony combo (that I now own), which does much better in this regard, but of course is in a completely different size, weight and cost league.
I chose the Sony combo because of the very high allround usability, I shoot a lot of wading birds at medium to longer distance during migration. I intend to add the Olympus combo at some point in future for travel though, since that 150-400mm lens has a very beautiful and particular look for subjects not too far off, and especially for songbirds fairly close, and it is built to a very high standard. And the OM-1 is a steal compared to the A1.
The Olympus lens has phenomenal clarity, but due to the 2x crop factor, is f9 wide open at 400mm (800mm), and f11 at 500mm (1000mmm) when speaking in full frame terms. The A1+600GM+1.4TC is f5.6 at 840mm, that is a big difference.
From what I have seen in the wide variety of images posted from the Olympus combo, is that the clarity helps for songbirds at smaller distances, but does not really contribute to getting attractive images at larger distances, as it tends to enhance the business of surroundings and backgrounds, which is already fairly prominent due to the high minimal f-stop at 500mm (with 1.4TC engaged). This is all relative to the Sony combo (that I now own), which does much better in this regard, but of course is in a completely different size, weight and cost league.
I chose the Sony combo because of the very high allround usability, I shoot a lot of wading birds at medium to longer distance during migration. I intend to add the Olympus combo at some point in future for travel though, since that 150-400mm lens has a very beautiful and particular look for subjects not too far off, and especially for songbirds fairly close, and it is built to a very high standard. And the OM-1 is a steal compared to the A1.
This man is braver than I. He’s Petr Bambousek, the guy from my last link in the post above at https://www.sulasula.com/en/om-1-in-ecuador-part-2/
I see he has some OM-1 tutorials hmmmm. Gonna check them out.
I see he has some OM-1 tutorials hmmmm. Gonna check them out.