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).
Thanks Karl
I have held an OM1 Olympus and honestly saw no difference in size or weight over the Sony body which sorta puzzled me. The lenses are definitely lighter on that system. I feel your pain with having an impediment because some days are extremely difficult for me with using my camera. Cold days are the worst and always have to wear heated gloves when it gets below 50 or so. My Cotton Carrier vest has been a lifesaver for trekking in the field.Thanks. I had the A1/A9 at one point with the 200-600 but again have switched so much I forgot which is which
Left Sony to try and find an overall lighter option that was FF.
Thanks for the kind words.
That system has tempted me many times, especially the zoom with the built in TC. Unfortunately, I haven't been around enough people that have used them long term to get much feedback. Their macro lens is top notch and probably the best on the market currently.
Thanks for the kind words.
The 150-400 is definitely a sweet lens. As long as you can get pixels on the subject, m43 holds its own. If you have to crop, that’s where things get dicey.
I keep eyeing the OM system and the 150-400mm lens in particular, but then I think, that defeats the purpose of switching to the OM system to get a "light" lens? Almost 5 pounds with the lens hood? Wish that OM systems came out with a 400mm f/4.5 prime that was 2 to 3 pounds.
Maybe not. In FF it would be only an f9 lens and thus could be very light or at least comparable. The Olympus 150-400 f4.5 (300-800 f9 equiv) is 1.860kg, the Canon 200-800 f6.3-9 is 2.050kg and very similar dimensions.Ricardo,
I guess if you think of it as a 300-800 with TC and imagine what a monster it would be in FF, it is a light lens
But I do agree with what you’re saying.
George
My back, knees and arms don't care how sweet a lens is. Just how heavy it is. One of the reasons I much prefer my 400mm f/4.5 over the much sweeter 800mm PF (which is only half a pound heavier than the 150-400mm).Ricardo,
I guess if you think of it as a 300-800 with TC and imagine what a monster it would be in FF, it is a light lens
But I do agree with what you’re saying.
George
I was right where you were a couple months ago, with the Z9/Z6II and 400.
Balance doesn't help when the weight is in a backpack on my back or knees. Besides all of Nikon's new lenses (ie. the 400mm f/4.5, 600mm PF and 800mm PF) iw well balanced. But someday may give the OM system a try, but personally would prefer to try when a lighter "great" lens is available.
At 83 I'm nowhere near as steady as I used to be and I use Olympus gear for the lighter weight and IS. As soon as the IBIS kicks on in my cameras the image in the viewfinder stabilizes. If the image in the viewfinder isn't stable the final image won't be sharp at low shutter speeds. Of course it really helps if the camera's IBIS and the lens's OIS synchronize, only a few Olympus lenses will do that although the camera's IBIS alone is often sufficient.
I was going to suggest those two cameras also. I have both. With arthritis in my hands I am not as steady as I used to be, but both cameras are great for steadiness. They are very different cameras, so the choice would be a matter of taste. Is weight a consideration also? These cameras are pretty light, especially the Z6iii. The 28-400 lens is feather weight, though not quite as good as more expensive lenses. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1818948-REG/nikon_nikkor_z_28_400mm_f_4_8.html Good luck!
Cotton Carrier vest carrying system has an arm attachment that serves to hold the camera, somewhat like a tripod on your body. I phoned them to inquire and what they told me was that they have a good return policy if you don’t like it. They told me that some people don’t like it because the vertical component may feel to some people like it is digging into your stomach. I personally have not used it, but have contemplated it. Here’s a link for specific information. if you try it, please let us know what you think about it. Thank you. https://www.cottoncarrier.com/colle...products/steadyshot-camera-harness-with-mount
The cotton carrier vest is without a doubt the best photography gear purchase I’ve ever made. I use mine 5-6 days a week 2-4 hours at a time even with a 600 f4 lens and two bodies on it at the same time with no issues. I’ve hiked 5-6 miles numerous times with no issues. I use the teather straps on the vest to attach to my camera/lens in case of a drop. 10/10 for me in every regard
I always use IS #1 "All Direction Shake" in the camera. The only lens I have that has OIS that doesn't sync with the camera's IBIS is the Olympus 100-400, with that I get the best photos with the lens's OIS off, but others do it other ways -- we don't all see alike and individual cameras and lenses seem to have their idiosyncrasies. Seldom do I use a tripod, when I do the IBIS is still on -- is that the absolute best way for my Olympus cameras ????
The 200-800 doesn't have the same dimensions when it's zoomed out to 800mm. And from what I've read the IQ doesn't appear to match the 150-400.Maybe not. In FF it would be only an f9 lens and thus could be very light or at least comparable. The Olympus 150-400 f4.5 (300-800 f9 equiv) is 1.860kg, the Canon 200-800 f6.3-9 is 2.050kg and very similar dimensions.
I believe the a9III has improved IS. Assuming the a1ii is the a9iii with a 50mb sensor I could see switching back to Sony from the OM-1 & 150-400.
The Sony bodies with stabilized sensors (all recent models if I'm not mistaken) synchronize with the lens optical stabilization.
For several Nikon bodies (I do not know about other brands) electronic VR adds extra stabilisation by slightly cropping the image and moving the image within the crop to add a second level of stabilisation.
