Which should I buy z6ii, canon R7 or OM systems OM-1?

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).

B

Blue tit photo

Well-known member
Member's gallery
Two years ago I got my canon 500d from my mother. A few months later I bought Sigma 150-600mm C lens. Then after a year, I purchased an Olympus em1 mark ii and Olympus 100-400mm non PRO lens. Now I have noticed that my current kit often trails behind in focusing, and functions quite poorly in the dark, and the image quality wasn't the best. So the OM-1 came out and I thought wow I have to buy it. Then I thought: let's wait. Suddenly Canon announces R7, which seemed good on paper, but I am not sure about IQ. Recently I thought about the Nikon Z6ii(z9 is out of budget and so are Canon R3, R5 and R6 in a very tight pinch) and the mount is not an issue since sigma can convert it to any other. I know that autofocus is not the best, to say the least, but the image quality should probably counter that. I am also torn if I should just buy the Olympus 300 f4 lens and be happy. Please help me decide.
 
Member's gallery
Blue tit photo said:
Two years ago I got my canon 500d from my mother. A few months later I bought Sigma 150-600mm C lens. Then after a year, I purchased an Olympus em1 mark ii and Olympus 100-400mm non PRO lens. Now I have noticed that my current kit often trails behind in focusing, and functions quite poorly in the dark, and the image quality wasn't the best. So the OM-1 came out and I thought wow I have to buy it. Then I thought: let's wait. Suddenly Canon announces R7, which seemed good on paper, but I am not sure about IQ. Recently I thought about the Nikon Z6ii(z9 is out of budget and so are Canon R3, R5 and R6 in a very tight pinch) and the mount is not an issue since sigma can convert it to any other. I know that autofocus is not the best, to say the least, but the image quality should probably counter that. I am also torn if I should just buy the Olympus 300 f4 lens and be happy. Please help me decide.
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on what you shoot. All the brands have capable af systems in some of their cameras but the what you shoot is more around sensor size. Your image quality is something I think needs more explanation as they are all capable of delivering a quality image.

Alex Pham has the R7 and he is not impressed with the af for BIF. He is getting about a 50% hit rate. He either owns it all or has shot it all and the R7 test was with his Canon 600F4.

If you asked Alex which you should, you can find him on many FB groups and is very active and will gladly respond to you. I’d bet money given the list above he would tell you OMD. That is also my suggestion. You can add or upgrade glass but the new OM-1 is pretty stellar and a great price.
 
Member's gallery
Blue tit photo said:
Two years ago I got my canon 500d from my mother. A few months later I bought Sigma 150-600mm C lens. Then after a year, I purchased an Olympus em1 mark ii and Olympus 100-400mm non PRO lens. Now I have noticed that my current kit often trails behind in focusing, and functions quite poorly in the dark, and the image quality wasn't the best. So the OM-1 came out and I thought wow I have to buy it. Then I thought: let's wait. Suddenly Canon announces R7, which seemed good on paper, but I am not sure about IQ. Recently I thought about the Nikon Z6ii(z9 is out of budget and so are Canon R3, R5 and R6 in a very tight pinch) and the mount is not an issue since sigma can convert it to any other. I know that autofocus is not the best, to say the least, but the image quality should probably counter that. I am also torn if I should just buy the Olympus 300 f4 lens and be happy. Please help me decide.
Click to expand...
E96E038F-AA41-450A-93C9-D042E12B5524.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
DavidT said:
View attachment 41719
Click to expand...


There are many very positive first impressions videos of the R7 autofocus so I'm not sure why you single this particular negative 'expert' out. DPreview and Jan Wegener for example. No one has reviewed the R7 fully yet because they are just now trickling out. Supposedly it inherits the auto focus of the top of the line R3, but at $1500 not the buffer or write speed.

I guess I'd wait for the full reviews on the better known review sites before prejudging.
 
Last edited:
Blue tit photo said:
Two years ago I got my canon 500d from my mother. A few months later I bought Sigma 150-600mm C lens. Then after a year, I purchased an Olympus em1 mark ii and Olympus 100-400mm non PRO lens. Now I have noticed that my current kit often trails behind in focusing, and functions quite poorly in the dark, and the image quality wasn't the best. So the OM-1 came out and I thought wow I have to buy it. Then I thought: let's wait. Suddenly Canon announces R7, which seemed good on paper, but I am not sure about IQ. Recently I thought about the Nikon Z6ii(z9 is out of budget and so are Canon R3, R5 and R6 in a very tight pinch) and the mount is not an issue since sigma can convert it to any other. I know that autofocus is not the best, to say the least, but the image quality should probably counter that. I am also torn if I should just buy the Olympus 300 f4 lens and be happy. Please help me decide.
Click to expand...

Recent rumors about a z6 version iii coming soon, so might be worth a look to see if some of the z9 AF tech trickles down.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
There are many very positive first impressions videos of the R7 autofocus so I'm not sure why you single this particular negative 'expert' out. DPreview and Jan Wegener for example. No one has reviewed the R7 fully yet because they are just now trickling out. Supposedly it inherits the auto focus of the top of the line R3, but at $1500 not the buffer or write speed.
Click to expand...
Because Alex is an actual wildlife photographer with pro glass. He shoots OMD, Sony, Canon and Nikon. He owns the best from all these makers. He shoots wildlife with a big focus on BIF and shoots almost everyday. He has more experience than any of these reviewers who have a day at best with a camera and none of them actually have the good glass let alone the experience. Alex is an outstanding photographer who isn’t afraid to try new things and be brutally honest about his findings. Who do you know who shoots all 4 brands daily and is a wildlife photographer?
 
Member's gallery
Blue tit photo said:
If you can could you post Alex's opinion about OM-! here as well since I do not use any social media except Youtube.
Click to expand...
Way to many post to do that over years. Check out the Fred Miranda forum he is an active poster over there and you can read real life use and opinions from him and others.
 
Member's gallery
I may be wrong, but the only one you mention that has stacked sensor is the OM-1. That is what gives you the speed for BIF. A friend has it and loves it and she gets very good BIF. So if that's what you're after, your choice is pretty simple. If not, seems to me it's a toss-up.
 
DavidT said:
Because Alex is an actual wildlife photographer with pro glass. He shoots OMD, Sony, Canon and Nikon. He owns the best from all these makers. He shoots wildlife with a big focus on BIF and shoots almost everyday. He has more experience than any of these reviewers who have a day at best with a camera and none of them actually have the good glass let alone the experience. Alex is an outstanding photographer who isn’t afraid to try new things and be brutally honest about his findings. Who do you know who shoots all 4 brands daily and is a wildlife photographer?
Click to expand...

Your endorsement made me go looking for his review of the R7 but I couldn't find it. Can you a link to his hands on review other than that little snippet?

I know many of the better known reviewers were allowed to use preproduction cameras for one shoot, but so far I haven't seen any of the better known reviewers that i follow with a detailed review of a production model. So maybe it is too soon to judge it.

I signed up for one at my local camera shop, but still have not been told the camera is in, and B and H is only preordering so far.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Nigel Danson’s first impression of the Z9 went something to the affect of, “it takes good action photos of his dog Pebbles.” It was heavy and didn’t have a place in his kit.

So, Nikon provided him with a Z9 and 100-400 lens for his Antarctic trip. He found it to be a great combination for the environment he was operating in. But, he still hasn’t put out his own money to buy one.

Sometimes the best ‘reviews’ aren’t reviews at all. But, you have to look a bit deeper to find them.
 
Member's gallery
The real question is what is important to you?

I am comparing the R7/100-500 and OM-1/100-400 to my Nikon D-500/500pf. I am posting results here. I received the OM-1 yesterday and will receive the R7 today. I am upgrading my D-500 because I want the flexibility of a zoom and want a sub-5# rig. The D-500/500pf takes great shots.

Most reviews of the OM-1 are either with a 300f/4 or the $7,500 150-400 lens. The lens that I chose is 1.5+# lighter and $6000 less but can only AF @ 25 f/s. Still, that's excellent IMO. I found the OM-1 quite small in my hands but seemed to have instant AF, faster than the D-500 in preliminary single point, single shot mode.

Preliminary data indicates that the R7 works well with the 15f/s with the 100-500 but the electronic shutter has rolling shutter issues. I would NOT write the R7 off just yet because 15f/s and a 32.5mp sensor is a nice combination paired with the first rate 100-500 Canon zoom.

Neither of these combinations will satisfy the FF 600 F/4 crowd but both seem ideal for those wanting a lightweight rig and 800 equivalent MM in reach.
 
Member's gallery
IQ in m43 really hasn’t change that much since your Mk ii so while you’ll get way more in focus shots with the OM1 the actual IQ is be roughly the same. As you are thinking about, you need to go with the 300 f4 Pro to improve IQ.

So you have to kind of prioritize what you need… better AF with more in focus shots (at least for moving targets) or better IQ with the 300 Pro.
 
Member's gallery
Palmor said:
IQ in m43 really hasn’t change that much since your Mk ii so while you’ll get way more in focus shots with the OM1 the actual IQ is be roughly the same. As you are thinking about, you need to go with the 300 f4 Pro to improve IQ.

So you have to kind of prioritize what you need… better AF with more in focus shots (at least for moving targets) or better IQ with the 300 Pro.
Click to expand...
Yep, I agree.
 
Member's gallery
DavidT said:
I guess it depends on what you shoot. All the brands have capable af systems in some of their cameras but the what you shoot is more around sensor size. Your image quality is something I think needs more explanation as they are all capable of delivering a quality image.

Alex Pham has the R7 and he is not impressed with the af for BIF. He is getting about a 50% hit rate. He either owns it all or has shot it all and the R7 test was with his Canon 600F4.

If you asked Alex which you should, you can find him on many FB groups and is very active and will gladly respond to you. I’d bet money given the list above he would tell you OMD. That is also my suggestion. You can add or upgrade glass but the new OM-1 is pretty stellar and a great price.
Click to expand...
I have done a search on FB for Alex and not finding him. Would like to ask him about the R7 as I have it on my list as a possible camera to buy but am also leaning toward the OM1-Mark II. Thanks.
 
Member's gallery
fishrman said:
I have done a search on FB for Alex and not finding him. Would like to ask him about the R7 as I have it on my list as a possible camera to buy but am also leaning toward the OM1-Mark II. Thanks.
Click to expand...
www.facebook.com

Alex Phan

Alex Phan is on Facebook. Join Facebook to connect with Alex Phan and others you may know. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected.
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
 
Member's gallery
My current preferred rig is an OM-1 mark II and a 300f4, possibly with a TC. In my view the IQ without a TC is slightly superior to my D-500/500pf and with a 2.0 TC about equal. I find that the OM-1 Mark 1 and the 100-400 is slightly inferior to the D-500/500pf. FYI I am observing 11 x 14 prints on metal done by Bay Photo to make these comparisons, not pixel peeping on a computer.

I would like a zoom and eventually will invest in a 150-400 lens which most report to have equivalent IQ to the 300f4.

While I initially investigated the R7/100-500 if I was making a decision today, I would consider the Nikon Z-8/600pf but not a Z-8/180-600 and not the Canon R7.


Regards,

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