Ugly Hedgehog - Photography
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon girl
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
May 29, 2024 12:49:42   #
markwilliam1
 
ckescher wrote:
Hi. I have only used Nikon cameras . I had been planning to purchase a Nikon z8. I read an interesting article on the new Olympus camera. I think it does everything I would want it to. I do some bird photography and other animals when available but I have been doing more landscape photos. I believe this camera is also capable of low light photography. Maybe the Aurora or Milkyway. I know there would be a learning curve involved.
Any opinions offered are appreciated.


Since you’re considering a change to a new system may I recommend the Sony RX10M4 camera…the Best in the world! It would meet all your needs. I own this Beauty and it’s all I need now.

Reply
May 29, 2024 13:38:47   #
ckescher
 
Dennis, thanks for your reply. The weight is a significant factor. I recently went on a photography tour in Norway. We shot for2-4 hours in the morning,then again in the afternoon and then at night if the Northern lights were available. I found, both my hands,wrists and fingers were sore at the end of each day. I am in my mid 70s and still wish to join this group in Patagonia in 2025. Thinking of the weight of my camera and lens combinations. And Tripod!

Reply
May 29, 2024 13:41:29   #
stan0301 Loc: Colorado
 
not to mention lenses

Reply
 
 
May 29, 2024 14:49:14   #
SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA
 
markwilliam1 wrote:
Since you’re considering a change to a new system may I recommend the Sony RX10M4 camera…the Best in the world! It would meet all your needs. I own this Beauty and it’s all I need now.


I have an RX10MIV. It’s a fine camera but no comparison to either a FF Nikon or OM-1, both of which I shoot. It would be a terrible camera for Astrophotography.

Reply
May 29, 2024 15:19:22   #
SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA
 
ckescher wrote:
Hi. I have only used Nikon cameras . I had been planning to purchase a Nikon z8. I read an interesting article on the new Olympus camera. I think it does everything I would want it to. I do some bird photography and other animals when available but I have been doing more landscape photos. I believe this camera is also capable of low light photography. Maybe the Aurora or Milkyway. I know there would be a learning curve involved.
Any opinions offered are appreciated.


I can offer you more definitive advice than most here because I actually shoot both a Z9 and an OM-1. I love them both, but if I had to limit myself to one I think the OM-1 would have the edge. It’s become my travel camera when I fly because I can fit the camera and a good array of lenses into a bag small enough to be my carry on item, (sometimes with a longer lens in my carry on bag). I take it when I hike any distance and despite the small sensor the image quality is excellent. If the 20mp image isn’t enough for your landscape, (and usually it’s plenty), you can go to High Res mode for 50mp handheld or 80mp on a tripod. You can also do in camera focus stacking. I love to do night city shooting and long exposure and I often use features like Live ND, (which is even better on the MkII version, and Live Composite. There’s Starry Sky focus for your Astro work and for wildlife, Pro Capture, (Nikon has a version but only for JPEG). And if you do shoot JPEG, it produces the best JPEG’s out there. I don’t think you can go wrong with a Z8, but the OM-1 is a beast and the MkII even better. Several of the women in our club have switched from Nikon and Canon to Olympus and are very happy with them. I have a pretty full complement of lenses, the complete f/2.8 “trilogy”, (7-14,12-40, 40-150, all Pro, but their f/4 Pro lenses are also excellent and even smaller and lighter, (and cheaper), and the 12-100 f/4 Pro is what’s mounted most of the time. The 100-400 isn’t a Pro lens but still a great bird lens that gets you 200-800 equivalent to FF and easily shot handheld. I think you would be pleased with the switch.

Reply
May 29, 2024 17:06:58   #
wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
 
ckescher wrote:
Hi. I have only used Nikon cameras . I had been planning to purchase a Nikon z8. I read an interesting article on the new Olympus camera. I think it does everything I would want it to. I do some bird photography and other animals when available but I have been doing more landscape photos. I believe this camera is also capable of low light photography. Maybe the Aurora or Milkyway. I know there would be a learning curve involved.
Any opinions offered are appreciated.


The OM-1 mkII is quite capable for some aspects of astrophotography. And it is capable of 80mp images which could be very useful for some landscape photography. And the OM or Panasonic system for the same angle of view as a full frame system will be smaller, lighter, and less costly. The most 4/3rds savings are in size and weight of the lenses. But each format has it's own pros - and cons. Just make sure you understand what they are for each format and which pros and cons are important for your photography. There are some photographers that their needs are more simple and they can be met with an all-in-one like Sony RX-10iv. But then there are others of us that easily exceed those simple limits with our photography.

I am, like some of the others here, quite happy with my 4/3rds system. And like some of the others here, you may find keeping your Nikon along with a 4/3rds system will offer more shooting and travel opinions as far as equipment goes. There really will be no bad decisions in your case.

Reply
May 29, 2024 17:28:20   #
larryepage
 
wdross wrote:
The OM-1 mkII is quite capable for some aspects of astrophotography. And it is capable of 80mp images which could be very useful for some landscape photography. And the OM or Panasonic system for the same angle of view as a full frame system will be smaller, lighter, and less costly. The most 4/3rds savings are in size and weight of the lenses. But each format has it's own pros - and cons. Just make sure you understand what they are for each format and which pros and cons are important for your photography. There are some photographers that their needs are more simple and they can be met with an all-in-one like Sony RX-10iv. But then there are others of us that easily exceed those simple limits with our photography.

I am, like some of the others here, quite happy with my 4/3rds system. And like some of the others here, you may find keeping your Nikon along with a 4/3rds system will offer more shooting and travel opinions as far as equipment goes. There really will be no bad decisions in your case.
The OM-1 mkII is quite capable for some aspects of... (show quote)


Yes. A wide range of cameras can be readily coupled to a telescope. But for skyscapes, i routinely shoot at 14mm on a full frame camera. Doing the same thing on m4/3 would call for a 7 mm lens with low chromatic aberration and low coma. Low frame distortion can be managed, but life is a lot better without it. That's a pretty tall order in any format.

Reply
 
 
May 29, 2024 20:44:29   #
wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
 
larryepage wrote:
Yes. A wide range of cameras can be readily coupled to a telescope. But for skyscapes, i routinely shoot at 14mm on a full frame camera. Doing the same thing on m4/3 would call for a 7 mm lens with low chromatic aberration and low coma. Low frame distortion can be managed, but life is a lot better without it. That's a pretty tall order in any format.


Actually, the OM 7-14 f2.8 Pro lens meets those requirements. It is basically chromatic aberration free, very low coma, and rectilinear throughout the range. I had a choice between the pro lens and the Panasonic 7-14 f4 lens. The Panasonic was about 1/2 the size, 1/2 the weight, one stop slower, not nearly as rectilinear, and 1/2 the cost. I "bit the bullet", bought the 7-14 f2.8 Pro, and I can assure you it is one of the best buys I have ever done. It is one of the finest lenses I have ever owned, including Hasselblad lenses. If it was not so big, heavy, and costly for a 4/3rds lens, I think it would be more popular.

Reply
May 29, 2024 21:04:38   #
larryepage
 
wdross wrote:
Actually, the OM 7-14 f2.8 Pro lens meets those requirements. It is basically chromatic aberration free, very low coma, and rectilinear throughout the range. I had a choice between the pro lens and the Panasonic 7-14 f4 lens. The Panasonic was about 1/2 the size, 1/2 the weight, one stop slower, not nearly as rectilinear, and 1/2 the cost. I "bit the bullet", bought the 7-14 f2.8 Pro, and I can assure you it is one of the best buys I have ever done. It is one of the finest lenses I have ever owned, including Hasselblad lenses. If it was not so big, heavy, and costly for a 4/3rds lens, I think it would be more popular.
Actually, the OM 7-14 f2.8 Pro lens meets those re... (show quote)


That's good to hear. I didn't know that.

Reply
May 29, 2024 21:50:42   #
Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
My brother traded off all his Canon film equipment and went Olympus. Over the years he collected a bunch of OM lenses. He retired and treated himself to the OM flagship and their top line pro glass. He has never been happier and no regrets. The quality is excellent. He saved hundreds of bucks by selling his cheap glass and buying like new (used) glass from KEH.

Reply
May 29, 2024 22:03:47   #
SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA
 
wdross wrote:
Actually, the OM 7-14 f2.8 Pro lens meets those requirements. It is basically chromatic aberration free, very low coma, and rectilinear throughout the range. I had a choice between the pro lens and the Panasonic 7-14 f4 lens. The Panasonic was about 1/2 the size, 1/2 the weight, one stop slower, not nearly as rectilinear, and 1/2 the cost. I "bit the bullet", bought the 7-14 f2.8 Pro, and I can assure you it is one of the best buys I have ever done. It is one of the finest lenses I have ever owned, including Hasselblad lenses. If it was not so big, heavy, and costly for a 4/3rds lens, I think it would be more popular.
Actually, the OM 7-14 f2.8 Pro lens meets those re... (show quote)


I’ve had that lens for a couple of years and hadn’t really used it. When we had a chance at the Aurora recently I put it on my OM-1. Sadly the Aurora was a bust for me, but a couple of days later I was in Richmond and wanted to scout locations for a future night shoot. I grabbed the OM-1 and didn’t notice it was the 7-14 instead of the 12-100 f/4 Pro. Since I was just scouting I didn’t want to go back to the car so I ended up taking it. Well in my scouting I found good locations for my planned shoot but I also found a lot of stuff to shoot that day and got some fantastic stuff with that lens. I’ll definitely be using it more often

Reply
 
 
May 29, 2024 22:54:21   #
jcboy3
 
ricardo00 wrote:
This is a reasonable explanation of the OM system but your statement that other systems do not have Pro Capture is wrong. The Nikon Z8 has pre-capture which does the same thing. Look it up. I have used it many times so can attest to its usefulness. The Nikon Z8 shoots pre-capture as JPG but still works okay for most uses. I have seen many impressive photos with the OM system, so it is clearly a capable system.


The Nikon Z8/Z9 Pre-Capture is JPG only. Nikon does not do zebras in live view. These are two of many reasons that I did not buy either of those cameras. I have a Nikon Z6ii and Z7ii, but that live view limitation is a killer. If it weren't for the way Nikon handles auto ISO with flash (which I use to shoot weddings), I probably wouldn't have any Nikon gear. They ignored one of the primary benefits of mirrorless.

Reply
May 30, 2024 05:35:40   #
John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK
 
We had a demo at the club a while back from (new) Olympus and although we were in the hall and couldn't test them fully I was most impressed with the system. I did not get to see these on a 4k screen, just the LCD and the club's projector.

As mentioned previously the image stabilisation is 'near voodoo'. I can't remember the details but I do recall shooting a page from a broadsheet newspaper at a very slow handheld and being able to read to the corners.

Several people in our club have gone this way mainly because as they've got older they've found using a lighter, smaller system preferable.

If I were you I'd see if you can hire one for a week or two, maybe Olympus does a loan scheme.

Reply
May 30, 2024 07:43:11   #
joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois
 
ckescher wrote:
Hi. I have only used Nikon cameras . I had been planning to purchase a Nikon z8. I read an interesting article on the new Olympus camera. I think it does everything I would want it to. I do some bird photography and other animals when available but I have been doing more landscape photos. I believe this camera is also capable of low light photography. Maybe the Aurora or Milkyway. I know there would be a learning curve involved.
Any opinions offered are appreciated.


Why rely on opinions. Rent one and decide for yourself.

Reply
May 30, 2024 16:54:55   #
Artcameraman Loc: Springfield NH
 
ckescher wrote:
Hi. I have only used Nikon cameras . I had been planning to purchase a Nikon z8. I read an interesting article on the new Olympus camera. I think it does everything I would want it to. I do some bird photography and other animals when available but I have been doing more landscape photos. I believe this camera is also capable of low light photography. Maybe the Aurora or Milkyway. I know there would be a learning curve involved.
Any opinions offered are appreciated.


How much glass do you have? The FTZii will work with almost all, not really, Nikkor glass.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 4 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.