SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

He gave you bad info. I have had both a D7200 and a D500 and the OM-1 is superior in every way. Yes the new 150-600 lens is pricey and heavy, but with the crop factor it’s like shooting a 300-1200 lens. It did not replace the 100-400, (200-800 equivalent), which is a very nice lens and pretty inexpensive. It’s a great wildlife camera but so much more with features like Live ND and Live Comp.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

You have no clue what you’re talking about. ON Systems makes a 100-400mm lens that is very good. It’s only $1500, (currently on sale for $1300). I shoot both FF Nikon and M4/3 and yes my Z9 with the 180-600 is a great combo but I also get great stuff from my OM-1 with the 100-400, and yes the OIS in the lens works in conjunction with the IBIS in the body. Yes the smaller sensor of the same vintage can be subject to more noise, but the newer OM-1 sensor is better in low light than the older sensors in both of those Nikons.

jeffhacker Loc: Dallas, Texas

I’ve owned both. You’re very right. The OM is a great light-weight lens and great for a grab-n-go type lens. You can get by with two lenses - both ok for travel as well. But for some reason I always gravitated to my Nikon equipment (I currently have gone mirrorless with the Z series). I’m also still not sure what will happen with the 4/3 system as to any new developments, with Panasonic backing off and Olympus having sold their camera operations to the new OM entity. Given the choice, I think I’d go with either a DSLR, or if weight and size is a consideration, a Mirrorless.

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

Thanks to all of you who have given of their time to help me make the right decision. Great stuff guys !! I will check the post for other contributions over the next few days and thanks in anticipation to any future participants.

Peteso Loc: Blacks Hills

I would add a few comments about the Olympus offerings for wildlife, birds, and other potentially fast moving and unpredictable subjects. The Pro Capture feature is excellent and unique to Olympus. It’s like having a time travel machine so you can catch something that happened in the very recent past, which you may have otherwise missed. Also, the range of lenses to pick from is ubiquitous, including Panasonic lenses, which is also a micro for thirds system and compatible with Olympus. Having said that, there are trade-offs, particularly when comparing micro 4/3 to full frame. I use both the Olympus and a Sony A7Riv, which have their advantages and disadvantages, so give careful consideration to what type of shooting you are doing to assess the best choice.

Lagoonguy Loc: New Smyrna Beach, FL

I have the OM-1 & Olympus 300mm f4 with both 1.4 & 2.0 TC’s, original 100-400mm Panasonic, Panasonic G9 & G9 II and many Pano Leica and Oly Pro lenses. I also have a Nikon D500 & Nikon 500mm PF f5.6 lens. I came to M43 for a travel camera system and I am so glad I did. It is much lighter than my past D750’s and full frame gear and I would not want to carry that weight again at age 79. But I also like to photograph birds, wildlife and bugs and the I can’t decide if I like the DSLR Nikon or OM-1 kit better despite all the mirrorless advantages and great stabilization of the Oly. You would not be unhappy with the Oly kit but you might want to try a Nikon 500mm PF lens on your D500 before changing or getting a new system as it weighs about 85 ozs and balances very well vs 73 ozs & 77 with the TC 1.4 for the Oly kit and the image quality is hard to beat. You can get the 500 PF for $2000 at MPB. I didn’t go with the Z8 or 9 because I wanted less weight. You can spend a lot of money changing to M43 system but at my age, for what I do it was the correct choice, I just can’t let go of the 500 PF yet. Good luck!

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Panasonic backing off M4/3? Yes they’ve started making FF, but they’ve released upgrades to their flagship M4/3 cameras. Since acquiring the Olympus camera division OM Systems has released 3 new bodies and several lenses. And if buying a new camera in 2024 it makes no sense to buy a DSLR.

prcb1949 Loc: Ex Zimbabwe - Now UK

Thank you

ricardo00

Not anymore. OM was great in adding this feature first but Sony has it on their new a9 iii, called pre-capture. Nikon has a "cheating" version of pre-capture on the Z8 and Z9, it does only JPG.

jackpinoh Loc: Kettering, OH 45419

1. Putting a 600mm lens on a crop sensor camera vs a full frame camera changes the field of view. On an 20 megapixel OM camera, the 600mm lens has the same field of view as a 1200mm lens on on a full frame camera. If you crop the image of the Z8 frame camera with a 600mm lens the field of view of a 1200mm lens, you will have a 23 megapixel image.
2. The aperture equivalent? What does that mean? Aperture is a function of the lens, not the camera sensor. Both the OM 150-600mm lens and the Nikon 180-600mm lens have a 95mm filter ring--both lenses allow the same amount of light to enter. Since that light is focused over a smaller area on a crop sensor, each pixel in the crop sensor camera receives more light on each pixel in the full frame sensor receives.

I am not knocking full frame cameras. Any camera available today will capture beautiful images. I own a Sony A7R5 and a Sony A1 camera. I switched from Nikon to Sony before Nikon offered a mirrorless camera. My first OM System camera was the Olympus OM-D E-M1x. I now own two OM Systems OM-1 Mk2 cameras. I just sold my Sony 200-600mm lens. I own the OM Systems 150-400mm lens with the built-in 1.25x teleconverter. I don't plan to buy the 200-600mm OM lens. I will probably sell my Sony gear this year. The OM cameras and lenses are easier to use for both landscapes and birds in flight because of a wide variety of built-in computational features (hand held high resolution, Live Composite, Live ND, focus stacking, and and ProCapture) and superior image stabilization, dust reduction, and waterproofing.

I know I could crop images from a full frame camera. I've done that. I just find it more satisfying to fill the frame.

ricardo00

If you want to argue or quibble semantics, I am out. But a f/4 on a micro 4/3 sensor gives a DOF of an f/8 lens on a full frame sensor, I am sure you know this. So if you are trying to isolate a subject and have comparable bokeh, then you need to use a f/2.8 lens on the micro 4/3 sensor to make it comparable to the f/4 on a full frame sensor. And an f/4 on a full frame sensor collects 4 times as much light as on the micro 4/3 sensor. So yes the focal length and aperture are integral parts of the design of the lens, but the size of the sensor affects things (it drove me crazy when I went on a photo tour with several OM users they would call their 300mm lens a 600mm lens). So just as an f/4 is an f/4 no matter what camera you put it on, the 600mm is 600mm. If a 300mm f/4 OM lens on a micro 4/3 sensor was really the equivalent of a 600mm f/4 lens on a full frame sensor, all those Sony, Nikon and Canon photographers are wasting their money and struggling with the increased weight for no reason? And based on your arguments, why not just use a camera with a 1 inch sensor like the Sony RX10? That would save even more weight.
PS. I have seen lots of great photos taken with the OM system and some day I might even switch to it, so this is not meant to "trash" the system. I would love it if OM systems would bring out a light weight zoom lens which had the IS of the newer lenses as well potentially better aperture, say a 100-400mm f/4.5 without the built in TC with 7 stops of IS. And my wish would be that it would be under 4 pounds.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Your wish is close to being granted! Try the OM 150-400 f4.5 Pro IS 1.25X. The angle of view in 35mm terms is 300-800 and 375-1000 with the internal 1.25 teleconverter on. On the new OM1 mkII, it is a combined 8.5 stops of IS. Size is 4.6 dia. x 12.4" long at 4.14 pounds. And it can shoot 1:1 macro. It only misses on the internal teleconverter, 150 instead of 100, and 0.14 pounds over the 4 pound or less that you wanted. And for comparison to full frame - wait, full frame has nothing to compare to it!

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Your math and science is kinda off. A 2x crop on a Z8 will not give you 23mp, it’s closer to 11mp.
You don’t talk about the filter size to determine how much light you’re getting, you talk aperture. Yes, filter size is a factor in determining the maximum potential aperture, but just because the sensor is smaller doesn’t mean the light is more concentrated. The crop factor doesn’t effect the aperture as far as light is concerned, f/4 is f/4 no matter sensor size, but crop factor does apply to DOF.

ricardo00

Thanks, you are right, it is close and have been tempted! But for $7,500, would want something closer to my dream lens. Since I already have lots of lenses, I can wait. Maybe someone at OM Systems is monitoring these discussions.
PS. The real weight of this lens with its hood and foot I believe is over 4.5 pounds. Think the weight you have is without the hood?

ricardo00

Not sure what you mean that the OM 100-400mm lens IS works "in conjunction" with the camera body IS but according to the Olympus website: "5-Axis Sync IS is not supported in the 100-400mm lens." The camera system is expected to use either the in-body 5-axis stabilization system or the 2-axis (yaw and pitch) image stabilization in this lens, which provides 3 steps. By contrast, the Olympus 300 mm f/4 lens provides 6 shutter speed steps of compensation with its 5-Axis Sync, lens and body. So to me, that means they don't work in conjunction.