I need to work on my panning technique - he was partially or completely out of the frame for more than half of the shots, but here are three that I like:
Wasting some photons on a cloudy morning, testing out the MC-20 2x teleconverter on the MZ 150-400mm. AF response slows down noticeably with this combo, as does AF precision, especially in low light. Image stabilization still works pretty well at 800mm (1,600mm FF equivalent) but does drop off dramatically at 1,000mm (2,000mm FF equivalent). I think I will leave that TC at home from now on.
Bobby V:
Just check out you reviews and field notes. I am a new OM-1 owner coming from Canon R5s.
The OM-1 is an impressive little beast. The 150-400 f/4.5 is back ordered everywhere, so have to be content with the 300 f/4 for now.
Speaking of impressive... your photos....Wow.
I have the 300f4 which is great when 300mm is the right reach and also with the MC-14 1.4 TC. You will also find the 100-400 excellent and with better reach than the R5/100-500.
mitesh wrote:
OM-1 + 150-400 @500mm@
1/3200, f/5.6, ISO 1250
Brown Pelican returning to its nest in the late afternoon
Fantastic image, Really shows what the m43 OM-1 combined with 150-400 Pro and a great photographer can do.
I am pondering selling my OM-1 with 150-400 Pro and jumping to Sony A1 or Nikon Z9 but its a big leap and i'm wondering how green the grass is on the Full Frame side. Any guidance would be gratefully accepted
wildlife_62 wrote:
Fantastic image, Really shows what the m43 OM-1 combined with 150-400 Pro and a great photographer can do.
I am pondering selling my OM-1 with 150-400 Pro and jumping to Sony A1 or Nikon Z9 but its a big leap and i'm wondering how green the grass is on the Full Frame side. Any guidance would be gratefully accepted
I’m probably not the best person to offer anyone advice on gear, since I obviously cannot make up my own mind 😂
That said, my experience has been that for what I shoot, ever since I got the 150-400, I have not shot a single frame with my Sony a1 + 200-600, 400 GM or 600 GM. I’ve shot the OM gear in low light, into the direct sun, in overcast conditions, in rain, in blowing sand, in mud, wading in a river, and traipsing over Patagonian landscapes — and it’s delivered in every instance. In fact, I was shooting with a few people this past weekend, including a published professional, and all of them were using CaNikon bodies and super teles anchored to tripods. We were shooting in the water, and due to having heavier setups on tripods, they could not easily change location and tripod height. I, on the other hand, with my OM combo, had no tripod and could easily move and reposition myself. The pro photographer suggeted that I use a tripod so that I could use a longer lens. I let him look thru my EVF and he was surprised to see my image framing was tighter than his (he was shooting a1 + 600 GM + 1.4x). A few shots below from that morning.
Certainly there will be use cases in which a heavier, bulkier FF kit will offer advantages over the m4/3 kit. But for me, in the majority of cases, I’m better off with greater focal length flexibility and system portability. I’m sure you’ve considered these things, as the decision calculus isn’t the same for all of us.
Thanks for your thoughts, I think your real world experience speaks volumes. It's very easy to get drawn in to the Full Frame debate etc. I love the head on shot of the spoonbill. I was wondering what post processing you used as the results you achieve with all your images posted are very consistent. It's a real joy to see such wonderful images from a very talented photographer. I look forward to seeing more.
I'm new to this forum so perhaps you could explain how I could post some images?
wildlife_62 wrote:
Fantastic image, Really shows what the m43 OM-1 combined with 150-400 Pro and a great photographer can do.
I am pondering selling my OM-1 with 150-400 Pro and jumping to Sony A1 or Nikon Z9 but its a big leap and i'm wondering how green the grass is on the Full Frame side. Any guidance would be gratefully accepted
Perhaps it's for financial reasons, but if not, why not keep the Olympus combo and add the Sony A1 or Nikon Z9 with a big lens? I can imagine you can get a lot of satisfaction from the Olympus combo if you think over a longer period.
I recently got the Sony 600GM for use with the A1, but almost went for the Olympus combo when I found the 150-400mm f4.5 (which is extremely rare where I live) that had just arrived in a camera store.
The reason I did not, is that I first wanted a true 600mm lens with bright aperture. But there are going to be times/trips when the 600GM is simply too big. So when finance allows, I see myself adding the Olympus combo in the future.
ChrisMak wrote:
Perhaps it's for financial reasons, but if not, why not keep the Olympus combo and add the Sony A1 or Nikon Z9 with a big lens? I can imagine you can get a lot of satisfaction from the Olympus combo if you think over a longer period.
I recently got the Sony 600GM for use with the A1, but almost went for the Olympus combo when I found the 150-400mm f4.5 (which is extremely rare where I live) that had just arrived in a camera store.
The reason I did not, is that I first wanted a true 600mm lens with bright aperture. But there are going to be times/trips when the 600GM is simply too big. So when finance allows, I see myself adding the Olympus combo in the future....Show more →
That's what I did as I am dual system shooter with my OM-1 + 150-400mm, and Z9 + 400mm 2.8S TC.
I am also considering adding the OM-1 and 150-400 back into my gear bag, as I am shooting from wet places more often now and would appreciate the splashproof qualities of the OM system. I just need to find one for sale again!
mitesh wrote:
I’m probably not the best person to offer anyone advice on gear, since I obviously cannot make up my own mind 😂
That said, my experience has been that for what I shoot, ever since I got the 150-400, I have not shot a single frame with my Sony a1 + 200-600, 400 GM or 600 GM. I’ve shot the OM gear in low light, into the direct sun, in overcast conditions, in rain, in blowing sand, in mud, wading in a river, and traipsing over Patagonian landscapes — and it’s delivered in every instance. In fact, I was shooting with a few people this past weekend, including a published professional, and all of them were using CaNikon bodies and super teles anchored to tripods. We were shooting in the water, and due to having heavier setups on tripods, they could not easily change location and tripod height. I, on the other hand, with my OM combo, had no tripod and could easily move and reposition myself. The pro photographer suggeted that I use a tripod so that I could use a longer lens. I let him look thru my EVF and he was surprised to see my image framing was tighter than his (he was shooting a1 + 600 GM + 1.4x). A few shots below from that morning.
Certainly there will be use cases in which a heavier, bulkier FF kit will offer advantages over the m4/3 kit. But for me, in the majority of cases, I’m better off with greater focal length flexibility and system portability. I’m sure you’ve considered these things, as the decision calculus isn’t the same for all of us.
Bryan Holliday wrote:
I am also considering adding the OM-1 and 150-400 back into my gear bag, as I am shooting from wet places more often now and would appreciate the splashproof qualities of the OM system. I just need to find one for sale again!
Did you buy one back in June? What happened to it?
