If all I were getting was 1.8 and 1.4 primes, om3. But seeing the smaller than full frame and super long and macro lenses of m43, more grip seems better
amci4 wrote:
newyork wrote
When cash is in hand I’ll have to snatch one. Maybe grab a lens and a card and battery and charger along the way to divide the cost. Not 100% sure whether I’d want the on-3 or more of a traditional grip to add more lenses to, or if I’m just going with a couple primes for a while.
Still thinking that out.
amci4 wrote
You know there are OM-3 bodies that pop up here for $1200 to $1300 right?
newyork wrote
Lately I’ve really been looking hard at getting an OM and some lenses. Not immediately but possibly by the holiday.
My Nikon z lenses can sometimes be massive or even more bulky than I wish they were during vacations, at work (between my service calls) and just going to town. They have a couple compact lenses for my zf but not extensive and tiny like OM.
Also, the zooms are minuscule when you compare focal lengths.
Anyway, I’d love the om-1 mark II and/or om3 but since this is a side thing I’m wondering if the OM-5ii is worth a look. Small and light and probably awesome with 1.8 primes and some of the zooms.
For now it’s just for daily photos of local landscape, kids running around, street, random daily photos and vacation
If I get more into macro or birds using OM, will the 5 be a problem or is it just fine? How is its human AF speed and accuracy.
If I’m better off spending more I’ll just get one of the higher end models. If you want the traditional grip, then the OM-1 MK I is a similar price used. It also has similar specs to the OM-3, which didn’t get the larger buffer of the OM-1 II as far as I can tell.