This hawk was captured on my first outing with my new to me OM-1 and 100-400. Incredible how fast this camera picks up birds in flight! My shutter speed was too slow for this shot, but I lucked out with a useable one. I don't have the camera setup how I'd like it just yet so I forgot to up my shutter after taking a shot of a slower object.
My second time out with the OM-1 and 150-400 (this time with the GD 120FPS option made invisible). Of course, as luck would have it, the birds just weren't flying.
Coming from a Sony A1 and 600 f/4, this is a huge, and frankly depressing adjustment. The much lower resolution, dynamic range, ISO performance etc, really make it a challenge to get decent images, especially in poor light, like this morning. I have to work the crappy looking files pretty hard.
Colin F wrote:
My second time out with the OM-1 and 150-400 (this time with the GD 120FPS option made invisible).
Coming from a Sony A1 and 600 f/4, this is a huge, and frankly depressing adjustment. The much lower resolution, dynamic range, ISO performance etc, really make it a challenge to get decent images, especially in poor light, like this morning. I have to work the crappy looking files pretty hard.
Colin F wrote:
My second time out with the OM-1 and 150-400 (this time with the GD 120FPS option made invisible).
Coming from a Sony A1 and 600 f/4, this is a huge, and frankly depressing adjustment. The much lower resolution, dynamic range, ISO performance etc, really make it a challenge to get decent images, especially in poor light, like this morning. I have to work the crappy looking files pretty hard.
Colin F wrote:
Thanks, but no, no sarcasm there. The files make me wince compared to the FF files.
I guess you have to decide if it's a reasonable trade-off for the weight savings.
I found the m4/3 files are a little more competitive in better light, although that's a scarce commodity around here this time of year. I'm actually debating a move back to a smaller sensor again myself.
^^^ Yes, it was the best option for me given my increasing weakness, and I'm sure I'll be happier with it with better light. Still, we could use a few more megapickles with this OM-1.
molson wrote:
I guess you have to decide if it's a reasonable trade-off for the weight savings.
I found the m4/3 files are a little more competitive in better light, although that's a scarce commodity around here this time of year. I'm actually debating a move back to a smaller sensor again myself.
---------------------------------------------
Colin F wrote:
^^^ Yes, it was the best option for me given my increasing weakness, and I'm sure I'll be happier with it with better light. Still, we could use a few more megapickles with this OM-1.
Interesting discussion between the two of you.
I still have all my Olympus gear, but have not used it in a long while.
The optics of their lenses always seemed exceptional to me.
But I got spoiled by my Sony A1 and found the Olympus MFT cameras lacking.
The last of their cameras I bought were the Olympus OM-D E-M5 and E-M1 Mark III cameras.
Tony Markle, alias Imagemaster, used to generate stunning images, including IQ, with his MFT gear.
But he always accomplished that, regardless of the gear he used, be it Sony or Nikon variety.
I lost track of him and have no idea if he is still active and what kind of equipment he is using.
I also remember stunning images here by mitesh and lately by Ronny Olson, and others including one of you.
Certainly in good light MFT holds its own.
From my collection of images, it looks like 2016 was the last year I actively used my MFT equipment.
Occasional use much later.
Olympus E-M1MarkIII + M.300mm F4.0 @ 300 mm (600 mm in 35mm), f/8, 1/640 s, ISO 200, Taken 2021-12-05.
Imagemaster shoots Canon these days. He did put up a want to buy add in the for sale forum to get the 150-400 Olympus lens a few weeks ago . I am not sure of the result. He shows up on this forum once in a while.
