I've been shooting a Z9 and Z 180-600 since the 180-600 was released. And alongside that I've been shooting an OM-1 and Olympus 100-400 for over a year. I am not a very technical person so anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Regarding the light gathering, I don't believe you give up anything. A 6.3 lens is a 6.3 lens regardless of the crop factor. Both lenses transmit the same amount of light at 6.3. But you are correct, the DOF is affected.
After much deliberation, I just shipped off my Z9, 180-600, and some other Z lenses to MPB in exchange for an OM-1 ll and the OM System 150-600 and some cash. There were a number of reasons for my decision. First and foremost is weight and size. I'm finding I'm not using the Z system enough to justify keeping it. The weight savings between the Z9/180-600 and OM-1/150-600 is three pounds. At my age that's a big difference. The OM will be much more packable. I'm tired of juggling two different systems and I enjoy shooting the OM system that much that I don't want to get rid of it. Muscle memory and all that. The OM-1 does everything the Z9 does FOR MY USES. Some things even better. I'm really getting into insects, Dragonfly, Butterfly, that type of thing. I'm constantly switching lenses on the single body. Now I'll be able to have either the 150-600 or the 100-400 on one body and the 90 macro on the other. No more lenses lying in the weeds and much quicker to switch between the two. There's no question that the Z9 is a much smoother and more intuitive body than the OM-1 but I'm okay with the switch. The only thing I think I'm going to miss is the 180-600 on the full frame Z9 has beautiful out of focus rendering for a 6.3 lens. Much better than my Sigma 150-600 S that I shot with for seven years. So I'm expecting I'll have to work a little harder to achieve that for some wildlife subjects with the OM system but that's fine.
I'm of the opinion that there is no more capable combo out there for wildlife right now, for the $$, than the OM-1 and Olly 100-400. I'm convinced that I would have missed the last shot I'm posting here if I was using my Z9/180-600. I saw this Peregrine streaking in from my left and disappear below the cliff I was standing on. I knew from experience that there was a good possibility that he would fly up and land on that perch. There is no time to track the bird as he appears in an instant from below the cliff face. I immediately swung around and focused on the branch and started firing. This is a problem area for the Z9, grabbing that branch in an instant. To be fair, not sure if it's a Z9 problem or a 180-600 problem but the OM-1 nailed it. This is also a situation where the increased depth of field was a big advantage as I grabbed focus on the branch not the bird.
All with the 100-400 original version.
I realize this is much more info than you were asking for
Gary
I've been shooting a Z9 and Z 180-600 since the 180-600 was released. And alongside that I've been shooting an OM-1 and Olympus 100-400 for over a year. I am not a very technical person so anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Regarding the light gathering, I don't believe you give up anything. A 6.3 lens is a 6.3 lens regardless of the crop factor. Both lenses transmit the same amount of light at 6.3. But you are correct, the DOF is affected.
After much deliberation, I just shipped off my Z9, 180-600, and some other Z lenses to MPB in exchange for an OM-1 ll and the OM System 150-600 and some cash. There were a number of reasons for my decision. First and foremost is weight and size. I'm finding I'm not using the Z system enough to justify keeping it. The weight savings between the Z9/180-600 and OM-1/150-600 is three pounds. At my age that's a big difference. The OM will be much more packable. I'm tired of juggling two different systems and I enjoy shooting the OM system that much that I don't want to get rid of it. Muscle memory and all that. The OM-1 does everything the Z9 does FOR MY USES. Some things even better. I'm really getting into insects, Dragonfly, Butterfly, that type of thing. I'm constantly switching lenses on the single body. Now I'll be able to have either the 150-600 or the 100-400 on one body and the 90 macro on the other. No more lenses lying in the weeds and much quicker to switch between the two. There's no question that the Z9 is a much smoother and more intuitive body than the OM-1 but I'm okay with the switch. The only thing I think I'm going to miss is the 180-600 on the full frame Z9 has beautiful out of focus rendering for a 6.3 lens. Much better than my Sigma 150-600 S that I shot with for seven years. So I'm expecting I'll have to work a little harder to achieve that for some wildlife subjects with the OM system but that's fine.
I'm of the opinion that there is no more capable combo out there for wildlife right now, for the $$, than the OM-1 and Olly 100-400. I'm convinced that I would have missed the last shot I'm posting here if I was using my Z9/180-600. I saw this Peregrine streaking in from my left and disappear below the cliff I was standing on. I knew from experience that there was a good possibility that he would fly up and land on that perch. There is no time to track the bird as he appears in an instant from below the cliff face. I immediately swung around and focused on the branch and started firing. This is a problem area for the Z9, grabbing that branch in an instant. To be fair, not sure if it's a Z9 problem or a 180-600 problem but the OM-1 nailed it. This is also a situation where the increased depth of field was a big advantage as I grabbed focus on the branch not the bird.
All with the 100-400 original version.
I realize this is much more info than you were asking for
Gary
I've been shooting a Z9 and Z 180-600 since the 180-600 was released. And alongside that I've been shooting an OM-1 and Olympus 100-400 for over a year. I am not a very technical person so anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Regarding the light gathering, I don't believe you give up anything. A 6.3 lens is a 6.3 lens regardless of the crop factor. Both lenses transmit the same amount of light at 6.3. But you are correct, the DOF is affected.
After much deliberation, I just shipped off my Z9, 180-600, and some other Z lenses to MPB in exchange for an OM-1 ll and the OM System 150-600 and some cash. There were a number of reasons for my decision. First and foremost is weight and size. I'm finding I'm not using the Z system enough to justify keeping it. The weight savings between the Z9/180-600 and OM-1/150-600 is three pounds. At my age that's a big difference. The OM will be much more packable. I'm tired of juggling two different systems and I enjoy shooting the OM system that much that I don't want to get rid of it. Muscle memory and all that. The OM-1 does everything the Z9 does FOR MY USES. Some things even better. I'm really getting into insects, Dragonfly, Butterfly, that type of thing. I'm constantly switching lenses on the single body. Now I'll be able to have either the 150-600 or the 100-400 on one body and the 90 macro on the other. No more lenses lying in the weeds and much quicker to switch between the two. There's no question that the Z9 is a much smoother and more intuitive body than the OM-1 but I'm okay with the switch. The only thing I think I'm going to miss is the 180-600 on the full frame Z9 has beautiful out of focus rendering for a 6.3 lens. Much better than my Sigma 150-600 S that I shot with for seven years. So I'm expecting I'll have to work a little harder to achieve that for some wildlife subjects with the OM system but that's fine.
I'm of the opinion that there is no more capable combo out there right now for the $$ than the OM-1 and Olly 100-400. I'm convinced that I would have missed the last shot I'm posting here if I was using my Z9/180-600. I saw this Peregrine streaking I from my left and disappear below the cliff I was standing on. I knew from experience that there was a good possibility that he would fly up and land on that perch. There is no time to track the bird as he appears in an instant from below the cliff face. I immediately swung around and focused on the branch and started firing. This is a problem area for the Z9, grabbing that branch in an instant. To be fair, not sure if it's a Z9 problem or a 180-600 problem but the OM-1 nailed it. This is also a situation where the increased depth of field was a big advantage as I grabbed focus on the branch not the bird.
All with the 100-400 original version.
I realize this is much more info than you were asking for
Gary
I've been shooting a Z9 and Z 180-600 since the 180-600 was released. And alongside that I've been shooting an OM-1 and Olympus 100-400 for over a year. I am not a very technical person so anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Regarding the light gathering, I don't believe you give up anything. A 6.3 lens is a 6.3 lens regardless of the crop factor. Both lenses transmit the same amount of light at 6.3. But you are correct, the DOF is affected.
After much deliberation, I just shipped off my Z9, 180-600, and some other Z lenses to MPB in exchange for an OM-1 ll and the OM System 150-600 and some cash. There were a number of reasons for my decision. First and foremost is weight and size. I'm finding I'm not using the Z system enough to justify keeping it. The weight savings between the Z9/180-600 and OM-1/150-600 is three pounds. At my age that's a big difference. The OM will be much more packable. I'm tired of juggling two different systems and I enjoy shooting the OM system that much that I don't want to get rid of it. Muscle memory and all that. The OM-1 does everything the Z9 does FOR MY USES. Some things even better. I'm really getting into insects, Dragonfly, Butterfly, that type of thing. I'm constantly switching lenses on the single body. Now I'll be able to have either the 150-600 or the 100-400 on one body and the 90 macro on the other. No more lenses lying in the weeds and much quicker to switch between the two. There's no question that the Z9 is a much smoother and more intuitive body than the OM-1 but I'm okay with the switch. The only thing I think I'm going to miss is the 180-600 on the full frame Z9 has beautiful out of focus rendering for a 6.3 lens. Much better than my Sigma 150-600 S that I shot with for seven years. So I'm expecting I'll have to work a little harder to achieve that for some wildlife subjects with the OM system but that's fine.
I'm of the opinion that there is no more capable combo out there right now for the $$ than the OM-1 and Olly 100-400. I'm convinced that I would have missed the last shot I'm posting here if I was using my Z9/180-600. I saw this Peregrine streaking I from my left and disappear below the cliff I was standing on. I knew from experience that there was a good possibility that he would fly up and land on that perch. There is no time to track the bird as he appears in an instant from below the cliff face. I immediately swung around and focused on the branch and started firing. This is a problem area for the Z9, grabbing that branch in an instant. To be fair, not sure if it's a Z9 problem or a 180-600 problem but the OM-1 nailed it. All with the 100-400 original version.
I realize this is much more info than you were asking for
Gary
Jul 12, 2025 at 07:56 AM
Previous versions of sum1sgrampa's message #16849872 « What am I missing? »
