Thinking of buying a new OM-1 mk2 (1 Viewer)

[MelospizaMelodiaFan]

...as Ive only started getting into photography of birds

You want a better camera, yes. That feeling never goes away; all of us want a better camera.
There is a lot to learn as a beginner, and you don't need the latest premium gear to pursue it. It is easy to find barely used equipment at a reasonable price. I say get a used setup and use the crap out if it. If you still are into bird photography at that point, then go ahead and spend the big bucks.

 

[IanBen]

I have the OM 150-600 mated with a OM-1 - images are crystal clear hand held at 600 (1200). I use to have the Oly 100-400 with 1.4x and the 150-600 is far a superior set up

 

[10ForCash]

I have the OM 150-600 mated with a OM-1 - images are crystal clear hand held at 600 (1200). I use to have the Oly 100-400 with 1.4x and the 150-600 is far a superior set up

What's the weight difference do you know ?

 

[IanBen]

What's the weight difference do you know ?

I haven’t the exact figures for weight, but I did purchase a Peak Design Slide Strap so I could use the supports on the lens rather than the supports on the camera so subconsciously I felt that the weight was too much for the cameras mount. I can still shoot handheld without any issue though, the camera and lens have sync stabilisation, the same as you’d have if you were using the 300 F4 Pro lens. The only reason OM haven’t classified the 150-600 a pro lens is because it has a variable aperture, which doesn’t bother me.

 

[njlarsen]

What's the weight difference do you know ?

Google, bing, etc are quite good at answering questions such as this.
Niels

 

[njlarsen]

The latest review contains this

OM-1 Mark II review by DigitalCameraWorld: “has features that you WISH your camera had “ – 43 Rumors

www.43rumors.com

It’s hard to fault the OM System OM-1 Mark II. Yes, it’s similar to its predecessor, but the differences are huge ones – including one that’s so significant, I wish every camera had it. In my opinion, this is the ultimate outdoor camera: it’s astonishingly weather-proofed, its compactness is unparalleled, it negates the need for both ND filters and grads, it matches full frame sensors for ISO noise and actually beats them for dynamic range, the improved autofocus is super-reliable even for birding, and the 2x crop factor is a secret weapon for wildlife.

 

[10ForCash]

Going for the Mk2, just need to decide on the lense. Decided against the prime as prefer zoom. So I guess its between the 100-400mm and the 150-600mm but weight wise the other half is going to want the lighter one

 

[10ForCash]

Looked at the 150-600mm today compared to 100-400mm and big difference in weight. Almost 1kg heavier and didn't really get on well hand held because of the weight and size 😕

 

[aucarius]

When I switched to OM-1 from Canon 7Dii I started with the 100-400 but found it too soft for me, compared to the Canon EF 100-400 Lii. I traded for the 300mm F4 plus 1.4x & couldn't be happier. Great reach & fantastic sharpness, it's also lighter & I don't end up with backache after a long hike.

 

[Searun]

Hi all,
I am looking to replace my Nikon P1000 for a new OM-1 mk2 with this lens, Olympus OM SYSTEM M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm F/5.0-6.3 IS Lens.

As its such a lot of money its a bit of a worry if a little overkill as Ive only started getting into photography of birds. I bought the P1000 which has an incredible zoom but not the picture quality. Does anyone else have this above combo ? Thanks.

I have the OM1.1 and several lenses, longest being the 100-400. I am considering the 150-600. OM1 bird detection is good, and several camera forum users report improved bird tracking on the updated OM1.2, particularly in brushy areas wih partially obscured view.

If I was buying today I would get a Nikon Z8 with the 180-600. Consider your budget. An OM1.1 with the 150-600 would cost less, and with the 100-400 even less. Do you need really 600mm?

 

[10ForCash]

I've gone for the OM-1 mk2 and the 100-400mm

 

[10ForCash]

Does anyone recommend lens filters these days ? If so what would be a good brand ? TIA 😊

 

[njlarsen]

Most lens filters reduce the quality of the photos.

 

[10ForCash]

Yes that what I was thinking but the chap in the shop was highly recommending one. Probably more of a sales thing then lol.

 

[njlarsen]

As this is not a question specific to any specific brand of camera, you could make a new thread in the general camera section.
Niels

 

[Pauhana]

If I was buying today I would get a Nikon Z8 with the 180-600. Consider your budget. An OM1.1 with the 150-600 would cost less, and with the 100-400 even less.

If i was richer to buy and younger to carry that load that would I add this to bag. But that is not gonna happen. And besides am quite happy with my OM-1 system

 

[Iceberg slim]

I’m looking at the Oly system, but would love the 300 pro on a Fuji body (X H2S)

 

[faunagraphy]

I've been shooting Olympus for years, and the OM-1 since it came out (pre-ordered). I didn't see this thread in time to offer buying advice, but I'm glad you found something that works for you (100-400mm). Perhaps some months later, you might want to view your photos and see how many shots were shot at under 300mm. My suspicion is that there would be few of them, and that you will find the 300mm Pro + MC-20 (600mm) far more rewarding to use.

Even with the 2x teleconverter, the sharpness of that lens is insane. It's manufactured to very high standards and I've never heard anyone complain of a poor copy even with a used lens, which are quite affordable these days. That's what I use anyway, after having tried both the Olympus / Panasonic 100-400's and some other systems e.g. Nikon 200-500mm and D500.

Does anyone recommend lens filters these days ? If so what would be a good brand ? TIA 😊

Regarding filters: the primary purpose of one, IMO, is to protect the coating on the front element of your lens from scratches, unless you want a CPL filter or a special effects one. Replacing a filter is a lot cheaper than sending a lens in for repair. With a high quality (expensive) filter, the degradation is minimal and you'd barely notice it. You want to use a multi-coated brass filter. As with high-quality optics, you can safely buy a used filter and be assured of good quality, so long as it's manufactured to high standards.

I use a B+W XS-Pro 007 Clear MRC Nano filter with my 300mm Pro, and do not bother with filters for my cheaper lenses. They might have a newer equivalent model now.

007 indicates that the glass is thinner than their 010 filter (less impact on image quality). You want a Clear or a UV filter for birding. MRC means that it is multi-coated to minimize aberrations and light loss. Nano is their water-repellent coating for bad weather.

Other brands might have other nomenclatures, but the key factors remain the same: brass construction and multi-coating. A good brand would include charts of light loss in their literature.

 

[10ForCash]

Brilliant, thank you so much 👍