Worth upgrading to OM1 for landscape, macro and portraits?

ahaslett wrote:

tomrandall86 wrote:

Yannis1976 wrote:

tomrandall86 wrote:

So how about landscape shooters who walk/hike a lot wanting to keep weight down; would the faster HHHR and things like built in ND negate the use of a tripod, allowing you to save on weight?

I’m in the same boat; outdoor photography but no emphasis on wildlife. I’ve been in self-debate on moving on from my E-M1 mark II to either the OM-1 or trade it all in and switch systems; maybe to an X-T5 or X-H2. Need to do a bit more research on those really, I’ve read some shadow detail can be a bit crap, it’s a lot of resolution for an aps-c sensor.

In terms of sensor IQ the Fuji 40MP is definitely better, but this is just one factor of the Fuji vs Oly equation... There are many other things that make those two systems competitive and both are great solutions, with Olympus more into wildlfie and Fuji more into street and general shooting.

The hand held high res modes on the later OM cameras really have me interested though; most of my outings are tripodless and sometimes would like that little bit more detail to play with, but then it makes me think should I be looking at other offerings for what I like to shoot. It’s a lot of money to jack it in for something else.

Personally, right now, I am leaning more towards to the XT5 (I do like the Fuji interface more than the PASM), but will wait for some real user reviews. If IBIS and CAF are good, the XT5 combined with the fast small and WR Fuji primes could be a beautiful street/portrait machine.

I'll have to download some decent raw samples from the Fujis and take a look. Really, I don't shoot that much wildlife but I like the option; more UK wildlife with a little bit of bird photography at the local reserves, nothing majorly overkill or demanding.

My main need (or want) really is a good hiking system, where I could get away with leaving the tripod at home/in the car; so decent stabilisation, decent versatile lenses and the best image quality for the money. The Olympus and the Fuji bodies sit in that kind of price bracket I'd be looking at max. I have the E-M1 mark II at the moment, with the 12-40 f.28 pro, 12-100 f4 pro (a great hiking/outdoor lens), the 75-300 (pretty good in decent light), 14-150 II which I don't use much, and a 12mm manual focus Samyang I use on trips up north to get a bit of the aurora when it decides to show it's face.

The OM-1 in the UK is £2k for the body, cheapest I've seen from camera stores and OM directly. Fuji body is a very very good price, XT-5 is £1699 and the X-H2 is £1899. Obviously I'd have to factor in the lenses I'd need to go with it, but it's a tough one isn't it. I know Olympus so well, the only thing that irritates me a little bit is detail in an outdoor shot in background elements, 20mp and it looks a bit mushy, but I can rectify it to a certain degree by doing a tripod high res shot (which does give lots of detail in far away elements).

Eternal pain these decisions bring! (Yoda).

Also, weather sealing is important to me; and OM system has to win hands down there. I had my older E-M1 mark II and 12-100 f4 pro out in the rain last October shooting some proper moody scenes on the Isle of Skye; it did not bat an eye lid at the rain.

How does IS compare between the systems?

Andrew

X-H2 has 5 axis according to the interwebs. OM-1 has 7 in body I believe, increasing to 7.5 if you have a lens with built in stabilisation. At least, that's what Google tells me.

I'm normally good at listening to my gut on such matters, but this time my gut doesn't care about this and just wants food; it's my brain causing these questions. It's probably because of budget; switching systems is expensive, and I like to know I'm getting a good investment for my money.