New in MFT (2020): Panasonic G9 or Olympus E-M1ii (mainly wildlife)

Hi everyone

Im' fairly new to photography and I'm completely self-thought on the matter. I've been shooting and getting outside with my very modest Lumix FZ300, which I've been using for almost a year now. I've been holding off on investing because I wasn't sure this new hobby would last. As I am now sure I would like to keep doing this, I have been looking into buying a new and better camera. (I am aware that the most important piece of the kit is always the photographer, however I feel my current camera really has its limits in IQ, AF...).

I've been pondering different systems (FF, APS-C, MFT and a regular all-in-one (Sony RX 10 iv to be more precise) and I have decided I would like to get into the MFT systems (it's a compromise between getting the IQ I want, not being a professional photographer so limited budget and portability).

My main interests are wildlife photography (I go on safari every few years, but I also love just going out in my neighborhood and shoot some of the local wildlife) and street/urban photography. I don't focus on BIF, but I would still really like to have the possibility to do this since local wildlife is very limited where I live. I am not at all interested in video performance, so I don't even look at those specs. Looking at my pictures of the past year I'd say 60% wildlife & nature, 20% BIF and 20% street/urban.

So far (after many days of research) I've narrowed it down to either the Panasonic Lumix G9 or Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark ii. I will list my thoughts below. I have decided on budget of €2.000 at the moment for the camera + a telezoom lens.

Panasonic Lumix G9

• Pros
  • I am familiar with the Panasonic system, however this would be my first mirrorless camera, so I'm not really sure if I should consider this
  • I would initially buy the 100-300 lens (100-300MM F/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario Mark II) and then aim to upgrade to the 100-400 lens (Panasonic MFT 100-400mm F/4.0-6.3 Power O.I.S. Leica DG Vario). Both are weather sealed which is really important to me.
• Cons
  • I have read (excessively) on the AF-performance of the DfD-system and I am afraid the camera will struggle with BIF.
  • I have found some vague issues with the 100-400 Leica lens, but I couldn't find whether this was still the case nowadays. Is this a bad lens?
  • I cannot find any roadmap for Lumix MFT lenses, which concerns me that Panasonic might be looking at the FF-system more.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark ii

• Pros
  • The lenses made by Olympus are supposably better quality. There is however no weather sealed telezoom lens at the moment, so I would have to buy the same initial lens as with the G9 (100-300MM F/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario Mark II). As for upgrading I have found that Olympus has a 100-400 lens on their roadmap (M.Zuiko ED 100-400mm f/5.0-6.3 IS). Odds are good enough that this would be weather sealed so this would then become my upgrade goal.
  • The E-M1ii has phase detection AF and has better BIF performance according to my sources (mainly the mirrorlesscomparison.com articles)
• Cons
  • The Olympus menu system is a lot more complicated then Lumix, however I learn quickly and I don't think of this as a big issue.
  • The E-M1ii is both older and more expensive.

All in all, both cameras + lenses are within my budget range (although the E-M1 is about 20% more expensive). I have done excessive research and posting on this forum is really my last resort as I cannot make a choice between both cameras. I haven't held them (as all stores are closed due to the current crisis), but that is something I will definitely do before buying. I think it bottles down to these 3 questions:

1. Is the E-M1 significantly better at photographing BIF? So much better that I should consider it over the G9 even if BIF is not my main concern but it's also not something I'm willing to neglect.
2. I haven't got any lenses at the moment, which lenses are the best between Pana and Oly? Also, is it worth waiting on the Oly 100-400 lens or is it already determined that the quality will be inferior to the Leica 100-400?
3. Which is the best system to begin with considering future expectations? I would really hate to invest in a either one of them only to read that they will abandon the format (I know no one knows the answer to this question, but some might have a more informed take on this than me).

This has become quite a write-up and if you made it to this point, I already want to thank you. I hope some user input can help me make the best choice to start with a new system and to continue improving my own skills.

You will get plenty of opinion but I suspect that the truth is that you will be happy with either. I'm a Panny G9 user and a very happy user. It's no more difficult shooting BIFs with a G9 than any other camera. DFD works fine. It's like everything else get familiar with the camera and you can do what ever you want once you learn how to use it properly.

IMHO there are only two lens that are suitable for bird photography at the moment. The PL100-400 and the Oly 300. In ultimate IQ the latter probably has the edge but it is double the price and personally I much prefer to shoot birds with a zoom.

As far as the future goes, nobody knows anything especially in the current crisis you really have to look at current options and not worry you much about what is around the corner.

At UK prices and keeping an eye out for the deals, you can probably get a G9 and a 100-400 for £2000.

The link in my signature below has loads of birds taken with this combination with numerous BIFs.

Both are fine camera that are a great value for the price.  The Oly had a recent firmware update that the bird shooters seemed to like a lot.  I don't have a G9, but I have looked at it.  I do have the E-m1II and a 1x.  They are all good cameras.  I think the Olympus is a bit more versatile, but at the expense of more complicated menus.  The Oly lens catalog is also really good and it's AF system is not dependent on brand.  The G9 needs Lumix lenses to get the best out of it's AF system.  That could be a factor, if you are looking for fast AF.

Elias06 wrote:

Hi everyone

Im' fairly new to photography and I'm completely self-thought on the matter. I've been shooting and getting outside with my very modest Lumix FZ300, which I've been using for almost a year now. I've been holding off on investing because I wasn't sure this new hobby would last. As I am now sure I would like to keep doing this, I have been looking into buying a new and better camera. (I am aware that the most important piece of the kit is always the photographer, however I feel my current camera really has its limits in IQ, AF...).

I've been pondering different systems (FF, APS-C, MFT and a regular all-in-one (Sony RX 10 iv to be more precise) and I have decided I would like to get into the MFT systems (it's a compromise between getting the IQ I want, not being a professional photographer so limited budget and portability).

My main interests are wildlife photography (I go on safari every few years, but I also love just going out in my neighborhood and shoot some of the local wildlife) and street/urban photography. I don't focus on BIF, but I would still really like to have the possibility to do this since local wildlife is very limited where I live. I am not at all interested in video performance, so I don't even look at those specs. Looking at my pictures of the past year I'd say 60% wildlife & nature, 20% BIF and 20% street/urban.

So far (after many days of research) I've narrowed it down to either the Panasonic Lumix G9 or Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark ii. I will list my thoughts below. I have decided on budget of €2.000 at the moment for the camera + a telezoom lens.

Panasonic Lumix G9

• Pros
  • I am familiar with the Panasonic system, however this would be my first mirrorless camera, so I'm not really sure if I should consider this
  • I would initially buy the 100-300 lens (100-300MM F/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario Mark II) and then aim to upgrade to the 100-400 lens (Panasonic MFT 100-400mm F/4.0-6.3 Power O.I.S. Leica DG Vario). Both are weather sealed which is really important to me.
• Cons
  • I have read (excessively) on the AF-performance of the DfD-system and I am afraid the camera will struggle with BIF.
  • I have found some vague issues with the 100-400 Leica lens, but I couldn't find whether this was still the case nowadays. Is this a bad lens?
  • I cannot find any roadmap for Lumix MFT lenses, which concerns me that Panasonic might be looking at the FF-system more.

I arrived at M43 Panasonics after a series of FZs, including the FZ330 - see links below , because of the similarity of the menus. I have G80s and GM/GF bodies and a couple of weeks ago was seduced by a special offer on the G9. I've had the 100-400mm for a could of years, previously had the 100-300mm. I've had my 100-400mm for a couple of years, yes the zoom on mine is a little stiff but not too stiff to use easily. I believe the stiffness is much less in more recent models. The 100-400mm is now around £1,100. After using the 100-400mm there's no going back to the 100-300mm.

I wasn't tempted to get the G90, which uses the same battery as the G80 and the FZ330, because of the still high price. I think the G9 is a class above for wildlife, one of my interests.

The G9 + 100-400mm is a fantastic combo, hardly small but not massive. If you're not in a hurry, I'd wait for an offer on the G9. I suspect there'll be more offers in the current climate. (At Wilkinson Camera, I paid £799, 3 year warranty and, in 3 weeks, I can claim the free battery grip, 25mm f1.7 lens and spare battery).  So, I think you can go straight to the 100-400mm with this combo.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark ii

• Pros
  • The lenses made by Olympus are supposably better quality. There is however no weather sealed telezoom lens at the moment, so I would have to buy the same initial lens as with the G9 (100-300MM F/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario Mark II). As for upgrading I have found that Olympus has a 100-400 lens on their roadmap (M.Zuiko ED 100-400mm f/5.0-6.3 IS). Odds are good enough that this would be weather sealed so this would then become my upgrade goal.
  • The E-M1ii has phase detection AF and has better BIF performance according to my sources (mainly the mirrorlesscomparison.com articles)
• Cons
  • The Olympus menu system is a lot more complicated then Lumix, however I learn quickly and I don't think of this as a big issue.
  • The E-M1ii is both older and more expensive.

All in all, both cameras + lenses are within my budget range (although the E-M1 is about 20% more expensive). I have done excessive research and posting on this forum is really my last resort as I cannot make a choice between both cameras. I haven't held them (as all stores are closed due to the current crisis), but that is something I will definitely do before buying. I think it bottles down to these 3 questions:

1. Is the E-M1 significantly better at photographing BIF? So much better that I should consider it over the G9 even if BIF is not my main concern but it's also not something I'm willing to neglect.
2. I haven't got any lenses at the moment, which lenses are the best between Pana and Oly? Also, is it worth waiting on the Oly 100-400 lens or is it already determined that the quality will be inferior to the Leica 100-400?
3. Which is the best system to begin with considering future expectations? I would really hate to invest in a either one of them only to read that they will abandon the format (I know no one knows the answer to this question, but some might have a more informed take on this than me).

I'm sure the Olympus is a good camera too but I can't comment other than I did handle a few when moving to M43 and didn't like the feel or the menus.

Whatever you buy, you really should handle it before you buy.  In the current lockdown that'd be difficult but also, maybe, removes any urgency. If you buy online then you have the right to return.  My guess is you'll take to the G9 body because it will be less daunting and familiar in so many ways. Going straight to the 100-400mm will be cheaper in the long run and you'll see a remarkable improvement.

This has become quite a write-up and if you made it to this point, I already want to thank you. I hope some user input can help me make the best choice to start with a new system and to continue improving my own skills.

Hello,

First off, to all that are looking to buy a new system I recommend this fun and informative reading:

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/05/letter-to-george.html

That out of the way, here is my take on your questions:

Is the E-M1 significantly better at photographing BIF? So much better that I should consider it over the G9 even if BIF is not my main concern but it's also not something I'm willing to neglect.

https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/#cameras

The E-M1 II is ahead by a somewhat serious margin. This translates in a somewhat better AF overall for the E-M1 II for all kind of wildlife scenarios.

Both are bottom of the pack though...

I haven't got any lenses at the moment, which lenses are the best between Pana and Oly? Also, is it worth waiting on the Oly 100-400 lens or is it already determined that the quality will be inferior to the Leica 100-400?

It depends on what and how you are shooting... I for one like the Panasonic 8-18 over the Olympus 7-14, the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 over the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 and so on. The beauty of MFT is that you can mix and match high quality lenses from multiple providers without taking a hit on functionality.

Until a lens comes out, it is hard to tell how good it will be. My tea leaves tell me that the Oly 100-400 will be slightly better than the Panasonic 100-400mm. But I wouldn't make buying decisions based on tea leaves.

Which is the best system to begin with considering future expectations? I would really hate to invest in a either one of them only to read that they will abandon the format (I know no one knows the answer to this question, but some might have a more informed take on this than me).

Actually, the answer to this question is quite simple for a serious wildlife shooter (unless there is a medical reason that makes carrying anything over 2kg impossible): Nikon, with Canon a close second.

Reason for that is growth potential, both in the sense of lenses and sensors.

With MFT you are stuck with the sensor size (you'll get better sensors in time, but so will everybody else, and when it comes to sensors and wildlife, size does matter).

With MFT, for lenses, you either go for the 75-300/100-300 consumer tele lenses, which aren't really great, you sidestep into the 100-400mm (which in my experience with it, is a bit of a disappointment) or go for the optically superb, expensive and heavy (for the system) 300mm f4 and 200mm f2.8.

So, putting it all together: get either a Nikon D7500 or Z50 (if you prefer mirrorless) and the Nikon 200-500 if you shoot 60% wildlife and 20% BIFs. You can get it in budget if you shop around and it will out-wildlife and out-BIF anything in MFT land short of a E-M1x and Oly 300mm f4.

If you can't squeeze the 200-500 in the budget, go for the Sigma 150-600mm C or the Sigma 100-400mm C. Both are strong performers, above what is currently available from MFT tele zooms with similar reach.

With this set-up you'll have access to full frame sensors if you desire/need in the future and you'll be able to access various high end lenses (for example, the light 300mm and 500mm PF lenses or the optically superb, expensive and extremely heavy 400/500/600mms). Not to mention the vast used market and various either lenses.

Some additional comments

Elias06 wrote:

Hi everyone

Im' fairly new to photography and I'm completely self-thought on the matter. I've been shooting and getting outside with my very modest Lumix FZ300, which I've been using for almost a year now. I've been holding off on investing because I wasn't sure this new hobby would last. As I am now sure I would like to keep doing this, I have been looking into buying a new and better camera. (I am aware that the most important piece of the kit is always the photographer, however I feel my current camera really has its limits in IQ, AF...).

I've been pondering different systems (FF, APS-C, MFT and a regular all-in-one (Sony RX 10 iv to be more precise) and I have decided I would like to get into the MFT systems (it's a compromise between getting the IQ I want, not being a professional photographer so limited budget and portability).

My main interests are wildlife photography (I go on safari every few years, but I also love just going out in my neighborhood and shoot some of the local wildlife) and street/urban photography. I don't focus on BIF, but I would still really like to have the possibility to do this since local wildlife is very limited where I live. I am not at all interested in video performance, so I don't even look at those specs. Looking at my pictures of the past year I'd say 60% wildlife & nature, 20% BIF and 20% street/urban.

So far (after many days of research) I've narrowed it down to either the Panasonic Lumix G9 or Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark ii. I will list my thoughts below. I have decided on budget of €2.000 at the moment for the camera + a telezoom lens.

Panasonic Lumix G9

• Pros
  • I am familiar with the Panasonic system, however this would be my first mirrorless camera, so I'm not really sure if I should consider this
  • I would initially buy the 100-300 lens (100-300MM F/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario Mark II) and then aim to upgrade to the 100-400 lens (Panasonic MFT 100-400mm F/4.0-6.3 Power O.I.S. Leica DG Vario). Both are weather sealed which is really important to me.
• Cons
  • I have read (excessively) on the AF-performance of the DfD-system and I am afraid the camera will struggle with BIF.
  • I have found some vague issues with the 100-400 Leica lens, but I couldn't find whether this was still the case nowadays. Is this a bad lens?

The Panny 100-400 is very good lens. At maximum magnification it is a little soft, similar to many super telephoto zooms.

This lens is very difficult to align, in the past many people have been offered only an expensive refurbished model instaed of even minor repairs. The repair center in the US now has the ability to repair and align this lens.

You have to be very careful not to drop this lens especially when mounted on a camera, there have been cases where a relatively small drop has torn the mounting flange.

•  
  • I cannot find any roadmap for Lumix MFT lenses, which concerns me that Panasonic might be looking at the FF-system more.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark ii

• Pros
  • The lenses made by Olympus are supposably better quality. There is however no weather sealed telezoom lens at the moment, so I would have to buy the same initial lens as with the G9 (100-300MM F/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario Mark II). As for upgrading I have found that Olympus has a 100-400 lens on their roadmap (M.Zuiko ED 100-400mm f/5.0-6.3 IS). Odds are good enough that this would be weather sealed so this would then become my upgrade goal.

The question is when would it be available? No date has been given. Could be several years, even longer if there is a signifcant recession due to coronavirus.

The Pan 100-400 works well enough on the E-M1ii

• • The E-M1ii has phase detection AF and has better BIF performance according to my sources (mainly the mirrorlesscomparison.com articles)
• Cons
  • The Olympus menu system is a lot more complicated then Lumix, however I learn quickly and I don't think of this as a big issue.
  • The E-M1ii is both older and more expensive.

All in all, both cameras + lenses are within my budget range (although the E-M1 is about 20% more expensive). I have done excessive research and posting on this forum is really my last resort as I cannot make a choice between both cameras. I haven't held them (as all stores are closed due to the current crisis), but that is something I will definitely do before buying. I think it bottles down to these 3 questions:

1. Is the E-M1 significantly better at photographing BIF? So much better that I should consider it over the G9 even if BIF is not my main concern but it's also not something I'm willing to neglect.
2. I haven't got any lenses at the moment, which lenses are the best between Pana and Oly? Also, is it worth waiting on the Oly 100-400 lens or is it already determined that the quality will be inferior to the Leica 100-400?
3. Which is the best system to begin with considering future expectations? I would really hate to invest in a either one of them only to read that they will abandon the format (I know no one knows the answer to this question, but some might have a more informed take on this than me).

This has become quite a write-up and if you made it to this point, I already want to thank you. I hope some user input can help me make the best choice to start with a new system and to continue improving my own skills.

StefanSC wrote:

That out of the way, here is my take on your questions:

Is the E-M1 significantly better at photographing BIF? So much better that I should consider it over the G9 even if BIF is not my main concern but it's also not something I'm willing to neglect.

https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/#cameras

The E-M1 II is ahead by a somewhat serious margin. This translates in a somewhat better AF overall for the E-M1 II for all kind of wildlife scenarios.

Both are bottom of the pack though...

That is a pretty useless test.  He's not shooting BIFs he is shooting one type of bird in an almost controlled environment.  If he got out and shot real birds I'm sure he would find that the G9 is a great tool (as probably is the EM1-II) for  BIF shooting providing you take the time to learn how to use it.

I agree with the fact somebody who would get really familiar with the G9 or the E-M1 II would be able to obtain better results.

I also think that, after the 2.0 FW update, the G9 has more depth for BiF (the near/far AF has a lot of potential).

That being said, the test is far from useless as :

1) It is roughly controlled so you can compare results between cameras.

2) It works on the "how easy is to get good results with this camera" level, which I guess is what we all want: the camera to get out of the way in order to focus on the actual image.

Elias06 wrote:

Hi everyone

Im' fairly new to photography and I'm completely self-thought on the matter. I've been shooting and getting outside with my very modest Lumix FZ300, which I've been using for almost a year now. I've been holding off on investing because I wasn't sure this new hobby would last. As I am now sure I would like to keep doing this, I have been looking into buying a new and better camera. (I am aware that the most important piece of the kit is always the photographer, however I feel my current camera really has its limits in IQ, AF...).

I've been pondering different systems (FF, APS-C, MFT and a regular all-in-one (Sony RX 10 iv to be more precise) and I have decided I would like to get into the MFT systems (it's a compromise between getting the IQ I want, not being a professional photographer so limited budget and portability).

My main interests are wildlife photography (I go on safari every few years, but I also love just going out in my neighborhood and shoot some of the local wildlife) and street/urban photography. I don't focus on BIF, but I would still really like to have the possibility to do this since local wildlife is very limited where I live. I am not at all interested in video performance, so I don't even look at those specs. Looking at my pictures of the past year I'd say 60% wildlife & nature, 20% BIF and 20% street/urban.

So far (after many days of research) I've narrowed it down to either the Panasonic Lumix G9 or Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark ii. I will list my thoughts below. I have decided on budget of €2.000 at the moment for the camera + a telezoom lens.

Panasonic Lumix G9

• Pros
  • I am familiar with the Panasonic system, however this would be my first mirrorless camera, so I'm not really sure if I should consider this
  • I would initially buy the 100-300 lens (100-300MM F/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario Mark II) and then aim to upgrade to the 100-400 lens (Panasonic MFT 100-400mm F/4.0-6.3 Power O.I.S. Leica DG Vario). Both are weather sealed which is really important to me.
• Cons
  • I have read (excessively) on the AF-performance of the DfD-system and I am afraid the camera will struggle with BIF.
  • I have found some vague issues with the 100-400 Leica lens, but I couldn't find whether this was still the case nowadays. Is this a bad lens?
  • I cannot find any roadmap for Lumix MFT lenses, which concerns me that Panasonic might be looking at the FF-system more.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 mark ii

• Pros
  • The lenses made by Olympus are supposably better quality. There is however no weather sealed telezoom lens at the moment, so I would have to buy the same initial lens as with the G9 (100-300MM F/4.0-5.6 Lumix G Vario Mark II). As for upgrading I have found that Olympus has a 100-400 lens on their roadmap (M.Zuiko ED 100-400mm f/5.0-6.3 IS). Odds are good enough that this would be weather sealed so this would then become my upgrade goal.
  • The E-M1ii has phase detection AF and has better BIF performance according to my sources (mainly the mirrorlesscomparison.com articles)
• Cons
  • The Olympus menu system is a lot more complicated then Lumix, however I learn quickly and I don't think of this as a big issue.
  • The E-M1ii is both older and more expensive.

All in all, both cameras + lenses are within my budget range (although the E-M1 is about 20% more expensive). I have done excessive research and posting on this forum is really my last resort as I cannot make a choice between both cameras. I haven't held them (as all stores are closed due to the current crisis), but that is something I will definitely do before buying. I think it bottles down to these 3 questions:

1. Is the E-M1 significantly better at photographing BIF? So much better that I should consider it over the G9 even if BIF is not my main concern but it's also not something I'm willing to neglect.
2. I haven't got any lenses at the moment, which lenses are the best between Pana and Oly? Also, is it worth waiting on the Oly 100-400 lens or is it already determined that the quality will be inferior to the Leica 100-400?
3. Which is the best system to begin with considering future expectations? I would really hate to invest in a either one of them only to read that they will abandon the format (I know no one knows the answer to this question, but some might have a more informed take on this than me).

This has become quite a write-up and if you made it to this point, I already want to thank you. I hope some user input can help me make the best choice to start with a new system and to continue improving my own skills.

You have already get a fair amount of advice but I would add this

For wildlife in general you can usually get around with a 400 fov equivalent, but for birds you want to reach a 600mm FOV. so since this is going to narrow the choice of the lens big time , you may want to wonder how often you are going to photograph birds , especially small birds  and if this alone justify you buying a mUCH bigger , heavier and/or more expensive lens

Regardless if you are going to buy the PL100-400 your choice of camera is simplified . G9 for sure because you do NOT want to pass the advantage of dual IS2. regardless of the quality of the lens getting sharp results at fl more than. 600mm FOV handheld requires some practice and you would not want to get just Lens IOS

Make sure you get the G9 battery grip as well. you are going it. there are several offers where you can get the  grip for free or almost nothing

H

StefanSC wrote:

I agree with the fact somebody who would get really familiar with the G9 or the E-M1 II would be able to obtain better results.

I also think that, after the 2.0 FW update, the G9 has more depth for BiF (the near/far AF has a lot of potential).

I'm not an expert on the G9's (over)complicated AF system, but personally I've not found the 2.0 FW update's features to have any benefit when shooting birds in flight.

The near/far AF options work quite well with still subjects, e.g. when trying to get it to focus on a bird in a tree rather than the branches around it. But trying to use near AF when tracking a bird in flight against a busy background just caused a lot more hunting and completely missed shots. For me simply using a cluster of focus points worked better than seemingly more advanced features like animal detect and near/far AF.

My impression is that even though both cameras are capable, it's easier and simpler to get decent BIF results with Olympus PDAF.

Given both cameras have pros and cons AND are equally specced for the purpose my suggestion is to grab both of them and see which of the two suits you betterm in terms of ergonomics.

That done you won't regret the choice afterwards.

avalvo wrote:

Both are fine camera that are a great value for the price. The Oly had a recent firmware update that the bird shooters seemed to like a lot. I don't have a G9, but I have looked at it. I do have the E-m1II and a 1x. They are all good cameras. I think the Olympus is a bit more versatile, but at the expense of more complicated menus. The Oly lens catalog is also really good and it's AF system is not dependent on brand. The G9 needs Lumix lenses to get the best out of it's AF system. That could be a factor, if you are looking for fast AF.

Yes, you need to have Panasonic lenses to get the best of Panasonic's AF and dual stabilization. Similar to needing Olympus lenses for best image stabilization on Olympus cameras (albeit, only available in a few select Olympus lenses).

Still, Panasonic does have the superior AF-S (single point auto focus) so even Olympus lenses often focuses faster on Panasonic cameras.

Mind you, Olympus has pdaf on e-m1 (series) and the new E-M5 mkiii, so CF (continuous focus) is faster on those cameras.

Elias06 wrote:

1. Is the E-M1 significantly better at photographing BIF? So much better that I should consider it over the G9 even if BIF is not my main concern but it's also not something I'm willing to neglect.
2. I haven't got any lenses at the moment, which lenses are the best between Pana and Oly? Also, is it worth waiting on the Oly 100-400 lens or is it already determined that the quality will be inferior to the Leica 100-400?
3. Which is the best system to begin with considering future expectations? I would really hate to invest in a either one of them only to read that they will abandon the format (I know no one knows the answer to this question, but some might have a more informed take on this than me).

I am not a dedicated birder and I would not consider lugging around heavy equipment and sitting silently for hours to get the perfect shot while being eaten by mosquitos. I shoot birds on walks. Therefor my choice of body and lens is heavily influenced by the weight I feel comfortable carrying around my neck on a two hour walk.

When I started birding I already had the Pen-F so the inexpensive and light Oly 75-300 II was the natural choice. Some might say that the Pen-F without a grip and "only" contrast af is an interesting choice for birding. However my experience has been that on a sunny day if you don't get the picture it's not the camera or lens' fault. On cloudy days I leave the camera at home and take the binos instead.

If I were to buy a birding combo today I would probably go for an Oly em5 III (which is basically the same as an em1 II in a very light body) and the Oly 75-300 II.

Here are some pictures to give you an impression of what I can do with a Pen F, so you probably cannot go wrong with either the G9 or EM-1:

stationary great tit

geese, slow fly by

crazy, erratic and fast peewits

StefanSC wrote:

So, putting it all together: get either a Nikon D7500 or Z50 (if you prefer mirrorless) and the Nikon 200-500 if you shoot 60% wildlife and 20% BIFs. You can get it in budget if you shop around and it will out-wildlife and out-BIF anything in MFT land short of a E-M1x and Oly 300mm f4.

If you can't squeeze the 200-500 in the budget, go for the Sigma 150-600mm C or the Sigma 100-400mm C. Both are strong performers, above what is currently available from MFT tele zooms with similar reach.

With this set-up you'll have access to full frame sensors if you desire/need in the future and you'll be able to access various high end lenses (for example, the light 300mm and 500mm PF lenses or the optically superb, expensive and extremely heavy 400/500/600mms). Not to mention the vast used market and various either lenses.

Thank you for your answer. I had actually considered the Z50 but as I couldn't find any reviews on its use for wildlife photography I let that ship sail.

What is your opinion on the Z50 for wildlife and BIF? I have checked prices and I could definitely afford the camera + converter + Tamron 18-400MM F/3.5-6.3 DI II VC HLD NIKON (while maybe saving up for one of the better Nikon lenses like you propose).

When I compare the Z50 to the Pana and Oly I notice the following:

• Pro
  • Sensor size
  • Flexibility for next step-up if and when necessary
  • More lenses to choose from on the long zoom end
• Con
  • Not weather sealed (is this correct? I get mixed messages)
  • Lenses are larger, I don't have any physical restraints, but I do travel a lot and a smaller system might be better for me (however the combo I described above is actually smaller than G9 + PL 100-400)
  • No IBIS

My main concern is size and my other concern is that I cannot find any info on the AF-system of the Z50 and how it compares to G9/E-M1ii.

Elias06 wrote:

StefanSC wrote:

So, putting it all together: get either a Nikon D7500 or Z50 (if you prefer mirrorless) and the Nikon 200-500 if you shoot 60% wildlife and 20% BIFs. You can get it in budget if you shop around and it will out-wildlife and out-BIF anything in MFT land short of a E-M1x and Oly 300mm f4.

If you can't squeeze the 200-500 in the budget, go for the Sigma 150-600mm C or the Sigma 100-400mm C. Both are strong performers, above what is currently available from MFT tele zooms with similar reach.

With this set-up you'll have access to full frame sensors if you desire/need in the future and you'll be able to access various high end lenses (for example, the light 300mm and 500mm PF lenses or the optically superb, expensive and extremely heavy 400/500/600mms). Not to mention the vast used market and various either lenses.

Thank you for your answer. I had actually considered the Z50 but as I couldn't find any reviews on its use for wildlife photography I let that ship sail.

What is your opinion on the Z50 for wildlife and BIF? I have checked prices and I could definitely afford the camera + converter + Tamron 18-400MM F/3.5-6.3 DI II VC HLD NIKON (while maybe saving up for one of the better Nikon lenses like you propose).

When I compare the Z50 to the Pana and Oly I notice the following:

• Pro
  • Sensor size
  • Flexibility for next step-up if and when necessary
  • More lenses to choose from on the long zoom end
• Con
  • Not weather sealed (is this correct? I get mixed messages)
  • Lenses are larger, I don't have any physical restraints, but I do travel a lot and a smaller system might be better for me (however the combo I described above is actually smaller than G9 + PL 100-400)
  • No IBIS

My main concern is size and my other concern is that I cannot find any info on the AF-system of the Z50 and how it compares to G9/E-M1ii.

The current lack of native lenses and the lack of IBIS would both be negatives for the Z50.  While IBIS or stabilization is not generally required for BIFs, it is important for everything else including stationary wildlife.

drj3 wrote:

The current lack of native lenses and the lack of IBIS would both be negatives for the Z50. While IBIS or stabilization is not generally required for BIFs, it is important for everything else including stationary wildlife.

That is correct, however with the FTZ adapter I should be able to use the F-mount lenses as well. Is the lack of IBIS a big issue if the lens has stabilization?