Even the bigger m43rds are small and light...

wild-snaps wrote:

Perhaps more realistic??

Z6ii+Z24-70F4S = 1278 gr

OM-1+12-40F2.8 ii = 1051 gr

Paid more for the OM-1 and 12-40 individually recently.

220gr weight advantage but A$500 cost disadvantage. So MFT combo is more expensive before I look at IQ. I received the lens yesterday so need to do a detailed comp.

Hi, PM if you got a comparison you want to make. I am curious how you find the IQ over the other.  If I can ask also, why did you get both?  You can PM me to avoid going OT on the thread, if you are cool with that.

Thanks much in advance.

StefanSC wrote:

And if you buy both body only and lens afterwards, the Nikon kit is only 200 USD cheaper.

Yes, USD200 is about AUD300, price structure here is different to US.

That being said, feel free to share your comparison between the two, I would be curious to see what conclusions you come to.

My main concern is the image performance for distance subject shots. I see mostly close up and macro shots or wildlife shots in the local zoo for reviews. I will do more testing next week to see how the lens performs for my use case.

Gary from Seattle wrote:

A_Mist wrote:

MZ 7-14/2.8 has fixed lens hood. There’s nothing I can do about it.

Yeah I didn't buy that lens because it is too large - like the Cannon on the right. But there are a number of m4/3 UWA lenses that don't have an attached hood. Personally, I didn't even know the 7-14 had an attached hood because I never considered it.

The Panasonic 7-14 f/4 also has a fixed hood, probably because of the bulbous front element:

I traveled with this lens for 10 years. It weighs just 10.6 oz (300 g). Also nice lens for walking around town.

Raist3d wrote:

I am curious how you find the IQ over the other.

Thanks much in advance.

Did try out OM-1/12-40 F2.8 ii briefly , lens may be ok for travel so will keep it.