Making the switch to OM

[OlyInKanab]

This will be similar to many of the responses you will read. You've chosen great lenses for your proposed kit, the 12-100 f/4 is the perfect walk around lens and balances nicely on the OM-1. The 40-150 f/2.8 is superb and with the 1.4 TC becomes a fabulous 100-400 f/4 wildlife lens. The 300 f/4 is also superb, I shoot with it almost every day and generally have the 1.4 TC on it. Were it me I would skip the 2x TC and get two 1.4's, one for each of the lenses I mentioned previously.

The other lens I'd think about is the 100-400, which is not a Pro lens but which would give you flexibility to zoom through a huge range. The 300 is a better quality lens for sure but comes with the inflexibility of a prime, so only you can judge which is a better fit for you.

You didn't mention wider, if you were going to get a wide lens I would go with the 8-25 f/4. I own the 7-14 f/2.8 and while a fine lens, it has issues with flare and that bulbous front element negates easily mounting a filter.

Great gear though, I think you'll be happy.

 

[Owlsfan]

Buy the 2x it's better than cropping. Ofc don't get too giddy with the range and try to fill the frame if possible.

Nobody is saying you don't lose anything, you do but ignore charts and people who don't have any interest in wildlife photography.

 

[TeeJay626]

This will be similar to many of the responses you will read. You've chosen great lenses for your proposed kit, the 12-100 f/4 is the perfect walk around lens and balances nicely on the OM-1. The 40-150 f/2.8 is superb and with the 1.4 TC becomes a fabulous 100-400 f/4 wildlife lens. The 300 f/4 is also superb, I shoot with it almost every day and generally have the 1.4 TC on it. Were it me I would skip the 2x TC and get two 1.4's, one for each of the lenses I mentioned previously.

The other lens I'd think about is the 100-400, which is not a Pro lens but which would give you flexibility to zoom through a huge range. The 300 is a better quality lens for sure but comes with the inflexibility of a prime, so only you can judge which is a better fit for you.

You didn't mention wider, if you were going to get a wide lens I would go with the 8-25 f/4. I own the 7-14 f/2.8 and while a fine lens, it has issues with flare and that bulbous front element negates easily mounting a filter.

Great gear though, I think you'll be happy.

The owner of the camera shop I'll be doing the trade in called me today and is offering me $500 more than I had figured. They also have a 100-400 mk I in like new condition that he'll sell me for $699. I'm adding that to the kit I mentioned. I think that will be a well rounded kit for my wildlife photography.

I do not do much, if any wide angle shooting. I currently have the Canon RF 14-35 and I think I've used it once in the last 12 months. Fantastic lens, but I never am in a position to use it. For me, a 24mm full frame equivalent is fine for me.

 

[HicHic]

I've been pondering this for a few months now and I think I'm about to make the switch.

I'm an enthusiast wildlife photographer, and 95% of the images I take are wildlife. I've been shooting Canon for over 15 years now, with most of that time being on APS-C DSLR and RF. I currently use the Canon R6 Mark II and R5 with the RF 100-500L and RF 200-800 lenses. It's a heavy kit, and honestly I've been less than enthusiastic with the results I'm getting. Yes, the 100-500 is a fantastic lens. The 200-800 also produces great images, but also has a high failure rate in some situations. So, I'm looking to make the switch to OM for a few reasons - weight, seemingly better IQ in many areas, and a lens lineup that makes sense.

The R5 + 100-500 is super light, how much weight are you expecting to shave going to M43? The 300/4 is not exactly the lightest 300mm prime out there. The 100-500 is not as sharp as the 300/4, but it's a longer lens and you have more megapixels to work with. If you crop the 100-500 image to the 300/4's 600mm FoV, you have 31.25MP to work with instead of 20MP. It's also much more flexible than the 300/4. If weight and image quality are your reasons to switch, you're going to be disappointed. The autofocus is also nowhere near as sticky as the R5 or R6II. You will experience a lot of micro pulsing in front of and behind the eye.

 

[Richandhiscat]

Buy the 2x it's better than cropping. Ofc don't get too giddy with the range and try to fill the frame if possible.

Nobody is saying you don't lose anything, you do but ignore charts and people who don't have any interest in wildlife photography.

Totally agree, my copy of the 2x is excellent.

 

[TeeJay626]

I've been pondering this for a few months now and I think I'm about to make the switch.

I'm an enthusiast wildlife photographer, and 95% of the images I take are wildlife. I've been shooting Canon for over 15 years now, with most of that time being on APS-C DSLR and RF. I currently use the Canon R6 Mark II and R5 with the RF 100-500L and RF 200-800 lenses. It's a heavy kit, and honestly I've been less than enthusiastic with the results I'm getting. Yes, the 100-500 is a fantastic lens. The 200-800 also produces great images, but also has a high failure rate in some situations. So, I'm looking to make the switch to OM for a few reasons - weight, seemingly better IQ in many areas, and a lens lineup that makes sense.

The R5 + 100-500 is super light, how much weight are you expecting to shave going to M43? The 300/4 is not exactly the lightest 300mm prime out there. The 100-500 is not as sharp as the 300/4, but it's a longer lens and you have more megapixels to work with. If you crop the 100-500 image to the 300/4's 600mm FoV, you have 31.25MP to work with instead of 20MP. It's also much more flexible than the 300/4. If weight and image quality are your reasons to switch, you're going to be disappointed. The autofocus is also nowhere near as sticky as the R5 or R6II. You will experience a lot of micro pulsing in front of and behind the eye.

I'm going to disagree with a lot of your comments, which is fine. I think you may have missed where I also have the RF 200-800, which weighs around 4.5 pounds, and I use that more than the 100-500. That lens weighs around 3 pounds. Also, the 100-500 really isn't a "longer" lens, as the OM 300 f4 will have a field of view of 600mm. You also need to look at pixel density, which I won't get into. And yes, weight and image quality are main reasons for the upgrade. I've already tested the OM system and lenses, and I was highly impressed. Sharper images, especially compared to the 200-800. Lighter kit. Much better IS.

As far as AF goes, I did not see any focus pulsing on the OM-1 mark II when testing on birds and my neighbors cat . Also, IMO the AF is better than the R5, and close to as good as the R6 Mark II. What I did notice is that the OM-1 was MUCH better sticking with a bird in flight with a busy background, where the R5 would go all over the place.

As I said, I've been pondering this for over 2 months, and after my recent Yellowstone spring trip, I'm ready to make the switch. Timing is perfect now too since Canon prices went up and OM hasn't budged, and my local camera shop is giving me significantly more money for my trade in. With that, I'm also picking up the OM 100-400 mk 1 lens.

 

[HicHic]

Also, the 100-500 really isn't a "longer" lens, as the OM 300 f4 will have a field of view of 600mm.

500 is longer than 300.

 

[oneofone25]

If you like macro, save up some for the OM 90mm f3.5 Pro



you won’t believe what it can do, especially when coupled with a teleconverter. It’s 2x without all on its own, and 4x with.





(Strawberry below)

 

[HicHic]

How do you get the spider to stay still??

 

[oneofone25]

How do you get the spider to stay still??

It was trying to “scare” my lens away, I had it on focus bracket mode at 3/10 for the step size and let the camera btw let while it was in position

 

[Skeeterbytes]

How do you get the spider to stay still??

It was trying to “scare” my lens away, I had it on focus bracket mode at 3/10 for the step size and let the camera btw let while it was in position

Was really hoping you'd say "My assistant was holding its favorite squeaky toy behind me during the shoot."

Rick

 

[HicHic]

How do you get the spider to stay still??

It was trying to “scare” my lens away, I had it on focus bracket mode at 3/10 for the step size and let the camera btw let while it was in position

Lucky, I can never get them to sit still for me.

 

[oneofone25]

How do you get the spider to stay still??

It was trying to “scare” my lens away, I had it on focus bracket mode at 3/10 for the step size and let the camera btw let while it was in position

Lucky, I can never get them to sit still for me.

it’s taken years to figure it out - helps to have them as pets

 

[tammons]

I've been pondering this for a few months now and I think I'm about to make the switch.

I'm an enthusiast wildlife photographer, and 95% of the images I take are wildlife. I've been shooting Canon for over 15 years now, with most of that time being on APS-C DSLR and RF. I currently use the Canon R6 Mark II and R5 with the RF 100-500L and RF 200-800 lenses. It's a heavy kit, and honestly I've been less than enthusiastic with the results I'm getting. Yes, the 100-500 is a fantastic lens. The 200-800 also produces great images, but also has a high failure rate in some situations. So, I'm looking to make the switch to OM for a few reasons - weight, seemingly better IQ in many areas, and a lens lineup that makes sense.

Also, Canon today significantly raised their prices on most of their cameras and lenses, and in many cases substantially. As a result, the trade in value of my gear also rose by several hundred dollars (just checked). I will be trading in at my local camera shop and making the purchase there. Here's what I'm considering my my OM kit:

OM-1 Mark II, 12-100 f4 Pro, 40-150 f2.8 Pro, 300 f4 Pro and the MC-14. The shop also has a used copy in like new condition of the MC-20 at a good price, but I've never been a fan of 2x TCs. I was also considering the 150-600, but it weighs about the same as my 200-800 and looks to have the same IQ.

Thoughts? Any changes to my kit? I'll end up with about $7,600 to spend after my trade in. And as much as I'd love the 150-400, it's not an option.

My kit = Om1 II, O 8-25, P 12-60 kit lens, P 100-400mm, both TCs, O 60mm macro, and a few others. IQ of the O 300mm F4 is outstanding, but I like the versatility of the P 100-400 and it is small and light for what it is. You may have to shop the P 100-400 to find a super sharp copy at 400mm. Took me three trys to find a top copy. The P 100-400 II may be different.

 

[sherman_levine]

Thanks everyone for all the replies so far. You now have me rethinking the MC-20, as it sounds like it may be a good piece of kit to have. I also do understand the effects of atmospheric distortion so I won't have crazy expectations with very far away objects. I learned that lesson early on lol.

Does anyone have an opinion or first hand experience with the 150-600? I know it's heavy and kind of defeats the purpose a bit for a lighter kit, but if the IQ is solid, I may consider that as well. Honestly I just think the 300 f4 Pro is a beast of a lens and should be happy with that.

I've been delighted with it. I carry it cross-body using a Op-Tech elastic harness and it's an easy carry.

Here's a link to several of my prior posts regarding the lens/OM-1m2

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68266343

and some samples

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4798670

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4794986

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4788528

--

Sherm
Sherms flickr page

P950 album

P900 album RX10iv album
OM1.2 150-600 album

 

[bluevellet]

I've been pondering this for a few months now and I think I'm about to make the switch.

I'm an enthusiast wildlife photographer, and 95% of the images I take are wildlife. I've been shooting Canon for over 15 years now, with most of that time being on APS-C DSLR and RF. I currently use the Canon R6 Mark II and R5 with the RF 100-500L and RF 200-800 lenses. It's a heavy kit, and honestly I've been less than enthusiastic with the results I'm getting. Yes, the 100-500 is a fantastic lens. The 200-800 also produces great images, but also has a high failure rate in some situations. So, I'm looking to make the switch to OM for a few reasons - weight, seemingly better IQ in many areas, and a lens lineup that makes sense.

Also, Canon today significantly raised their prices on most of their cameras and lenses, and in many cases substantially. As a result, the trade in value of my gear also rose by several hundred dollars (just checked). I will be trading in at my local camera shop and making the purchase there. Here's what I'm considering my my OM kit:

OM-1 Mark II, 12-100 f4 Pro, 40-150 f2.8 Pro, 300 f4 Pro and the MC-14. The shop also has a used copy in like new condition of the MC-20 at a good price, but I've never been a fan of 2x TCs. I was also considering the 150-600, but it weighs about the same as my 200-800 and looks to have the same IQ.

Thoughts? Any changes to my kit? I'll end up with about $7,600 to spend after my trade in. And as much as I'd love the 150-400, it's not an option.

Pretty banging Canon kit you have there already.



I have my doubts about the "better IQ" in many areas, but yeah, you could lighten the load. Certainly.