1. Sootchucker

    Sootchucker

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Andrew
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Right guys, I've put this in it's own thread as I didn't want it biased by sticking it in a Nikon, Olympus or Fuji thread (bear with me and hopefully you will understand why).

    OK, so as some may know, I used to be a Nikon guy (for over 30 years in fact), but about a year ago sold off the last of my Nikon gear (my D810 and D500 bodies and a few remaining lenses). Following the sale I became a sole micro four thirds shooter and currently have the Olympus EM1.2 and Panasonic G9 bodies which are both very nice, and a really nice set of Olympus and Panny glass (more of that later). Recently (about 5 weeks ago) I added a Fuji X-H1 to the mix with just a small selection of classic lenses (10-24, 16-55, 55-200 & 35 F2).

    My photography encompasses many genres's (Landscape, people, travel and wildlife/bird photography). I still use the M4/3 stuff for the majority of my stuff and am still very happy with it, and have started using the Fuji for a bit of Landscape work and portraits.

    Now, when it comes to my current passion (wildlife and bird photography), in decent light (where I can shoot at ISO 1600 or below, my M4/3 bodies and my Olympus 300mm F4 + Teleconverter along with the Olympus 40-150 F2.8 (again with the optional teleconverter), nets me a reach of around 840mm in FF terms (at F5.6). My longest lens for the Fuji system is my 55-200 (300mm equivalent @ F4.8). Whilst the Fuji is a bit better than the M4/3 bodies at high ISO (maybe ½ to ¾ stop max), the "only" long lens for the Fuji system is the 100-400 (with an equivalent reach of 600mm @ F5.6) - that's if you exclude the hideously expensive new 200mm F2 (which I have). I understand the 100-400 is a great lens, but I'm wondering if I'll see much (if any) difference between shooting my Olympus 300mm F4 (without converter) @ ISO 1600 to Shooting the X-H1 with the 100-400 F5.6 @ ISO 3200, or would it be a wash (and considering the Fuji Lens is the thick end of £1,600 new). Both would be a F/L of approx 600mm in FF terms but one stop apart in aperture.

    Therefore, i was thinking if I should just stick to the M4/3 pair and only shoot in decent(ish) light where the ISO's can be kept relatively low, or (and this is a bit off the wall), buy another D500 with the 200-500 Nikon lens. I really missed the D500 when I sold it as it was by far and away my fav DSLR in all the Nikon's I've even owned (and I've owned a few) !) As it happens, an acquaintance of mine just happens to be selling both for a VERY good price (also very well looked after). Now I know a lot of you will say it's crazy to even consider adding a 3rd system (and maybe you are right), but despite the X-H1 being good, when I was shooting with the Nikon D500 and my Tamron 150-600 F4-6.3 (Gen 1), I could quite regularly get more than acceptable images (in fact pretty amazing images truth be told) from the D500 at ISO's up to 12,800, and the D500's AF is still up their with the very best (and much better than either of my current cameras, even though they are still quite good).

    So options are
    • Stick with the M4/3 system for long lens shooting (as I already own the glass), but look for better lighting to keep the ISO low.
    • Get the 100-400 for the Fuji X-H1 to get me to 600mm which should suffice for 80% of my photography (but again it's an F5.6 lens) so any low light sensor advantages of the X-H1 are probably negated by the one stop slower max aperture?.
    • Add a D500 with Grip and the Nikon 200-500 and use this primary as my wildlife rig.
    For the time being whilst this is being discussed I'd like to keep FF (so Nikon D850 & A7 III etc.) out of the mix as I'd need much bigger and costlier lenses for the same reach as APS-C or M4/3. As far as cost goes, let's just say that in this instance, money isn't the primary driver.
     
  2. sk66

    sk66

    Messages:
    6,321
    Name:
    Steven
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Hate to say it, but I would go with the D500 combination if you're serious about it...
    The general rules are that the larger sensor wins and the shorter FL wins... in this case that's kind of a wash most of the time (at max FL). However, AF/tracking/metering/etc all make a significant difference and the D500 is pretty amazing in those areas.
     
  3. pooley

    pooley

    Messages:
    4,369
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I agree with Steven - the D500 option is the best for serious work. The 4/3 can produce some good results, but the D500 200-500 combo is pretty unbeatable for the cost, both interns of IQ and AF. It'll also produce better high ISO results.

    4/3 is getting very good, but at the moment, as long as you can afford it, the Nikon setup is the way to go

    Mike
     
  4. mikew

    mikew

    Messages:
    3,139
    Name:
    mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    As a m4/3 shooter who has had the D500 its a no brainer for me, the D500 wins hands down.
     
  5. trevorbray

    trevorbray

    Messages:
    4,742
    Name:
    Trevor
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Yep. D500, but you already know that.
     
  6. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The easy answer is the D500, so long as you're prepared to return to the heft of the much bigger lenses. The D500 is possibly one of the best wildlife cameras out there, no matter the format.

    BUT ... of course, it might be worth reading from those who have actually used both systems for wildlife. This guy here had no issue with the Olympus up to 6400 - http://www.wild-eye.co.za/wildlife-photography-omd-em-1-mark-ii/

    In general, you're going to be told the D500, mostly by people who have not used the Oly.
     
  7. sk66

    sk66

    Messages:
    6,321
    Name:
    Steven
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    When reach is an issue (i.e. wildlife) that benefit tends to be negated... longer FL's tend to have/require smaller apertures and therefore the ISO has to be higher.
     
  8. pooley

    pooley

    Messages:
    4,369
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    To a degree, but in this case there will be about 1/2 stop difference in the aperture between the 2 systems as the lengths differ a little, but the D500 will easily win the high ISO states, and the sharper effective capture with the larger sensor will win the battle here hands down.
     
  9. Sootchucker

    Sootchucker

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Andrew
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Damn it you guys..........

    I thought you would all tell me that I was crazy to consider going back to a DSLR from mirrorless. You aren't making my decision to stay with what I have very easy at all. :D:D

    To add insult to injury, I've just been on Panamoz, and a brand New D500, with MB-D17 grip and the Nikon 200-500 can be had for £2,299.00, whereas according to Camera Price Buster, the cheapest from UK stock today (8/11/18) is £3,218.00 - that's a fair old saving, and cheaper than I've seen second hand on Ebay.

    Are Panamoz still good to deal with?
     
  10. Peter123

    Peter123

    Messages:
    1,100
    Name:
    Peter
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Excellent.
     
    trevorbray likes this.
  11. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    I wish I had this problem :D
     
  12. trevorbray

    trevorbray

    Messages:
    4,742
    Name:
    Trevor
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    @Sootchucker

    Panamoz. I’ve used them loads. Terrific service and I’ve sent a camera back, instant refund.
     
  13. the black fox

    the black fox

    Messages:
    6,388
    Name:
    Jeff
    Edit My Images:
    No
    as with the other comments the Nikon d500 is the best option as long as your happy with the size and weight factor . I use a Panasonic g80 and p/leica 100-400 which suits my age and portability expectations , and to be honest I rarely have trouble with high i.s.o shots . the secret being to get close enough to target in the first place , not hard with a 800mm equiv. lens and as long as the image is sharp any noise can be easily dealt with in p/p .. just lend me some of your gear or feel free to donate it to a struggling o.a.p :beer::beer::beer:
     
    Cagey75 and Bobsyeruncle like this.
  14. Bobsyeruncle

    Bobsyeruncle

    Messages:
    7,278
    Name:
    Robert
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Why can't you just be happy with what you've got? :p
     
  15. Sootchucker

    Sootchucker

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Andrew
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Because I never am :cool::cool:
     
    Bobsyeruncle likes this.
  16. Sootchucker

    Sootchucker

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Andrew
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Well I've gone and done it. I've just ordered a new D500 with 16-80 VR and the 200-500 VR lens from Panamoz. Although I've had a D500 before, I must admit to being quite excited. Just hope I don't get one with the battery drain issues that I had last time (have Nikon sorted this on later bodies) ?

    Can't believe the price saving on the body / lens combo. According to camera Price buster, the cheapest today on the web is from SRS Microssystems (a real good company BTW), and that's £2,419.00 and on Panamoz is was £1,530.00 (less £30 for buying two items). That equates to a nearly £900 saving (or around 37%) :eek:. Whilst 95% of all my camera gear was purchased new though UK traders (Wex, Park, Mifsuds, SRS etc.), and I try and be fully supportive of UK traders, I just couldn't' pass up those sort of savings.

    Also, whilst I don't think I'll be using it all the time, Nikon's implementation of Snapbridge was just plain awful last time, however I've heard it's now been rewritten and the newer version is now much more straightforward to connect and more reliable. Is that the case or is it as flaky as ever ?

    Just got to decide what I'll do with my Fuji gear now. Do i keep it for general work, or sell it and use the money to plug the focal lengths for the Nikon Gear? I currently have a gripped X-H1, 16-55 F2.8, 10-24 F4, 55-200 F3.5-4.8 and the tiny 35mm F2 WR ?

    Decisions, decisions. Think I might wait a little while and see.
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2018 at 8:06 AM
  17. Nawty

    Nawty

    Messages:
    6,215
    Name:
    Ned
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    That was going great until I got halfway down and immediately spotted the 'nervous' bokeh the 40-150 is known for in the puma photo - totally ruins the shot for me as it is so distracting. Shame, as otherwise it is my favourite lens...

    For me the argument boils down to usage scenario; need to travel light? m43 is the way forward; if you don't, the Nikon.

    I chose m43 as I travel a lot and value portability, if all I did was go and sit in a hide a few hundred metres from the car then bigger kit would be an option.
     
  18. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No

    Totally ruined, I think you should let that lens go ... luckily I've just set up an Adopt-a-lens home for the unwanted :D

    I see what you mean about the nervous bokeh, I guess that's a personal preference as I didn't really pay heed to it when I looked the first time, but now I can't un-see it. I think bokeh in general is over rated, it's only purpose IMO is to help the main subject stand out more. But if it does make your eyes wander a bit and you find it distracting, you may not enjoy the image as much.
     
  19. Sootchucker

    Sootchucker

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Andrew
    Edit My Images:
    No
    It's amazing how spoiled we are nowadays (and I should know). In the 70's and early 80's when i was shooting with manual focusing lenses on film bodies with typical max ISO's or 400-800, I've have killed for a lens like the 40-150 (nervous bokeh or not). In fact the word Bokeh hadn't even been invented (or at least hadn't entered into the western worlds physci). These days we are now more concerned with being able to shoot at ISO 100,000 with super clean images, auto focusing down to -8ev (or more), having 100+mp (or way more than we would ever need), and seem to debate endlessly over the quality of the out of focus highlights (i.e. Bokeh).

    Like I say, I am as guilty as most and have had way too much equipment over the years and never seem to be happy with what I have (there's always something better elsewhere). Well this is my line in the sand guys and gals. I love the Micro four thirds system and even if it does go the way of the Dodo (unlikely but you never know), I'll just keep shooting with it until it dies and they can't be repaired anymore, but there are just some areas that aren't where it's strength lies, and that's lowish light high iso wildlife shooting, where the AF system and sensor is just plainly inferior (still very good but inferior) to larger sensor cameras. For me, the M4/3 system along side the Nikon D500 system means I should be able to pretty much shoot anything.

    Like I say my only concern is what I now do with the Fuji system which now seems to overlap the two ?
     
    Cagey75 likes this.
  20. SsSsSsSsSnake

    SsSsSsSsSnake

    Messages:
    8,900
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice