Nikon Full Frame to m4/3

Bristolian

Bristolian

Messages
4,289
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Currently, I am shooting wildlife (birds mainly), motor sports (cars and bikes), cycling and general stuff like holiday snaps, etc. with a D780, Sigma 150-600C and Nikon 28-300, oh! and a D40. Over the past few months I have been finding carrying this gear around nature reserves and race tracks is getting to be a pain - quite literally.

Not knowing much about m4/3 cameras or lenses (and feeling totally punch-drunk from watching YouTube videos) I have been looking at the OM Systems OM1 plus a 150-400 100-400 lens, plus something smaller for everyday use.

I have lots of questions but the main one is; will this combination give me the same results that I get from my Nikon kit, or should I be looking elsewhere?

Some additional information that might colour any responses:
  1. The difference in weight between the D780 and a Z body isn't enough to sway me in that direction
  2. I don't really get on with prime lenses, much preferring the adaptability of zooms even at the expense of image quality
  3. Physical equipment size is also important
  4. My budget for new/used kit will be whatever I can sell my existing system for plus about £150
All suggestions/comments/recommendations appreciated.

Edit: I specified the wrong long lens for the OM-1 and have corrected it above.
 
Last edited:
@the black fox Jeff can demonstrate the effectiveness of the M43 kit at birding and similar. Clearly there are bound to be negatives to the impact of the smaller sensor - what you gain in reach you lose in ability to crop, but for most purposes, the weight and bulk reduction is very noticeable as an advantage in your flexibility. I can easily carry my complete EM1ii outfit (100-400, 12-42, wide angle zoom and a couple of primes) in a modest backpack whereas I struggled a bit today carrying my D850, 24-35, 35-150, 105macro and 50mm primes with a tripod attached to the bag as well. I'm not changing, as I have both to select from, but I can totally see the advantages of swapping FF for M43.
 
I shoot professionally with two Nikon Z9s.
I also have a reasonably extensive Olympus m4/3 system. I initially bought this just for me but I love it so much it has become my 'pro' system that I use when I travel (outside the UK) for pro jobs.
I absolutely love it. 'Half' the size and weight of the Nikon gear with great performance.
 
I shot m4/3 alongside Nikon FF for quite some time and for a large proportion of scenarios the IQ difference is negligible. The two areas m4/3 fell a little short for me was the shallow DOF (not everyone’s preference) and noise handling, but with lightroom’s denoise and topaz denoise the latter isn’t really an issue these days.

I’m a huge fan of Olympus and sometimes regret getting rid of mine.

One thing to point out, although I’m sure you’re already aware, is the Olympus 150-400mm is VERY expensive and is only a fraction lighter than your 150-600mm.
 
I currently shoot with a D850, plus various lenses including a Sigma 60-600mm and a Sigma 14-24mm, both pretty heavy lenses in their class so you can imagine the weight penalty is very high. I also have a little Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 20mm prime (40mm equivalent). Because of the HUGE weight and size difference, I too considered moving to M4/3 exclusively but...

As sneckler says, a super telephoto zoom is ridiculously expensive and the weight difference is very small (although a M4/3 camera would take some of the weight off) so I really wouldn't gain anything by changing systems for long range photography. So for that reason alone, I can't move away from Nikon FF. I do love the Olympus as an every day camera though and it's very tough; I know, I pulled it out of the back seat of my car with a coat and it crashed to the concrete floor of a multi-storey car park. It is undamaged and still fully functional, a heavier camera lens combination may not have faired so well.

So my recommendation? Have both and pick the right weapon to take with you depending on what your objective is for that shoot.
 
ShinySideUp said:
I currently shoot with a D850, plus various lenses including a Sigma 60-600mm and a Sigma 14-24mm, both pretty heavy lenses in their class so you can imagine the weight penalty is very high. I also have a little Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 20mm prime (40mm equivalent). Because of the HUGE weight and size difference, I too considered moving to M4/3 exclusively but...

As sneckler says, a super telephoto zoom is ridiculously expensive and the weight difference is very small (although a M4/3 camera would take some of the weight off) so I really wouldn't gain anything by changing systems for long range photography. So for that reason alone, I can't move away from Nikon FF. I do love the Olympus as an every day camera though and it's very tough; I know, I pulled it out of the back seat of my car with a coat and it crashed to the concrete floor of a multi-storey car park. It is undamaged and still fully functional, a heavier camera lens combination may not have faired so well.

So my recommendation? Have both and pick the right weapon to take with you depending on what your objective is for that shoot.
Click to expand...
There are other telephotos that give the same reach but are much cheaper and lighter such as the 100-400mm. I used to have the Panny Leica 100-400mm and it was an excellent lens, and weighs only just over 1kg IIRC.
 
As Lindsay says I do well with my olympus gear i was forced to change about four years ago due to heart failure curtailing weight carried ,pretty much the same as you.. ,the other Makers are catching up but the main advantages Are weight , price and useabilty .. I currently use a OM1 + 300mm f4 + 1.4 tc which weighs a touch over 2 kgs or a bag of sugar , or you could get the 100-400 which also takes t.c’s .. ,pros …speed anything between 20fps to 50fps is the norm for wildlife , 2 x crop factor .. 4 x if you use digital tc as well .. 7 stops of i.b.i.s .. not used a tripod or monopod in 4 years .. weather sealing you can wash camera and lens under a tap if dirty .. most lenses are tack sharp . Freedom of movement like cliff Richard got no bags or baggage .. most of the small primes are small and light enough to fit in your pocket . And finally the crème de la crème is the bird I.d it’s totally stunning and does what it says on the tin . I take far more than I post on here link from any photo to my flickr all exif is posted
 
Bristolian said:
Currently, I am shooting wildlife (birds mainly), motor sports (cars and bikes), cycling and general stuff like holiday snaps, etc. with a D780, Sigma 150-600C and Nikon 28-300, oh! and a D40. Over the past few months I have been finding carrying this gear around nature reserves and race tracks is getting to be a pain - quite literally.

Not knowing much about m4/3 cameras or lenses (and feeling totally punch-drunk from watching YouTube videos) I have been looking at the OM Systems OM1 plus a 150-400 lens, plus something smaller for everyday use.

I have lots of questions but the main one is; will this combination give me the same results that I get from my Nikon kit, or should I be looking elsewhere?

Some additional information that might colour any responses:
  1. The difference in weight between the D780 and a Z body isn't enough to sway me in that direction
Click to expand...
the OM1 weighs just 70g less than Z6 give or take. So it's not that much lighter or smaller of a body.
Bristolian said:
  1. I don't really get on with prime lenses, much preferring the adaptability of zooms even at the expense of image quality
  2. Physical equipment size is also important
  3. My budget for new/used kit will be whatever I can sell my existing system for plus about £150
Click to expand...
The 150-400mm is as large and heavy as your 150-600mm and it costs more than all your gear put together. Not sure it matches any of your requirements.
Bristolian said:
All suggestions/comments/recommendations appreciated.
Click to expand...
On m43 there are 100-400mm lenses which are lighter and cheaper.

I'd suggest you also consider the Sony RX10iv.

Also consider Fuji XT5 with 70-300mm or Sony A6700+70-350mm. You don't get at much reach as m43 but these lenses are better than 100-300mm or 75-300mm type lenses on m43.
 
Last edited:
Clearly by the responses everyone has a solution to your question which is healthy debate As photographers we know the perfect system does not exist its all about compromise Having shot m4/3 for the years its a system that suits me

Their are things about the OM systems I don't or would like but on balance I havnt regretted the move

Pour a coffee and take time to read the article below I think its a fair response to the full frame m4/3 debate

www.jamesrodkey.com

Three Cheers for Micro Four Thirds — James Rodkey

I’ve been shooting micro four thirds cameras for almost a decade. In this post I explain the benefits and drawbacks of the system and suggest that many more photographers should make the switch from full frame to MFT cameras.
www.jamesrodkey.com www.jamesrodkey.com
 
nandbytes said:
the OM1 weighs just 70g less than Z6 give or take. So it's not that much lighter or smaller of a body.
Click to expand...
This is true, and one of the reasons I decided to go with a single system as the right full frame setup isn't significantly heavier than m4/3 anymore and you get the obvious advantages of FF such as noise handling, depth of field and the option of high mp. It is the latter than I use to get the reach of telephotos without having to get one of the heavy lenes, the 100-400mm only weighs 1.3kg and I can use my camera in crop mode to give 600mm and still get 22mp. Add a TC and it's 840mm reach. Of course the setup is still circa 500g heavier than the OM! with 100-400mm and that is becoming significant, however overall it's still very manageable and far more manageable than the D850 and 150-600mm I used to use.

As above, you have to weigh up the pros and cons and make the right choice for you. This is a link to my favourite shots I took with Olympus and when I look back at them I still really rate the IQ
flic.kr

Favourite Olympus Photos

Explore this photo album by TDG-77 on Flickr!
flic.kr flic.kr
 
snerkler said:
This is true, and one of the reasons I decided to go with a single system as the right full frame setup isn't significantly heavier than m4/3 anymore and you get the obvious advantages of FF such as noise handling, depth of field and the option of high mp. It is the latter than I use to get the reach of telephotos without having to get one of the heavy lenes, the 100-400mm only weighs 1.3kg and I can use my camera in crop mode to give 600mm and still get 22mp. Add a TC and it's 840mm reach. Of course the setup is still circa 500g heavier than the OM! with 100-400mm and that is becoming significant, however overall it's still very manageable and far more manageable than the D850 and 150-600mm I used to use.

As above, you have to weigh up the pros and cons and make the right choice for you. This is a link to my favourite shots I took with Olympus and when I look back at them I still really rate the IQ
flic.kr

Favourite Olympus Photos

Explore this photo album by TDG-77 on Flickr!
flic.kr flic.kr
Click to expand...
That's because m43 lenses are f6.3 at longer end. You can get FF 100-400mm which are also f6.3 at long end that are just as light.

You don't save much weight on tele lenses by going with a crop sensor. A 400mm has to be certain length to get that much optical reach regardless of the sensor size.
What you are gaining with crop sensors is mainly digital reach i.e. higher pixel density.

Right now G9ii and X-T5 have the highest pixel density equivalent to a 100mp FF sensor. Followed by OM1 and R7.
 
In my opinion, it sounds like you'd be covered with an Olympus OM E-M1 Mark 3, Olympus 12-100 and an Olympus 100-400.
 
Obviously things have moved on in the last few years and can/nik/sony have all been catching up fast to Olympus /oms . But I also take into account both photos I see from other users and also read between the lines on both here and social media when things go tits up and need repairing … the olympus repair facility although in Portugal does do a Stirling service and things do get repaired pretty promptly ,I have read some nightmare stories re Nikon and Panasonic is bin it and buy new .
At the end of the day the best advice for Bristolian is seek out an olympus user at a nature reserve and ask there opion and try to handle one .. I did the same with the OM1 put my own card in someones camera and fired off some test shots .then bought on the basis of results
 
nandbytes said:
That's because m43 lenses are f6.3 at longer end. You can get FF 100-400mm which are also f6.3 at long end that are just as light.

You don't save much weight on tele lenses by going with a crop sensor. A 400mm has to be certain length to get that much optical reach regardless of the sensor size.
What you are gaining with crop sensors is mainly digital reach i.e. higher pixel density.

Right now G9ii and X-T5 have the highest pixel density equivalent to a 100mp FF sensor. Followed by OM1 and R7.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was just referring to my own usage there.
 
the black fox said:
Obviously things have moved on in the last few years and can/nik/sony have all been catching up fast to Olympus /oms . But I also take into account both photos I see from other users and also read between the lines on both here and social media when things go tits up and need repairing … the olympus repair facility although in Portugal does do a Stirling service and things do get repaired pretty promptly ,I have read some nightmare stories re Nikon and Panasonic is bin it and buy new .
At the end of the day the best advice for Bristolian is seek out an olympus user at a nature reserve and ask there opion and try to handle one .. I did the same with the OM1 put my own card in someones camera and fired off some test shots .then bought on the basis of results
Click to expand...
I've had brilliant service with Nikon, and poor service from Olympus so I'd take social medai with a pinch of salt myself (y)
 
I went from larger bodied DSLR to fully Olympus with an e-m1 iii, thought I was missing something, it never quite felt right for me.
Moved over to Sony A7 and am now selling all that kit. Thought I could put up with the weight, but really can’t and looking at images from both, for me I think the Olympus just pips the Sony.
Not a 100% sure which way to go next. It’s either back to another e-m1 iii, second hand prices seem really good at the moment or to a Fuji x-s10 or 20. Will try to handle one of them soon
 
In my opinion, it sounds like you'd be covered with an Olympus OM E-M1 Mark 3, Olympus 12-100 and an Olympus 100-400.
 
leaky5 said:
I went from larger bodied DSLR to fully Olympus with an e-m1 iii, thought I was missing something, it never quite felt right for me.
Moved over to Sony A7 and am now selling all that kit. Thought I could put up with the weight, but really can’t and looking at images from both, for me I think the Olympus just pips the Sony.
Not a 100% sure which way to go next. It’s either back to another e-m1 iii, second hand prices seem really good at the moment or to a Fuji x-s10 or 20. Will try to handle one of them soon
Click to expand...
That's a bold call ;) Objectively, all things considered equally the Sony will produce better images, it's just a question of whether that difference is enough to put up with the weight. However, as been discussed already you can get very good Sony FF setups that are only a few grams more than Olympus.
 
snerkler said:
That's a bold call ;) Objectively, all things considered equally the Sony will produce better images, it's just a question of whether that difference is enough to put up with the weight. However, as been discussed already you can get very good Sony FF setups that are only a few grams more than Olympus.
Click to expand...
Probably a couple of hundred grams less for the Olympus, but a lot less bulk. That was probably down to my main choice of walk about lens for the A7.
The image quality just me comparing images side by side and I can’t really say the Sony has the edge.
I do also really miss the fully articulating screen on the Olympus.
 
leaky5 said:
Probably a couple of hundred grams less for the Olympus, but a lot less bulk. That was probably down to my main choice of walk about lens for the A7.
The image quality just me comparing images side by side and I can’t really say the Sony has the edge.
I do also really miss the fully articulating screen on the Olympus.
Click to expand...
Yeah we all have preferences, and of course it will depend on which lenses you are comparing. This was the walkabout options I had, which are roughly as close as you’ll get in terms of focal length, DOF etc. Light gathering advantage still slightly favour the FF overall but not enough to consider for me.

Screenshot 2024-01-20 at 09.31.37.jpg
 
Just my thoughts on the differences between MFT, APS-C and FF...

I didn't see any significant difference in image quality between the APS-C Fuji X100s and f I had and my Panasonic MFT cameras but when compared to my FF Sony A7 the Sony wins out quite easily if you go looking for the differences. If you don't go looking for the differences or other clues such as the image format (MFT 4:3, FF 3:2) MFT pictures can get lost in a slideshow containing them and FF pictures. There are things you can do to close the gap a bit too, for example I find that all my MFT lenses are good enough to be used wide open and as the crop factor is x2 I can use MFT from wide open at f1.8 to f5 or whatever aperture the lens can provide and get a similar look that I'd get from FF at f3.6-f10 or so and only stop down MFT occasionally for any more required depth and I don't often stop MFT down if at the long end it's already at f5.6 or f6.3 with a zoom. With wide wider aperture lenses I'm normally at wide open to f4 or 5. This can help to keep the ISO down and in some situations this can help to keep the image quality up.

I think a lot of any possible weight savings may be down to specific body and lens combinations. I almost exclusively use primes and the difference in bulk at least between a MFT prime and a FF one can be significant.

If you're an obsessive pixel peeper or push top end FF capabilities to the limit then you'll have to think hard and do some comparisons between MFT and FF but if you're not MFT could be a choice at least worth thinking about.

Good luck choosing.
 
Last edited:
could I have got this shot with any camera ,well yes .. the waxwings landed in the tree... I was stood next to my mate with his Nikon gear .. the birds flew in grabbed the berries and flew off again .. I then turned to my mate and said did you get them .. no to fast for me was his reply .. I looked at my screen 38 shots in sequence so about a 2 second burst all in focus .. proof of the pudding below
the boss bird by jeff cohen, on Flickr
 
the black fox said:
could I have got this shot with any camera ,well yes .. the waxwings landed in the tree... I was stood next to my mate with his Nikon gear .. the birds flew in grabbed the berries and flew off again .. I then turned to my mate and said did you get them .. no to fast for me was his reply .. I looked at my screen 38 shots in sequence so about a 2 second burst all in focus .. proof of the pudding below
the boss bird by jeff cohen, on Flickr
Click to expand...
To be fair FF cameras can shoot this quickly and faster and have them all in focus. I’d say this is more down to the photographer than the gear. I actually think this is an example where FF may yield better results, at ISO 1600 you’re going to get better feather detail on FF.
 
nandbytes said:
the OM1 weighs just 70g less than Z6 give or take. So it's not that much lighter or smaller of a body.

The 150-400mm is as large and heavy as your 150-600mm and it costs more than all your gear put together. Not sure it matches any of your requirements.

On m43 there are 100-400mm lenses which are lighter and cheaper.

I'd suggest you also consider the Sony RX10iv.

Also consider Fuji XT5 with 70-300mm or Sony A6700+70-350mm. You don't get at much reach as m43 but these lenses are better than 100-300mm or 75-300mm type lenses on m43.
Click to expand...
Many thanks for the comments - all taken on board. I think I mean to put the 100-400 lens but had both on my list and picked the wrong one above.
 
snerkler said:
I shot m4/3 alongside Nikon FF for quite some time and for a large proportion of scenarios the IQ difference is negligible. The two areas m4/3 fell a little short for me was the shallow DOF (not everyone’s preference) and noise handling, but with lightroom’s denoise and topaz denoise the latter isn’t really an issue these days.

I’m a huge fan of Olympus and sometimes regret getting rid of mine.

One thing to point out, although I’m sure you’re already aware, is the Olympus 150-400mm is VERY expensive and is only a fraction lighter than your 150-600mm.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your input. Yes, I realise I should have listed the 100-400 rather then the 150-400. I will edit my OP (y)
 
ShinySideUp said:
I currently shoot with a D850, plus various lenses including a Sigma 60-600mm and a Sigma 14-24mm, both pretty heavy lenses in their class so you can imagine the weight penalty is very high. I also have a little Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 20mm prime (40mm equivalent). Because of the HUGE weight and size difference, I too considered moving to M4/3 exclusively but...

As sneckler says, a super telephoto zoom is ridiculously expensive and the weight difference is very small (although a M4/3 camera would take some of the weight off) so I really wouldn't gain anything by changing systems for long range photography. So for that reason alone, I can't move away from Nikon FF. I do love the Olympus as an every day camera though and it's very tough; I know, I pulled it out of the back seat of my car with a coat and it crashed to the concrete floor of a multi-storey car park. It is undamaged and still fully functional, a heavier camera lens combination may not have faired so well.

So my recommendation? Have both and pick the right weapon to take with you depending on what your objective is for that shoot.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your comments, Martin. Having both systems is not really on the cards for me unless I decide to divorce Mrs B :eek:
 
snerkler said:
I've had brilliant service with Nikon, and poor service from Olympus so I'd take social medai with a pinch of salt myself (y)
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, I have had mixed experiences with Nikon service. The first time they were brilliant but the most recent was a disaster and they ended up having to loan me a body and then giving me a 100% discount off the repair cost. That body earned more air miles than I did that year!
 
Thanks to everyone that has responded above - there are too many for me to answer every one of you, sorry :(

You have given me some food for thought and I think my next step will be to see if I can get some hands-on with a few m43 cameras and lenses ... see what the local camera shops have got and maybe hire a few.

Please feel free to continue with the thread (y)
 
I think a first step you can do from the comfort of your own home is download some files or see if anyone here can send you some and see how you feel about the quality.
 
Bristolian said:
Thanks to everyone that has responded above - there are too many for me to answer every one of you, sorry :(

You have given me some food for thought and I think my next step will be to see if I can get some hands-on with a few m43 cameras and lenses ... see what the local camera shops have got and maybe hire a few.

Please feel free to continue with the thread (y)
Click to expand...
Hire wise ....

Body & lenses here

Lenses for Hire

Hire cameras, lenses and other photographic equipment
lensesforhire.co.uk lensesforhire.co.uk
 
Bristolian said:
Thanks to everyone that has responded above - there are too many for me to answer every one of you, sorry :(

You have given me some food for thought and I think my next step will be to see if I can get some hands-on with a few m43 cameras and lenses ... see what the local camera shops have got and maybe hire a few.

Please feel free to continue with the thread (y)
Click to expand...

Box Brownie said:
Hire wise ....

Body & lenses here

Lenses for Hire

Hire cameras, lenses and other photographic equipment
lensesforhire.co.uk lensesforhire.co.uk
Click to expand...
Don’t Olympus still do the try before you buy scheme? If they do that’ll save you hire costs.
 
costs wise a new OM1 is Still around 2k although cheaper used from reputable dealers .. the 100-400 is around £1200 new same applies used .
A used 1-mkiii can be bought used with dealer warranty for around £700 and is still a good choice to start . The onl6 real difference on the OM1 is bird / car/ train I.d .
Be careful if testing in shop as they tend to not have the cameras set up so your shooting in jpg with no bells and whistles ..
best to seek out someone local that uses Olympus and seek there help . If your anywhere near n.wales I can help .
 
Bristolian said:
Thanks for your comments, Martin. Having both systems is not really on the cards for me unless I decide to divorce Mrs B :eek:
Click to expand...
It was just a thought. I bought my Olympus used from WEX and camera and lens cost me less than £600 and it is great when I just want a camera to go anywhere quickly.
 
snerkler said:
Don’t Olympus still do the try before you buy scheme? If they do that’ll save you hire costs.
Click to expand...
None too sure, has been a while since I looked at the website and don't recall it last time I looked :thinking:
 
Box Brownie said:
None too sure, has been a while since I looked at the website and don't recall it last time I looked :thinking:
Click to expand...

It is/was called Test and Wow.

It seems to be available in the US but not here anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top