[Dan Rentea]

This is one of the guy I meet who switched to Olympus and very happy with the system. He is extremely professional. He also uses a Sony full frame mirrorless for pro work outside of wildlife photography. Another extremely good photographer is confidential. Looking at their works, and the way they use the camera system. I pretty sure it can do whatever you want to throw at it when talk about wildlife work.

He has very nice images but given the fact that most of his subjects are large and static, those images are quite easy to shoot even with the Pentax gear that the OP has.

When I want to see demanding situations to have an idea about Af performance I'm thinking more on images like the ones of this guy ( Mark Smith (@mark.smith.photography) ? Instagram photos and videos ).

He also has a nice video on Youtube where D500 did a very good job against A9

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

---

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 03-01-2020 at 02:12 AM.

[tokyoscape]

He has very nice images but given the fact that most of his subjects are large and static, those images are quite easy to shoot even with the Pentax gear that the OP has.

When I want to see demanding situations to have an idea about Af performance I'm thinking more on images like the ones of this guy ( Mark Smith (@mark.smith.photography) ? Instagram photos and videos ).

He also has a nice video on Youtube where D500 did a very good job against A9 Nikon D500 VS SONY A9 - Bird Photography - Best Experience to Date! - YouTube

I bet people like that won't survive as a pro for so long if they only do easy things. The other guy I can not mention here also pretty much the same. They are not in the industry for a few years but +2 decades. They were using another well known brand earlier in their career. And both find no performance problem after switch to a smaller player like Olympus. That's why I don't think OP will find problems doing wildlife using an Olympus camera.

[larryaustin3]

I think Dan is right. If you are interested in sports photography and want to stay with a crop sensor, Sony APS-C or even a D500 will give you really good performance -- particularly as you probably should have f2.8 lens for the job.

While the D500 is a great performer as you said, it's a beast compared to the Olympus in size and weight. And from what I've seen, my A6400, for instance, is no comparison to the Olympus in terms of ergonomics, weather sealing, image stabilization, and ease of use (specifically the atrocious Sony menu system). The Sony autofocus is amazing, but if Olympus is excellent in that regard too, I can't knock someone for picking Oly over Sony.

Which brings up the point that Pentax beats Sony on so many things as well that I would go back to Pentax in a heartbeat if the next K-new body had better autofocus for sport.

[Dan Rentea]

I bet people like that won't survive as a pro for so long if they only do easy things. The other guy I can not mention here also pretty much the same. They are not in the industry for a few years but +2 decades. They were using another well known brand earlier in their career. And both find no performance problem after switch to a smaller player like Olympus. That's why I don't think OP will find problems doing wildlife using an Olympus camera.

These days you can survive as a pro with pretty much any gear as long as you have great marketing skills. I have quite a few examples around me, not only in photography. When wildlife is mentioned, I associate the word wildlife with action while many others are talking about static subjects. It's my fault because I should have mentioned this aspect. We have a popular pro wildlife and landscape photographer in Romania who was a Nikon ambassador until he had an argue with Nikon Romania and he switched brands to Olympus because Olympus was the first (maybe the only one also) to give him gear to test it. He has great images taken with Olympus, but a lot of people realized that Nikon images were better, especially in terms of subject isolation. This doesn't mean that Olympus doesn't produce great images as long as you use best Olympus lenses. The guy I'm talking about is using E-M1X and 300mm f4 lens for wildlife.

Speaking of weight, let me give you just one example for wildlife:

1. Olympus E-M1 Mark III with Olympus 300mm f4 weights 2,05kg. If you add a grip to E-M1 for better handling, the weight will be around 2,3kg. The cost of this combo at B&H is 4550$ without battery grip.
2. Nikon D500 with 500mm f5.6 weights 2,32kg. The cost of this combo at B&H is 5096$.

Going with Oly you'll save 270g and 546$. If you add a grip to E-M1 Mark III the weight and price advantage is gone. Given the ISO performance between m4/3 and APS-C, I say that in terms of image quality at high ISO will be pretty similar the images in terms of noise due to the difference in terms of aperture between lenses, but handling, subject separation and af performance of Nikon gear will be superior to Oly.

I would actually look also at the new Fuji X-T4 (new 26mp APS-C sensor, 5 stops of IBIS, new processor, 15fps with mechanical shutter or 20fps with electronic shutter) with Fujifilm 100-400mm lens for wildlife over Olympus...

That's why I insist that people should try and rent/borrow before investing in a new system.

---------- Post added 03-02-20 at 08:01 AM ----------

While the D500 is a great performer as you said, it's a beast compared to the Olympus in size and weight.

If we talk about wildlife, take a look at the above comparison I did and you'll see that the weight difference between the Nikon D500 with 500mm f5.6 lens and E-M1 Mark III with 300mm f4 lens is only 270g. Oly is quite unbalanced without grip with the 300mm f4 lens and therefore the size and weight is gone if you add a battery grip for Oly. For wildlife D500 with 500mm f5.6 would be my choice any time of the day over Olympus.

---

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 03-02-2020 at 01:23 AM.

[repaap]

My god! you guys are turnig this thing around. This guy would like to have oly 1emIII with 12-100/4 lens. to actually enjoy shooting with it. Compared to what pentax has to offer, it sounds great to him.

That is still quite different than oly with 300/4, let alone Nikon 500 + 500/5,6 lens, which is still quite hard to get. and is no where same as 12-100/4 on that Oly. And if you take these actually small zooms that Oly does have, it will be smaller, and has great tracking, and silent shutter and great SR and, and, and. For having fun, it sounds quite good. For wearing camo, dressed in wetsuit, diving in to bird life and turnig to a big swan to get exellent pro grade photos, maybe yes. But one has to be quite dedicated to go 'that' far. Besides, one can get good photos with any gear now a days.

[Dan Rentea]

My god! you guys are turnig this thing around. This guy would like to have oly 1emIII with 12-100/4 lens. to actually enjoy shooting with it. Compared to what pentax has to offer, it sounds great to him.

That is still quite different than oly with 300/4, let alone Nikon 500 + 500/5,6 lens, which is still quite hard to get. and is no where same as 12-100/4 on that Oly. And if you take these actually small zooms that Oly does have, it will be smaller, and has great tracking, and silent shutter and great SR and, and, and. For having fun, it sounds quite good. For wearing camo, dressed in wetsuit, diving in to bird life and turnig to a big swan to get exellent pro grade photos, maybe yes. But one has to be quite dedicated to go 'that' far. Besides, one can get good photos with any gear now a days.

Well, he did mentioned:
- nature and wildlife
- 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO and possibly even the upcoming M.Zuiko 150-400mm f/4.5 PRO.

This means hat his budget is a little bigger than the one of the average people, especially since E-M1 Mark III is more expensive than both D500 and Fuji X-T4. And I tried to offer him alternatives in the same budget... For both nature and wildlife I still think Nikon and Fuji wins over Olympus. Even Sony A6600 with the new Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 and Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 will be similar in size and weight to pretty much any Olympus equivalent lenses.

But as I said, renting is the best option if he wants to make the right decision.

[repaap]

Well, he did mentioned:
- nature and wildlife
- 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO and possibly even the upcoming M.Zuiko 150-400mm f/4.5 PRO.

This means hat his budget is a little bigger than the one of the average people, especially since E-M1 Mark III is more expensive than both D500 and Fuji X-T4. And I tried to offer him alternatives in the same budget... For both nature and wildlife I still think Nikon and Fuji wins over Olympus. Even Sony A6600 with the new Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 and Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 will be similar in size and weight to pretty much any Olympus equivalent lenses.

But as I said, renting is the best option if he wants to make the right decision.

I’m not saying that renting is a bad thing to do.

40-150/2.8 pro is not ’that expensive’ but the other lenses are. As is anything at that lengths/speed. Still, there are many ways of shooting nature and wildlife. For one, I’d just wait a bit more. And see what K-new will be like. Then add 150-450 to that. But obviously that is not on the map. D500 is one of oldest options out of these(Pentax was going trend anyway). Fuji seems to be really upping their game. And Sony is what it is.

But Olympus should not be too bad either.

[Dan Rentea]

But Olympus should not be too bad either.

It's not bad at all. To me it only feels way to expensive for what it delivers. X-T4 will probably outperform E-M1 Mark III on pretty much any aspect, except maybe build quality, but even there it's not far behind. Other than that, Fuji has:

- 26mp without AA filter vs old 20mp on E-M1 Mark III
- APS-C sensor vs micro 4/3 sensor
- 16 bit depth vs 12 bit depth
- shutter speed 1/8000 to 900 Second vs. 1/8000 to 60 Second
- 4k video at 60p and full hd video at 240p, 10 bit external recording vs. 4k video at 30p and full hd video at 120p, 8 bit external recording
- Af sensitivity down to -6 EV vs -3.5 EV for E-M1 Mark III
- 3,7k Dot viewfinder resolution with 100 fps refresh rate vs. 2,35k Dot with 60 fps refresh rate
- 1,6k Dot LCD resolution vs. 1k Dot resolution
- 2 UHS-II memory cards vs one UHS-I and one UHS-II memory cards
- Approx. 600 Shots vs. Approx. 420 Shots
- 526 g vs. 580g

Given the specs comparison, guess what? Olympus E-M1 Mark III is 100$ more expensive than Fuji X-T4. Now that's what I call "performance".

On paper Oly is outperformed on pretty much any aspect, including size and weight... Sony A6600 will also outperform on paper Oly and as long as Sony has My menu in their new cameras, the menu problem is history. Given my experience with X-T3 and E-M1 Mark II, in real life Oly E-M1 Mark III will probably be outperformed also.

I bet that the new Pentax APS-C will outperform Olympus also.

[Rondec]

My god! you guys are turnig this thing around. This guy would like to have oly 1emIII with 12-100/4 lens. to actually enjoy shooting with it. Compared to what pentax has to offer, it sounds great to him.

That is still quite different than oly with 300/4, let alone Nikon 500 + 500/5,6 lens, which is still quite hard to get. and is no where same as 12-100/4 on that Oly. And if you take these actually small zooms that Oly does have, it will be smaller, and has great tracking, and silent shutter and great SR and, and, and. For having fun, it sounds quite good. For wearing camo, dressed in wetsuit, diving in to bird life and turnig to a big swan to get exellent pro grade photos, maybe yes. But one has to be quite dedicated to go 'that' far. Besides, one can get good photos with any gear now a days.

Wildlife is going to take longer lenses than just a 12-100. Those lenses aren't going to be cheap for any system, particularly if you want something with a decently fast aperture.

Just overall, if the OP wasn't interested in input on his purchases, he probably shouldn't have posted his plan. People are just indicating that there are other systems than Olympus that may offer similar to better performance for similar cost and with actually minimal difference in weight. Obviously it is going to be the OP's decision as to what he ends up purchasing and even if he goes with Olympus, he can always switch again down the road if it doesn't work out.

[Dan Rentea]

Wildlife is going to take longer lenses than just a 12-100. Those lenses aren't going to be cheap for any system, particularly if you want something with a decently fast aperture.

Just overall, if the OP wasn't interested in input on his purchases, he probably shouldn't have posted his plan. People are just indicating that there are other systems than Olympus that may offer similar to better performance for similar cost and with actually minimal difference in weight. Obviously it is going to be the OP's decision as to what he ends up purchasing and even if he goes with Olympus, he can always switch again down the road if it doesn't work out.

To make things even more interesting, Sony A7 III vs. Olympus E-M1 Mark III:

A7 III costs 2000$ and weights 650g vs. Olympus E-M1 Mark III that costs 1800$ and weights 580g. 70g difference in weight with one having full frame sensor and the other micro 4/3 sensor.

For A7 III there is the new trinity of f2.8 lenses:
- Tamron 17-28mm f2.8 lens that weights 420g and costs 900$
- Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens (I really like this lens, I used it on a A6500 a few times and it delivers) that weights 550g and costs 880$
- Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 lens that weights 815g and costs 1200$

You will basically have a full frame with 3 modern f2.8 lenses that covers 17mm to 180mm with a total weight of 2,45kg and a total cost of 4980$. Only E-M1 Mark III with 12-100mm f4 lens costs 3000$ and the weight will be 1,15kg.

I'm really curious which Oly gear can "beat" the above kit for the same money and weight.

[WorksAsIntended]

To make things even more interesting, Sony A7 III vs. Olympus E-M1 Mark III:

A7 III costs 2000$ and weights 650g vs. Olympus E-M1 Mark III that costs 1800$ and weights 580g. 70g difference in weight with one having full frame sensor and the other micro 4/3 sensor.

For A7 III there is the new trinity of f2.8 lenses:
- Tamron 17-28mm f2.8 lens that weights 420g and costs 900$
- Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens (I really like this lens, I used it on a A6500 a few times and it delivers) that weights 550g and costs 880$
- Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 lens that weights 815g and costs 1200$

You will basically have a full frame with 3 modern f2.8 lenses that covers 17mm to 180mm with a total weight of 2,45kg and a total cost of 4980$. Only E-M1 Mark III with 12-100mm f4 lens costs 3000$ and the weight will be 1,15kg.

I'm really curious which Oly gear can "beat" the above kit for the same money and weight.

Well, the price of the 70-180 is a bit of a bummer for many other systems that do not have it (yet). I wonder though, if they finally got a decent bokeh now with this lense and wait for a couple of reviews showing it before getting really interested. The A7 IV is also expected this year and will drop the A7 III prices. Look at the A7 II, it is available at about $1000 now.

[repaap]

Wildlife is going to take longer lenses than just a 12-100. Those lenses aren't going to be cheap for any system, particularly if you want something with a decently fast aperture.

Just overall, if the OP wasn't interested in input on his purchases, he probably shouldn't have posted his plan. People are just indicating that there are other systems than Olympus that may offer similar to better performance for similar cost and with actually minimal difference in weight. Obviously it is going to be the OP's decision as to what he ends up purchasing and even if he goes with Olympus, he can always switch again down the road if it doesn't work out.

Atleast now even if OP was not interested of opinion, there for sure is some. I know that 12-100 won’t get you far, but it should be nice allaround (even if I do not have experience on one it would be fair to say so).

[Dan Rentea]

Well, the price of the 70-180 is a bit of a bummer for many other systems that do not have it (yet). I wonder though, if they finally got a decent bokeh now with this lense and wait for a couple of reviews showing it before getting really interested. The A7 IV is also expected this year and will drop the A7 III prices. Look at the A7 II, it is available at about $1000 now.

The 70-210mm f4 lens has quite nice bokeh and I think the 70-180mm f2.8 lens will be a keeper also. I do hope Tamron will release this trinity of lenses in other mounts also because I'm really interested in the 28-75mm f2.8 lens as my travel and all around lens.

Yes, there are rumors about Sony A7 IV, but to be honest, as long as Olympus used the same old sensor in both E-M1X and E-M1 Mark III, then A7 III, X-T3 or D500 are still up to date in this regard.

[normhead]

I shoot landscape and wildlife, but i don't go to areas where birds in flight are a big thing. Most people don't. It's really annoying that when anyone says "wildlife" people go to birds in flight. It might be cool to ask the OP if he plans to shoot birds in flight before launching into this endless debate which is largely irrelevant to most Pentax shooters.

Because if the answer is no then there's a lot you can do without super AF.

Wildlife | Flickr

Contrary to what some would have you believe, there is a great deal of wildlife that doesn't not involve birds in flight, it's a very small subset for most of us. It's hardly the standard by which 99% of photographers should be judging what camera to buy.

[luftfluss]

I shoot landscape and wildlife, but i don't go to areas where birds in flight are a big thing. Most people don't. It's really annoying that when anyone says "wildlife" people go to birds in flight. It might be cool to ask the OP if he plans to shoot birds in flight before launching into this endless debate which is largely irrelevant to most Pentax shooters.

Because if the answer is no then there's a lot you can do without super AF.

Wildlife | Flickr

Contrary to what some would have you believe, there is a great deal of wildlife that doesn't not involve birds in flight, it's a very small subset for most of us. It's hardly the standard by which 99% of photographers should be judging what camera to buy.

I would say about 90% of my birding opportunities are not BIF, unless I want photos of avian posteriors.