Any advice appreciated 🙏 (1 Viewer)

[Peregrine Took]

The Olympus and Panasonic 4/3 lenses work fine on each other's bodies - I've got three Panasonic bodies and use the 75mm Olympus and 60mm macro on them. I'm not aware of any compatability problems with newer bodies/lenses.

Which is why I couldn't find the Olympus 45-200... it's a Panasonic! If it's not too late, OP, I'd take that one back and buy the Olympus 75-300, or the Panasonic 100-300. The Olympus has a much closer minimum focus distance - good for butterflies and other insects, if that means anything, but the Panasonic is 'faster' (has a bigger maximum aperture, both wide and telephoto), meaning it can be set to let in more light, which is useful in poor light.
.
.

 

[njlarsen]

Which is why I couldn't find the Olympus 45-200... it's a Panasonic! If it's not too late, OP, I'd take that one back and buy the Olympus 75-300, or the Panasonic 100-300. The Olympus has a much closer minimum focus distance - good for butterflies and other insects, if that means anything, but the Panasonic is 'faster' (has a bigger maximum aperture, both wide and telephoto), meaning it can be set to let in more light, which is useful in poor light.
.
.

I am a little uncertain here, but I think I do remember more than one person (using OLY bodies) stating that the pana 100-300 was better than the oly 75-300 in their hands.
Niels

 

[Richard D]

I am a little uncertain here, but I think I do remember more than one person (using OLY bodies) stating that the pana 100-300 was better than the oly 75-300 in their hands.
Niels

The Pana is a more solid construction than the 75-300 and IMO optically better - decent lense until about 275mm then rather soft. Some of the Olympus lenses are excellent - I think the 75mm is one of the best 4/3rds, but too short for bird photography!

 

[njlarsen]

The Pana is a more solid construction than the 75-300 and IMO optically better - decent lense until about 275mm then rather soft. Some of the Olympus lenses are excellent - I think the 75mm is one of the best 4/3rds, but too short for bird photography!

I would like to add that the rating of the pana above the oly lens is specific to these two lenses. I believe that generally and especially for the newer lenses that oly lenses are considered excellent!
Niels

 

[Richard D]

I would like to add that the rating of the pana above the oly lens is specific to these two lenses. I believe that generally and especially for the newer lenses that oly lenses are considered excellent!
Niels

It's a very mixed picture at the older and budget end of lens choices - some Panasonic are better, some Olympus better and often there's not much to choose between them. Some of the 3rd party options are decent too - Sigma, Samyang etc.

The Panasonic Lumix 100-400 is excellent but it's £1299 and the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm f/4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO is supposedly superb but you're talking £6499... way over most peoples budgets.

 

[Peregrine Took]

... the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm f/4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO is supposedly superb but you're talking £6499...

That's a snip... trouble is, the snip would have to be to the first or last digit!

 

[PaulCountyDurham]

Hello all, I have just stumbled across the forum which has been a great help but need a bit of guidance please?

My wife and her family have always been into birds and wildlife. My wife recently announced that she would like to start some photography for fun and has been looking at cameras. This opened a world that I have zero knowledge on but after a week on YouTube I have gained 5% knowledge 🙈.

My wife is torn between a Nikon P950 due to zoom options however does have its disadvantages from what I can see being size and lack of versatility.

She also likes the Sony A6100 which seems like a neater solution and allows room to grow by adding additional lenses as required which is a whole other world I need to understand.

Has anyone got any experience with the above so we can get an understanding of real world use in our lovely UK weather and set expectations.

We are open to options and doesn’t have to be one of the above. We set ourselves £1000 as a budget.

Thanks in advance for any guidance.

In the end, you get what you pay for.

But, you can bridge the gap in terms of quality providing you take pictures in a certain manner.

I have the Nikon P950 and my advice is: if you plan on taking pictures standing up, don't buy it, save up more money and get a more expensive camera; if you're versatile and don't mind crawling along on the ground to get close to birds, it's a good camera and worth the money.

 

[avidopticguy]

If this is a hobby. GO CHEAP!!!! It is so much fun to see what kind of results you can get on a shoe sting budget (I am talking <$500). Also it will maximize your skills and really make you understand where money is best spent for actual results. In the digital age...as a broke college student I started the hobby with a FREE, destined for the trash, FILM camera with an assortment of lenses. The expensive film (to me at the time) really made me think about composure, exposure, shutter speed, ISO of the film before releasing the shutter. I remember assigning a $ value to releasing the shutter, you become disciplined fast!! Some of my favorite photographs to date are the film ones I took in college.

I would suggest going used, ex canon t2i and there are a ton of lenses floating aroud you can uses with that both crop and full size lenses. you will be suprised at the results that 18mp sensor will give you with some decent glass!!!

Basically you need a body with iso, aperture and shutter speed control then it is mixing and matching glass at different focal (lenses) lengths.<--- that is rudimentary photography in one sentence.

Have Fun with it!!