Video

Great vudeo! Did you made the video you mentioned about best iso for astro?

The bokeh on the Canon is lovely. And it's sharp. But I sold my full frame Canon gear simply because it's too much to lug around. Not just hiking and birding - but travel too. The OM1 and the 300mm F4 has produced some lovely images for me and its ability to follow focus on BIF is excellent. Sure, noise is up, dynamic range is a little less. But, the keeper ration of sharp bird photos is better. Also, in recent years, the AI tools can really help with bokeh and noise. Yeah, I know that's true for FF stuff also - and you can crop more. If I was 25 years younger then maybe I'd lug that 600mm around. Maybe....

I’m ashamed to say that I have owned and used the Oly 300 f4 for quite a few years but it now stays in the cupboard. That’s because the 150-400tc now lives on my OM1ii! All of the quality of the 300 but what a zoom. At 74 and slowly falling apart, I don’t use a tripod or monopod - the Mk 2 has even better stabilisation! Was shooting the Paradise Riflebird in Queensland yesterday alongside a guy with the A1 and Sony 600 yesterday (his on a gimbal and tripod). If I’m honest, the extra pixels would be nice but noise isn’t a problem, courtesy of DXO Pure RAW.

Hi Alex, I love your videos! You have great content! I have an OM-D EM1 Mark III and recently purchased the Olympus 100-400mm f5-6.3 and a Nomad star tracker. During my initial tests last night the star tracker worked great, no star trails! But the Starry Sky AF didn't seem to work and I know this has to be user error and/or my lens and camera settings are off? Any advice or do you have another video that goes over some of the settings that are best for the OM-D EM1 Mark III? Thanks!

By far the best review thank you 🌹🫶

My NOMAD is on the way. Am clueless with such set ups, so will be a frequent visitor to your channel once I start on this journey. Thanks!

That was a really comprehensive comparison, thanks for that. I'm having even more doubts now hahaha. Thing is, I go to the mountains, normally alone, and I spend the entire night there, I usually carry 30kg on my back from time to time up to 3200mts above sea, so, even though is hard, I'm not afraid of carrying more weight. Now, since I don't have now a telescope, I'll be using my camera, my wife angle lenses and, occasionally, an old 300mm Minolta .is very light weight, but I'm also considering the telescope again in the future. When I do timelapses, I do it with a slider, so, that's not really a problem. The nomad or the big one.... That's the question.

Hola, quizás sea una pregunta tonta. He alineado el nomad con el laser y me ha dado buenos tiempos de exposición. Pero al intentar afinar la alineación con el visor polar, veo que el laser y el centro de la retícula no coinciden. En otros vídeos he visto que en el antiguo msn la polar no se coloca en el centro de la retícula . En el Nomad donde coloco la polar exactamente. Gracias y buen trabajo

The only big difference that I see in some photos is that in the OM the grain, noise is much more noticeable, especially in the shadows and that the backgrounds also do not appear as blurred as in the Canon. I suppose that in good lighting conditions the difference in grain is not noticeable, but when it is necessary to use high ISO there is a loss of quality in the small sensor.

I'll take an EF 600 F/4 and save some money.

Hey Alex I have the previous version. Do u have a video on that one?

Very informative. Thanks. Would like to find out what is the function of the brass screw. Does it need to be adjusted?

New to astro. I understand why using a tracker requires a separate foreground shot but is it common practice to recompose between foreground and sky?

Thx for the video Alex! Great Job. I started to photograph the Milkyway this year. Just by taking single shots or stacked shots, which i put together in sequator to reduce the noise. Now, i want to buy a msm nomad for tracking the Milkyway to get better results and more detail of the Milkyway. The Skyreplacement-Tool ist really cool. Just a question for tracking the sky. Is it better to stack and track with the nomad, for example 20-30 shots of about a minute ( and when doing this, how can i get those pictures together? Also with Photoshop? Using another Programm/Tool for doing this? ) or just takin one image of about 2-3 minutes? Thx for ur time and sharing your knowledge and sorry for my bad english. Hope you can understand what i am asking. Greets from Palatina Forest, Germany Rico

The OM Systems 300 f4 actually seemed just a tiny bit sharper to me than the Canon 600mm f4 in many of the photos which I found surprising. However, I know that changes as the light falls off and conditions favor the Canon. If you find yourself wanting to shoot in the predawn or twilight hours of the day the Canon is the lens you're going to want. But, for me at least, the portability of MFT gear is a great advantage in its own way. I'm grateful I live in a time that offers photographers such sophisticated options.

This was really helpful! I am fairly skilled with both of these programs, but never knew how to merge all these shots together!

honestly surprised, noise was the main downfall of the mf3 system. NOT worth the extra 10K unless you ARE a RENOUNED, and ESTABLISHED wildlife photographer that can write that thing off on your taxes. Then sure, but otherwise I'd be happy with the other combo!

What the hell the 300 looked better to me most of the time!

Wondering why I cannot save this video to my private folders to reference later?

An interesting comparison though for two widely different budgets. I think comparing the Olympus with the Canon 600mm F/11 would illustrate what m43 offers: feel & build quality

Everyone is a fan boy for the camera system they use!! I have an RF 600mm f/4, so you know how I feel! 😎

If the salmon are late or you are too early there are other ways to see costal brown bears. We flew across the bay from Homer to watch the bears eat grass and engage in the mating season. RatedXXX. The pilots got us in position to view bears from 50 yards. It was great walking with 12 bears on the tidal flats.

To my eyes, the limitations are more in the camera than the lens. They are both super sharp. The Olympus is clearly more noisy due to sensor size. With the 600 on a FF camera, I bet it would significantly outperform it in lower light.

Thank you for the video. It helped, although In my case, everything had to be adjusted. I must say adjusting the polar scope was by far the most difficult. Everything was wobbling and the adjustments were so minimal I had barely noticed them. I hope I'll never had to go through this again...

That's awesome, back in 1983, I got an original Olympus OM-1 black body 35mm film camera as my first camera when I as 14 years old. I loved that camera! Its nice to see they're still putting out some great cameras and lenses!

I don't have a tracker of any kind and a bit confused, I'm in Australia and after aligning to the scp because the milky way core rises in our Eastern sky do you then turn it all to face that direction(if it's on a swivel base) or do you only orientate the camera to face that direction via the ballhead it's on?

firstly, the 2 cameras are NOT similar. 20mp on a 4/3 camera is equivalent to roughly 80mp FF. Comparing the OM-1 20mp 4/3 to the 24mp R6II full frame sensor is not a fair comparison in terms of resolution of detail. Even comparing it to the R5/R5II isn't fair. You are already hobbling the Canon RF 600f4 lens by doing this. Secondly, the 4/3 lens will NEVER have the same background blur as the FF 600f4. If that's not important to you, then fine. I rarely shoot wide open anyway, but some people do. You can get excellent background/subject separation and background blur when shooting at f8 with a bit White prime if you know what you are doing. The RF 600f4 is also inferior optically to the EF600f4 II lens btw. The OM lens seems to have more contrast/micro-contrast and 1 thing that I have learned is that this can make an image appear sharper. The OM lens also seems to have a colour cast (I guess this could be camera, rather than lens related). This is another thing that I have learned from 18 months with my R3 - WB can also impact upon image sharpness. It's a pseudo image thing, but the brain is a very funny thing when it comes to viewing and processing optical data. With the owl shots, the Canon setup looks more colour accurate and sharper too. But, that's how MY eyes perceive the optical data. The Canon AF system seemed to be less affected by the falling snow too (you see the OM system pulse a lot more). For me personally, the Canon setup helps draw attention to the subject due to the background being shallow and out of focus. The OM system's more in focus background detracts from the subject of the image(s). Again, ymmv. I think you've exhibited some user bias here and not been fully impartial, or logical in your testing process. re-do the test with a R5 and the RF 600f4 and compare the results. The OM-1 simply has more pixels on the subject and will always have greater resolution. Is the OM system good? Yes. If I was starting out afresh, I would probably go with the OM-1 and 300f4 - size, weight and cost are big factors. I'm an older guy, with a not so great lower back. I've adapted to lugging around my R3 and EF 500f4 mark 1 + 1.4x TC, but a lighter solution wouldn't hurt.

im a noob... just found your channel...ordered a nomad today...wish me luck.

DXO PureRaw4 is simply AMAZING!!! It should be built right into all MFT cameras. So many pictures you took would look so much better after processing with PureRaw. It truly is a game changer for all cameras but for MFT it is a God send!!! Thank You for the comparison!!! Such good information!!!

hey Im looking at buying the MSM nomad but no one ever mentions what kind of tripod to get, any recommendations before I purchase the wrong one please ?

For 99.7% of the pictures I take, FF would make NO difference. I hike mountains with 2 bodies and 5 lenses and weight is a huge issue. But it’s more than just weight that matters to me. The computational features of the OM 1 fit my needs perfectly. I don’t need filters, I don’t need a tripod yet I can still get 10 second hand held shots. It’s the whole package that fits me and no other system even comes close.

HI, einen runden Lichtpunkt macht er aber nicht. ist das normal? In die Mitte habe Ihn bekommen wenn ich eine 360 -grad Drehung mache, nur der Laserpunkt ist nicht von der Abbildung scharf wie er eigentlich sein sollte. ich hoffe ich finde den Polaris und hoffe auch dass die Leuchtstärke zum Auffinden reicht. CS Rudi

Awesome video! I have two questions. What is the little round rubber plug on the top of the Nomad? Mine is a bit loose and feels like it could be pulled out. Also, my Nomad's plate does not have a set screw. There is a hole on mine where yours has a set acrew, but it's way too large for a set screw (several times larger), it's a weird (not perfect circle) shape, and has no threads. The photos of the Nomad on MSM's website look like mine, so compare those to yours to see what I'm talking about. Do you know why this is?

Re-Edit... for me at least.

This is the best video I’ve seen on this subject. Great job! I’ve subscribed, you really know this material and you do a phenomenal job of explaining it to a neophyte like myself. Thanks

Excellent video Alex, I already subscribed to learn more. Any suggestions for a good tripod for the Nomad?

What a great video, thanks! Such a fair and reasonable conclusion 👏👏👏

I bought the Sirui AT 125 that camera with the video head I have used my 150- 450 wildlife lens I also bought the SL200 center column extension it screws on to the center column and extended additional 2ft 6" for $ 20.00 and it is carbon fiber with the 22 pound capacity. I needed the additional height for my gimble to work properly on the tripod

I don't see any more detail or contrast on the 600mm just more background blur. I guess if you're only shooting with ~20MP go with the MFT version but for higher resolution maybe the 600 has a benefit? Not $10k of benefit unless you're literally shooting for National Geographic >.>

Does this work now when most lamps are LED?

Hi, I enjoyed your video, however I wanted to mention that when using the polar alignment scope, the celestial pole is what is centered in the crosshair not Polaris itself as the star is offset slightly from true celestial pole. Using various apps will assist with aligning Polaris to the correct position for your location and time.

Fabulous instruction video. Well worth the 25 minutes for this very thorough guide. Thanks! Now all I need is for the cloud cover to move out and I'm off to the races.

Super-pro Andy Rouse switched from Canon to Olympus (OM Systems now) years ago. He hasn't looked back. Super-super pro Sebastian Salgado used to maximise depth of field (opposite of subject separation) "because that's how the human eye sees". He often used a Canon 70-300L at f11 to capture things as he thought they should naturally look. No need for large apertures or massive teles.

After using the 300mmf4 pro for 2 years, i enjoyed the om system so much I upgrade to the 150400pro instead of going FF.

Great video! A few questions: How far away do you place light from subject? Should light placement be same distance from subject as the camera? Instead of moving light closer to subject, why not just increase intensity? What setting variables do you use for stacking? Thank you!

Nice video, completely agree with you. The difference is minimal and mostly in the background blur in some images and a bit in noise. In fact for some images I preferred the Olympus setup, for others the Canon. For me the portability and flexibility is more important than maybe 10% extra in image quality. In addition, for extra 10K you can travel to many amazing places.....

For focus, wouldn’t you just want to focus to infinity?

Flippy screen is the most annoying thing when shooting handheld wildlife. Especially when you have a camera strap.

Thank you for all your guidance! Love your work!

Are the Nomad batteries Lithium? Can they be replaced - consumer standard?