Let’s have a long view in color. I really love this Olympus 12-100/4 lens. It’s the one ideal travel lens. This one and the 7-14/2.8, that has been my travel kit for years now.
Shall I switch systems?
OM-Systems basically is selling Olympus’ remainder of stock. I doubt, that we’ll ever see a Pen F mkII or an OM-1 iii. I recently saw a video claiming impressive improvements in the OM-1 ii, given that your niche is birding. I fully believe that, but it’s not what I do.
Requirements
I need a lightweight camera (practically available for all systems, even “full-frame”), lightweight lenses of highest quality wide open, excellent in-body stabilization, sufficient High-ISO performance, and I want to be not cut off from progress in sensor development.
Micro Four Thirds is perfect in all but the last regard. Its future is uncertain. What options do I have?
Panasonic Micro Four Thirds
Panasonic still produces MFT cameras, and with the G9 ii they are at 25 megapixels (small progress, but in line with all those 24 megapixel cameras for APS-C or FF), stabilization is ok, the viewfinder is not up to the OM-1’s standard, and it is much better in video. Which I don’t need. The big drawback is, that Olympus and Panasonic stupidly didn’t cooperate on tandem stabilization between body and lenses. Therefore, my 12-100/4 would not be able to contribute to what the Panasonic body does. The same applies to Panasonic’s dedicated aperture rings, Olympus does not support them.
A different system?
If I think about it, what I really want is a lightweight lens with 16-133/4 for APS-C (assuming 1.5, not Canon’s 1.6 conversion factor) or a 24-200/4 for full frame. Of course, those lenses don’t exist.
Yes, I know, FF guys say my 12-100/4 is equivalent to 24-200/8, and while this is true in terms of “apparent DOF after cropping”, it’s totally wrong in terms of light, and how that relates to shutter speed. In terms of light, my f4 is as good as everybody else’s, regardless of sensor size.
In lower light, the wider aperture keeps shutter-speed higher, or ISO lower. When I still can just use the base ISO of 200 with given shutter speed, a “full-frame” camera with an “equivalent” 24-200/8 would already be at ISO 800. If such a lens did exist.
And there’s more. The 12-100/4 is of the highest quality, already showing maximum sharpness across the frame, wide open, and across the whole zoom range. It’s a pro lens.
What you get in other systems as “travel lenses”, is definitely not up to this standard.
Requirements refined
Just for reference, let’s look at weight. My 12-100/4 has 561g. That’s already heavy, but for a stabilized, weather-sealed f4 lens with a travel range, this is outstanding. I combine it with the 7-14/2.8, coming in at another 534g. Add the OM-1 with 599g, battery and cards included. Add a spare battery and a light bag. Now you are at 2kg, maybe 2.1kg, depending on the bag and your preferred camera strip.
2kg, that’s the benchmark. At that weight, I want to cover a “full-frame” equivalent of 24-200mm with high-quality lenses and a sufficiently sophisticated camera. 5-axis in-body stabilization is a must for what I do, and weather-sealing has turned out to be very convenient.
Let’s start with the lenses and APS-C. Almost everything begins at 18mm, that’s 28 for Canon, 27 for everybody else.
One option is going for three lenses. This would mean a zoom starting below 10mm, but there is none on the market, regardless of quality or light gathering capacity. Ok, let’s start at 15mm eq.
Not Canon APS-C
I’ve never used Canon, 1.6 is a weird conversion factor, and a 10mm Canon would need further concessions on the wide end. Wide is even more important to me than long. Canon APS-C is out.
Nikon APS-C?
Nikon doesn’t have a Z-Mount wide-angle zoom starting a 10mm.
There are two Laowa, but they are both manual focus. Still, manual focus is pretty acceptable in wide-angle.
The Laowa 10-18/4.5-5.6 for Nikon Z weighs 520g. On the other hand, it’s a full-frame lens. Reviews are mixed, mostly because of lacking corner sharpness, which wouldn’t be much of a problem on APS-C.
The Laowa 8-16mm 3.5-5.0 Zoom CF is APS-C, 463g, but corner sharpness at the wide end is not great.
Sigma doesn’t produce for Z mount yet. It would have to be one of the two Laowas.
Do we have a Nikon Z body with APS-C? Yes, but all of them have 20 megapixels. That’s surprising. The Z30 is lightweight (405g, batteries included), but it’s entry-level and does not have a viewfinder. Nope.
The Z50 is from 2019, weighs 450g with batteries, and has a mediocre viewfinder.
Then there is the Zfc. Looks nicely vintage, same weight as the Z50, same viewfinder, and the “silver” version is painted plastic, as far as I can tell.
It looks like the Z fc does not have custom modes, but the Z 50 has two of them, U1 and U2. I am used to C1-C4 on the OM-1, and actually I use only two of them, one for high-speed exposure bracketing, and one for focus-following. I could live with only one for exposure bracketing, so the Z50 is still in the game, the Zfc is not.
What do we have now? In terms of weight, we are at about 1kg. If we can get a decent 18-130+ with a maximum weight of 600g, we might be at something.
There’s a single choice for Z mount, the fairly recent Nikon 18-140/3.5-6.3 VR weighing 315g. Wow! Ok, that’s the range, two lenses, what about quality?
Well, it’s “surprisingly good”, the three reviews I’ve seen recommend it highly, but … optically it is not in the Oly’s class in terms of sharpness across field and focal lengths.
Overall, Nikon APS-C is not very attractive, not at least because of Nikon’s traditional neglect of the format.
Fuji
Let’s have a look a Fuji. Let’s start with the ultra-wide. Fujinon XF 8-16mm 2.8 R LM WR, that’s 805g, but with 12-36mm eq, it is wider than my 7-14/2.8, as well as longer. It’s an expensive and heavy beast of a lens. At slightly more than half the price and half the weight (385g), we have the Fujinon XF 10-24mm 4.0 R OIS WR. “WR” stands for “Weather Resitance”, and that’s also fine. “OIS” is “Optical Image Stabilization”. Furthermore, there is the Sigma Contemporary 10-18mm 2.8 DC DN, weighing only 260g!
Let’s say we take the 10-24. Can we combine it with a ~24-140? There is a Fujinon XF 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR that fits the bill. 490g. Performance is maybe about the same as the Nikon 18-140, maybe better, seemingly lower than that of the Olympus.
I would consider two bodies, the 26 megapixel X-T4, 607g with batteries, and the 40 megapixel X-H2 with 660g, batteries included. Hmm … higher resolution, better viewfinder, nope, the X-H2 it is.
Compromising on the long end opens up the Fujinon XF 18-120mm f/4 LM PZ WR. 460g, and excellent sharpness.
For Fuji, we can also consider giving up on weight. A nice kit consists of Sigma Contemporary 10-18mm 2.8 DC DN (260g), Sigma Contemporary 18-50mm 2.8 DC DN (290g) and the Fujinon XF 50-140mm 2.8 R LM OIS WR (995g). With bag and spare battery we’d be at 2.5kg, but at excellent quality.
If that’s too heavy, the Fujinon XC 50-230mm 4.5-6.7 OIS II is cheap and comes at 375g. If we skip the range between 50 and 55 mm, the stabilized Fujinon XF 55-200mm 3.5-4.8 R LM OIS (580g) would probably be the better choice. Sharpness on the long side seems to suffer though.
I think, I would opt for either the compromised long end or the overweight Sigma/Fuji combo. Lots of options in Fuji’s APS-only land.
DxO Pure RAW supports the X-H2, but they seemingly don’t support the lenses. This is not a matter of in-body software correction. The OM-1 has software correction, but DxO often produces better results. By the way, we have the same situation with Sigma on Sony. DxO just does not support the lenses.
Sony
On the wide end, the Sony E 10-20mm F/4 PZ G seems to be the way to go, especially at 178g 😁
The Sony E 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 OSS is also widely recommended, and it comes at 325g.
If we go for a three-lens setup, there is the Sony E 16-55mm 2.8 G with 494g and excellent reviews. Let’s combine it with … what?
There’s the Tamron 35-150mm 2.0-2.8 Di III VXD, but at 1.17kg, it’s out. Just out. So is the Samyang AF 35-150mm 2.0-2.8 FE, weighing 1.22kg 😁
The Tamron 28-200mm 2.8-5.6 Di III RXD comes at 575g. Reviews are raving, and we will also have to consider it for “full-frame”. For APS-C, I can imagine pairing it with nothing but the Sony E 10-20mm F/4 PZ G. It leaves out the range of 35-42 mm eq, but I suppose I could live with that.
What about Sony bodies for APS-C?
The Sony a6700 has an underwhelming viewfinder, stabilization is not up to par with Olympus, but the at 493g (batteries included), you can build the so far lightest kit with Sony E 10-20mm F/4 PZ G and Sony E 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 OSS. Two lenses and a camera, covering the desired range, altogether at 996g. Amazing.
Accepting the gap, combining the Sony E 10-20mm F/4 PZ G and the Tamron 28-200mm 2.8-5.6 Di III RXD, I’d have more range at still less weight than with my Olympus kit.
What about Sony “full-frame”? The Tamron 28-200mm 2.8-5.6 Di III RXD is the widely praised travel zoom. Now let’s get something below.
The Sony FE 12-24mm 2.8 GM is ghastly expensive and at 847g pretty heavy. Together with the Tamron, we’ll be overweight. 1422g without a body. The Sony Alpha 7R V comes at 723g (batteries included). 2145g, that’s about 2.5kg with bag and second battery.
The Sigma Art 14-24mm 2.8 DG DN brings us down only 50g, at half the price. It’s still expensive but reasonable. Still a gap of 4 mm, still too heavy.
The Sigma Contemporary 16-28mm 2.8 DG DN is a nice match for the Tamron 28-200mm 2.8-5.6 Di III RXD, and it weighs only 450g. 1748g, with bag and spare battery we are still not where we want to be, but very, very close. 16mm is … well, we could have gone Canon APS-C as well for that.
Nikon “full-frame”?
The Nikon Z 14-30mm 4.0 S is fine at 485g. I’d have wanted something like that for Sony “full-frame”, instead of the 800g monsters.
The only travel zoom for Nikon is the Nikon Z 24-200mm 4.0-6.3 VR. 570g, overall good reviews.
So far, we have 1055g for two lenses. Let’s search for a body.
The Nikon Z9 is at 1.34 kg. It’s not a travel camera. One step down we have the Z8, 910g. Makes 1965g. Quite heavy.
The Z7II weighs in at 705g. I’d say that is ok, and so is the upgrade to 45,7 megapixels.
The Z6III is up to 760g and down to 24.5 megapixels. It has a better viewfinder, but the Z7III will likely get that as well. I suppose it’s due this year.
The two Nikon lenses and the Z7III would be, what I’d wait for. I wouldn’t buy the 2.8 zooms, none of them, but I can imagine a few primes coming my way.
Canon “full-frame”
The wide is a Canon RF 14-35mm 4.0 L IS USM (540g). No doubt.
The travel zoom would be the Canon RF 24-240mm 4.0-6.3 IS USM, weighing in at 750g. It seems to be “good for a superzoom”. To me, the impression is, it’s slightly below the Nikon. I may be wrong though.
1290g so far. What about a body?
Similar situation as with Nikon (who wonders?). The R5C has 45 megapixels and 770g. That’s the video version. Without a fan, the R5 has only 738g. The R6II has 24 megapixels and 670g. I’d opt for the R5. This is slightly too heavy (maybe 2.3kg with spare battery and bag), but I might accept it.
Leica L mount
Starts good with the Panasonic Lumix S 14-28mm 4.0-5.6 Makro at 345g. Reviews are good, let’s try to pair it.
The Panasonic Lumix S 20-60mm 3.5-5.6 at 350g and the Panasonic Lumix S 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 Macro OIS at 790g are quite interesting. The 20-60 has excellent reviews, the 70-300 still very good. Together, we talk about 500g left for the body. This won’t work out.
Let’s have a look at the Panasonic Lumix S 28-200mm 4.0-7.1 Makro OIS. We’ll cover the whole range, and it only brings 413g to the table. Bag, I mean. Is it good? Apart from the 7.1 at the long side, yes, at least not outrightt bad. At 200mm you seem to have to stop down to f8 or even f11, but that’s what OIS and in-body stabilization are for, right?
345g for the 14-28, 413g for the 28-200. That makes for 760g. 1 kg to spare for a body. Heck, I wouldn’t combine it with those lenses, but at 770g, even the Leica SL3 would be an option 😁
Everything above 24 megapixels is a Leica and out of range in terms of cost. The Panasonic S9 lacks a viewfinder. Nope.
The Panasonic Lumix DC-S5II has a more expensive video cousin, but I don’t need that. The S5II still has better video than most cameras 😁
24 megapixels, 740g. That’s 1.5kg overall. Not the highest resolution, not the best combo at the long end, not as light as Sony APS-C, but not bad at all.
And you can mount super-expensive Leica primes 😝
Conclusion
Some systems I’ve considered, have quite good options. Fuji, Sony APS-C, Nikon Z and Leica L are the best, none is compelling though.
At the moment, I’ll keep my Olympus gear. I really have no need in terms of anything. If OM-Systems closes shop, I’ll certainly be able to get a backup OM-1 or OM-1ii, as well as another Olympus 12-100/4, if I need one. That might get me along another five years. In the meantime, anything can happen. Even OM-Systems might have a new, higher resolution camera.