Dynamic Range on Olympus vs Sony cameras for birds in flight

Sony vs OM dynamic range wildlife zooms — schematic illustrating how sensor DR and lens speed interact to determine real-world image quality

If you would rather head straight to a concise summary, the TL;DR is at the foot of the page — or jump directly to the FAQ.

In other articles I have compared focus accuracy and noise between the Sony A9 and Olympus EM1x cameras. This time I’ll look at Dynamic Range on Olympus vs Sony, specifically when photographing birds in flight (BIF).

TL;DR
  • A9 has 1–2 stops more dynamic range than EM1x at base ISO (100). At ISO 3200+, the gap shrinks to 0.5 stop—negligible for BIF.
  • At practical BIF ISOs (3200–6400), both systems clip shadows and highlights identically in difficult lighting.
  • EM1x’s wider depth of field and superior IBIS (5-stop vs no IBIS on A9) often recover more useable frames, offsetting DR disadvantage.
  • Post-processing: both cameras have enough DR for shadow recovery on backlit sequences; highlight recovery favours neither system.
  • For BIF, dynamic range is 4th-order priority after focus accuracy, AF reliability, and frame rate.

Back to the article.

Frequently asked questions

Why does dynamic range matter less at high ISO?

At base ISO 100, A9’s sensor with ~14 stops DR is significantly ahead of EM1x’s ~11 stops. At ISO 3200, thermal noise floor rises and both systems converge to ~9–10 stops. At ISO 6400 (typical BIF), measured DR drops to ~8 stops on both cameras. The advantage is marginal.

Do bird images typically use bright exposures where DR matters?

No. BIF shooting favours fast shutter (1/2500s+) and tight exposures to avoid overexposure. Highlights are rarely recovered—they’re clipped intentionally to preserve the bird silhouette. Shadow recovery (lifting underexposed areas) matters more than highlight recovery, and both systems perform equally here.

How does IBIS offset lower DR?

EM1x’s 5-stop IBIS allows shooting at lower shutter speeds without blur. Lower shutter speed = better AF tracking and higher success rate overall. That translates to more useable frames per session, compensating for any DR loss on individual images.

Which dynamic range scenario is most common in BIF?

Backlit subjects (e.g., sunrise, sunset, cloud backdrop). Shadows need lifting; highlights are already blown. A9’s 1–2 stop advantage helps here—but only if the photographer exposed for the bird. In practice, most BIF frames are slightly underexposed for safety, and shadow lifting happens in post on both systems equally.

Should DR be a deciding factor between EM1x and A9?

No. Focus accuracy, AF reliability, and burst buffer are more important. A9 is faster and has a larger buffer. EM1x has unique ProCapture. Choose based on those—DR is similar enough at BIF ISOs that it won’t affect the outcome.

Back to the article.

Similar Posts

  • OM1 vs R5, A1 and Z8: which is the best all-round system?

    Testing the Canon R5, Sony A1, and Nikon Z8 paired with lightweight telephoto lenses at 600–800mm against the OM-1 and 300mm f4, none of the full-frame alternatives produced better BIF output — all three had worse net noise when the slower lens apertures were factored in, and most lacked pre-capture RAW or live exposure blinkies. The least-worst full-frame option was the Nikon Z7 or Z8 with the 500mm PF f5.6, which reached approximate noise parity with the OM-1 at 750mm in crop mode but still could not match the frame rate or pre-capture capability.

  • Sony Zooms vs the 600mm f4 Prime—comparative image quality

    Using standardised test data from The-Digital-Picture — the only widely available source with controlled lab comparisons of both the 600mm f4 GMaster and the wildlife zooms — the £12,000 prime shows minimal perceptible image quality advantage over the £1,600 200-600mm or the £2,400 400-800mm at 600mm. Independent numerical resolution data comparing exotic primes to wildlife zooms essentially does not exist, because manufacturers provide early samples to YouTube influencers rather than to test houses that might measure the difference.

  • Multi-lens speed and noise comparison of EM1x to Sony A9

    Matching the EM1x and A9 at equivalent subject magnification and aperture — rather than at the same focal length and ISO, which is the comparison most reviewers use — shows the two systems within 0.5 stops of each other at ISO 3200. The perceived noise advantage of Sony full-frame is largely an artefact of unfair comparison conditions that favour the larger sensor by ignoring how much more light the smaller-sensor OM lenses gather per pixel.

  • Sony a6400 for birds in flight

    Over 3,441 shots across seven sessions at Andover and Richmond Park, the Sony a6400 averaged 35% focus accuracy for birds in flight despite trying every published autofocus setup recommendation. The ergonomics made a difficult situation worse: a tiny viewfinder aperture that requires near-squinting to use, a stiff rear control dial, intrusive exposure zebras that obscure the subject, and no proper battery grip available from Sony or third parties.

  • Sony A9 focus accuracy – birds in flight hit rate

    Detailed analysis using AFV.exe to check the focus point location for 1,600 A9 shots showed that even when the camera placed a focus point directly on the bird, the resulting image was out of focus 40% of the time — camera error, not user error. The afternoon session hit rate of 39% reflects a genuine limitation in demanding conditions, not the test methodology.

  • OM5 custom settings explained

    The OM-5 has only one ‘hard’ custom setting on the mode dial (C), with three additional ‘soft’ settings (C2–C4) that can be recalled from buttons but are lost as soon as you press the Menu button — a behaviour that initially baffled me. The practical solution is to store landscape/base settings in C so they can always be recalled as a clean baseline, and use C2–C4 for specialist genres with the understanding that pressing Menu exits them.