Where they actually differ
The most decisive specs, ranked by how much they matter — before the full spec table.
| Spec | Nikon - Z 9 | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 1340 g | 599 g |
| Megapixels | 45 MP | 20 MP |
| AF points | 493 | 1053 |
| Sensor size | Full Frame | Four Thirds |
| Max video | 8K | 4K60 |
Between the Z 9 and OM-1 Mark II, the Z 9 comes out ahead in megapixels / sensor size, while the OM-1 Mark II wins on weight / af points. Overall, the Z 9 scores 71.2 and the OM-1 Mark II scores 67.4 on our Mars Score.
Which should you buy?
The Z 9 edges ahead on the Mars Score (71.2 vs 67.4), but the 3.8-point gap is small enough that the right pick comes down to which spec advantages matter to you.
Pick the Z 9 if you care most about megapixels / sensor size. The biggest gaps in its favor are megapixels, sensor size, max video. The single most decisive one: Megapixels — 125.00% more. 45 MP vs 20 MP.
Pick the OM-1 Mark II if you carry the device everywhere and weight or thickness has been the deciding factor before. Its strongest claims are weight, af points. The single most decisive one: Weight — 741.00 g less. 599 vs 1340.
Both ship with comparable in-body stabilization, log profile, so those specs do not separate the two — focus on the differences below.
Bottom line: there is no wrong answer here — match the spec advantages to how you actually use the product. The Mars Score parity says both are well-rounded; the differences are about trade-offs, not quality.
Which should you buy: Nikon - Z 9 or OM System - OM-1 Mark II?
Nikon - Z 9 leads the current Mars Score by 3.8 points.The more useful decision is the trade-off behind that result: compare megapixels, sensor size, max video, weight against the way you will actually use the product.
Choose Nikon - Z 9 if…
Nikon - Z 9 has the measurable edge on megapixels, sensor size, max video.
Choose OM System - OM-1 Mark II if…
OM System - OM-1 Mark II has the measurable edge on weight g, af points.
This is a structured comparison of the published catalog values. It is not a claim of identical real-world performance across every workload; use the linked spec drill-downs and methodology page to inspect the inputs.
Why Nikon - Z 9 wins
- ▲Megapixels — 125.00% more. 45 MP vs 20 MP.
- ▲Sensor size: Full Frame (vs Four Thirds).
- ▲Max video: 8K (vs 4K60).
Why OM System - OM-1 Mark II wins
- ▲Weight — 741.00 g less. 599 vs 1340.
- ▲AF points — 113.59% more. 1053 vs 493.
Spec comparison
Sensor
| Spec | Nikon - Z 9 | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| Sensor sizeⓘ | Full Framelead | Four Thirds |
| Megapixels | 45 MPlead | 20 MP |
| Max ISO | 102400 | 102400 |
Video
| Spec | Nikon - Z 9 | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| Max video | 8Klead | 4K60 |
| RAW video | truelead | false |
| Log profileⓘ | true | true |
Autofocus
| Spec | Nikon - Z 9 | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| AF pointsⓘ | 493 | 1053lead |
| Eye AFⓘ | true | true |
| In-body stabilizationⓘ | true | true |
Body & Controls
| Spec | Nikon - Z 9 | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 1340 g | 599 glead |
| Weather sealedⓘ | true | true |
| Dual card slotsⓘ | true | true |