Where they actually differ
The most decisive specs, ranked by how much they matter — before the full spec table.
| Spec | Nikon - Z f | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| AF points | 299 | 1053 |
| Weight | 710 g | 599 g |
| Megapixels | 24 MP | 20 MP |
| Sensor size | Full Frame | Four Thirds |
Between the Z f and OM-1 Mark II, the Z f comes out ahead in megapixels / sensor size, while the OM-1 Mark II wins on af points / weight. Overall, the Z f scores 64.3 and the OM-1 Mark II scores 67.4 on our Mars Score.
Which should you buy?
The OM-1 Mark II edges ahead on the Mars Score (64.3 vs 67.4), but the 3.1-point gap is small enough that the right pick comes down to which spec advantages matter to you.
Pick the Z f if you care most about megapixels / sensor size. The biggest gaps in its favor are megapixels, sensor size. The single most decisive one: Megapixels — 20.00% more. 24 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 af points, weight. The single most decisive one: AF points — 252.17% more. 1053 vs 299.
Both ship with comparable max video, 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 f or OM System - OM-1 Mark II?
OM System - OM-1 Mark II leads the current Mars Score by 3.1 points.The more useful decision is the trade-off behind that result: compare megapixels, sensor size, weight against the way you will actually use the product.
Choose Nikon - Z f if…
Nikon - Z f has the measurable edge on megapixels, sensor size.
Choose OM System - OM-1 Mark II if…
OM System - OM-1 Mark II has the measurable edge on af points, weight g.
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 f wins
- ▲Megapixels — 20.00% more. 24 MP vs 20 MP.
- ▲Sensor size: Full Frame (vs Four Thirds).
Why OM System - OM-1 Mark II wins
- ▲AF points — 252.17% more. 1053 vs 299.
- ▲Weight — 111.00 g less. 599 vs 710.
Spec comparison
Sensor
| Spec | Nikon - Z f | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| Sensor sizeⓘ | Full Framelead | Four Thirds |
| Megapixels | 24 MPlead | 20 MP |
| Max ISO | 64000 | 102400lead |
Video
| Spec | Nikon - Z f | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| Max video | 4K60 | 4K60 |
| RAW video | false | false |
| Log profileⓘ | true | true |
Autofocus
| Spec | Nikon - Z f | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| AF pointsⓘ | 299 | 1053lead |
| Eye AFⓘ | true | true |
| In-body stabilizationⓘ | true | true |
Body & Controls
| Spec | Nikon - Z f | OM System - OM-1 Mark II |
|---|---|---|
| Weight | 710 g | 599 glead |
| Weather sealedⓘ | true | true |
| Dual card slotsⓘ | false | truelead |