• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Olympus EM1 MKII seems to be in the pipeline.

MFT Lympus EM1

  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Wolf

Wolf

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts

Posted 02 August 2016 - 03:40 PM

Olympus rumours seem to be confirming the appearance of an update to the EM1 with exciting specifications as below

 

http://thenewcamera....lympus-rumors/ 

 

This could really put Olympus in the pro league; It certainly would have all I need, provided the AF tracking really is good enough for shooting flying birds. It could stop me from having to leave the MFT system for Nikon, which I had planned until I saw this announcement. Now I will wait.



#2 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,043 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 02 August 2016 - 11:33 PM

Just some general comments here:

Phase detection alone will never be as good in a mirrorless camera as in a DSLR. The phase detection diodes are embedded into the sensor whereas there's a dedicated chip for this purpose alone in DSLRs. Or in other words - the diodes are simply much bigger (more sensitive) in DSLRs which is why PD-AF is much better in low light on DSLRs for instance. Now phase detection alone is not the end of wisdom though. Phase detection is quite dumb. Contrast detection can be smart because it can recognize shapes. Thus over time I have no doubts that contrast detection will be far superior (with a little help from PD-AF to find the initial focus).

 

Now with respect to the E-M1 II ... I doubt that the PD-AF wil be substantially better than on the mk I. C-AF will be quite different though. The mk I is stoneage by now (3 years). Things have quite evolved every since. Just take the Sony A6300 as a benchmark there.

 

Birds in flight will continue to be tough though. Birds are small, they tend to fly in front of busy backgrounds and they often blend into their environment. This is a worst case scenario for any AF system. "Sports" is actually easy - the background is comparatively uniform, the subjects have a high contrast vs the background, the distance between subject and background is usually quite pronounced.

 

In any case it makes sense to wait for the E-M1 II - and also to see how the X-T2 will be perceived in reviews.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#3 Ayoh

Ayoh

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts

Posted 03 August 2016 - 03:42 AM

A dual-pixel type approach to on-sensor PDAF solves the low light sensitivity problem



#4 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts

Posted 03 August 2016 - 05:10 AM

Put simply for birds in flight/ sports you can have:

 

     almost perfect and unbelievably fast focusing with the D500..."guaranteed"...low light included...with a 10 FPS endless buffer and X1 magnification viewfinder with a lag of the speed of light...no discussion,

 

  available at your local store right now!

 

  or, wait to see the "outcome" of an Olympus's upgraded PD/CD AF system with it's usual advantages of accuracy, and it's usual disadvantages of high speed AF tracking, low light limitations and viewfinder lag....maybe soon, maybe years later! 

  With the usual "it's getting there" .."improvements" ....looking forward to the next generation...etc. etc!

 

 There's no doubt that mirrorless "is" getting there with both Olympus/ Fuji and Sony and great progress is being made....but mirror-less is a young man's sport...because when it finally gets there the older generation (me for example)  will already be firmly ensconced in their coffins!

 

For sports and action;  

 

    Cheer the "future" of mirror-less,

 

    get the shot "today" with a DSLR!



#5 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,043 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 03 August 2016 - 06:53 AM

A dual-pixel type approach to on-sensor PDAF solves the low light sensitivity problem

 

I have a 7D II and I am not so impressed actually ....


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#6 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,953 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 03 August 2016 - 09:12 AM

Put simply for birds in flight/ sports you can have:
 
     almost perfect and unbelievably fast focusing with the D500..."guaranteed"...low light included...with a 10 FPS endless buffer and X1 magnification viewfinder with a lag of the speed of light...no discussion,


If someone tells me "no discussion" I manage from time to time to stay silent.

But here you're also using wishful thinking. We experienced a couple of "best ever AF" with Nikon. D800 improved over D7000, D810 over D800 and Nikon's best AF I had so far was D750, so there is some reason to expect better performance with D500. And my friend tells me, his best ever AF of Nikon was D700. But with all the weaknesses of indirect focusing or different values for AFMA at different distances, that advantages all become very relative. Always fast and more or less often inaccurate is DSLR and so far mirrorless is the other way round. At the moment, using both systems parallel is not a bad idea.

But it deserves also a bit less wishful thinking and more reality. My reality was, with AF-C and fast continuous shooting, the first D750 or D810 shot was mostly sharp, the others.... Still could have some keepers, but not reliably. This was for the best AF. And the worst DSLR AF was for sure not better than state-of-the-art-mirrorless are today. Not in terms of speed and especially not in terms of accuracy AND focus point coverage in the finder.

If you don't plan to die soon or get blind, you will experience mirrorless speeding up to D500 level.

And there's another bonus point which is not discussed yet. The absolutely silent electronic shutter, ideal for birds which are easily disturbed by noise. I'm still wondering why Nikon is not able to build a hybrid DSLR. All things needed for LiveView are aboard, but not electronic shutter in LiveView. That's like a car with a turbo engine, but only two years, and one of the is the reverse gear.

#7 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts

Posted 03 August 2016 - 12:30 PM

If someone tells me "no discussion" I manage from time to time to stay silent.

But here you're also using wishful thinking. We experienced a couple of "best ever AF" with Nikon. D800 improved over D7000, D810 over D800 and Nikon's best AF I had so far was D750, so there is some reason to expect better performance with D500. And my friend tells me, his best ever AF of Nikon was D700. But with all the weaknesses of indirect focusing or different values for AFMA at different distances, that advantages all become very relative. Always fast and more or less often inaccurate is DSLR and so far mirrorless is the other way round. At the moment, using both systems parallel is not a bad idea.

But it deserves also a bit less wishful thinking and more reality. My reality was, with AF-C and fast continuous shooting, the first D750 or D810 shot was mostly sharp, the others.... Still could have some keepers, but not reliably. This was for the best AF. And the worst DSLR AF was for sure not better than state-of-the-art-mirrorless are today. Not in terms of speed and especially not in terms of accuracy AND focus point coverage in the finder.

If you don't plan to die soon or get blind, you will experience mirrorless speeding up to D500 level.

And there's another bonus point which is not discussed yet. The absolutely silent electronic shutter, ideal for birds which are easily disturbed by noise. I'm still wondering why Nikon is not able to build a hybrid DSLR. All things needed for LiveView are aboard, but not electronic shutter in LiveView. That's like a car with a turbo engine, but only two years, and one of the is the reverse gear.

 There's lots and lots of great aspects with mirror-less, as you say accuracy, which is one of the points with which you had issues with Nikon. I found it puzzling myself as I haven't had theses issues over and above a small percentage of missed shots.

 

  "The Angry Photographer" Ken Wheeler well known for his fidelity to Nikon, has two favourite cameras (amongst others) the Fuji XT1 and the Nikon D500 and posts endless videos (some of which are painful to watch) on Utube. Fuji also have a particularly good quality of seeing things through in terms of updates and listening to their customer base  I could quite easily see myself shooting Fuji were it not for the fact that I'm sports/birding shooting, as far as I can see ML isn't there yet....then there's the lenses!

 

  BTW. The butterfly shots are taken with the 500mm F4 with a pair of extension tubes that make 56mm bringing the MFD down to about 2mts, I only used AF-C and the combination (D7100) even out of it's specified distance range, manged to regularly hit the critters eye!

 

https://www.flickr.c...124690178@N08/ 

 

 

 I hope I've got another tn ten years in me so maybe I will see mirror-less get there, but I'm shooting now! 



#8 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,043 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 03 August 2016 - 01:58 PM

While I partially agree we are probably a camera generation away from breaking even - thus 2-3 years. Not 10 years.

If you rely on making money with sports/bird photography TODAY I would stick to a DSLR - or if money is no issue.

I don't see any really limiting factor beyond this very specific topic though (give or take a little regarding gaps in the lineups).


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#9 Wolf

Wolf

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts

Posted 03 August 2016 - 03:54 PM

My problem is I'm trying to, not always managing to, make money with photography AND I'm getting to an age where I don't have many more gear changes i me. That is why I really need to make sure that this time counts and gives me what I really need. My age, arthritis in hands and feet, plus some should all send me in the direction of MFT, because the weight and size advantage is so huge compared to DSLR's and even the Fuji system.  However, if I cannot bring images to the potential customer that are sharp and contrasty, it is very difficult to convince someone to spend bucks to follow me on a trip to Spitzbergen or Finland for polar bears and brown bears or puffins in Shetland. I was kitted out with Nikon D700 and the best glass and never had problems with sharp pictures. Now I must say I never have problems with sharp pictures of still subjects with MFT either and lenses like the 75 f1.8 or the 40-150 f2.8 are just marvellous in terms of IQ. Unfortunately, my future is now, so my next step has to be the right one.



#10 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,043 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 03 August 2016 - 11:17 PM

Well, if you are trying to make money (based on a sane investment) I'd suggest a full format DSLR plus the Sigma 150-600mm Sports. Carrying this will not be fun though.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#11 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts

Posted 04 August 2016 - 08:19 AM

Tony Northrup raves about the Canon 400mm F5.6 combined with a teleconverter and the APSc 7DII body for nature, the 400mm is compact, not heavy and is sharper than the zooms, used with a 1.4 converter that gives you 640mm + 1.4 converter 896mm equivalent.
The lens is very solid and can be found S/H for $1,000 or less!

 

 The 7DII shoots at 10Fps and has a pro level AF.

 

The whole caboodle is about as "light and compact as you can get" for birding and nature.

 

 

Here's a link to his comparison video:

 



#12 chlky0001

chlky0001

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 13 September 2016 - 05:10 PM

I have a 7D II and I am not so impressed actually ....


Is it the same as in 80D? I feel the one in 80D is pretty snappy, or maybe I just used fujifilm too much





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: MFT, Lympus, EM1

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de