Why Thom is wrong...

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
MarkJH
Contributing MemberPosts: 614Gear list
Like?
When to be a hater that's gotta hate
In reply to paulkienitz, 7 months ago

paulkienitz wrote:

MarkJH wrote:

I guess what I'm getting at, here, is that the "dual-pixel" development is impressive, but it's also very clearly a "first gen" product. Live View with the 70D is a big leap over, say, Live View with the 5DIII; and for subjects in motion, it may have an advantage over Olympus or Panasonic (I say "may" because, again, I'm not a sports shooter; it isn't more effective with models).

However, it's still not nearly so quick or so confident as the 2012-vintage EM-5 for single-shot stills. It's not really close. And it's not just an issue of lens motor speed: there's a confidence in the way the EM-5 locks that no DSLR I've ever shot has. It's amazing, and though the 70D is great, shooting the EM-5 reminds you how far Canon still has to go.

I'm curious on what grounds you believe this "confidence" is not about lens motors. Bear in mind that the Canon is doing all this with lenses designed solely for use with viewfinder focusing, and the equivalent test for the EM-5 (or more appropriately, the EM-1) would be to try it solely with Four Thirds Classic lenses.

My "grounds" start with actually having used both of the cameras in question (and a few others) for professional work.

Lens drives do absolutely have something to do with the OM-D's amazing speed, but there's also the complete lack of processing delay or comparison "hitch" when you move target-to-target.   In that regard with stationary targets, the OM-D behaves very, very much like a top-end pro sports DSLR: it's right there with the 1Dx and 5DIII: instantaneous moves.  It's not just that (some) Canon lens drives aren't as quick--it's that cameras like the 70D don't process the target acquisitions as quickly, either.  And in this case, I'm not just talking about their live-view / CD-AF capability--I'm talking about their PDAF, too.

In a fashion shoot, the OM-D's speed and confidence is a big deal.  You can just snap from expression to expression, pose to pose, without even a moment's hitch--your models can move naturally without any need to "hold" a mood.   You'd get the same benefit shooting your work with a 1Dx and one of Canon's quickest lenses--say, a 70-200LII (using PDAF, of course), but not every shot would be as perfectly, critically focused.  (Because you wouldn't have focus points of equal quality everywhere in frame, because AF fine tuning responsive to the center point may not apply as well to outer points, because PDAF tolerances are wider than CDAF, etc. etc. etc.)

Last: I guess I don't follow your reasoning that the m4/3 lens system should be excluded from comparison with CaNikon.  It seems, to me, that a lens system adapted to faster, more accurate, more consistent autofocus is just another comparative advantage for the mirrorless end of things, and, for CaNikon, another liability delaying their progress.   I'm with you that the 70D's "dual-pixel" system probably would be faster with purpose-built lens designs, but as it stands with the lenses available for it, it's markedly slower and less resolute.

I get the sense that you're just gonna think what you're gonna think, and that's cool.  Hate what you want to hate.  My shooting partner doesn't prefer mirrorless either.  Her opinions, however, come from actually using one and thinking critically about the results that came of it.   Ask her about mirrorless and she says this: put her DSLR (OVF) photographs next to her mirrorless (EVF) work, and you can see that she wasn't as engaged with the model in the mirrorless shots.  I'd agree: the results say that the technology doesn't work as well for her, even if it is technically superior in some ways.

There's a world of difference, however, between "it doesn't work as well for her" and "it doesn't work as well."   I read these threads and just about every post in them reduces "it doesn't (or might) not work as well or better for me" to "it can't work as well or better for anyone."  And as if that weren't silly enough, I suspect many of the folks with the most vehement opinions, here, have never even touched mirrorless gear.

I had to laugh at the OP's language in the first post: "if you're really honest with yourself . . . " you might think some experience with the gear you're talking about would be useful in formulating an opinion.

 MarkJH's gear list:MarkJH's gear list
Nikon D700 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 1,4/35 +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow