Its official. Oly AF sucks!

Started Sep 11, 2013 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Big Ga Forum Pro • Posts: 18,344
Its official. Oly AF sucks!
10

ROTFLM... well you know the rest ...

In the original DPR hands on review of the EM1, they wrote:

"The way see it is this: if you're a Four Thirds lens owner and hoping for contemporary DSLR performance, you're going to be disappointed"

Which promptly got jumped on as a number of other sites seemed to be suggesting it was ballpark the same as normal Oly 4/3 cameras.

Well, DPR have gone and revisited this, and have posted an update:

"UPDATE:

Having gone back and spent some more time with an Olympus E-5, I'm inclined to be more positive about the E-M1's behaviour with Four Thirds lenses - not because it's better than I originally stated, but because the E-5 isn't as good as I'd previously thought"

See ... that's what happens when you spend too time reviewing things like D4 and 1DX cameras (or perhaps even any modern mid range APSc camera?).. one tends to forget... totally understandable.

Now ... for everyone on 1022. Put 2 and 2 together. I'll give you a clue. The answer isn't 5 ... LOL ....

eaa Senior Member • Posts: 1,882
Re: Its official. Oly AF sucks!
8

Like DPR is the only reliable source in the world?
There are already lots of contradicting reviews out there, stating that it's not bad at all. You seriously didn't think a 1st generation PDAFOS (on sensor) system would rival the big guns ultimate state of the art native PDAF systems to a 100%, did you? PDAF systems that have been honed to perfection for decades, and spent millions of dollars in R&D into, and put exclusively into their top tier pro models, costing 5x the E-M1? Well, for pure speed that would not be very likely. But for front- and back-focus issues OTOH, I'd wager the E-M1 beats them hands down

-- hide signature --
 eaa's gear list:eaa's gear list
Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm 1:3.5 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 +9 more
Gregm61 Forum Pro • Posts: 14,505
Re: Its official. Oly AF sucks!
1

eaa wrote:

Like DPR is the only reliable source in the world?
There are already lots of contradicting reviews out there, stating that it's not bad at all. You seriously didn't think a 1st generation PDAFOS (on sensor) system would rival the big guns ultimate state of the art native PDAF systems to a 100%, did you?

And having used an E-5 for a while myself, I wouldn't be putting it up on a pedestal with any state of the art pdaf systems today The MSC-driven Micro Zuikos focus faster on micro bodies than the 12-60 and 50-200 SWD Zuikos ever did on my E-5.

Eric, I've missed looking at your awesome folders with images you capture with the big Olympus glass. I'm gonna go see if you've got some recent stuff out there. I can only imagine what files captured with an E-M1 and your 90-250mm f2.8 would look like.

-- hide signature --

"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights

 Gregm61's gear list:Gregm61's gear list
Leica M9 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Leica M (Typ 262) Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro +21 more
Messier Object Veteran Member • Posts: 4,120
you seem to
5

take great joy from reporting this 'news' , why is that ?

 Messier Object's gear list:Messier Object's gear list
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Olympus E-5 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 7D Mark II Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro +11 more
tinternaut Veteran Member • Posts: 7,155
Re: The PDAF is likely as good as it's going to get
2

I don't see Olympus expending R&D costs in getting that side of AF any better than the E-3/5/30 (which are actually pretty good - like night and day compared to my E-510, but happen to be behind the CaNikon state of the art).

-- hide signature --
 tinternaut's gear list:tinternaut's gear list
Olympus E-510 Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1 Olympus E-30 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PM2 +13 more
WhyNot
WhyNot Veteran Member • Posts: 4,684
Too Bad!
2

I went back and reread the review and those results are very disappointing. I use the 14-54 Mk II and the ZD 40-150mm lenses regularly with the G2 and GX1 and they works very well and I would assume their focusing is improved on any of the newer m43 camera bodies. The 50mm macro and the 105mm Sigma macro are unacceptable and I would only use them as manual focus lenses on mFT bodies. The 70-300 will focus but compared to the E-30 the focus speed is like pouring molasses... … These results mean that when I upgrade the E-30 I'll probably be looking somewhere else as I don't expect Oly to deliver a 100 mm macro for the mFT system and I can always find an equivalent lens to the 70-300 on another system. …. But I will continue to read reviews and the opinions of others as they use the camera. …. Sorry to read these results as I was hoping for a better solution...

SHood Veteran Member • Posts: 4,571
check out this review instead
 SHood's gear list:SHood's gear list
Sony RX100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko 300mm F4 IS Pro
Big Ga OP Forum Pro • Posts: 18,344
"Please sir ... is the answer 5 ?"
3

eaa wrote:

Like DPR is the only reliable source in the world?
There are already lots of contradicting reviews out there, stating that it's not bad at all. You seriously didn't think a 1st generation PDAFOS (on sensor) system would rival the big guns ultimate state of the art native PDAF systems to a 100%, did you?

Who's talking about the EM1? (well ... you it seems, but you've missed the whole point!) We're talking E5 focus ...

PDAF systems that have been honed to perfection for decades, and spent millions of dollars in R&D into, and put exclusively into their top tier pro models, costing 5x the E-M1? Well, for pure speed that would not be very likely.

Exclusively into top tier models ?!? Bet cameras like the D7100 smoke it as well. And they're cheaper than an EM1

But for front- and back-focus issues OTOH, I'd wager the E-M1 beats them hands down

Well that's an interesting one. Personally, I'd think that I would actually take that wager (albeit for something small like a pint) if we were comparing like for like DOF. The extended DOF of 4/3 hides a multitude of sins and the mostly fast apertures used by FF users suffering focus issues makes things more obvious.

I'm not one of these evangelists that thinks CDAF is infallible. My take is that the AF with some lenses would be unacceptably slow if they were to go for maximum accuracy, so the algorithms have to do a certain amount of extrapolation and guessing to ensure an AF confirmation in an acceptable time. I don't believe they always get it right.

Big Ga OP Forum Pro • Posts: 18,344
Re: you seem to
2

Messier Object wrote:

take great joy from reporting this 'news' , why is that ?

Well Doh! because its absolutely hilarious !!

bofo777 Contributing Member • Posts: 787
Re: check out this review instead
1

SHood wrote:

http://fourthirds-user.com/2013/09/olympus_omd_em1_handson_preview.php

http://fourthirds-user.com/2013/09/olympus_omd_em1_new_features_explained_.php/b

-- hide signature --

Ian Burly writes in first fourthirds-users above "although a direct comparison with the E-5 the older camera edged out the EM-1 in extremely low light conditions"......So why is this camera such an upgrade when a lot of my photography with my fourthird lenses is in dim buildings and churches with no flash??? I guess the better ISO of the EM-1 in low light doesn't mean the AF is any better...John

 bofo777's gear list:bofo777's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD +8 more
WhyNot
WhyNot Veteran Member • Posts: 4,684
Thanks

Thanks for the references, they were interesting. However, the bottom line seemed to be PDAF is good enough now but if you want PDAF the equals or exceeds what you have on the E-5 or E-30 wait a couple generations...I was a little disappointed that the final PD focus wasn't CD for its accuracy even if it meant a slightly slower focus...

Louis_Dobson
Louis_Dobson Forum Pro • Posts: 27,317
Re: Its official. Oly AF sucks!
2

As I've said before, I had two D3s and one E3, and the E3 was right up there with the D3.
I dunno whether this was because the E3 suffered terrible sample variation and I had one of the few good ones, or if I had two duff D3s.  I mustard mitt I was very disappointed by the D3 rather than delighted by the E3, so perhaps the latter is more likely.
Anyway, both cameras are obsolete now.

-- hide signature --

www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com

 Louis_Dobson's gear list:Louis_Dobson's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Messier Object Veteran Member • Posts: 4,120
Re: you seem to
6

Then your intention is to FLAME  and the MODs need to pay attention . . .

 Messier Object's gear list:Messier Object's gear list
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Olympus E-5 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 7D Mark II Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro +11 more
JiminDenver Veteran Member • Posts: 5,189
Re: Its official. Oly AF sucks!
2

I agree. Both my E 3 and E 5 are great at focusing. It was worth the money for the 12-60 and a second 50-200 although the original was no slouch on the E 3 even with the EC 20.

-- hide signature --

JimB
Bug Whisperer
Join us in The Weekly Close up every weekend

 JiminDenver's gear list:JiminDenver's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus E-3 Olympus E-5 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD +14 more
LiquidSilver Forum Member • Posts: 81
Actually, the reviewer was spoiled by E-m1 + m43 lens, that is "so fast" (nt)
2

No text.

Danielvr Veteran Member • Posts: 3,232
Zuiko 50mm f2 AF speed
1

WhyNot wrote:

The 50mm macro and the 105mm Sigma macro are unacceptable and I would only use them as manual focus lenses on mFT bodies.

You may have missed this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEBz5h_1cHc

 Danielvr's gear list:Danielvr's gear list
Olympus E-330 Olympus E-510 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +2 more
alatchin Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
Re: Its official. Oly AF sucks!
6

I agree. Both my E 3 and E 5 are great at focusing. It was worth the money for the 12-60 and a second 50-200 although the original was no slouch on the E 3 even with the EC 20.

-- hide signature --

JimB
Bug Whisperer
Join us in The Weekly Close up every weekend

I also had the a850 and the a900... My e3 put them to shame on a whole host of af areas.

Gareth is a clown... And enjoys clowning around here.
--
“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

alatchin Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
actually their cdaf system is state of the art.
2

ROTFLM... well you know the rest ...

In the original DPR hands on review of the EM1, they wrote:

"The way see it is this: if you're a Four Thirds lens owner and hoping for contemporary DSLR performance, you're going to be disappointed"

Which promptly got jumped on as a number of other sites seemed to be suggesting it was ballpark the same as normal Oly 4/3 cameras.

Well, DPR have gone and revisited this, and have posted an update:

"UPDATE:

Having gone back and spent some more time with an Olympus E-5, I'm inclined to be more positive about the E-M1's behaviour with Four Thirds lenses - not because it's better than I originally stated, but because the E-5 isn't as good as I'd previously thought"

See ... that's what happens when you spend too time reviewing things like D4 and 1DX cameras (or perhaps even any modern mid range APSc camera?).. one tends to forget... totally understandable.

Now ... for everyone on 1022. Put 2 and 2 together. I'll give you a clue. The answer isn't 5 ... LOL ....

But you can keep focusing on what you want to see.
--
“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” -Ansel Adams
blog.alatchinphotography(dot)com

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 35,516
Re: actually their cdaf system is state of the art.

Well. But of course people with 4/3 lenses want to focus on PDaf with 4/3. Its the bridge after all no?

Here's what I say- if its better than e-5 I think that's pretty good (for me) as long as (I) can do it to -2 ev (which is what the e-3/e-5 where rated at), and two: does it accurately without back or front focus issues (main e-4 problem that varies to e-5 though e-5 was tweaked for better)
--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

WhyNot
WhyNot Veteran Member • Posts: 4,684
I did missed it ... Thanks
1

You're right, I did miss that video and the E-M1 in this video certainly focuses the 50mm lens much better than the G2. Now if the 105mm lens focuses that well I may have to start thinking about explaining this expense to my wife who will want a new ??????????     Well it may be worth considering...  but I'll wait until members of this forum start reporting their experiences with the camera.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads