James McDaniel is a self-taught photographer with a special interest in roller derby. He's also a Micro Four Thirds shooter, so when we were looking for someone to test out the E-M5 II in the real world with us, we immediately thought of James.
Watch our latest field test video to see how the camera performed on game day, and don't miss an opportunity to see our very own Allison Johnson in action, and editor Barney Britton trying out roller skates for the first time in his life - all for the sake of camera testing.
So was this entirely shot on these cameras? Impressive if so! Ah ... never mind, read below ... but the Oly slo mo footage looked fine. But I doubt it was shot in 4K, since that would take an external recorder ... and just isn't necessary for web content.
I watched all the way through the end credits to see the gear info - would be great if you could include this technical production data in future episodes.
Great vid review, nice to see some actionfootage and real-world usage.
I have a hard time accepting these "sharp" images when even the small thumbnails shown were loaded with noise.
To bad since the camera, features and design seems excellent and small lenses giving good results (though obviously never tested on anything higher than 16mp) Just wished the noise was better. Even at native iso it is easy to see noise when croping.
I hope Sony gives the next generation batch to Olympus some upgrades.
Wow, it is a tough crowd. How many of you have tried to shoot such a fast moving subject in such dim lighting? This would be a challenge with FX gear and you'd have to resort to full on f/2.8 FX primes. Yes, I agree the pics are not museum of fine art worthy, but for what they are or are meant to be they seem just fine.
I think most are reacting to the large DOF and are expecting more OOF backgrounds. That's just a limitation of the format and available lenses. Would have liked to seen the 42.5/1.2 Pany being used (why just Oly lenses?).
Dim light? I checked he exposure and it is around f2.8 1/500 at oly iso 6400 (which is inflated and more like iso 3200 for other cameras) and no subject is actually moving towards the camera.
I am pretty sure that any modern aps dslr paired with cheap 3.5-4.5 zooms can take better results at fraction of the cost. Yes and i have been shooting sports for years, since D1 era.
Because it's loaned equipment, directly from the manufacturer. In exchange, DPR does these informecials. Olympus would be crazy to turn down that kind of free publicity or to allow a rival (Panasonic) to shine when Olympus should get all the limelight for this occasion.
You don't even need to depend on others to test "ISO cheating", you can test it yourself. Take two cameras, use lenses with the same light transmission (or the very same lens if possible) and then take shots of the same scene with the two cameras. If exposed correctly, the exposure values should be (nearly) the same. One EV difference should be easy to spot after all.
"First of all, forget about ISO 100. Base ISO is 200 with Oly cameras."
Are you sure? For me it looks more like iso100 is the base sensitivity of the sensor and they are underexposing by 1 stop by default to retain highlights for iso 200 and above, similar to what various DR modes do on other cameras. Sensible design decision IMHO, as many modern sensors have crazy dynamic range in the shadows.
And you are right about the other topics, I'll should take my words back, it's not cheating when exposure time/f-stop are the same for a given iso value and light level, but just another approach for image processing, exchanging shadow dynamic range for highlight headroom.
Yes, pretty certain about ISO 100. It's not been in every camera, but when it is there, it always comes with the warning that it comes with the risk of highlight clipping, with ISO 200 always as the prefered ISO setting.
There was also a recent Olympus interview at DPR, I think it's the one talking about the possibility of the hi-res mode handheld. They recognize wanting to lower the base ISO but pass on the blame on their suppliers (Sony/Panasonic) for not offering that capability in their sensors.
I too thought it was a video test of the camera shooting moving subjects. But I'm always looking for something with global shutter-like qualities so I guess that is what popped in my head
No composition, no value added by photographer, just average mindless point and shoot. I see a lot of photos like this around, but I belive Dpreview can do better. Plus the technical quality looks like it's from APS-C DSLR with kit lens.
Feel free to check my photogallery: www.artofsport.cz
Had a look. Nah, I think Donald Chin does much better work.
Oh, what's that? I'm not supposed to troll the professional sports photogs when they act like jerks. :P
I had a look at your art of sport page. Great shots, but entirely useless for what the Roller Derby people are looking for. I suspect you know that though.
Gee all this time I've just looked at sample photos from a technical aspect. Now I see some actually expect the folks testing the equipment to achieve award winning photos!
I don't care about Martinka's photo gallery but I do think the roller derby pics are very point and shoot looking and they do a disservice to the EM5II. Olympus should have sent these guys to Hawaii, Vancouver, Maine, Alaska, or the next block over...
I kinda agree with Martinka. I'm not an event/sports photographer so i doubt i could do better, but i'd say the Photos are nothing special. They cover the event and I don't think the equipment is the problem, there's just nothing that stands out. Maybe that OMG moment never came, maybe the photographer wasn't ready when it did come. No photo makes you wonder how it was taken. No photo surprises you with its creativity.
It is common to complain about sample photos at DPR. I know. They rarely satisfy.
Photos aside, the video was well produced and it gave a nice overview of the camera which, I think, is what really matters.
Don't worry Barney. I think what Martinka means, is that if you tilt the camera to about 30 degrees off horizontal you'll get a much better look, like he does. My daughter does this on instagram very successfully too. See http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3790254#forum-post-55188360 for examples.
For any sports photography, you just need sharp, well isolated from background, clean image of something interesting. Another option is pan the subject to make the image more dynamic.
Those pics are technically not satisfying. Compositions are confusing (not a full close up nor a full shot), not quite dynamic, and there are tons of distracting backgrounds around.
And most of those issues came from equipments - lack of reach, lack of background blur, lack of fast fps.
If only I had more than 10fps, I could have caught the moment. If only I had 1 or 2 extra stops of DoF control, I could have made this uneventful photo more interesting. If only I had more reach, I could have stayed at my spot and lazily took photos from there.
If you'd like to give me 10-15 grand or so, I can put together a rig that would satisfy your requirements, nerd2. Something like a D4 and a 200f2 would be the place to start.
Armchair criticism is easy. Roller Derby is easy to access. Go shoot some and report back.
A few people here seem to be under the impression that the goal behind shooting derby is to grab a handful of shots for your blog. That is incorrect. The photos are usually for the players so they can see the bout from a more relaxed viewpoint (as opposed to being in the thick of it). Finding some nice artsy shots is a bonus, but that's the sort of thing you play around with when there are enough other photogs providing decent coverage of the bout.
And, as I mentioned before, if your plan is to use DoF to isolate players, then, IMO, you're doing it wrong. It's not the best tool for the job. A much better approach is to isolate with lighting.
Precious few of the greatest sports photographs fit your list of requirements.
Another fun video @Barney, but yeah expect tough crowds when you do mirror-less for sports. But let's get you to a major American Sporting event @Barney - eg college or pro - that pays for the shot(s). Then mirror-less will go to the wayside and 7d2+ canon glass will get gold at dpreview for the $ invested in gear as it generates many more returns, and is a sports artist's brush, that your site thought was a general camera to be rated by a general checklist.
Problem is that those pics were taken with $4K amount of gear, not a $500 entry DSLR with kit lenses.
For that kind of event and $4K budget, I'd rather use D700 (now dirt cheap, still have great high ISO capability, 8fps, pro ergonomics) paired with f4 lenses (1 stop faster than oly lenses in equivalence)
And you'll end up with similarly noisy photos with such an ancient FF camera, not helped with the F4 limitations of your zooms for exposure.
With 12MP, you will also be limited in reach not be able to crop as much. If you try to compensate with longer lenses, be prepare to pay with money and extra weight to carry. No crop factor to help you here.
But you still get your extra stop of DoF control. Woo-hoo! Take that, m43!
Fortunately, it's 2015 and not 2008 so there are more choices around.
Yeah, we've already seen your earlier efforts in this thread, nerd2. We don't need another bait and switch from you so soon.
What happened to the need for "For any sports photography, you just need sharp, well isolated from background, clean image of something interesting." Did you decide that wasn't a goal worth following up on?
"A few people here seem to be under the impression that the goal behind shooting derby is to grab a handful of shots for your blog. That is incorrect. The photos are usually for the players so they can see the bout from a more relaxed viewpoint "
The goal behind every shooting could be whatever. The goal behind this field report was to show readers that 4000$ mirrorless gear is capable of shooting roller derby. Was the goal succesfully filled? I don't think so. Images are really bad, both from technical and aestethical aspect. And it's definitely not just camera's fault, but also photographer's.
And even if all his f4 zooms have optical stabilization, it's less effective than the EM5 II IBIS so nerd2 will have to shoot at higher ISOs in such a dark environment to compensate. I don't think the results would be particularly pretty.
He could always shoot with a tripod but then he'd be conceding m43 is better hand-held. Poor nerd2. So close yet so far.
D3/d700 still have vastly better high iso performance than any m43 to date. And Oh yeah, 5 axis ibis is crucial for action photos with 1/500sec shutter speeds or faster.
After all its your money, and its up to you which gear to invest.
Well, let's look at this claim. D700 is about 1 stop better than an OM-D at ISO 3200-6400 (See DXO). You'd be shooting f4, and the OM-D at f2.8, so there goes any IQ advantage with respect to noise, etc. You do get 1 stop DOF advantage. Obviously if the M4/3 needs to go to 6400, then you're SOL.
So, with regard to IQ, there's almost no difference.
Ok, how about weight. Well, D700 + 24-120f4 + 70-200f4 = ~2.55kg And E-M5II + 12-35 + 35-100 = ~ 1.16kg Quite a substantial difference there.
And finally cost According to B&H $3542 for the Nikon kit, and $3599 for the M4/3s kit. However, for the Nikon kit you get a B+ second hand body. Oh yeah, D700 is 5FPS, unless you add a grip. That's another $300 and 300gm (plus batteries).
Yep. That looks like an awesome deal to me. :P
If you want to isolate roller derby with DOF, then for your "needs" I think you probably need to be around 200 f2. That's the lens you want. Start there and work backwards. :P
The Nikkor 150 f2 is a spectacular lens indeed, but "starting there" would mean breaking the 4k limit just with this lens. I think that was the point of bringing up this lens. :p
Well, what would you use to isolate using DoF? The 70-200 doesn't cut it (I shoot alongside FF users using that lens. We all have problems with cluttered backgrounds - not surprising as there's less than a stop in DoF, between the 70-200f2.8 and the 75mm f1.8). PS. I don't know any Nikon 150f2. I was thinking the 200f2.
My father uses em1 with 2.8 lenses, and theres no way m43 body has only 1 stop disadvantage from d700. I even think the ancient 5d is still a much better performer at iso 3200 than em1.
Also portrait grip is a must for any serious shooting imo, which oly charges as much as nikon too.
No, no, martin, you were right. You gave a lens that nerd2 could actually use to "destroy" m43, but you busted his budget in the process. I think that's the point, many of his claims are flaky and unrealistic and that's why people punch holes in them.
Some of it was apparently, but DPR says it most of it was shot on some unknown 4K camera. Many believe it's the A7s, but to avoid camera system wars, no official confirmation. :)
DPR can come off as remarkably defensive and even smarmy, can't they? Especially for an organization that otherwise seems to embrace an appropriate journalistic detachment. You folks cast judgement for a living; one would think you'd have a slightly thicker skin.
You'd like to think so. But Barney, this wasn't exactly your first comment in these pages, was it? What compels you to spend so much time in these forums self-consciously responding/reacting/defending/objecting? Maybe if you worried less about how people were reacting to your reviews, you could actually dedicate yourself to writing more reviews.
You've never needed baiting, Barney. And I'm not trying to draw you into an argument. You do good work, and I take it seriously. It's harder to do that when you undermine it with smug comments in these forums, that's all.
You mentioned in the video that you like the sound of the shutter, so do I. It sounds almost identical to a Leica M7, which is a camera that I used to own and still miss. Also, you guys and gal did a fantastic job!
I don't get it. $1099 body + $899 12-40 2.8 + $1499 40-150 2.8 + 45 1.8 = whooping $4K worth of gear, frequent lens changes and only 5fps.
I could use D750 + 28-300 lens combo to take approximately the same outputs, while much less hassle overall (cheaper and lighter, does not require lens change, faster AF, faster fps, comparable DOF, comparable resolution etc)
@nerd2: You can't calculate that way. There are very good kit offers, you would never ever pay that much. And furthermore: No need to get all these lenses. Choose wisely and one lens will be enough in this case.
that's like saying people are foolish for paying $1000 on a 12-40 pro zoom when they can get a $250 kit zoom... disregarding that the pro zoom is heads and tails better than a plastic janky kit zoom.
but why stop there when you can get a point and shoot with a 10x zoom clearly written on the barrel..
next time you might want yo try comparing like for like.
Now add another lens to get to 24mm. And another lens to beat the 75mm, and another lens to beat the 45mm. Actually, you're shooting derby, so perhaps the 70-200 f2.8 would be a good choice and will cleanup the M4/3 primes. So now we're back at D750 + 24-70 + 70-200 (and a janky 28-300). Now we're up above 4kg of kit. That's not looking so fun anymore but at least you'll be able to say you can beat the M4/3s kit. :P
Of course, that's assuming you plan to use the camera for one job. Now add macro, wildlife, etc into the mix. That's ok, 150-600mm lenses are now common. What's another couple of kilos. :D
Then, leave it all behind and buy a superzoom for when you go travelling.
28-300 is reasonably sharp (to resolve 16MP at least), and all of those pics are taken at high ISO where noise kills most of the sharpness anyway. Just download originals and see. None of those pics are pixel sharp.
Of course more sensible choice for indoor sports will be f4 combo (24-120VR + 70-200VR) or even third party f2.8 lenses but then the results will be totally in different league and not really comparable. What I am saying is this kind of shooting situation is the worst case scenario for m43, and is really not any better than pairing f5.6 superzoom to D750
What I don't get is your motive for engaging in a sophomoric and reductivist campaign against m43.
What do you gain from repeatedly making a fool of yourself with oversimplified comparisons? What makes you think you know which gear this guy should be using better than he does?
Is it possible that a photographer might have good reasons - subjective or not - for using m43? Is it possible that you might have no idea what those reasons are?
Part of growing up is learning that other people know what works for them better than you do. Put down your ego and stop acting otherwise.
As with the previous a6000 field test video, I am curious to know how DPReview team managed to find photographers who actually use the particular camera system in question.
Very good and informative video on capabilities of such a small camera. Details like cat's meow and Annie leave-em-in-bits makes it great fun to watch too! :-)) Great job people!
Another great video! I would like it even more if you only used the camera in question for making the whole field test. I dont think this video is made for pulling framgrabs and study them at 200% anyway??
So, could you reshoot the whole E-M5 II field test hand held using 24 fps All-I and 60 fps @ 50 Mbps slowed down to 24 fps? Thanx in advance!
That was really fun and informative to watch. My former roommate in Chicago is in The Windy City Rollers.
As a camera newb (I don't even own a camera), I really enjoyed being informed with the real world use of the equipment and seeing the size of it in someone's hands.
Excellent video! I find these real world experiences to be much more relevant than the technical discussions like ISO invariance and equivalence. Keep up the great work!
I just wanted to say "Thanks!" to everyone here for the great comments and questions today. It was a blast working with the DPReview folks on this video, and it's always nice to read that people appreciated and enjoyed it.
Excellent video, please continue to produce them. The camera; looks capable. The slow motion, excellent. Broken arm; ouch! In speed skating we say, 'Check yourself before you wreck yourself'. Yeah, I've broken a couple. Production quality; Very good but I thought the sequences with shooting data display should have been held longer than a 2 or 1-1/4 since the info often got by before I could hit pause to read the shooting data. Good job guys.
With the Seahawks, the Sounders, the Puyallup Fair, Pioneer Square, Blue Angels, Seafair and all the surrounding cities as well as short trips to the waterfront and Canada - future videos will have plenty to keep their readers interested.
Remember that grey skies and a lack of light is a challenge for Digital Cameras because of how CMOS sensors work based around concepts of linear gamma and exposure:
Ignoring the camera and review - the quality of these DPreview productions is incredible. You are making great use of the a7s and your editing is spot on. Easy to follow, exciting, great audio, informative.
Please continue these for all brands. Its inspirational to see quality productions and a breath of fresh air vs all the negativity usually associated with other websites.
Ah... the "eyes are sharp" thing. I looked at some shots in the gallery. We are talking about DoF of 2-3 meters. It's not really about nailing focus as getting something in focus or being totally lost. Players are isolated very well... As such, 20% rate of "being totally lost" is quite a lot. Especially at 5 fps.
I'm pointing this out because Olympus is planning to release the 300/4 and 600mm FF equivalent is not exactly a general-purpose lens. With this quality of focusing I don't think it will win over many nature photographers...
I thought I read that a 20-25% AF failure rate was normal for pro cameras/lenses. Either from a lens rentals article or wikipedia. At the very least wiki says 'Autofocus accuracy within 1/3 of the depth of field (DOF) at the widest aperture of the lens is not uncommon in professional AF SLR cameras' So modern AF is not 100% spot on 100% of the time.
As far as testing lenses like the upcoming 300mm, I think it would have higher rate of keepers because a lens like that has to be shot off of a high-level tripod with a Wimberly gimbal mount, or at the very least a hell of a monopod. That would help focus accuracy somewhat I think because you've eliminated camera movement from the focusing equation and now the camera only has to keep track of the subject.
@SmilerGrogan, 'As far as testing lenses like the upcoming 300mm, I think it would have higher rate of keepers because a lens like that has to be shot off of a high-level tripod with a Wimberly gimbal mount, or at the very least a hell of a monopod.'
But but but... Olympus Head Honcho said that lens is for handholding unlike other equivalent FF lenses. So you must be wrong... :p
Wow. That sounds like an awesome challenge. The birds in flight photographers are going to be very interested in that lens. If you hustle you still have time to test it out on the birds at Bosque del Apache.
nerd2: I'd like to clarify that by AF failure I'm talking about AF not being spot on accurate.
See this: 'Still, that gives us a "missed focus" rate of 20 percent in this little test, and that's using center point AF with a still target. That's not a big sample size obviously, and we repeated it with several other 50mm f/1.4 lenses and got "missed focus" rates of between 10 and 20 percent for all of them.' from - http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-1-center-point-single-shot-accuracy
Pro cameras and lenses usually have higher than 90 percent af hit rate with 2.8 lenses. And those oly lenses are f5.6 equivalent, and having huge DOF to boot. They are totally in different league.
@Macx You can watch the pictures and guess the DoF. I didn't do that.
What I did is: 1) I checked the focal length in EXIF 2) I *assumed* images weren't cropped. From 1 and 2 you can: 3) Estimate the distance to the subject. From 1 and 3 you can: 4) Estimate the DoF.
You can easily find all needed equations on wiki OR use some online calculators.
@Barney Britton I'm not saying it isn't a good CDAF. It is. But most Olympus bodies have great CDAF, so we shouldn't be surprised.
But the % of failed shots is still quite high (IMHO). As said before: DoF was covering the players, you had a large distance to the background and not many objects that could distract the AF. In such conditions I would expect better results. If the camera didn't focus on skaters, it must have chosen the background or just surrender.
By contrast, if this was shot with a FF + 85/1.8 DoF would be under 1m. At this point a failed shot could mean locking on a leg or a player behind - you could already miss the face.
E-M5II is clearly a very good camera, but IMO you're getting soft with mirrorless. :) We want them to get better than DSLRs in every way. Because they can. The "almost there, but at least smaller" approach is worrying. :D
@Barney Britton And just a small suggestion. This is another (after - at least - the 7Dm2 and a6000) review, when you shoot with someone using the same camera. I totally get the idea: comparing, tutoring, discussing the results etc.
But wouldn't it be good to have another person with a different camera on set? Something older and well known - to give us a reference point? :)
@Pkosweski: "Depth of field" comes down to "does it look sharp". When we estimate it mathematically, we need to take into account the size of the image output and how close the viewer is looking at it.
Most DoF-calculators on the web defaults to the common film standards of postcard-sized images, but for enthusiasts making digital images it's more reasonable to think in large high-definition displays or large print outs. In these cases, the DoF is smaller.
When I look at the images in the gallery on my display, I see focus drop off a lot faster than the 2-3 meters you were claiming.
I destroyed my Fuji 16-50mm kit lens that way. I slipped while trying to shoot my friends with my X-E1. Thankfully the camera is well built, but the lens on the other hand could not be mounted on to my camera anymore, :-(
Nice video, thx. So here it becomes clear that cdaf is getting there. First panasonic with dfd that gets us 7,5 fps. Now this one gets to 5 fps....and much like the gh4 it does very well in low light. I don't think ospdaf currently can do that.
And the darned menusystem...both agree it id pretty obnoxious...Change it please oly.
Start to wonder why it does not grt a gold reward...
Actually, the reason why the E-M1 can do 9 fps with continuous AF and not 5 fps like the E-M5II is that the E-M1 has ospdaf (almost exclusively used for focus tracking and legacy lenses). So I'd say that phase detection is still superior.
Really enjoyed the video especially Barney not afraid to mix it up. One thing stands out for me is that the portrait shots seem like P&S quality with little separation from the background even at 2.8. Easy to get everything focus though with such wide DOF.
@Intermittentoverexposure, most of these were shot with the f/2.8 zooms, in a small "arena" where the crowd is sitting right up against the edge of the track. One does get a shallower DoF and more subject-background separation when using the f/1.8 primes. (Though obviously not as shallow as fast primes on a full-frame sensor.)
@Millsner, for those portraits my priority was testing the camera's improved IBIS by setting my shutter speed to 1/8th. At the camera's lowest normal (not extended) ISO of 200, the camera had no choice but to set the aperture higher than f/1.8 in order to get a proper exposure, thus resulting in a wider DoF. (Of course when I'm shooting such portraits on my own and not working with the fine folks at DPReview, I usually set the camera to aperture priority - or sometimes manual with auto ISO - and keep the lens wide open in order to minimize DoF and maximize subject-background separation.)
Another superb field test video by the DPR team that I cannot get enough of! Thanks for the entertaining, informative, and well-shot video! Barney Britton is becoming quite an on-screen character in the online photographer community as well! Would be nice to have more of these videos, featuring Barney Britton and maybe other co-hosts. Keep the great format and substance, add more personality to spice it up...
.... sorry I'd just go stand in that corner myself; clearly I miss Top Gear.
Another fun "on site" experience with the DPR team! Thanks Barney. I very well remember my first time on roller skates at age 5. 60 years on I still cannot recall a time anywhere where I had as much as I had that night while my twin brother and I learned and terrorize the real skaters who had to do back flips to miss us every time we kissed the floor. This was a really fun review. It looks like you had fun too!!! As it should be!. Regards to DPR staff all, and I hope the arm mends perfectly.
You guys are getting good at these videos. One thing I like to do when shooting roller derby is slow shutter panning. Set a higher f-stop, lower iso and go crazy. Low keeper rate but the good ones can look awesome. Good way to test out the panning IS mode too.
I was wondering the same thing, then I decided that the quality is probably too good to be achieved via the EM5 Mk2. Do you mind letting us know what 4k system was used to shoot the video?
I actually did test the improved C-AF of the new E-M1 v3 firmware with about 2400 shots (taken during the same scrimmage) in 5 fps bursts, and I would say that the v3 improvement is significant. Perhaps not quite as high of a success rate during roller derby as the E-M5 mark 2, maybe, but still well worth trying out in your particular shooting environments.
I'm surprised you find the Mark II better for C-AF, as it doesn't have the PDAF of the E-M1. I haven't used a Mark II, but the new firmware definitely improved my E-M1. The Mark II must be doing very well, indeed.
Yes, it surprised me too, Jim. One would think PDAF would give the E-M1 the edge. But it was only my first night trying out the C-AF improvements on the E-M1, and I was still getting 70% or higher success rate during the chaos of derby. (Plus I got even higher hit rates during a preliminary test using both cameras with automobile traffic.) So overall I feel that any difference in my results is still within the "margin of error" and I'll know more (and feel more certain) with continued usage.
But yes, I was impressed by the results of the CDAF-only E-M5 mark 2.
inorogNL, all of the C-AF testing - that Barney and I did using the E-M5 mark 2 for this video, and that I did myself with the E-M1 - was done with native micro-4/3 lenses. (I personally don't own any of the old Four Thirds DSLR lenses.)
I find this very fascinating. It is my understanding that sensor based PDAF does not do as well indoors or as the lighting is reduced. I saw Panasonic explain this is one reason they think their DFD is a smarter technology. With the E-M5ii also possibly outperforming the PDAF based E-M1 indoors, it adds to my impression that CDAF which can use all the pixels instead of a couple hundred might be better than sensor based PDAF.
@Mr. McDaniel So you shot H mode set to 5fps? I have found the CDAF+PDAF hybrid to be great in C-AF before 3.0 firmware but now the PDAF only on H+C-AF is awesome. Have you noticed that the flicker from lights would affect the focusing accuracy?
@Fri13, for both tests (E-M5 mark 2 and E-M1 v3 firmware) I shot in Sequential L mode (not H) with L fps = 5 and Rls Priority C set to Off, 1/500 shutter and ISO 6400 with the f/2.8 zooms and around 3200 for the f/1.8 primes. My understanding is that L (low speed) mode does frame-to-frame AF while H (high speed) mode does not. So I didn't test H mode with it's minimum 5 fps.
It's a question of light. The PDAF of the E-M1 needs lots of light to function well, because the PDAF sensor area is small. Once light levels drop down to about "indoors with a big daylight window" it first becomes jerky (drop of Live View / focus frame-rate) and then automatically switches to CDAF. And the user mostly has no control over its behavior (switching).
@Timur, thank you! I remember now - I *was* getting that stuttering, low EVF frame-rate when testing the E-M1 at the Rat's Nest. I had no idea why it was happening, and no idea that it was due to the PDAF usage switching on or off. I also did not get that stuttering when shooting with the E-M5 mark 2, and now I know why. Do you have a URL where this behavior is discussed in more detail?
The only extensive discussion (or rather ongoing report) I know about is my own "Focusing explained" thread here on DPR. It started with the E-M5 and went on with the E-M1 later.
In short with AF-C (face detection disabled) there are four modes of operation on the E-M1:
1. Good light: PDAF with high fps EVF/screen (CDAF around the PDAF areas with tracking). 2. Medium light: PDAF with low fps EVF. 3. Medium to low light: CDAF with high fps EVF. 4. Low light: CDAF with low fps EVF (can be prohibited by using the "fast" EVF refresh rate setting).
The E-M5 also slows down EVF fps in order to catch more light for its CDAF once light levels turn too low, same as 3. and 4. on the list above. But with PDAF on the E-M1 it happens with higher light levels already.
So the stuttering (aka longer exposure per single EVF frame) is a way to fetch more light. Once the E-M1 switches to CDAF it usually stops stuttering until light levels drop even more.
The firmware 3.0 brought update to C-AF is only available in H mode with C-AF. Otherwise you use the same old PDAF+CDAF on L + C-AF and that is the limitation.
The Firmware 3.0 change was that now the High burst mode has C-AF capability, so no more limited to Low burst mode to get continues autofocus, and then the framerate to burst mode was raised from 6.5 to 9 with C-AF.
So try some time by setting E-M1 to H burst mode, FPS to 10 and C-AF. The camera will automatically drop to 9 FPS when using C-AF and when using S-AF it use 10 FPS.
And in H + C-AF mode you get the PDAF only being used. And there is the difference to previous firmwares and to L burst mode. Sure you can use 5fps as well in H mode but seems to be a limitation if shutter speed is capable to higher.
This is the thing in firmware that really changed the E-M1 to totally new level as high burst speed continues autofocus is possible with PDAF only.
Well, the implication of higher PDAF burst rate is that PDAF (algorithms) in general must have been improved (in speed). I was not using the E-M1 enough lately (got a D750 for improved AF-C), so I cannot really compare.
It isn't that PDAF was improved alone, it was the C-AF algorithms. The E-M1 used hybrid focusing, where it first use PDAF to get direction and proximity and then every frame finalized focus was done with CDAF. Now they dropped the CDAF from the focus and only use PDAF, that made it far faster.
It wasn't more or less hybrid before v3, I see no difference in behavior there, at least with non sequential modes. On a side note, the E-M1 even uses limited PDAF in AF-S, it's just not advertised (or even denied).
As I wrote, only in H + C-AF the new mode, only PDAF, is used. Otherwise is it exactly the old one. And PDAF is not used in S-AF, unless you shoot with a 4/3 lenses. The hybrid mode is used only in C-AF L mode.
As I wrote, PDAF is used with m4/3 lenses, but not in S-AF mode (only CDAF in S-AF) and only in C-AF and C-AF+Trk modes. Now since firmware 3.0 it is used as only focus method in H + C-AF combination. The PDAF is only thing used when used 4/3 lenses, not CDAF at all as Hybrid. Olympus documentation covers all this.
Olympus documentation does and does not cover a lot of things. Albeit it is irrelevant for this video it still stands, the E-M1 uses PDAF for AF-S with M43 lenses. It is used for initial validation of whether the target distance has changed at all. If it didn't change a bit then you get an instant in-focus and no further (CDAF) focusing procedure is initiated at all (there isn't even a screen contrast change like what happens with CDAF). It doesn't seem to work in all instances, but again, it has been reproduced and is only reproducible within the PDAF area. Search the MFT forum here on DPR.
So is the general consensus that so long as you're satisfied with no more than 5 FPS, the E-M5 II C-AF will keep up with the E-M1 in indoor lighting situations? And also, does this mean that in outdoor situations, the E-M1 would outperform the E-M5 II C-AF due to the availability of PDAF?
It demonstrates its versatility. Not the ideal tool for the job but you can make it work. I own both DSLR and Mirrorless systems and use my mirrorless (Fuji XE2) 60-70% of the time but in this situation, my 5d3 with 70-200ii would be amazing. You can get better subject isolation with the thinner dof and much cleaner at iso 6400 although the fuji xtrans sensor is also very good.
I'm impressed with the frame rate and continuos focusing. But there really isn't much subject separation even in the f2.8 shots. In sports photography, you can have incredibly cluttered environments and narrowing the DOF is essential. So I'm surprised that the video review never mentioned that issue.
Sure TimT999. That can be done. In an event like roller derby, where the crowd is often closer to the skaters than you are, you could do that with, say a 200mm f2 or faster.
I'll let you get on with that.
Most derby photogs I've seen prefer the 70-200 f2.8, and if they want to isolate a skater use lighting, rather than trying to rely on DOF to knock out the background.
Well said, Martin.au. And you are correct, my "go to" derby lens is the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 (70-200 in full-frame equiv). Also it's a conscious choice on my part to shoot only with ambient light. I enjoy the naturalistic look, plus there's often another photographer already doing OCF so why duplicate that?
Well, there are rules, referees, fans, teams, leagues, international playoffs and championships, junior leagues, men's leagues, highly physical competition, so yes, I think it's definitely a sport.
Of course this is a sport! Quite interesting as well. I did not know that the rule is so complicated. I thought what happens is the skaters race around a tiny veledrome-like track, like human nascar. Now I know it's a lot more complicated than that.
Im actually glad it's still around and doing well. Not that im a bleeding heart liberal but im glad women have something they can call home, men have had their own sports for a long time. Im also a big supporter of women's MMA while many people oppose it.
I've written twice now and posted how I was hoping you were getting better quickly. I was also comparing how this sport has a lot of shoving in it and I was comparing it's injuries to football but football has an objective of getting the ball in the field goal. It just seems, from the video, that the main goal looks like bullying, which is taught how horrible just a couple of blocks from where your games are happening. To each their own. I'm glad you - and many others - enjoy it. @ Martin.au you are right. I am very much ignorant as questioned in my first post. By the time I came up in roller skating almost all of the arenas had been shutdown and converted to machine shops. The one left here were left for church groups.
Bryce. The "bullying" is blocking. It's part of the game strategy. The objective is to score points, or keep the other team from dong so. I've shot derby, and I can attest that these women are some of the best athletes I've ever been around. They do it for love, they don't get paid. It's a wonderful community and sport that encourages empowerment to women and girls. I highly recommend you find s local league and check it out. It is a lot of fun.
@bryce Thanks for the well wishes! Just two more weeks in the cast. My explanation of the sport in the video is really lacking, there are a lot of rules which are designed to keep the sport as safe as possible. There are legal hitting and blocking zones, so for instance you can't elbow someone in the face, or shove someone out of your way with your hands or forearms. Not that that doesn't happen on accident, but you get sent to the penalty box for it. Skaters can be removed from a game for 'egregious' hits too.
That said, it is a full contact sport and even a legal hit can send you flying. I think football is a good comparison in some ways, just that instead of a ball, we are the ball we're trying to get through the goal post!
I do totally get that it looks like a lot of people throwing themselves at each other, it looked like total chaos to me when I first saw it. And the time after that. And so on.
James, nice work. Found your methods helpful for all action shots. You've helped me before at Rat City events with my EM1. Realizing this was an Olympus shoot your comment that the Panasonic 35-100 2.8 was your 'go to lens' for roller derby was a surprise. Since you were shooting lots with the Oly 40-150 2.8 how does that compare. I just bought one and have you shot it with the TC 1.4 ?
@photodx1913, I am mostly an Olympus shooter, but I also own quite a few Panny Lenses. In this case you have to understand that the Pany 35-100 f2.8 came out a couple of years earlier than the Oly 40-150 f2.8. I own them both now. So for a while the Pany 35-100 f2.8 was the only option, though a very good option. I pick which one to use these days based on portability, weight, visibility and range consideration for the occasion I am shooting. It's good to have choices ;)
Yes Martin I agree exactly. I got the Panny lens with my EM1 in the Fall of '13 for that reason and have been waiting for something longer. Tried the Panny 100-300, but not suitable for action and too slow for AF also. Leaving for a Nat. Geo trip from Sri Lanka to Bali soon and will pick up the TC for the 40-150 for the long shots of wildlife, but retain the Panny for street shooting when I don't want to be so obvious for example. I'm not willing to give it up yet or maybe never. My shots of Rat City Roller Girls and my articles were mostly done with that lens which you could find here.............. https://www.flickr.com/photos/marc_weinberg/sets/72157635300504865/
@photodx1913, nice to see you here on DPR! And Martin is correct, I've been shooting derby since 2012 and using the two Panasonic fast zooms since early 2013, long before the Olympus 40-150mm lens was even announced much less available for purchase. The nice folks at DPReview let me borrow the new Olympus lens along with the E-M5 mark 2 for this video. P.S. The only challenge for me shooting the Olympus lens was the fact that the zoom ring goes "the other way 'round" - so I was working the whole bout to overcome my muscle memory, deeply ingrained from almost 3 years and hundreds of thousands of derby shots with the Panasonic lenses.
Hi James, love both the 12-40 and 40-150 2.8 Pro lenses. I have to be careful because sometimes in zooming in or out I accidentally snap the manual focus ring and wonder why I can't get the AF to work. A diving friend in Palau did that and unfortunately he was 40 feet down with the gear inside his housing and ''well out of luck" ! CU
With the 40-150 are you at all concerned about letting all that weight hang from the camera body screw fitting when using your Rapid Strap? Do you think it might deflect the lens to camera contact connection??
50-60 years ago, it wasn't the same sport. In fact it was most probably "sports entertainment". Roller Derby as seen here is a sport developed only in the last 10-15 years.
Seriously? With so many things going on at once, plus the chance of being injured? I'm not a fan, but I'll not down someone's choice of entertainment/sport. I bet a lens that a lot of us would get our butts handed to us in a sling if we got out there!
Olympus today also announced a 2X teleconverter, which is compatible with its 300mm F4 and 40-150mm F2.8 lenses, as well as the 150-400mm which is under development. The company has also released an updated lens roadmap showing what's to come.
Olympus has announced updates for its OM-D E-M1 Mark II, OM-D E-M5 Mark II and Pen-F cameras in the lead up to CP+ 2018. On the list of updates are improvements to the E-M1 II's Pro Capture Mode, and the addition of in-camera Focus Stacking in the E-M5 II.
Olympus has released a major firmware update for two of its OM-D cameras as well as the PEN-F. It adds support for Profoto's TTL flash system and also brings numerous new features and bug fixes. Read more
At the end of last year we asked you to vote for the best cameras and lenses of 2015. Across two rounds of voting in December and January DPReview readers did just that, selecting the top overall photography products of 2015. It was no easy feat, as 2015 brought huge advancements in stills and video technology, but with thousands of votes tallied it's time to declare a winner. See how the votes stacked up. Read more
Late last year we asked you to vote on the outstanding products of 2015. We created four polls, covering lenses and cameras, including more than 50 products in total. With thousands of votes cast, and plenty of 'discussion' in the comments, we're ready to announce the winners! But the fun isn't over yet - now is your chance to vote on the winners and runners-up from each of the four categories, to determine the readers' choice award for best overall product of 2015 - click through to vote
The Leica Q2 is a fixed-lens, full-frame camera sporting a new 47.3MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and replaces the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116), launched in 2015.
Fujifilm's GFX 50R takes the image quality from the existing 50S model and wraps it in a new body with new controls and a lower price of entry. Is that enough to tempt you to pick one up for yourself? Find out how the GFX 50R performs in our full review.
The Mavic Air hits the sweet spot for many drone users, combining compact size with high performance and good image quality. Find out what makes it so useful, and why it might just be the best travel-friendly drone on the market today.
The Fujifilm XF10 is a stylish, compact, well-priced pocket camera that will take great photographs. Unfortunately, the XF10's overall performance may be a let-down, including for those users coming from smartphone cameras.
The EF-M 32mm F1.4 is a welcome addition to Canon's APS-C mirrorless lens lineup. It's a good performer all-around and enjoyable to use on the EOS M50, and we hope to see more like it introduced to the EF-M range.
If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.
A question frequently asked on the Internet is 'what's the best DSLR?' In this buying guide we've answered that question – but also whether it's the right question to be asking in the first place.
What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
With the arrival of some much-needed sunshine and final production firmware for the Panasonic S1, we've been able to get outside and really start putting the camera through its paces.
On its own, the FTZ adapter retails for $250 and when bundled it dropped the cost to just $150. Now, Nikon is offering it for free with all Z6, Z7 purchases in the United States.
Canon says its new EF 400mm F2.8L IS III and EF 600mm F4L IS III lenses can suffer from an intermittent flickering when shooting video in M or Av modes with certain cameras.
Leica recently announced the Q2, a digital rangefinder with a fixed 28mm F1.7 lens. It's a heck of a lot of fun to shoot with, but is it right for you? Based on our time with the camera, and its specifications, we've examined how well-suited it is for common photography use-cases.
Now that our Panasonic Lumix S1R has final firmware, we couldn't wait to get out shooting with it - and we also tried the high-res mode, which combines files to get 187 megapixel images. Because sometimes, 47 megapixels just isn't enough.
the lens lacks any electronics whatsoever and is constructed entirely of glass and metal. Of course, that comes at the expense of weight — this thing weighs in at 1.1kg / 2.43lbs.
Drones can be useful tools in urban areas, where they're utilized for everything from news reporting to building inspections, but flying in these areas requires careful preparation. Here's what you need to know to do so safely.
After a report published by NBC News, Flickr has taken heat for allegedly letting IBM 'scrape' photos for use in its facial recognition datasets. But the problem isn't what it seems on the surface.
Independent cinema lens manufacturer SLR Magic has announced it will offer all of its existing MicroPrime range in the Fujifilm X mount and has even created a Fuji-specific 12mm lens.
Sigma has released firmware updates for a number of its lenses as well as its EF-E adapter to address various errors and features with Canon, Nikon and Sony cameras.
We've added the Fujifilm X-T30 and Sony a6400 to our 'Best Cameras under $1000' buying guide. These two mirrorless models pack in a lot of features for just $900 body only.
Insta360 has unveiled its latest camera, as well as a new VR headset app and a specialized smartphone cover that makes it possible to view 3D video on standard smartphones.
At the Hydrogen One launch RED promised a range of bolt-on modules designed to expand the device's feature set. However, there is now doubt if those modules will ever be released.
Due to growing concerns about drones around regulated airspace, no-fly zones in the United Kingdom will be more than four times larger than before starting March 13.
Comments