OM-D E-M5 vs E-5 (build quality)

Started May 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP philosomatographer Contributing Member • Posts: 539
Re: agree on some points but not completely
I would not call AF abysmally slow.  Just not fast enough in some circumstances.

I've used a number of FT lenses on my E-M5 without many AF issues (in circumstances where speed is not essential).  The ZD70-300 gives average to OK results in good light.

You know, I think the experience with some of the newer standard-grade lenses - especially the ones optimised for CDAF - is possibly much better than with the Super High Grade f/2.0 zooms.

With my 35-100mm and the MMF-3, I cannot even lock focus on a person walking reasonably slowly. Situations like those are all that I would need AF for in the first place - almost any other situation would be better servied with manual-focusing in anyway.

So - with my lenses - I am not sure the autofocusing with the adaptor adds any value. It's a pity - if it were just a tad faster, I could live with it. I don't do sports, but when I need AF, I need it tio be fast for unplanned, spontaneous compositions.

Thanks for the reply! WRT to the controls, it's not just the size of the buttons - it's the "feel"... And the ease with which they can be accidentally activated. No such possibility with the weighted controls of the E-5.

 philosomatographer's gear list:philosomatographer's gear list
Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200mm f/2G ED-IF VR Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow