Thank you DPR .

There are going to be a lot of these type of pro and con threads around for awhile. This is my point of view.

Before I get jumped on . I have looked at all the stuff after I had a shower and got dressed ( Read below) and this looks like a wonderful camera in most aspects and a great upgrade for those who find it fills their section of the pond.

Thank you DPR for your preview and for being candid about the auto focus of the E-M1on 4/3 lenses. They brought to the fore exactly what I was looking for as regards the comparison before we all got gear lust and plonked some money down. Some see it differently , I see it as a service to their readers buy informing them that there might be dragons depending on your requirements. For the people coming from a E-5xx/6xx system it will probably be a great advancement. Please keep in mind that this camera is toted as a E-5 replacement which should mean its better in all departments.

There will be the others that say read this blog or read this review or that. As to competency. The preview is one of the most comprehensive I have seen on this site a near mini review. The testers on this site must have tens of cameras through their hands per year and they know what a camera should do. What came out strongly is if you expect E-3/5/30 AF well you are not going to get it with 4/3 lenses on this camera. DPR where never that enamored with the E-3/5 focus to start off with so read between the lines.

I read the pre view scanning for the AF part and found what I wanted or did not want to find. I stopped reading and went and had a shower and got dressed for work. I then read the rest of the stuff and was very impressed with the other assets of this camera.

Gear lust , want needs are going to be the driving factor around here for awhile. And that is why I thank DPR for being candid , I and a few others will not be jumping at this kit due to their findings for awhile other than maybe some others jumping to a different ship. The focus thing is my issue to others it's not going to be a issue which can't be sorted out with a bit of nip and tuck so this can be seen as a bit of hot air.

I will probably be told to bugger of else where but that would not be the first rime.

Collin I am in your camp so I won't tell you to bugger off! :-D

But the EM-1 maybe a nice walk around/travel camera when we are not shooting birds!

Cheers

Dennis

Denjw said:

Denjw wrote:

Collin I am in your camp so I won't tell you to bugger off! :-D

But the EM-1 maybe a nice walk around/travel camera when we are not shooting birds!

Click to expand...

yep I see it as a replacement for the E-620 with short lenses for carry around or very static shooting.

Interesting to see what the 40-150 will be like and if they have got CAF sorted in m4/3 native mode.

Denjw said:

Cheers

Dennis

Click to expand...

Collin, I think that we must see real measurements before believing anybody. I hope that there will be shorter end-focuscorrection-time, not bzzzz, bzzz, bz, bz, bz bang, but bzzzz, bz, bang. It will be about the same time than as a E3/5.

Hi Col

Agree with everything that you've stated...you've made some really valid points but I also think we need to see the full reviews from DPR, Imaging resources etc as well before being able to make a final judgement.

I'll be taking my 35-100F2 to test with a EM1 in store when I get a chance ..just hoping they'll have an adapter to mount it on..

--
http://harjtt.smugmug.com

Hi Collin

Me too hopefully started to read this preview to get confirmation that we now get the very best autofocus thing in the word with our rusty 43-leses :-D. So we didn't get that :-(. I didn't need a shower to realise that what we read was what the real world has to offer. Some good progress, and that is it for now:-|.

But there is still one thing I'm very curious about: focus peaking! If that feature is what I mean it is then the solution for focusing we often be: manual. I could imagine that I could get better results with focus peaking with the 90-200 then with PAF on the E-5.

I often especially had difficulties to get focus lately through leafs surrounding the object or get a leopard in focus behind a wire fence.

What do you birder think about that?

Cheers

Emilio

Yes, thank you DPR for an honest assessment of the auto-focus.

I think it is now time for me to save up and buy that K5 II or K5 IIs or whatever is current in the Pentax Line up.

Olympus has dealt the "death blow" to any hope for a DSLR with an OVF for me.

There are times when I want/need an OVF for shooting action/movement in a "timing specific" shot.. The delay in timing in an EVF (so far) is too variable, and unreliable for those shots.

I have several M4/3 cameras, and I like them a lot. The 16mp sensor used in the EPM2 is great, and sufficient for daily shooting, so I dont see any new Olympus/Panasonic camera in my future.

I dont like the idea of buying all new lenses, but I dislike missing half my shots MUCH worse than that.

Olympus will not be getting any more of my money.

EDIT:

They probably have knocked the pins out from under any chance of selling your Lenses at a decent price.

--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Connecticut
Be Careful, sleep can be a symptom of caffeine deprivation
..
I figured out why I cant lose weight! The only exercise Im good at is CHEWING
..
Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does
..
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Oscar Wilde

Hi Col

As my previous post on why I did not regard this as the true E5 successor we were promised stated (And which drew vitriol from those effectively telling me to "get with the programme" or jump) there were issues that concerned me for my working conditions.

DP review has been up-front and cut to the chase on the AF issue which is why I sold one of the 2 EM-5's I bought and went back to the E5s. The EM-5 system simply could not perform as fast and reliably as the E5 and the SWD and the 300 or 150 primes. The key - and telling - phrase is that it is good "...for a live-view" system.

The added features of the EM-1 such as HDR, interval timer and the much vaunted EVF (which I still have an issue with after many months of trying to love the one on the EM-5) etc are advances but one of my other prime issues - that of power supply - still seems as valid as before. Only one battery in the grip and no AA option according to the specs I have seen so far - happy to be corrected but this seems to be the state of play.

I shall wait for a touch and try with all my HG and SHG glass before making a final decision but - as things stand now on the feedback to date - the cigars have to stay in the box and the finger on the E-Bay listing draft that will herald the end of a 37 year relationship with Olympus if there is no upgrade path from the E5.

... have pointed out how good the AF is with 4/3 lenses. A couple quotes here:

"I had the opportunity to try an E-5 (itself no slouch at AF speeds) side by side against the E-M1 with the same lenses: I don’t see any difference in focusing speeds or ability to jump quickly and decisively to different subject distances. This is a huge bonus for legacy 4/3 system users: all your glass is now usable at normal speed again, and the new body is both more capable and smaller than the outgoing one. For M4/3 users, there may not be quite so much excitement about use of 4/3 lenses – until you start looking for high grade special purpose glass like the 50-200 SWD, 150/2, or the 90-250/2.8…"

http://blog.mingthein.com/2013/09/10/olympus-om-d-e-m1-review-1/

"We tested the EM5 with both Micro Four Thirds lenses and Four Thirds lenses. We don’t really know all the technicalities of the autofocus, but somehow or another the Four Thirds lenses focus super quick–faster than they did on the E5. Micro Four Thirds lenses also focus quite fast. Part of this is due to Phase Detection AF in the camera.

Micro Four Thirds lenses will be able to use a larger area of focusing than Four Thirds lenses will be able to. For the most part, the Four Thirds lens focusing area is all in the center–just like a full frame DSLR.

In our uses with Four Thirds lenses, focusing in low light wasn’t so stellar–but we were shooting fireworks."

http://www.pekkapotka.com/journal/2013/9/9/olympus-om-d-e-m1-hands-on-preview.html

"I just HAD to give the new dual focus site system (both phase detect and contrast detect on the sensor) a run for its money so I spent a few hours with a friend and his E-5 and slew of 4/3 lenses to do a side by side comparison of focusing speeds and hit count. We picked some objects in his back yard to shoot. Things like bird houses, planters, and other stationary objects of varying size,shape, and color. Things that would be both easy and tough to get a focus on. Let me get off subject for one second. The 50-200mm SWD handled wonderfully on this NON-Gripped camera just so you know.

With the OM-D-E-M1 we both noticed (un-scientificaly) that it focused, get this, FASTER than with the E-5!! Again, no stopwatches or tools like that to measure down to the millisecond, but it was something we both felt was a noticeable speed difference. The same with the 4/3 50mm f/2 macro! The 12-60mm SWD seemed to be a draw. But something else to note, there were several times when we got a more accurate focus using the 50-200mm than with the E-5. Slight differences in depth at which focus was hit. Again, we weren’t trying to be DPReview or anything, just two guys who know their Olympus gear."

http://www.smallcamerabigpicture.com/om-d_e-m1/

Until I actually see a video of the camera focusing with 4/3 glass I'm going to reserve judgment, however I'm erring more on the optimistic side of things.

Jules

yes the AF will not be as in the E-5.

I wrote that here in a former thread 1 week ago.

The reason is: Sony sensors do not provide really fast phase detect AF.

For me, the slower AF than on E-5 is not the critical thing - I like the feature set and the buttons of the E-M1. There are more things in the world than fastest AF.

But I understand that for others the AF is critical.

If i continue with 4/3" then the E-M1 will be my cam - in 2-3 years when the E-M1 is quite cheap.

Collin,

IF YOU are not going to dive in and test it with a big lens,,, leave it out in the rain all night,,, take it out into the Namibian desert dust,,, and stand you ground to a charging rhino while you test CAF then who's going to do it for us?

I've been busy telling the missus it's a bad camera just so she won't buy it as another surprise (E-5, ZD300, 5DIII - all of which were rather nice surprises)

Seriously though,
reading the various reviews it looks like a damn good camera and I'm interested to try that new EVF and 10 fps. The tiny battery is worry though. Does the HLD take two, or is it one in the breach and one in the magazine like the EM-5 ? That would be a worry for me out in the bush having to change batteries. Not to mention the cost of buying the HLD and 5 extra batteries.

I see it the same as you and Dennis and others . . .unless I can see a positive AF review from a trusted bird/wildlife shooter of the 150mm, 50-200, 90-250 and 300mm with both EC's then I'm unlikely to buy it. It's just got to be better than the E-5 for it to be called a replacement/successor.

And blogs and reviews that do studio AF tests of static subjects are (as you well know) worth poop when it comes to how well it will work with 4/3 lenses shooting moving subjects with background clutter in average light
I'm sure it will be a big success and there will be a newer model within 2-3 years.
The good Plan-A then might be to just wait for the next model and keep shooting our E-5's
In the meantime I'm sure there will be enough of us left here to keep the light on.
or there is the Plan-B: I've been thinking of getting a 50-500 or 150-500 Bigma for my canon j ust to see if I like it, but I know I'd get hooked and that path leads to the hard stuff . . a 500mm /4 L .

Peter

Sounds great to me!! Anyone looking for a E5 two months old with less than 500 shutter count?? All packaging like new (last one purchased from agents)

I was given the following understanding:

The current sample cameras focus a wee bit slower vs e-5.

However OLY knows of this and it seems it may be improved in the firmware.

Take it for what you will.

This MAY explain the apparent discrepancy in the various previews found online; some say the 50-200 actually focuses faster on the EM-1.

Regards

Mark

Larry, no panic,

Just read on Oly-e dot de in German a answer from Reinhard Wagner on his forum about this. Here in my translation;

I've tried it with the 150, and the 35-100 and Bigma. And in direct comparison to my e-5 the AF of the E-M1 is more accurate, the C-AF outclasses the E-5 and the normal S-AF, it all depends where the (actual focus) setting of the lens is , which of the two cameras is faster. Overall, the S-AF is also a kick faster than in the E-5th.

When I first got it, I thought I'd test out the ZD 35-100 on both E3 and EM5.

Chose a somewhat difficult target, a clump of cattails growing in my back yard - lots of small things at different distances.

And what I found was - the E3 was faster, but it kept locking on the wrong target. Took three or four AF cycles to get lock on the center subject.

The EM5 was slower, but nailed the center target first time, every time.

Very true, I must say I've had that exact same experience. Focus has (previously to the EM1) been slow with m43 cameras but is always bang on.

I recently acquired the 150mm f2 to use with my E3 and I must say the amount of times it misses focus is very worrying, and at f2 it shows up every time. I would be VERY surprised if the EM1 did any worse than the E3 in regards to AF.

dingenus said:

dingenus wrote:

Larry, no panic,

Just read on Oly-e dot de in German a answer from Reinhard Wagner on his forum about this. Here in my translation;

I've tried it with the 150, and the 35-100 and Bigma. And in direct comparison to my e-5 the AF of the E-M1 is more accurate, the C-AF outclasses the E-5 and the normal S-AF, it all depends where the (actual focus) setting of the lens is , which of the two cameras is faster. Overall, the S-AF is also a kick faster than in the E-5th.

Click to expand...

All of this can be true and it doesnt do a thing about EVF lag.

There will be lag in an EVF simply because you cant get electrons to move through a circuit faster than the speed of light!

Since the viewer cant show you what is happening RIGHT! NOW! some forms of action photography are darn near impossible.

Im not talking "shutter lag" Im talking "viewer lag".

Lag in the EVF needs to be miniscule, and constant, NOT varying with the light level. So far this has not been accomplished with an EVF.

"Spray and pray" will work "sometimes" and not work other times. Results are too variable to be counted on.

--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Connecticut
Be Careful, sleep can be a symptom of caffeine deprivation
..
I figured out why I cant lose weight! The only exercise Im good at is CHEWING
..
Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does
..
In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.
Oscar Wilde

With no C-af with 4/3s lenses and a lag in the EVF, static shots are about it. I can get those with my 8080 on a tripod.

Actually I was able to do moving subjects with the 8080 and even the OM-G by focusing on a point and when the subject came by and racking off as many shots as I could. Hopefully one came out.

So I guess that's what a Pro fashion photographer with a 35-100 will do as the model comes down the catwalk. Either that or leave that wonderful piece of glass home and buy their NEW lens that will C-af but is no match for the lens they already spent thousand on.

TrapperJohn said:

TrapperJohn wrote:

When I first got it, I thought I'd test out the ZD 35-100 on both E3 and EM5.

Chose a somewhat difficult target, a clump of cattails growing in my back yard - lots of small things at different distances.

And what I found was - the E3 was faster, but it kept locking on the wrong target. Took three or four AF cycles to get lock on the center subject.

The EM5 was slower, but nailed the center target first time, every time.

Click to expand...

I understand the reasons for accuracy on a m4/3 as it due to the CDAF. But from what I understand the E-M1 disables CDAF for all 4/3 lenses and purely uses PDAF.

So we become reliant on the implementation of Olympus's PDAF. And not the accurate but slow CDAF.