Its official. Oly AF sucks!

Started Sep 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
eaa Senior Member • Posts: 1,944
Re: "Please sir ... is the answer 5 ?"

Big Ga wrote:

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

Oh, do we now?
May I remind you - you started the thread like this:

Big Ga wrote:

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"

So that's about the E-5 then?
Who would have guessed...

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

If you're still talking about the E-5 (talking about smoke), I guess you're right.
But the optimal D4 or 1DX PDAF systems that DPR is comparing with, I don't think Canicon puts that into their lower tier DSLRs.

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.

PDAFOS is intrinsically precise, as focus is determined at the imaging sensor itself, as opposed to an external PDAF sensor, that is prone to misalignment w/ the imaging sensors plane of focus. Hence any DOF issues do not apply.

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.

Well, CDAF is lightning fast, almost instant, w/ the new MSC motors in the m4/3 lenses designed for CDAF. Supported by PDAF they will also gain speed during CAF. I guess the only thing holding the native 4/3 lenses back now (when mounted on a m4/3 body), are their focusing motors themselves, along with physical inertia due to bigger elements w/ bigger moves, combined with (sadly) weaker battery configurations to drive them.

My experience is that especially the bigger SHGs focuses not only faster, but also more precisely w/ the HLD-4 on the E-5, due to more juice from the batteries. But sadly it seems as the HLD-7 is configured differently, as it (allegedly) uses just one battery at a time. For use w/ the bigger SHGs, there should be a m4/3 HLD-8, holding 2 batteries in parallell, in addition to the one in the body. That would provide enough juice, as well as longer battery life.

-- 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 +10 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow