Using the 50-200 SWD on both E-5 and E-M1

Started Nov 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP boggis the cat Veteran Member • Posts: 6,329
Probable idiot

You seem to be putting replies above the text that you are responding to.

This is inconsistent with normal usage.

gnewylliw wrote:

Sorry, I mean s-af. I have no experience with the C-AF thus won't comment on that.

Nikon S-AF is not flawless, either.

boggis the cat wrote:

If the AF were 'impeccable', there would be no discussion of how to improve the AF success rate. But, in the thread I linked to, there is much discussion over which C-AF setting will yield the best 'keeper' rate. And not discussion to the effect that the keeper rate will be 100% regardless, due to the 'impeccable AF', .

No AF is perfect. Some are better in different situations than others, and there is often debate about whether e.g. Olympus S-AF used in a certain context produces a better yield than another brand's S-AF -- then argument over whether a particular result is simply a 'lemon' model, or the type of photograph isn't representative of the capabilities of the system, and so on.

If you never have AF issues with a D7100 then you may have chosen the right body and / or lens for what you are shooting. The people discussing taking soccer photos in the linked thread seem to be arguing about how to get a good 'keeper' rate under -- presumably -- different shooting conditions. (If you get a 100% success rate and shoot soccer then you should respond to that thread explaining how you achieve this.)

boggis the cat wrote:.

You're entitled to your opinions, but frankly, claims such as being able to tell misfocused shots from facebook photos suggests to me that you may have an unrealistic view of photography generally. (That is only my opinion, too.

D7100 is 300-400$ cheaper. Not a pro body but pretty close.

The Panasonic G6 is cheaper still. Also not a 'pro' body, but again 'pretty close'.

Those are your words not mine.

The D7100 is no more 'pro' level than the G6.

And given the reduced memory compared to the D7000, it performs worse if you want to use burst mode.  Nikon appear to have moved the D7100 further away from the performance of their professional bodies.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with 'your type of argument'.

Assertions with no attempt at backing up any of it.  Claims to incredible abilities (such as being able to tell mis-focus from facebook photos).  Changing what you are saying during a thread while also contradicting yourself.

Your inability to write a response to points in a consistent manner, or even maintain the text that you appear to be responding to is a new one on me, however.

The D4 is far more expensive, and is definitely a 'pro' body, yet may produce an image technically inferior to a much cheaper D600. So the D4 is rubbish, right? Nobody with any sense would buy one, so all of the professional photographers who do so are simply idiots.

(I have come across your type of argument before.

All of the scenarios (macro, protrait, landscape).

Then as a generalist you're pretty unlikely to have any expertise in any one area, and are likely not able to back up any of your assertions.

"All of them" what?

Are you talking about macro shooting, portrait distances, landscapes...?

Also, if you take lots of photos with a very narrow DOF then you'll likely get more mis-focused shots than if you shoot with a deeper DOF.

It wasn't a simple conclusion for me to make, but only after painstakingly going through every possible problem aside from sending it off the service (and i'm 99% sure they would just send it back saying it looked fine and I'm crazy), I make that conclusion.

I don't make conclusions based on other people's experiences. My opinion come out of my own experiences, and confirmed by others.

Not if you know how to read.

C-AF is different from S-AF. you should know that.

So now only Nikon S-AF is flawless?

So the people experiencing AF issues are simply wrong?

As I don't have Canon / Nikon / Pentax / Sony / Samsung / etc. equipment comparable to mine it is difficult to make any sort of definitive 'cross system' assessment

I don't what?

I don't understand your refusal to understand that some oly users have experienced inconsistent AF with their E-30s, E-5s.

I have not disputed that.  Some of those users seem to have rather strange ideas on how the AF should work, such as arguing that when a point sits on a foreground object with higher contrast it should somehow 'know' that they actually wanted the focus to be more rearward.  So a mixture of user error, stupidity, and what appear to be some genuine AF issues.

The problem is usually trying to figure out which of these factors is to blame.

Just because you haven't, doesn't mean the issue doesn't exsist. Maybe you aren't critical enough or don't expect enough out of your cameras.

Oh, this old claim -- "Your results are fine but the equipment is no good so you must just accept bad results".

I can say the same for you, then.  Especially as you have made no attempt to back up any of your assertions.

Clearly we have different opinion but we are arguing about 5-year old systems. Let's focus on (har har) the present, namely the E-M1. I provide my experiences with past AF as a reference to gauge the E-M1 capability.

Well, no, you don't. You are making assertions that seem to be making increasingly less sense.

I'll put you in the 'probable idiot' category.

 boggis the cat's gear list:boggis the cat's gear list
Olympus E-5 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 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +7 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