that if you really want wildlife/sports and miss your Nikon D7XXX than the E-M1 will not satisfy you. I have and use, an E-M1 with the 40-150 f2.8 and quite honestly it does not compare with my Canons (7D and 70D) when it comes to focus tracking and focus following.
Why not go back to Nikon where you know you will be happy?
I'd recommend to just learn to make maximum use of the AF system that doesn#t work like the one of a DSLR. I'd accept a shootout with a 7D MKI at any time.
C-AF, not tracking.
--
I wish I was an OLYgarch
I second that,
Even thought I don't have extensive experience yet,
I would take on a d7000 for sure(especially considering 6fps and buffer depth ), and I would not be ashamed to shoot aside a 1dmkiv ! (In good daylight), I can imagine the difference to be substantial in low lighting conditions.
Maybe a dslr perform much better with the in full auto mode (all af points/zones active) , I wouldn't know because that never suited my shooting 'style' , I like the focus where I point it with my centre point (sometimes with surrounding points active).
***
For action /sports/wildlife I would(did) also factor in buffer depth (I thought long and hard between many factors before deciding to give the em-1 a try, the nikon d4s for example was not in my budget).
I have had situations where I wanted to shoot a lot of frames for 5-10 seconds, but for comparison I will take 4 seconds.
I missed quite a bit of shots with the d7000 when the buffer filled
, it had only a 10 raw buffer, then goes to around 1 fps, So imagine 4 seconds of action: thats 10+3=13 shots, on an em-1 you would get 40 shots, meaning if you have 100% in focus with the d7000 you can have a 32.5% hit ratio on the em-1 and still have an equal amount of in focus shots ( if you have 50% in focus with d7000 you can have 16.25% in focus with the em1).
**
I understand this is an 'extreme' situations , and may vary from person to person, but for me it had to be taken into the equation.
**
,
canon 70d : 14 raw files then to 1.27 fps, so around 16 shots, if all in focus you can have only 40% hit ratio on the em-1 to have equal in focus shots. (If you would have 60% in focus with the 70d, you could have 24% with the em-1)
,
Even compared to the more expensive 7dII, in 4 seconds around 31 shots and 100% in focus, you would need 77.5% in focus on the em-1 (If you get 70% in focus with the 7dII you can have 54.25% with the em1)
**
-I did these comparisons for many cameras , for between 1 and 10 seconds of 'action'.
So even if you would have lower accuracy with an em-1, if your action lasts longer than 2 seconds it should play a bit of catch up with a d7000/d7100/d7200 canon 70d, even cameras like nikon d600/d610/d750/d800.
Given the fact that I like the AF so far, I think it holds it's own( Again this should be in good light).
*Note: When we factor in cost, the 7dII should not be in the comparison since it's over 50% more expensive here.
*Note2: If the samsung nx1 had bigger buffer depth(say 50raw), that would have been a very tempting option for me as well! ( If the d7200 shot more than 5fps(14bitraw) and has a bit bigger buffer, it would have been nice also, I do hope the nikon users are going to get that d300/s successor soon!)
*Note3: It maybe unnecessary for many, I don't need such a buffer either 98% of the time , but the most annoying moments for me were when the buffer was full in situations I am likely never to experience again
