Reading mode: Light Dark

E-M1.2 CAF: Focus Prediction Appears to be Based on Previously Exposed Images

Go to last post
Stejo said:
CliffWales said:
Amazing timing, I’ve just come back from a full day shooting BIF, 720 images in total and out of those 3 in focus, yes just 3 and the detail on those 3 is frankly poor

i was so frustrated and annoyed with the focus acquisition and accuracy today, I,ve ordered the D500 and tamron 150-600 G2, I know I’ve threatened to do this before but this time I’ve done it

enough is enough, I’m just wasting my time , energy and frankly my mind on this , the Olympus omd em1 ii and PL 100-400 Is just not capable period.consistency with birds in flight, some days reasonable other days appalling, my photographer friend today nailed all the critical moments, every single one with his DSLRs ( D500 and 300 PF), I got none

my olympus kit will be retained for perched birds only and general photography but any serious wildlife and especially BIF will now be the Nikon,s domain

wildlife camera system ? Olympus? Dream on, it’s currently night and day the difference between the D500 and EM1ii, maybe the next iteration but not this version.Ah, I feel better

Rant over
Click to expand...
What kind of birds are you shooting? I'm sorry to say, but 3 keepers out of 720 shots suggest user error. Either in shooting technique or camera settings. Probably both.

Even with swallows in terrible light, my keeper rate with the GH5 and 100-300ii has never dropped below 25-30%. With large birds my keeper rate is consistently over 80%.

The EM1ii with the PL100-400 should be doing even better.
Click to expand...
Having just spent half a day in a hide with Nikon and Fuji users, I can assure Cliff that my success rate for really good keepers far exceeded theirs.

I was using em1-mk2 and pl100-400, they were using Nikon D4 + 200-500 lens and the Fuji latest cam + 100?-400.

They didn't have the reach or the focus acquisition speed. My em1-mk2 rarely messed up. And the interesting thing about shooting alongside others is you hear and see the truth about how their systems are performing compared to your own.

Cliff's problem sounds like user error to me.
 
Adrian Harris said:
Stejo said:
CliffWales said:
Amazing timing, I’ve just come back from a full day shooting BIF, 720 images in total and out of those 3 in focus, yes just 3 and the detail on those 3 is frankly poor

i was so frustrated and annoyed with the focus acquisition and accuracy today, I,ve ordered the D500 and tamron 150-600 G2, I know I’ve threatened to do this before but this time I’ve done it

enough is enough, I’m just wasting my time , energy and frankly my mind on this , the Olympus omd em1 ii and PL 100-400 Is just not capable period.consistency with birds in flight, some days reasonable other days appalling, my photographer friend today nailed all the critical moments, every single one with his DSLRs ( D500 and 300 PF), I got none

my olympus kit will be retained for perched birds only and general photography but any serious wildlife and especially BIF will now be the Nikon,s domain

wildlife camera system ? Olympus? Dream on, it’s currently night and day the difference between the D500 and EM1ii, maybe the next iteration but not this version.Ah, I feel better

Rant over
Click to expand...
What kind of birds are you shooting? I'm sorry to say, but 3 keepers out of 720 shots suggest user error. Either in shooting technique or camera settings. Probably both.

Even with swallows in terrible light, my keeper rate with the GH5 and 100-300ii has never dropped below 25-30%. With large birds my keeper rate is consistently over 80%.

The EM1ii with the PL100-400 should be doing even better.
Click to expand...
Having just spent half a day in a hide with Nikon and Fuji users, I can assure Cliff that my success rate for really good keepers far exceeded theirs.
Click to expand...
Adrian Harris said:
I was using em1-mk2 and pl100-400, they were using Nikon D4 + 200-500 lens and the Fuji latest cam + 100?-400.

They didn't have the reach or the focus acquisition speed. My em1-mk2 rarely messed up. And the interesting thing about shooting alongside others is you hear and see the truth about how their systems are performing compared to your own.

Cliff's problem sounds like user error to me.
Click to expand...
Perhaps ‘user error’ was also afflicting the Nikon user alongside you.

Peter
 
I don't know why "even after almost a year of continually tweaking the relevant adjustments available" but I have found the best results for fast moving objects eg, sport to be silent low CAF-Trk. The second best is Pro capture. The other modes that should work do not, even HS SAF mechanical shutter which works a treat on the EM1.1

Even in Pro capture a typical 10 frame sequence will have frame 5 and frame 9 duff by duff I mean very soft... does not appear to be out of focus as the whole field of view has nothing in focus.

What has kept me going is that the non-duff frames are beautifully pin sharp.

I now use CAF-Trk for anything that may move even a flower on a windy day.

DPreview gave us a hint that this was the case in their review of the EM1.2 where they showed in their testing that CAF was not that good... same problem throwing completely un useable frames at us fairly often in sequential shooting but CAF Trk was no where as bad so we were warned !

The fact that the other modes do not deliver is a very serious problem that Oly should fix

There was intimation that FW 2.0 fixed this but no such luck in my experience it made it worse.

I suspect there is a fairly serious FW issue that Pro Capture and CAF-Trk work around..or it could even be a hardware deficiency or resource shortage that only effects the non performing modes

Go fix Only !
 
I’m beginning to wonder if there’s some variation between cameras or firmware, as some find CAF-Tracking the worst option (including me) and some hate while others love CAF..... go figure!
 
GBC said:
I'm curious, is there parts of the photo that are tack sharp where it is in focus, or is the whole image soft.

Could be IBIS, not focus issues.
Click to expand...
Interesting point, I’ll load the card back into the camera, photograph if I can the image on the screen to show the focus point, then include the actual image, it’s difficult to tell on most images as the backgrounds are clear sky but the whole image appears soft, hope that makes sense
 
Bob657 said:
I’m beginning to wonder if there’s some variation between cameras or firmware, as some find CAF-Tracking the worst option (including me) and some hate while others love CAF..... go figure!
Click to expand...
 
Adrian Harris said:
Stejo said:
CliffWales said:
Amazing timing, I’ve just come back from a full day shooting BIF, 720 images in total and out of those 3 in focus, yes just 3 and the detail on those 3 is frankly poor

i was so frustrated and annoyed with the focus acquisition and accuracy today, I,ve ordered the D500 and tamron 150-600 G2, I know I’ve threatened to do this before but this time I’ve done it

enough is enough, I’m just wasting my time , energy and frankly my mind on this , the Olympus omd em1 ii and PL 100-400 Is just not capable period.consistency with birds in flight, some days reasonable other days appalling, my photographer friend today nailed all the critical moments, every single one with his DSLRs ( D500 and 300 PF), I got none

my olympus kit will be retained for perched birds only and general photography but any serious wildlife and especially BIF will now be the Nikon,s domain

wildlife camera system ? Olympus? Dream on, it’s currently night and day the difference between the D500 and EM1ii, maybe the next iteration but not this version.Ah, I feel better

Rant over
Click to expand...
What kind of birds are you shooting? I'm sorry to say, but 3 keepers out of 720 shots suggest user error. Either in shooting technique or camera settings. Probably both.

Even with swallows in terrible light, my keeper rate with the GH5 and 100-300ii has never dropped below 25-30%. With large birds my keeper rate is consistently over 80%.

The EM1ii with the PL100-400 should be doing even better.
Click to expand...
Having just spent half a day in a hide with Nikon and Fuji users, I can assure Cliff that my success rate for really good keepers far exceeded theirs.

I was using em1-mk2 and pl100-400, they were using Nikon D4 + 200-500 lens and the Fuji latest cam + 100?-400.

They didn't have the reach or the focus acquisition speed. My em1-mk2 rarely messed up. And the interesting thing about shooting alongside others is you hear and see the truth about how their systems are performing compared to your own.

Cliff's problem sounds like user error to me.
Click to expand...
with respect, I am certainly not the only one who has experienced poor CAF performance with the EM1ii and 100-400 or indeed the 300 pro and think the Nikon D500 ( or 7dii) is far far superior as a camera for BIF, its well documented in articles, reviews, blogs and of course forums, as for my own alleged user error -you may well be right and this may has some bearing on the failure rate however, I didn't seem to suffer the same with the D7200 and 200-500 and my BIF skills have not changed that much to my knowledge LOL

an example is this one I found at random on DP review just now

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4101432

the whole of the first page is relevant especially poignant are the comments made by wildlifr • Senior Member • Posts: 1,611

in respect of your experience with the fuji and nikon users you mention and your superior keeper rate, all I can say is well done, clearly, kudos to you although I suspect at least with the D4 something is clearly amiss ,

can’t comment on the fuji as my only experience was with the XT1 and that was poor in CAF.
 
CliffWales said:
Adrian Harris said:
Stejo said:
CliffWales said:
Amazing timing, I’ve just come back from a full day shooting BIF, 720 images in total and out of those 3 in focus, yes just 3 and the detail on those 3 is frankly poor

i was so frustrated and annoyed with the focus acquisition and accuracy today, I,ve ordered the D500 and tamron 150-600 G2, I know I’ve threatened to do this before but this time I’ve done it

enough is enough, I’m just wasting my time , energy and frankly my mind on this , the Olympus omd em1 ii and PL 100-400 Is just not capable period.consistency with birds in flight, some days reasonable other days appalling, my photographer friend today nailed all the critical moments, every single one with his DSLRs ( D500 and 300 PF), I got none

my olympus kit will be retained for perched birds only and general photography but any serious wildlife and especially BIF will now be the Nikon,s domain

wildlife camera system ? Olympus? Dream on, it’s currently night and day the difference between the D500 and EM1ii, maybe the next iteration but not this version.Ah, I feel better

Rant over
Click to expand...
What kind of birds are you shooting? I'm sorry to say, but 3 keepers out of 720 shots suggest user error. Either in shooting technique or camera settings. Probably both.

Even with swallows in terrible light, my keeper rate with the GH5 and 100-300ii has never dropped below 25-30%. With large birds my keeper rate is consistently over 80%.

The EM1ii with the PL100-400 should be doing even better.
Click to expand...
Having just spent half a day in a hide with Nikon and Fuji users, I can assure Cliff that my success rate for really good keepers far exceeded theirs.

I was using em1-mk2 and pl100-400, they were using Nikon D4 + 200-500 lens and the Fuji latest cam + 100?-400.

They didn't have the reach or the focus acquisition speed. My em1-mk2 rarely messed up. And the interesting thing about shooting alongside others is you hear and see the truth about how their systems are performing compared to your own.

Cliff's problem sounds like user error to me.
Click to expand...
with respect, I am certainly not the only one who has experienced poor CAF performance with the EM1ii and 100-400 or indeed the 300 pro and think the Nikon D500 ( or 7dii) is far far superior as a camera for BIF, its well documented in articles, reviews, blogs and of course forums, as for my own alleged user error -you may well be right and this may has some bearing on the failure rate however, I didn't seem to suffer the same with the D7200 and 200-500 and my BIF skills have not changed that much to my knowledge LOL

an example is this one I found at random on DP review just now

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4101432

the whole of the first page is relevant especially poignant are the comments made by wildlifr • Senior Member • Posts: 1,611

in respect of your experience with the fuji and nikon users you mention and your superior keeper rate, all I can say is well done, clearly, kudos to you although I suspect at least with the D4 something is clearly amiss ,

can’t comment on the fuji as my only experience was with the XT1 and that was poor in CAF.
Click to expand...
I think that you are pretty much correct. E-M1 MkII is hard to get results with. Against a clear sky is the easiest but if the bird is against trees and reeds I have to deploy every trick I can - smallest possible focus group, set the limiter to try to eleiminate the background, have all the other settings just right, and track just about perfectly. Even doing that, I will probably fail. The main reason is that the E-M1 MkII doesn't favour the nearest subject. But even if I persuade it to focus on what I want, the accuracy is often poor. Very few of my best bif shots are against a cluttered background.

The E-M1 MkII was praised on release because it was a huge step up from the Mk I. Initially, I felt I finally had the tool to do the job. But, with experience, it is really a matter of degree. .i.e. how hard is it to use and how accurate are the AF results. And the answer is, it should be a lot better. The Mk I sometimes focused but was nearly always soft. The Mk II is ten times better but that still leaves it short.

I saw the "New WIldlife Camera" thread that you linked to but I decided not to comment because I didn't want somebody to spend all that money on an E-M1 MkII + 300mm based on my recommendation. I wouldn't recommend it to a friend so neither would I to a stranger. I don't have experience of dslrs but I have seen images, snatched in an instant, that I know I couldn't have got. E.g. a little bittern flying low over the water between reed beds.

I'm still hoping Olympus will release a C-AF update that favours the nearest subject rather than the most contrasty.
 
Tony Rogers said:
CliffWales said:
Adrian Harris said:
Stejo said:
CliffWales said:
Amazing timing, I’ve just come back from a full day shooting BIF, 720 images in total and out of those 3 in focus, yes just 3 and the detail on those 3 is frankly poor

i was so frustrated and annoyed with the focus acquisition and accuracy today, I,ve ordered the D500 and tamron 150-600 G2, I know I’ve threatened to do this before but this time I’ve done it

enough is enough, I’m just wasting my time , energy and frankly my mind on this , the Olympus omd em1 ii and PL 100-400 Is just not capable period.consistency with birds in flight, some days reasonable other days appalling, my photographer friend today nailed all the critical moments, every single one with his DSLRs ( D500 and 300 PF), I got none

my olympus kit will be retained for perched birds only and general photography but any serious wildlife and especially BIF will now be the Nikon,s domain

wildlife camera system ? Olympus? Dream on, it’s currently night and day the difference between the D500 and EM1ii, maybe the next iteration but not this version.Ah, I feel better

Rant over
Click to expand...
What kind of birds are you shooting? I'm sorry to say, but 3 keepers out of 720 shots suggest user error. Either in shooting technique or camera settings. Probably both.

Even with swallows in terrible light, my keeper rate with the GH5 and 100-300ii has never dropped below 25-30%. With large birds my keeper rate is consistently over 80%.

The EM1ii with the PL100-400 should be doing even better.
Click to expand...
Having just spent half a day in a hide with Nikon and Fuji users, I can assure Cliff that my success rate for really good keepers far exceeded theirs.

I was using em1-mk2 and pl100-400, they were using Nikon D4 + 200-500 lens and the Fuji latest cam + 100?-400.

They didn't have the reach or the focus acquisition speed. My em1-mk2 rarely messed up. And the interesting thing about shooting alongside others is you hear and see the truth about how their systems are performing compared to your own.

Cliff's problem sounds like user error to me.
Click to expand...
with respect, I am certainly not the only one who has experienced poor CAF performance with the EM1ii and 100-400 or indeed the 300 pro and think the Nikon D500 ( or 7dii) is far far superior as a camera for BIF, its well documented in articles, reviews, blogs and of course forums, as for my own alleged user error -you may well be right and this may has some bearing on the failure rate however, I didn't seem to suffer the same with the D7200 and 200-500 and my BIF skills have not changed that much to my knowledge LOL

an example is this one I found at random on DP review just now

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4101432

the whole of the first page is relevant especially poignant are the comments made by wildlifr • Senior Member • Posts: 1,611

in respect of your experience with the fuji and nikon users you mention and your superior keeper rate, all I can say is well done, clearly, kudos to you although I suspect at least with the D4 something is clearly amiss ,

can’t comment on the fuji as my only experience was with the XT1 and that was poor in CAF.
Click to expand...
I think that you are pretty much correct. E-M1 MkII is hard to get results with. Against a clear sky is the easiest but if the bird is against trees and reeds I have to deploy every trick I can - smallest possible focus group, set the limiter to try to eleiminate the background, have all the other settings just right, and track just about perfectly. Even doing that, I will probably fail. The main reason is that the E-M1 MkII doesn't favour the nearest subject. But even if I persuade it to focus on what I want, the accuracy is often poor. Very few of my best bif shots are against a cluttered background.

The E-M1 MkII was praised on release because it was a huge step up from the Mk I. Initially, I felt I finally had the tool to do the job. But, with experience, it is really a matter of degree. .i.e. how hard is it to use and how accurate are the AF results. And the answer is, it should be a lot better. The Mk I sometimes focused but was nearly always soft. The Mk II is ten times better but that still leaves it short.

I saw the "New WIldlife Camera" thread that you linked to but I decided not to comment because I didn't want somebody to spend all that money on an E-M1 MkII + 300mm based on my recommendation. I wouldn't recommend it to a friend so neither would I to a stranger. I don't have experience of dslrs but I have seen images, snatched in an instant, that I know I couldn't have got. E.g. a little bittern flying low over the water between reed beds.

I'm still hoping Olympus will release a C-AF update that favours the nearest subject rather than the most contrasty.
Click to expand...
appreciated Tony - your findings concur with my own, and probably articulated better as well, I certainly Hope Olympus can update the firmware to rival DSLR's as I much prefer to shoot with the Olympus but for now I'm awaiting receipt of the D500 + 150-600.Incidently how do you find using the 40-150 auto focus accuracy for BIf at close distance ( if you have tried it)
 
Tony,

There are far too many similar reports for user error to be a major factor. And many who have disappointing results are experienced shooters who get better results with other cameras.

I only use Olympus 4/3 lenses for shooting birds and while the 300mm F2.8 delivers superb image quality its AF performance is well below that of the 300mm F4 Pro. After much practice and experimenting with settings, and learning from others here , the best BIF keeper rate I get is about 20%. By most reports the 300mm Pro does a lot better. Yet I can pick up my Canon 7D Mk II and it will acquire, lock and Track a BIF and deliver 80-90% keeper rate with ease, and if the bird flies in front of or behind a tree the camera continues to track it. In clear sky I have on occasion shot a 30-frame BIF sequence with 28 or 29 frames sharp in focus.

I do not know what stops the E-M1 Mk II from equaling what the Canon can do, or the D500. Is it a limitation of the on-sensor PDAF ? Is it a matter of insufficient CPU power, ineffective software/algorithm, or some other limitation within the Olympus design team ?

Some here will say that the E-M1 II AF system can do anything the DSLRs can do. If that were true there’d be no complaints about its performance

Peter
 
Last edited:
Messier Object said:
Adrian Harris said:
Stejo said:
CliffWales said:
Amazing timing, I’ve just come back from a full day shooting BIF, 720 images in total and out of those 3 in focus, yes just 3 and the detail on those 3 is frankly poor

i was so frustrated and annoyed with the focus acquisition and accuracy today, I,ve ordered the D500 and tamron 150-600 G2, I know I’ve threatened to do this before but this time I’ve done it

enough is enough, I’m just wasting my time , energy and frankly my mind on this , the Olympus omd em1 ii and PL 100-400 Is just not capable period.consistency with birds in flight, some days reasonable other days appalling, my photographer friend today nailed all the critical moments, every single one with his DSLRs ( D500 and 300 PF), I got none

my olympus kit will be retained for perched birds only and general photography but any serious wildlife and especially BIF will now be the Nikon,s domain

wildlife camera system ? Olympus? Dream on, it’s currently night and day the difference between the D500 and EM1ii, maybe the next iteration but not this version.Ah, I feel better

Rant over
Click to expand...
What kind of birds are you shooting? I'm sorry to say, but 3 keepers out of 720 shots suggest user error. Either in shooting technique or camera settings. Probably both.

Even with swallows in terrible light, my keeper rate with the GH5 and 100-300ii has never dropped below 25-30%. With large birds my keeper rate is consistently over 80%.

The EM1ii with the PL100-400 should be doing even better.
Click to expand...
Having just spent half a day in a hide with Nikon and Fuji users, I can assure Cliff that my success rate for really good keepers far exceeded theirs.

I was using em1-mk2 and pl100-400, they were using Nikon D4 + 200-500 lens and the Fuji latest cam + 100?-400.

They didn't have the reach or the focus acquisition speed. My em1-mk2 rarely messed up. And the interesting thing about shooting alongside others is you hear and see the truth about how their systems are performing compared to your own.

Cliff's problem sounds like user error to me.
Click to expand...
Perhaps ‘user error’ was also afflicting the Nikon user alongside you.

Peter
Click to expand...
No doubt it was and with all of us, but they had been using their system's heavily for over a year, as have I, (and I am still learning how to get the best out of it) , however I am assuming that they have only posted their best shots (sorry they are on a private web so I can't share, otherwise I would really love to, it would certainly put a few arguments to bed!).

It took me many months to figure out how to get repeatably sharp shots using the pl100-400 and have posted on this forum many times - keep the lens OIS off, - but many here appear to disagree.

I do hope that Cliff will find great success with whatever system he ends up with, but unless it's faulty, there's nothing much better than his current setup. So it is irritating when remarks are made saying how rubish it is.

When I get to my PC I'll post some of mine from my last Thursday trip at Brownsea Island.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dav
Messier Object said:
Tony,

There are far too many similar reports for user error to be a major factor. And many who have disappointing results are experienced shooters who get better results with other cameras.

I only use Olympus 4/3 lenses for shooting birds and while the 300mm F2.8 delivers superb image quality its AF performance is well below that of the 300mm F4 Pro. After much practice and experimenting with settings, and learning from others here , the best BIF keeper rate I get is about 20%. By most reports the 300mm Pro does a lot better. Yet I can pick up my Canon 7D Mk II and it will acquire, lock and Track a BIF and deliver 80-90% keeper rate with ease, and if the bird flies in front of or behind a tree the camera continues to track it. In clear sky I have on occasion shot a 30-frame BIF sequence with 28 or 29 frames sharp in focus.

I do not know what stops the E-M1 Mk II from equaling what the Canon can do, or the D500. Is it a limitation of the on-sensor PDAF ? Is it a matter of insufficient CPU power, ineffective software/algorithm, or some other limitation within the Olympus design team ?

Some here will say that the E-M1 II AF system can do anything the DSLRs can do. If that were true there’d be no complaints about its performance

Peter
Click to expand...
another view of someone (along with a few others it must be said) who have expressed an honest view with experience of both sports and wildlife DSLr's and EM1ii, which mirrors my own and others experiences, good to know not everyone in this forum is a do or die fanboy but a pragmatist and real world experienced wildlife photographer, who understands the limitations and issues - personally I hope Olympus can solve the focus acquisition issues to rival the D500, 7Dii
 
Last edited:
Think for small birds in flight the canon Nikon are better more consistent but unless they are top end dslrs or big cannikon primes the results look appreciably as bad as mine ,good luck with D500 and Tamron 150-600mm g2 and have fun trying capture swallows in flight with it .I am going to be trying my omd em1.2 with 300mm f4 and dot sight trying to capture small birds in flight if successful I will let you know even if 25% keepers I will not be racking up my shutter count and having nearly as good success rate due to higher frame rates.
 
Mine is an early one, and I did see an improvement in CAF with 2.0, again opposite to your experience. Weird.
 
CliffWales said:
Tony Rogers said:
CliffWales said:
Adrian Harris said:
Stejo said:
CliffWales said:
Amazing timing, I’ve just come back from a full day shooting BIF, 720 images in total and out of those 3 in focus, yes just 3 and the detail on those 3 is frankly poor

i was so frustrated and annoyed with the focus acquisition and accuracy today, I,ve ordered the D500 and tamron 150-600 G2, I know I’ve threatened to do this before but this time I’ve done it

enough is enough, I’m just wasting my time , energy and frankly my mind on this , the Olympus omd em1 ii and PL 100-400 Is just not capable period.consistency with birds in flight, some days reasonable other days appalling, my photographer friend today nailed all the critical moments, every single one with his DSLRs ( D500 and 300 PF), I got none

my olympus kit will be retained for perched birds only and general photography but any serious wildlife and especially BIF will now be the Nikon,s domain

wildlife camera system ? Olympus? Dream on, it’s currently night and day the difference between the D500 and EM1ii, maybe the next iteration but not this version.Ah, I feel better

Rant over
Click to expand...
What kind of birds are you shooting? I'm sorry to say, but 3 keepers out of 720 shots suggest user error. Either in shooting technique or camera settings. Probably both.

Even with swallows in terrible light, my keeper rate with the GH5 and 100-300ii has never dropped below 25-30%. With large birds my keeper rate is consistently over 80%.

The EM1ii with the PL100-400 should be doing even better.
Click to expand...
Having just spent half a day in a hide with Nikon and Fuji users, I can assure Cliff that my success rate for really good keepers far exceeded theirs.

I was using em1-mk2 and pl100-400, they were using Nikon D4 + 200-500 lens and the Fuji latest cam + 100?-400.

They didn't have the reach or the focus acquisition speed. My em1-mk2 rarely messed up. And the interesting thing about shooting alongside others is you hear and see the truth about how their systems are performing compared to your own.

Cliff's problem sounds like user error to me.
Click to expand...
with respect, I am certainly not the only one who has experienced poor CAF performance with the EM1ii and 100-400 or indeed the 300 pro and think the Nikon D500 ( or 7dii) is far far superior as a camera for BIF, its well documented in articles, reviews, blogs and of course forums, as for my own alleged user error -you may well be right and this may has some bearing on the failure rate however, I didn't seem to suffer the same with the D7200 and 200-500 and my BIF skills have not changed that much to my knowledge LOL

an example is this one I found at random on DP review just now

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4101432

the whole of the first page is relevant especially poignant are the comments made by wildlifr • Senior Member • Posts: 1,611

in respect of your experience with the fuji and nikon users you mention and your superior keeper rate, all I can say is well done, clearly, kudos to you although I suspect at least with the D4 something is clearly amiss ,

can’t comment on the fuji as my only experience was with the XT1 and that was poor in CAF.
Click to expand...
I think that you are pretty much correct. E-M1 MkII is hard to get results with. Against a clear sky is the easiest but if the bird is against trees and reeds I have to deploy every trick I can - smallest possible focus group, set the limiter to try to eleiminate the background, have all the other settings just right, and track just about perfectly. Even doing that, I will probably fail. The main reason is that the E-M1 MkII doesn't favour the nearest subject. But even if I persuade it to focus on what I want, the accuracy is often poor. Very few of my best bif shots are against a cluttered background.

The E-M1 MkII was praised on release because it was a huge step up from the Mk I. Initially, I felt I finally had the tool to do the job. But, with experience, it is really a matter of degree. .i.e. how hard is it to use and how accurate are the AF results. And the answer is, it should be a lot better. The Mk I sometimes focused but was nearly always soft. The Mk II is ten times better but that still leaves it short.

I saw the "New WIldlife Camera" thread that you linked to but I decided not to comment because I didn't want somebody to spend all that money on an E-M1 MkII + 300mm based on my recommendation. I wouldn't recommend it to a friend so neither would I to a stranger. I don't have experience of dslrs but I have seen images, snatched in an instant, that I know I couldn't have got. E.g. a little bittern flying low over the water between reed beds.

I'm still hoping Olympus will release a C-AF update that favours the nearest subject rather than the most contrasty.
Click to expand...
appreciated Tony - your findings concur with my own, and probably articulated better as well, I certainly Hope Olympus can update the firmware to rival DSLR's as I much prefer to shoot with the Olympus but for now I'm awaiting receipt of the D500 + 150-600.Incidently how do you find using the 40-150 auto focus accuracy for BIf at close distance ( if you have tried it)
Click to expand...
@ Tony and Cliff. I am so sorry that your m43 kit hasn't performed as you have hoped and is presenting difficulties and poor results.

What I find so strange is what is being deported is not my experience at all. Even with birds flying past reeds my em1-mk2 always Locks on instantly, however there are times when it will produce a few soft shots afterwards during a burst.

I tend to only use C-AF in the default position for just about everything. But do notice that if very poor light the failure rate is more prominent.

I could no longer pick up a DSLR and long lens even if I wanted to, and certainly couldn't hand hold and shoot with it all day. But hope you soon find a solution to meet your needs.
 
cheers Adrian, and all the very best to you with your endeavours, I just hope Olympus can provide a firmware update to rectify this problem and of course produce a pro grade zoom lens within the 150-350 or 400 range at f4 to accompany it - still we can but hope
 
Tony Rogers said:
drj3 said:
Tony Rogers said:
First, thanks for doing the tests. We all need help trying to understand this!

Unless I missed it, you don't mention which AF points you used. Were you using a single point or more?

With you four sample images shown, I would be interested in knowing what the Exif attribute FocusDistance (and FocusStepCount) was for each of the four shots. My experience is that the camera wildly varies the FocusDistance between shots. Much more than you imply. It appears to oscillate around the correct focus.
Click to expand...
Have you checked this since firmware 2.0 with your 300mm? That update did improve CAF performance, though my experience would suggest that was mostly for use of CAF with stationary targets.

I will get back to you later with the requested information.

There were so many birds flying that the photographer fatigue from holding the camera out to use the Dot sight was the main problem.

I used all focus points and only birds with a sky as background.

I tracked only single birds (not difficult with the narrow field of view at 420mm). I did not want my ability to keep the focus point on the bird to add variability to the data.

I used the Dot Sight to better follow the birds for a longer period of time than would have been possible with the EVF. The Dot sight also enabled me to recover, if the bird moved quickly in a different direction out of the frame, so I could see what happened with lost focus (the same as initial focus).
Click to expand...
Thanks for the AF point info. That eleiminates losing the subject momentarily.

However, I have my concerns about how C-AF uses multiple points. It would be okay if the AF looked at all the points and picked the nearest one in each C-AF cycle and then used that for its predictions. However, I have a feeling it doesn't change points that often. It seems to stick with one/some for a while and then change. Sometimes the AF conformation rectangle disappears completely for a while. I can repeatable produce this by panning along a barbed wire fence at an angle to your line of view. If I pan too fast, the AF confirmation box is lost. Not quite sure what that means but the focus is poor when it does.

I look forward to the Exif data.

BTW My own take on the E-M1 MkII C-AF is that maybe it just isn't very accurate. Maybe the small, on-sensor pdaf points limit its resolution? On top of that, I suspect that the Olympus engineers have deliberately introduced a focus "wobble" around the approximate focus position so that at least some shots have a chance of being sharp, even though the measured AF location is rough. I have also never seen any evidence (before yours) that the C-AF uses any kind of prediction. I tend to half-press until I see the AF work and then press the shutter and often the first shot in the burst is the sharpest.

In short, I have never managed to convince myself that any of the settings available have an appreciable effect on the accuracy of the C-AF. I wish they did! My view has always been that the easiest subject to get accurate C-AF on is a stationary one. An algorithm that follows/predicts changes in distance can easily cope when that change in distance is zero. But using C-AF on a stationary subject yields a series of frames each of which has varying focus! I just tested this by pointing at my neighbour's roof apex with single AF point. Six shots and FocusDistance was 29.59m, 29.59m, 29.815m, 30.435m, 30.045m, 29.74m. So, a variation of 0.845m or getting on for 3 feet!
Click to expand...
absolutely, well thought out and articulated, this is exactly the issue, the camera focusses at random, and not always on the intended target, I put it down to focus shift and this can also happens on stationary subjects in burst mode, I've noticed a sharp image can be produced anywhere within the burst (or sometimes not at all, slightly out of focus )but unusually never all frames in perfect focus.
 
Since my hardware is of the same period as Cliff’s, I’m beginning to think there is a random setting that’s different between us, perhaps not even af related.

This might be any setting so troubleshooting would be problematic, but if anyone wants it I’m willing to detail each customization made.

The problem is I’ve set it up as i like to shoot and everyone’s approach is different!

PS that’s a lot of work so please be serious!
Bob G
Visit my website at:
http://bobgreenberg9918.zenfolio.com
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Bird Focus Accuracy Comparing SH2 with Normal Burst FPS Priority and with IS Priority.
Replies
11
Views
16
drj3
D
D
Why I Always Use a Short Burst for CAF and SAF with the MC20+300mm?
Replies
4
Views
9
drj3
D
W
OM-1.1 w/ 40-150mm, f/2.8, focus speed on small birds
2
Replies
22
Views
78
Doxa750
D
D
OM1 Focus Accuracy (Variability) with the MC20+300mm f4. A Short-eared Owl Example.
Replies
4
Views
5
drj3
D
C
Struggling mightily to achieve tack sharp image quality on wildlife, especially birds in flight
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
254
HicHic
HicHic

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top