OM-1 Autofocus Performance

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

HicHic said:

Are you telling me that when you watch that video at 4K, you unable to tell the difference between video compression and out of focusness? Mind you, each shot was displayed for several frames before it moved on to the next. So the compression creating softness selectively chooses certain photos to enact on?

Click to expand...

And if these few frames are all P-frames and the bitrate is low, they'll look bad

look at this link to BIF testing: https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/

just as a broken clock is right twice a day, some video screen caps will look good

Click to expand...

So your explanation of why the grass here is in focus, rather than the bird, is because the portion of the bird in this image is a P-frame and the bitrate is low, and the portion of the grass on the left side of the image is not a P-frame, and the bitrate is high?

Also, the link you provided doesn't have the OM-1ii. The OP is asking if the OM-1ii has fixed these focusing issues, or if it's just as bad.

Click to expand...

SusanLane said:

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

HicHic said:

This review too -

At 10:03, she says the AF "gets it 100% of the time", and shows a burst sequence of a puffin flying sideways to demonstrate this. If you slow down the video of those burst shots and view in 4K, you can see a significant amount of those shots are actually missing critical focus.

Is this the kind of result other OM-1ii users are getting too?

Click to expand...

Taking snapshots of a Youtube video of a burst sequence is not a reliable way to evaluate AF performance. What was the burst rate? What was the video's frame rate? What was the burst's shutter speed(s)? How well does the photographer pan? How much was the video compressed (bitrate)? What was the video's GOV length (a.k.a. I-frame interval)? Probably a lot more that I can't think of spontaneously.

Click to expand...

Doesn't matter, cuz the sequence shows shots that are obviously in focus, so you just have to judge the relative performance, rather than the absolute.

Click to expand...

HicHic, are you playing us? The sequence you are referring to (from which your snips showed only ~5% of the frame areas) begins with the camera locked on to a first bird sitting in the grass, that bird is perfectly in focus...but then a second bird flies across the frame, and we can see the camera remains locked on to the first (stationary) bird until the photographer begins panning to capture the second bird in flight...and that second bird then becomes the only bird in the frame.
What you showed us was the time it took the OM-1 MII to shift its focus from one (locked) bird to a new bird entering the frame.
It can (obviously) only focus on one bird at a time, maybe that's why it's called 'Bird AF' and not 'Birds AF'. LoL.
Moreover, elswhere in the comments, the photographer mentions she uses the "Frame Rate Priority" setting over the "Focus Priority" setting. That explains why the camera kept shooting frames at the chosen rate before aquiring another focus target. Frame Rate Priority PREVENTS the camera from breaking FPS sequence while looking for a new focus target.
Cute.


The ENTIRE frame. Bird 1on the left is (and remains) the focus target as Bird 2 flies across the frame...

Maybe OM Digital will come up with an algorithm that looks for flapping wings.

Click to expand...

Bassam Guy said:

Why don't you want to look at the link I've not provided thrice? I'm trying to assist you, not argue. https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/

Click to expand...

Bassam Guy said:

Bassam Guy said:

Bassam Guy said:

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The grass doesn't look particularly well focused. H.264/H.265 compression is complex. Could be the photographer couldn't pan well, Could be a too slow shutter. Could be a lot of things but you want to eliminate as many variables as possible.

Click to expand...

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

HicHic said:

HicHic said:

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The grass doesn't look particularly well focused. H.264/H.265 compression is complex. Could be the photographer couldn't pan well, Could be a too slow shutter. Could be a lot of things but you want to eliminate as many variables as possible.

Click to expand...

If you aren't able to tell that the focus has grabbed onto the grass in that image, and believe that the bird is soft due to compression, rather than out of focus softness, then perhaps this thread is not for you.

Click to expand...

whumber said:

If you start at the actual beginning, it's pretty obvious that the camera hasn't shifted the focal plane from the original subject, the stationary bird, yet. It's even more obvious if you show the entire image rather the small section you've cut out here.

Click to expand...

daveomd said:

Isn't there a saying in photography that the most important thing is the 6" Behind the camera.

So many seem determined to find fault with their equipment, which I don't understand. I point my camera in the direction of a BIF and the camera creates beautiful (IMHO) results.

Bald Eagle nest today,taken with the 150-600mm at a distance of 120M

Click to expand...

sherman_levine said:

daveomd said:

Isn't there a saying in photography that the most important thing is the 6" Behind the camera.

So many seem determined to find fault with their equipment, which I don't understand. I point my camera in the direction of a BIF and the camera creates beautiful (IMHO) results.

Bald Eagle nest today,taken with the 150-600mm at a distance of 120M

Click to expand...

The problem related to continuous autofocus during bursts. You’re not shooting bursts here - so you're not seeing the problem.

Click to expand...

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

Why don't you want to look at the link I've not provided thrice? I'm trying to assist you, not argue. https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/

Click to expand...

I've asked since the original post for OM-1ii AF performance, and you send a link 3 times that doesn't have OM-1ii testing. Not arguing, okay. Maybe just trolling.

Click to expand...

Bassam Guy said:

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

Why don't you want to look at the link I've not provided thrice? I'm trying to assist you, not argue. https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/

Click to expand...

I've asked since the original post for OM-1ii AF performance, and you send a link 3 times that doesn't have OM-1ii testing. Not arguing, okay. Maybe just trolling.

Click to expand...

If I owned an OM-1 I or II perhaps I'd have noticed that was not in the link. Anyway, it is a good resource and the type of resource one should use to evaluate AF. I commented only because I noticed how you'd attempted to judge IQ with snapshots from a Youtube video.

Click to expand...

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

Why don't you want to look at the link I've not provided thrice? I'm trying to assist you, not argue. https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/

Click to expand...

I've asked since the original post for OM-1ii AF performance, and you send a link 3 times that doesn't have OM-1ii testing. Not arguing, okay. Maybe just trolling.

Click to expand...

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

Why don't you want to look at the link I've not provided thrice? I'm trying to assist you, not argue. https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/

Click to expand...

I've asked since the original post for OM-1ii AF performance, and you send a link 3 times that doesn't have OM-1ii testing. Not arguing, okay. Maybe just trolling.

Click to expand...

If I owned an OM-1 I or II perhaps I'd have noticed that was not in the link. Anyway, it is a good resource and the type of resource one should use to evaluate AF. I commented only because I noticed how you'd attempted to judge IQ with snapshots from a Youtube video.

Click to expand...

This was posted a whole page back, before you posted the link for the 3rd time, before you accused me of not looking at your link. You aren't even reading what I'm saying. Did you even evaluate the video for yourself at the provided timestamp? There's a clear difference between bitrate compression induced softness and actual out of focus softness. If you took the time to watch the video in 4K on a large screen, slow the speed to 0.25x and actually judge the photos, you'd see. But you're just here to argue and troll it seems. I'm not interested in this type of conversation.

Click to expand...

daveomd said:

All were shoot at SH2 ProCapture, the selected photos are the ones that I selected from the stream of photos.

Click to expand...

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

HicHic said:

HicHic said:

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The grass doesn't look particularly well focused. H.264/H.265 compression is complex. Could be the photographer couldn't pan well, Could be a too slow shutter. Could be a lot of things but you want to eliminate as many variables as possible.

Click to expand...

If you aren't able to tell that the focus has grabbed onto the grass in that image, and believe that the bird is soft due to compression, rather than out of focus softness, then perhaps this thread is not for you.

Click to expand...

Bassam Guy said:

It does have the OM-1 I which has an impressive score, and the OM-1 II is only better.

Click to expand...

Bassam Guy said:

All that tells you is that the grass was close to the focus plane, not that it was the AF point.

Click to expand...

HicHic said:

It's hilarious how this sub-forum happily leap on any conclusion, insofar as it speaks something positive about the brand. But when the SLIGHTEST criticism is headed its way, we demand EXIF data, perfect images without any possible loss of detail, with the highest level of scrutiny and skepticism. But something positive? Ah, we'll take their word for it. Who needs the raws? Who needs EXIF?

Click to expand...

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

Why don't you want to look at the link I've not provided thrice? I'm trying to assist you, not argue. https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/

Click to expand...

I've asked since the original post for OM-1ii AF performance, and you send a link 3 times that doesn't have OM-1ii testing. Not arguing, okay. Maybe just trolling.

Click to expand...

If I owned an OM-1 I or II perhaps I'd have noticed that was not in the link. Anyway, it is a good resource and the type of resource one should use to evaluate AF. I commented only because I noticed how you'd attempted to judge IQ with snapshots from a Youtube video.

Click to expand...

This was posted a whole page back, before you posted the link for the 3rd time, before you accused me of not looking at your link. You aren't even reading what I'm saying. Did you even evaluate the video for yourself at the provided timestamp? There's a clear difference between bitrate compression induced softness and actual out of focus softness. If you took the time to watch the video in 4K on a large screen, slow the speed to 0.25x and actually judge the photos, you'd see. But you're just here to argue and troll it seems. I'm not interested in this type of conversation.

Click to expand...

HicHic said:

Bassam Guy said:

All that tells you is that the grass was close to the focus plane, not that it was the AF point.

Click to expand...

I don't care what the AF point is. The grass is in focus, the bird isn't.

Click to expand...