Why Olympus E-M1 II doesn't have such impressive sequence speed

[Moti]

Could you post some of your professional shots, so we can see where this Mk2 would fall short? Or post a link to your professional website?

That would be very helpful in trying to understand your point for this post.

--
God Bless,
Greg
www.imagismphotos.com
www.mccroskery.zenfolio.com
www.pbase.com/daddyo

Greg, what makes you think that he is a pro? From what I reckon, he hardly knows anything about real world photography. For me he is just a little troll who is looking for attention.

Moti

--
http://www.musicalpix.com

 

[Moti]

"A camera will not make you a pro at anything, its an aid, not a life saver."

Yet that is what some insist, which is why when I read such statements I think "this guy is not a pro". My experience has been that the more a person talks about what pros want or need, the less likely they are to be a pro, or to understand what goes into a given pro choosing a given camera system.

Professionals knows what tools they need, and they will use the tools they need so they can do the work.

You are welcome to go and look to any professional tools arsenal and see that I am totally correct.

The only difference is that many fails to understand, is that there are all kind professionals who do same area of work but different kinds and different ways with different results.

It is like a different driver has different setting values for their F-1 race car even when the car is exactly identical by every possible physical way to other driver car. But the software and adjustments makes huge difference to the driver capabilities to pull things differently, and that difference is so big that it is like driving a different car all together.

The same thing is with photography, there can't be a one universal perfect camera that does everything perfectly for everyone. You can either pick 3 features from 10 and get those 3 features 99% of best possible way, but 7 of 10 are below average or impossible. Or you can try to get all 10 features from 10, and get only 30-40% functionality from everyone, generating jack of all trades, master of none camera.

If you want cheap and good, you need to buy two.

If you want camera for photographers, it is compromise for videographers. If you want camera for videographers, it is compromise for photographers. If you want to please both, you are compromising both. And some compromises are such that simply are too much.

And professionals knows what they need and they simply get it. If they need camera for sports photography, they get camera designed for that. If they need camera for video, they get video camera. If they need silent camera, they are not going to get a camera with huge mirror clacking no matter how good other features are in the camera.

And when a professional say to you that they can't use a specific tool for their work, it does not mean that everyone is limited by same manner. But that doesn't either mean that professional is the only one in the whole universe who has the limitation from it.

You are as well welcomed to go to different hardware stores to look how there are dozens of different kinds tools for so simple tasks as pulling a nail or screwing a screw in. Or simply go to camera store and look how there are dozens of different kinds tools for different kind people, and none of those are perfect for everything.

You are really making a fool out of yourself. FYI, Charles is a pro photographer so now you come and try to lecture him about the tools he needs? Isn't there a limit for Stupidity?

Moti

 

[Tony Rogers]

"A camera will not make you a pro at anything, its an aid, not a life saver."

Yet that is what some insist, which is why when I read such statements I think "this guy is not a pro". My experience has been that the more a person talks about what pros want or need, the less likely they are to be a pro, or to understand what goes into a given pro choosing a given camera system.

Professionals knows what tools they need, and they will use the tools they need so they can do the work.

You are welcome to go and look to any professional tools arsenal and see that I am totally correct.

The only difference is that many fails to understand, is that there are all kind professionals who do same area of work but different kinds and different ways with different results.

It is like a different driver has different setting values for their F-1 race car even when the car is exactly identical by every possible physical way to other driver car. But the software and adjustments makes huge difference to the driver capabilities to pull things differently, and that difference is so big that it is like driving a different car all together.

The same thing is with photography, there can't be a one universal perfect camera that does everything perfectly for everyone. You can either pick 3 features from 10 and get those 3 features 99% of best possible way, but 7 of 10 are below average or impossible. Or you can try to get all 10 features from 10, and get only 30-40% functionality from everyone, generating jack of all trades, master of none camera.

If you want cheap and good, you need to buy two.

If you want camera for photographers, it is compromise for videographers. If you want camera for videographers, it is compromise for photographers. If you want to please both, you are compromising both. And some compromises are such that simply are too much.

And professionals knows what they need and they simply get it. If they need camera for sports photography, they get camera designed for that. If they need camera for video, they get video camera. If they need silent camera, they are not going to get a camera with huge mirror clacking no matter how good other features are in the camera.

And when a professional say to you that they can't use a specific tool for their work, it does not mean that everyone is limited by same manner. But that doesn't either mean that professional is the only one in the whole universe who has the limitation from it.

You are as well welcomed to go to different hardware stores to look how there are dozens of different kinds tools for so simple tasks as pulling a nail or screwing a screw in. Or simply go to camera store and look how there are dozens of different kinds tools for different kind people, and none of those are perfect for everything.

Such wisdom. We are blessed.

 

[String]

If you can't get "the shot" at 10fps, you don't have a hope of getting at 18fps either.

Not sure I agree with that. Think of catching a tennis stroke, the difference between 10 and 18 fps could be 1 or 2 extra frames during the strokes. That can easily be the difference between getting the a shot and getting the shot, so to speak.

Sorry, I quit watching when the first words out of Kelby's mouth is "In one of my books...".

Look there are those who read and those who do. Rather obvious which one you are.

 

[whumber]

If you can't get "the shot" at 10fps, you don't have a hope of getting at 18fps either.

Not sure I agree with that. Think of catching a tennis stroke, the difference between 10 and 18 fps could be 1 or 2 extra frames during the strokes. That can easily be the difference between getting the a shot and getting the shot, so to speak.

Sorry, I quit watching when the first words out of Kelby's mouth is "In one of my books...".

Look there are those who read and those who do. Rather obvious which one you are.

 

[String]

Coming home each day in two week period with 5000-7000 frames per day, I can say you learn truck or two to pick best 30 from day in few minutes.

I'll call you on this one.... 7000 frames a day equals 420,000 shots over 2 months. How often are you replacing shutter mechanisms?

1) Did you even understand that there are electronical shutters existing that doesn't wear out?

You were the one complaining about the "false" advertising, no one else.

2) Did you even understand that I didn't talk about one single individual camera but there can be multiple bodies?

Sure, whatever.

3) Did you even understand that I didn't say 2 months, I said 14 days.

No, you said you shoot 5000-7000 frames per day.

4) Do you even understand that cameras are just tools, they are replaceable and you can buy more from the stores?

Seems like you don't. You consider the Mk2 is a complete fail since it doesn't have a tilt screen.

Not everyone is using only one camera body, use it for 7 years like there is no way to buy a new one.

And what does that have to do with anything?

If you can't get "the shot" at 10fps, you don't have a hope of getting at 18fps either.

You don't know at all what you are talking about by saying that.

Still waiting to find out why YOU need 18fps (non electronic shutter I might add; does your cat move that fast?).

If you don't even understand that, it is exactly same thing as it was said when motored film backs came to SLR so you get 3 FPS, when advance leveler was said to be enough to get the shot.

No, actually its not but whatever.

It is same thing as was said that Autofocus isn't needed as all you need to do is learn manual focus and you can get the shot.

It is exactly same thing as saying that 8Mpix is enough and no one needs more!

Should we say "Movie makers don't need more than 24 FPS, having more does not make them get the scene"?

Olympus, Canon, Nikon, Sony etc did you all hear, the high framerates ain't needed, 10 is the ultimate speed that makes everything possible!

Once again, YOU are the one complaining incessantly about frame rates, flip screens and false advertising. No idea why because according to you, you use a camera body for 7 years so you still have another 4 to go before you upgrade anyway or are you one again pulling numbers out of thin air?

--
http://stringfellow.smugmug.com

 

[String]

Yeah, he (Kelby) is commercial as hell and clearly in Canon's pocket but the point he was making was valid.

I actually like Kelby; the guy is a PS/LR guru for sure and I own several of his books. I just have better things to do with my time that sit through a 7min commercial... maybe tomorrow at work

 

[String]

You are really making a fool out of yourself. FYI, Charles is a pro photographer so now you come and try to lecture him about the tools he needs? Isn't there a limit for Stupidity?

Moti

 

[CharlesB58]

Coming home each day in two week period with 5000-7000 frames per day, I can say you learn truck or two to pick best 30 from day in few minutes.

I'll call you on this one.... 7000 frames a day equals 420,000 shots over 2 months. How often are you replacing shutter mechanisms?

1) Did you even understand that there are electronical shutters existing that doesn't wear out?

2) Did you even understand that I didn't talk about one single individual camera but there can be multiple bodies?

3) Did you even understand that I didn't say 2 months, I said 14 days.

4) Do you even understand that cameras are just tools, they are replaceable and you can buy more from the stores?

Not everyone is using only one camera body, use it for 7 years like there is no way to buy a new one.

If you can't get "the shot" at 10fps, you don't have a hope of getting at 18fps either.

You don't know at all what you are talking about by saying that.

If you don't even understand that, it is exactly same thing as it was said when motored film backs came to SLR so you get 3 FPS, when advance leveler was said to be enough to get the shot.

It is same thing as was said that Autofocus isn't needed as all you need to do is learn manual focus and you can get the shot.

It is exactly same thing as saying that 8Mpix is enough and no one needs more!

Should we say "Movie makers don't need more than 24 FPS, having more does not make them get the scene"?

Olympus, Canon, Nikon, Sony etc did you all hear, the high framerates ain't needed, 10 is the ultimate speed that makes everything possible!

TommyK1, did you even understand that several pros and working photographers are on this thread, and between your claim of taking 7000 a day every day, plus your Donald Trump-like rambling about things like FAS and what pros need, you have basically no credibility left?

At this point in time you really ought to post a link to your website to back up all your talk.

 

[CharlesB58]

Shutter shock surely comes into play - the faster the shutter moves, the more shock that is created, and more time is needed to let those vibrations subside. I wonder how much time/effort manufacturers spend on trying to make the shutter as light (carbon fiber? magnesium?) and fast as possible.

Reports are that Olympus has isolated the shutter mechanism and sensor from the rest of the body to address this issue.

 

[Skeeterbytes]

Shutter shock surely comes into play - the faster the shutter moves, the more shock that is created, and more time is needed to let those vibrations subside. I wonder how much time/effort manufacturers spend on trying to make the shutter as light (carbon fiber? magnesium?) and fast as possible.

Reports are that Olympus has isolated the shutter mechanism and sensor from the rest of the body to address this issue.

It's held aloft by magic.

Certainly looking forward to finding out what the new kid on the block can do. Like the E-M1 so much I'm all a-quiver over what they've devised with four years' development, especially given all the new lenses we've received in the meantime.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[Moti]

Coming home each day in two week period with 5000-7000 frames per day, I can say you learn truck or two to pick best 30 from day in few minutes.

I'll call you on this one.... 7000 frames a day equals 420,000 shots over 2 months. How often are you replacing shutter mechanisms?

1) Did you even understand that there are electronical shutters existing that doesn't wear out?

2) Did you even understand that I didn't talk about one single individual camera but there can be multiple bodies?

3) Did you even understand that I didn't say 2 months, I said 14 days.

4) Do you even understand that cameras are just tools, they are replaceable and you can buy more from the stores?

Not everyone is using only one camera body, use it for 7 years like there is no way to buy a new one.

If you can't get "the shot" at 10fps, you don't have a hope of getting at 18fps either.

You don't know at all what you are talking about by saying that.

If you don't even understand that, it is exactly same thing as it was said when motored film backs came to SLR so you get 3 FPS, when advance leveler was said to be enough to get the shot.

It is same thing as was said that Autofocus isn't needed as all you need to do is learn manual focus and you can get the shot.

It is exactly same thing as saying that 8Mpix is enough and no one needs more!

Should we say "Movie makers don't need more than 24 FPS, having more does not make them get the scene"?

Olympus, Canon, Nikon, Sony etc did you all hear, the high framerates ain't needed, 10 is the ultimate speed that makes everything possible!

Did you even understand that you are just making a fool of yourself with all these half baked arguments that prove nothing?

Did you even understand that what you do here is called trolling.

Did you even understand that someone who claims to shoot 7000 images per day just to get few correct ones is either a liar or should learn how to take photos or both.

Moti

 

[Guy Parsons]

Could you post some of your professional shots, so we can see where this Mk2 would fall short? Or post a link to your professional website?

That would be very helpful in trying to understand your point for this post.

Greg, what makes you think that he is a pro? From what I reckon, he hardly knows anything about real world photography. For me he is just a little troll who is looking for attention.

All this reminds me of the good old days in the latter days of film late last century where I was "enjoying" the now late and definitely unlamented Photoshopper forum

Discussions got rowdy but none more so when colleges went back and the "experts" had access to computers again after holidays at home when there was limited home Internet access.

The troll factor rose to about 95% content at times and it was hard to find real information in that forum. It did spawn another forum or two by people sick of the noise. But then it thankfully was pulled as it got so bad and abusive.

Hey, I appeared in it then with my real name as usual but with the added tag "Prime Lens Preacher" but I since saw the light and now use zooms mostly.

All in all in the last maybe 20 years of Internet access of forums I have learnt way more than in the previous 30 years or so of the photography hobby. And that despite the trolls and all the bad information that infests the Internet.

Happy days.

My advice is to just ignore the trolls or answer simply with the truth so newbie lurkers don't get too confused.

Regards...... Guy

 

[zuikowesty]

I remember a bunch of years ago my pro-photog buddy was doing action sports photos with burst mode. I think he had about max 8.3fps at the time. He found though that when he needed to shoot sequence bursts, that he would intentionally slow it down to about 6.5fps since it gave better spacing between shots (to actually capture different micro-moments).

The gist is that 10fps is already fast enough. Sure, maybe more might be better, but personally I wouldn't use it. Less photos to sort through looking for the keeper. I'm sure someone will make use for fast, and I may want it someday. but for now, that's not a priority for many sports shooters that I know.

I think the needed improvements are with the quality and speed of the C-AF. Hopefully it will deliver as hyped.

Yes, this humble amateur mucking about with a Casio pocket camera capable of 30fps at 16MP settled it on 5fps as a sensible compromise between "capturing the moment" and number of images to wade through. That gives enough difference between frames for most human and traffic movement. At 60fps it would be a nightmare choosing the frame unless it was some dramatically fast and hard to capture event.

Regards.... Guy

I can think of one instance, which I just encountered recently - capturing birds in a close range fly-by situation without panning. In two passes with a bald eagle scooping a fish from a small "pond" about 6' wide, I only managed to get him in 4 frames at 9 fps, with the FOV about 12' wide... and eagles are slow - the falcons were mostly a bunch of empty frames for me!

Certainly not a common occurrence, but I can see where some might need this more often than I do. I usually leave my high rate around 5-6fps also.

 

[Guy Parsons]

I can think of one instance, which I just encountered recently - capturing birds in a close range fly-by situation without panning. In two passes with a bald eagle scooping a fish from a small "pond" about 6' wide, I only managed to get him in 4 frames at 9 fps, with the FOV about 12' wide... and eagles are slow - the falcons were mostly a bunch of empty frames for me!

Certainly not a common occurrence, but I can see where some might need this more often than I do. I usually leave my high rate around 5-6fps also.

Yes, the higher frame rate makes sense then.

Usually when faced with something like that where everything is moving, then I go take a short video clip, so I get the action and also get the sounds if relevant. If it is repeated action then I may add a few hopefully critically timed stills as well.

Regards....... Guy

 

[zuikowesty]

I can think of one instance, which I just encountered recently - capturing birds in a close range fly-by situation without panning. In two passes with a bald eagle scooping a fish from a small "pond" about 6' wide, I only managed to get him in 4 frames at 9 fps, with the FOV about 12' wide... and eagles are slow - the falcons were mostly a bunch of empty frames for me!

Certainly not a common occurrence, but I can see where some might need this more often than I do. I usually leave my high rate around 5-6fps also.

Yes, the higher frame rate makes sense then.

Usually when faced with something like that where everything is moving, then I go take a short video clip, so I get the action and also get the sounds if relevant. If it is repeated action then I may add a few hopefully critically timed stills as well.

You're right, video would have been a much better plan. The stills only serve to underscore why I don't attempt action photography! :-(