DPR - Olympus E-M1 X vs Nikon D5

[ijm5012]

Olympus E-M1X vs Nikon D5: shooting tennis

An interesting read seeing how the E-M1 X stands up against Nikon's D5 when shooting college tennis.

 

[ijm5012]

DPR's Takeaway:

All things considered, the E-M1X is a decent choice for sports, action and wildlife photographers seeking the ergonomics of the D5 in a more reasonably-priced package. While you won't quite get the AF reliability or superior image quality of Nikon's flagship, you will get a faster top burst speed and a lighter kit to carry.

Ultimately, I feel like those seeking the D5's level of AF reliability would likely be better served by the Nikon D500 than the E-M1X: it's more than a $1000 cheaper than Olympus' flagship and sports a larger APS-C sensor and 10 fps continuous shooting with an autofocus system nearly as dependable as the D5's. Plus, you can always pick up the vertical grip attachment for it if you need that portrait-orientation layout.​

 

[Mack]

Odd they overlooked the Pro Capture mode in the E-M1X which can overcome one's slow trigger finger which misses an important shot. A lot of reviewers seem to miss it too.

 

[Pluttis]

As expected.
At the same time, Nikon users gladely pay over $4000 more for the D5 to get marginal gains over the D500

 

[AussiePhil]

i shoot a lot of tennis and i'm still shaking my head... despite it's many accurate points here's a few of the clangers in my opinion..

the out of camera jpgs i can better with my eyes closed on a em1mk1 let alone with the EM1X ... the so called rolling shutter with the blurred ball is not... it's a shutter speed to slow....
Really "nothing beats the kerchunk of the D5 shutter" .... grow up and stop disturbing the players!
Not going to dispute the D5's AF ability it and the Canon 1Dxii are legendary but again the reviewer shows a lack of understanding when he said he maxed out the AF sensitivity early in the match yet shows both head on and side on angles, both really need different sensitivity settings

 

[Reflector]

Not going to dispute the D5's AF ability it and the Canon 1Dxii are legendary but again the reviewer shows a lack of understanding when he said he maxed out the AF sensitivity early in the match yet shows both head on and side on angles, both really need different sensitivity settings

There are very real and sometimes subtle differences between the AF systems from various camera manufacturers. Putting a Fuji user behind a Nikon body with less experience will probably yield bad rates while they find a Canon more in line with their usage patterns. Ultimately another part of the AF test is that the user needs to know what they're doing with the settings and the quirks of the camera...

Not that DPR cares about that, controversy generates clicks for them and they've always held a little disdain for things outside of their preferred favorites down to quietly ignoring flaws.

 

[ijm5012]

As expected.
At the same time, Nikon users gladely pay over $4000 more for the D5 to get marginal gains over the D500

Yeah, I think the D500 is the E-M1 X's real comptitor. Both sports-focused, crop-sensored cameras.

The E-M1 X is a better all-around camera than the D500, but the D500 has it beat on price and possibly AF performance. Having said that, the "E-M1 X in use" thread here on the site shows what users can get out of the camera once they've become accustomed to the camera.

 

[AussiePhil]

There are very real and sometimes subtle differences between the AF systems from various camera manufacturers. Putting a Fuji user behind a Nikon body with less experience will probably yield bad rates while they find a Canon more in line with their usage patterns. Ultimately another part of the AF test is that the user needs to know what they're doing with the settings and the quirks of the camera...

Not that DPR cares about that, controversy generates clicks for them and they've always held a little disdain for things outside of their preferred favorites down to quietly ignoring flaws.

Here's one i grabbed from the FIRST day of using the EM1X, yes the EM1mk2 gives me a big head start
The EM1X had no issue delivering all of the photo's in the sequence in focus despite the stupidly busy background..... the backgrond was not an issue in the photo's in the DPR article

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Canberra Clay Court International #2 by Phil Gartner, on Flickr

 

[AussiePhil]

Yeah, I think the D500 is the E-M1 X's real comptitor. Both sports-focused, crop-sensored cameras.

The E-M1 X is a better all-around camera than the D500, but the D500 has it beat on price and possibly AF performance. Having said that, the "E-M1 X in use" thread here on the site shows what users can get out of the camera once they've become accustomed to the camera.

I think the D5/1dxii remain the leading edge when the light goes down but i don't really agree that the D500 is the EM1X competitor... i still think that for a large number of use cases the EM1X is the equal of the two kings but we need the 150-400 and a couple of new F2 or 2.8 zooms to really play in the same sandpit.

 

[masayoshi]

I haven't checked all of that review but the "Viewfinder experience" below is somewhat in agreement with my experience for BIF shooting.

"Electronic viewfinders on mirrorless cameras keep improving and despite the E-M1X's somewhat modest EVF resolution (2.36M-dot compared to 5.76M-dot on the latest mirrorless cameras) and low contrast (it uses LCD instead of OLED display technology) the experience of using it to capture fast action is excellent.

Whether shooting 10 fps in mechanical or 18 fps in e-shutter, black-out times are minimal. And there's no noticeable resolution drop or slowdown in refresh rate when AF is engaged to distract your eyes from the action. This isn't the case for lots of other mirrorless cameras."

Yesterday, I compared D500 OVF and EM1X EVF side by side, just for 5 min or so before it started raining, but I actually liked EM1X EVF better because OVF in D500 was so dark (300PF/TC resulting F5.6) and couldn't see very well if the target is in focus or not. But the magic of D500 is, even I don't see the focus, I still got sharp images.....which is ultimately what we want.

 

[Mack]

I believe if you put a Nikon or Canon sports user up against someone who fully understands the E-M1X operation, the Olympus may come out ahead if just for Pro Capture mode alone. The other two have a ways to go before playing technological catch-up, imho. Maybe in their generation II mirrorless models.

I've used it in on birds and there is no way I could capture some of their antics without the Pro Capture mode as they are much quicker than me. The scrub jay below was part of a sequence in Pro Capture where I was trying to slow them down by putting a rubber-band around their peanut, but the bird got one loose and dropped it. You can see him beginning to take flight after it falling (Peanut is at the bottom of frame.). The distance from him and his wings spreading out to go after it must be in the milliseconds.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[AussiePhil]

I’ve been over on the other thread/forum covering this.... I’ve seen pro capture mention here and there and honestly for pro shooters and the amateurs like me if you know the sport intimately like most pro’s would them pro-capture is of limited to no benefit and just fills up your cards, most sports are predictable and tennis is certainly one of those. I gave up on pro-capture for tennis once the burden of culling become obvious.
I do use pro-capture at 60fps occasionally chasing shots like the ball just passing over the net or hitting the tape or even trying to get it hitting a line.
Now where it would be a huge benefit is the jack of all trades shooting for the local paper etc covering a range of sports.... swoop in grap some action with pro-capture and head off

 

[Drdave944]

Problems with this kind of comparison have been reported here. Cameras have so many settings and vary so much,it is almost impossible to compare even two lenses,much less than two vastly different cameras. As pointed out ,the experience and expertise of the operator is important. If you use a camera over time,you will find its place. On various settings you may discover hidden magic. For example I was taking numerous pictures from day to day with a Panny G-9 and Oly f.4 300mm.
BIF ,forget it. I can't get the bird in the screen to lock on while flying unless the bird is a thousand feet away. So what? Maybe some can master this ,but it is not the be all and end all. (especially the holy grail of 100% keepers). But if you put the AF setting on AFC, the rig works magic for birds or anything else which is not flying,or just moving around slowly.
I think the G-9 just needs to have time to compute the proper focus,but then does a beautiful job. Pardon me if I don't care so much about keeper rate. I mean no one ever shows anything but their keepers even if it is only one in a thousand.And how do we know the experience level and expertise of the testers who worry so much about such things?

 

[ijm5012]

Pardon me if I don't care so much about keeper rate. I mean no one ever shows anything but their keepers even if it is only one in a thousand.And how do we know the experience level and expertise of the testers who worry so much about such things?

While you may not care about keeper rate, I'd wager a bet that the majority of sports and action professionals/hobbyists do (I know I do).

I'd rather shoot less frames and know that they were in focus, than shoot a ton of frames and have to weed through them to find the good ones. The less time I have to spend behind a computer screen separating the wheat from the chaff, the better.

When I'm at the races, I'll routinely drop my frame from down to 6 or 7fps, even though the D500 can shoot at 10. I have the confidence in the camera's focusing abilities to get the shot, and I cut the number of images I have to sort through by 30-40%, saving me a lot of time behind the computer screen.

 

[AussiePhil]

Actually having observed a large number of genuine tennis pro togs at international level at the Australian open... keeper rate I suggest is stupidly low on their list, they will usually appear for the first few games and then come back for the last few games and maybe get stuck if the set doesn’t go as thought... they will fire a few bursts, cull all but a couple and rinse repeat till they have what they want... I sat directly behind a couple of them doing exactly that and it was enlightening just how fast they culled sets of images out... including toggling back and forwards... I was in awe actually.. showed deep and intimate knowledge of their cameras.
It’s this deep and intimate knowledge and workflows that locks them into brands and models as much as lenses.... I don’t believe Olympus will unlock those togs but they will convert up and coming togs or even move enthusiasts into more pro work taking the eco system with them

 

[AussiePhil]

While you may not care about keeper rate, I'd wager a bet that the majority of sports and action professionals/hobbyists do (I know I do).

I'd rather shoot less frames and know that they were in focus, than shoot a ton of frames and have to weed through them to find the good ones. The less time I have to spend behind a computer screen separating the wheat from the chaff, the better.

When I'm at the races, I'll routinely drop my frame from down to 6 or 7fps, even though the D500 can shoot at 10. I have the confidence in the camera's focusing abilities to get the shot, and I cut the number of images I have to sort through by 30-40%, saving me a lot of time behind the computer screen.

Interesting how different sport drive different workflows, see my post above about the tennis pro togs

 

[ijm5012]

Interesting how different sport drive different workflows, see my post above about the tennis pro togs

Yes, different sports dictate different workflows.

I wonder if the keeper rates in tennis are so low because they're looking for the image with the ball closest to the racket, and out of a 18 image burst, there may only be 1-2 images that they like?

Dunno, I'm not knowledgeable at all when it comes to shooting Tennis. However, Track & Field and Motorsports are a different story.

 

[masayoshi]

My keeper rate (as a BIFFER) is determined based on the money we spent to go birding, and rareness of the bird we encounter, and sharpness of the image I get. The last call is made by my wife.

"We drove all the way to Montana, and encountered Golden Eagle flying close by, and you got this OOF cr@p!?"
"Why don't you practice more with seagulls and ducks, so you don't miss anything next time"

Yes, that's what I'm doing with my EM1X now.

I'm so much scared of 'keeper rate' judge.

 

[Turbofrog]

One interesting thing that didn't really get mentioned in the test at all...

...the image quality of the OOC JPEGs from the E-M1X look at least as good as those from the D5.

I'm sure that situation would change - perhaps significantly - as lighting levels sink, but for sports short during the day, if 80% keepers from 18 fps works as well for you as 95% keepers from 12 fps, I'd say it's hard to see much difference between the two.

 

[ijm5012]

One interesting thing that didn't really get mentioned in the test at all...

...the image quality of the OOC JPEGs from the E-M1X look at least as good as those from the D5.

I'm sure that situation would change - perhaps significantly - as lighting levels sink, but for sports short during the day, if 80% keepers from 18 fps works as well for you as 95% keepers from 12 fps, I'd say it's hard to see much difference between the two.

I think it's not mentioned, because its not the focus of the test. While I agree with you about the colors of the JPGs from the E-M1 X, the test was really meant to evaluate the E-M1 X's AF abilities compared to the cameras it is supposedly competing against (based on the similarities in the form factor).

As you correctly state, had the same test been done under worse lighting conditions, the resulting JPG differences would be noticeable. However, the testing was done under pretty ideal conditions (bright sun, good contrast on the subjects, etc.), and as such, the JPGs look fine on both cameras.