E-M1 II and 4/3 lenses — very promising first impressions.

Me too. I got mine yesterday. Today I had it out with my 300 f2.8. Focus acquisition is very fast. This lens also used to occasionally rack back and forth if it lost its grip. This doesn't seem to be happening any more. Tracking seems to be working much better than it used to. Still have a ways to go to optimize all of the settings though.

I shot about 3200 frames this morning, and the battery is down to about 50%.

 

I'm really excited. I've my em1mkii with me but haven't got a chance to try my 300mm f2.8 here in Cali. Rotten weather and mid week delivery of new camera are latest gripes in my life right now

 

Wow, this is great! I wanted to hear some first-hand experiences with 4/3rds lenses and you guys are a big help. Awesome battery life too.

Keep it coming!

Thank you

 

Thanks for this. A thread I hope will continue to be added to & I've commented so I'm subscribed to updates.

 

I've sub'd to this thread, as this is a huge selling point of the E-M1 II for me, particularly for my 50-200 SWD.

@alex g , do you still have an E-M1? If so, would it be possible for you to make a video showing the AF differences between the cameras (point to point S-AF), as well as a string of C-AF shots to show the improvement from the E-M1 II? I think that would be very beneficial for those who have and use 4/3 glass.

 

Thanks for posting your findings. Any thoughts on the 50-200SWD? I have that lens on my E-M1 (mk1) and I've been more than a little disappointed in the AF performance. It doesn't take a lot to miss, and when it starts hunting, it keeps hunting.

 

I hadn't considered this, because I don't shoot with old 4/3 glass . . . but if the new EM1-II really improves performance with these lenses that would be a great reason to upgrade, especially if you're the kind of m43 user who doesn't really place a high priority on size/weight. There are so many great 4/3 lenses out there--heavy, but great.

 

Keep in mind the E-M1 only has horizontally aligned PD-AF pixels though whereas the Mk II uses cross type plus improved algorithms, so it has to be better, but these users will hopefully show us how much better though. As far as hunting goes, I replaced my 50-200 SWD lens (still have it) when the aperture blades started sticking with the 40-150 Pro lens with the MC14 & it also hunts in certain situations (on the E-M1).

 

To be fair, the 50-200 lens did that on the old 4/3rds bodies as well.

 

I have the non-SWD version of the 50-200 and I'm planning on testing it out as soon as I get the chance. I'll post something here once I have. I'm hoping it works well, because I'm planning on selling this lens so I'd like to be able to say it works on the mk II  

 

Thanks for sharing that. My expectation would be that since the MK1 provided good AF that the MK2 would be at least as good. I'm not sure how much better it could get other than in low light situations. I've only purchased two m4/3 AF lenses (the 45 and 75 1.8 primes) and have continued to use my existing arsenal of 4/3 legacy glass. I have been very happy with the AF performance of my 4/3 glass on the MK1.

 

All this is useless without samples  

 

Thanks.. Good to know the 4/3rd lenses work well.

 

Eagerly awaiting your results.  

 

Although from the first post I was glad to see "Reactions to the 12-60. In good light the focus is quick and with far less hunting than with the E-M1.1." which I chalk up to the cross point PDAF points allowing for better detecting of where to focus. For those of us still using the old 12-60mm, not having the camera be as confused by certain scenes due to horizontal PDAF points only on the original E-M1, that would be an noticeable improvement. While the actual obtaining focusing might not be any faster, having the lens NOT give up occasionally would be very welcome.  

 

I think Olympus should be commended for supporting these older lenses. Financially there isn't much in it for them if anything.