Em5 II possible for bif and sports?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by travelbug, Feb 14, 2016.

  1. travelbug

    travelbug Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 20, 2014
    I've read quite a lot on how the em5 ii's c-af (and even the em1s) lags behind other mirror less systems. Knowing this, is it still feasible to use the camera for bif and sports (tele) and with a sub 1k. If so, what lens would that be. For arguments sake, I won't put an optimal focus distance yet.
  2. Nawty

    Nawty Mu-43 Regular

    May 1, 2015
    Well, anything's possible - they used to do sports and BiF with manual focus!!!

    However, by modern DSLR standards the EM5ii is woefully lacking, the EM1 is better and is good enough if you just want the occasional shot but if BiF and sports are your usual subjects then you still want a DSLR.

    With regards to lenses, if you want the full 9fps CAF then the only real choice (as it has an impact on AF too) is the 40-150 pro (or one of the soon to be release super teles) but that will take the whole 1k budget. The older Four Thirds 50-200 is an option but you also need a converter and it will only AF on the EM1 and not as well the m43 lens.

    That said, the cheap 40-150 kit zoom is surprisingly good, plasticy and slow aperture but very good IQ.
  3. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    Sports, because it covers a large range of different types of motion doesn't describe the subject characteristics your question addresses. The question is whether the AF is capable of generally producing in focus pictures of fast moving, non-deterministic motion. The S-AF is generally fast and accurate and if you are familiar enough with your subject you can anticipate, to a large degree, motion and capture it. If you can't and have to depend on C-AF and possibly tracking, then the chances are greatly diminished. AF performance also depends on how fast a lens can change focus, and speed requires high torque motors that are generally only found in high end lenses.
  4. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    It's feasible and workable. However, I'm more prone to use S-AF as it is very fast and very capable. Whether you use S-AF or C-AF you need to be able to get your focus target on your subject and be able to keep it there, even with the best of cameras.

    I would not even try the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 on an E-M5II - I did on an E-M2 and it would take from a 1/2 - 2 sec to lock focus. So unless you want to try manually focusing or getting an E-M1, then m4/3 native lenses are what you are looking for.

    Check out the Native Lens Sample Image Showcase forum to see what others can get with the lenses. You might start looking at the Olympus 75-300mm F4.8-6.7 II or the Panasonic 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6 lenses.

    If you can get by with a 150mm focal length I'd look for a used Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 Pro and or up my budget to buy one new while on sale. If you just can't stretch the budget then Panasonic and Olympus offer probably five options anyplace between 40mm and 200mm with F/4.0-5.6 apertures.
  5. rezatravilla

    rezatravilla Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Aug 7, 2013
    Reza Travilla
    Hmmm I am using C-AF TR on my EM5 mark I with 75mm F1.8 today while photographed horse racing. It is also workable
  6. RMills

    RMills Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 7, 2014
    With the EM5 MKII I get about 50% keepers in C-AF using the 40-150 2.8 pro. I was getting about 75% keepers with the EM 1 and that lens. Hopefully the EM1 MKII will improve the keeper rate!
  7. stripedrex

    stripedrex Do or do not. There is no try.

    Jun 8, 2012
    Long Island, NY
    My keeper rate with the E-M1 is quite high (80% + if I have the right CAF settings setup) capturing my 5 year old son playing soccer running full speed at me with the E-M1. I have plenty of examples through the last season below:

    20151121 - Soccer 4th Season Last Game - recorded a sequence in here 40-150 2.8

    20151114 - Soccer 4th Season Game 8

    20151107 - Soccer 4th Season Game 7 - sequence here with 40-150 2.8 + 1.4 tc

    20150411 - Soccer 3rd Season Game 1 - some p14-140 and p35-100 2.8

    My only complaint really is I wish I had a bit more DOF control. A full frame 2.8 zoom would blur out a lot of the noisy backgrounds quite a bit more. Switching from the 35-100 2.8 to the 40-150 2.8 helped shooting longer for sure (shooting the 1.4 tc even more so at f4). And I try to get tighter at times risking missing composition if the kids are moving too fast. In the coming seasons I'm hoping to maybe rent or unload some m43 gear to get a full frame 70-200 2.8 for my Sony FE to see if I get the isolation I want. Not always happy with the oof of the 40-150 2.8. If it's really blown out looks great but if it's not it appears a bit busier then the 35-100. Personal taste though.

    I take photos of many of my sons soccer games that goes back 2 years or so I believe if you want to look at more examples (I take lots of pictures =p):

    Alex Geslani’s albums | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
    • Useful Useful x 1
  8. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Shots from our trip to Kenya last November. First is E-M1 with 40-150 Pro. Jumping zebra is E-M1 with Panasonic 100-300. The images are export with 1200 pixels on long side for fast loading.

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. janelux

    janelux Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 20, 2015
    Clearwater, Florida
    • Like Like x 1
  10. PakkyT

    PakkyT Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2015
    New England
    In this situation you are shooting with the 40-150 at f2.8 at a soccer field. If you switch to the Sony with the 70-200mm lens, for all shots in the 70 to 150mm range shot at the same f2.8 since your camera to subject to distance will be identical (unless you plan on running out onto the playing field during the game ;) ), the DoF field for the those Sony shots will be identical to the m43 shots (if a scene is shot at the same focal length). The exception will be that you will be shooting at double to focal length on the Sony as on the m43, which will give you shallower DoF, but your field of view is now limited to that max of 200mm. Where as your 40-150 gives you up to 300mm equiv. of field of view.

    So you might want to give this further thought before you dump your m43 system to buy a Sony lens that may not be as effective as you hope. You may gain a bit of DoF on some shots but also give up a fair bit of reach (something you mentioned as the reason to switch from the 35-100 to the 40-150 which on the Sony you will be going back to).

    Edit to add: Your son is still young so the fields are small so you can still get pretty close. As he gets older the fields get bigger and you will end up further away. You might be looking for more reach at that time.
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2016
  11. travelbug

    travelbug Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 20, 2014
    i havent tried it myself, but my friend whos been into photography for 40 years suggests i try the digital teleconverter for some zoom shots. it will retain your workable apperture (2.8) and could likely give you the same level of sharpness/detail at certain distances.

    do tell me how it goes, if you decide to give it a try.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. stripedrex

    stripedrex Do or do not. There is no try.

    Jun 8, 2012
    Long Island, NY
    Thanks will look it up, isn't that effectively cropping?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. travelbug

    travelbug Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 20, 2014
    it is, but you get the added benefit of being able to live compose your shot which is impt for tele lenses imo.
  14. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    You really are better off cropping in post over using the DTC. You will get a better photograph, that's if you shoot RAW, and have a bit more leeway for composition.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.