Focus issues with the FT Oly 50-200 on OM-D

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by nstelemark, Jun 1, 2013.

  1. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I'm using an FT Oly 50-200 with the MMF-3 on the Oly OM-D. This is the Mk 1 version of the lens FWIW. The focus time is not the issue it is simply that the photos are out of focus.

    I am using single-AF with the AFL on half shutter. The focus says it is locked but a lot of the time (more than 80% of my shots) the focus is either a bit or a lot out. When the shots are in focus, they are stunning.



    8917132538_26f08b484a_o.


    I am hand holding and I wonder if I simply need to use a tripod to achieve a better success rate? When it works the combo of this lens and body are everything I had hoped for.

    Suggestions are welcome.
     
  2. Eirik

    Eirik Mu-43 Regular

    72
    Aug 20, 2012
    Oslo, Norway
    Eirik
    try to select only one focus area, preferably just the "focus box" in the middle of the frame. I always do that with my FT-lenses when I use them on my E-M5, as that trick seems to make them behave...
     
  3. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    Normal operation as far as I have read and personally witnessed. I have the same lens, I either set the camera on S-AF(MF) and auto magnify, then let the camera "rough focus" with AF and fine tune with MF. Or just use straight MF. The only thing I wish is that the non-swd had real manual focus like the swd version, the focus by wire leaves a little to be desired.
     
  4. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Yes I'm using a single focus box in the middle with magnification.
     
  5. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Well this is discouraging. I was hoping the stabler platform (ie a tripod) would "fix" some of these issues.
     
  6. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    You shutter speeds on those two shots are fast enough (1/500,1/640) that I doubt a tripod would improve them. The 50-200 is just not a CDAF optimized lens so AF is hit and miss, To be honest with a little practice you could likely MF faster that the AF works anyway. I wouldn't give up on the lens as it is a phenomenal piece of glass.
     
  7. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I'm not giving up yet! I got a higher hit rate in living room testing with a tripod. I'll try that tomorrow. And, yes I agree the shutter speed was high enough it should not be an issue but the empirical evidence says it might be worth a try (I can be optimistic ;)). MF is always an option. I'll try that too.
     
  8. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Well the tripod doesn't help. I'm not sure I can manual focus reliably on this stuff either. What I find interesting is that it really seems like motion in the frame throws the focus off. Handheld on stationary targets has a much much higher success rate.



    8927389572_ccd75096ce_o.


    [​IMG]

    8926748975_a91ae73be2_o.
     
  9. fdifulco

    fdifulco Mu-43 Veteran

    251
    Nov 28, 2011
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Frank
    my experience has been is to use manual focus only with this lens. do old school - select an object at the same point as the object should cross and just wait. i do that for bee's and butterflies with that lens.
    frank
     
  10. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Yes that will be my next try. That could work well for what I am shooting due to the buoys in the course.
     
  11. fdifulco

    fdifulco Mu-43 Veteran

    251
    Nov 28, 2011
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Frank
    if you can tripod mount and use a remote to fire a burst as the boat begins to cross the focus point.
     
  12. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    That could work. I need to practice doing manual focus through the evf. I was already thinking a remote might be a good idea.

    I am still surprised that motion seems to be a big factor in the focus performance. And it doesn't have to be crossing motion either. At the start and finish where there is relatively low motion it works reasonably well but as soon as the blades are in motion the focus is not great.

    I wonder how much better the 14-54 ii is.
     
  13. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    The 14-54 mkII is much, much better! Nearly native in it's focusing abilities. It's the only one that is reliable, although the 70-300 isn't too bad.
     
  14. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Quantitatively any idea on how much better the 70-300 is? I would say the 50-200 is about 15% of the time on moving objects.
     
  15. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    One of the ironic things I noticed is that you can't shoot wide open in bright light at 50. The omd needs 1/8000s shutter speed ;).
     
  16. Maczero

    Maczero Mu-43 Regular

    141
    Feb 13, 2010
    Fife
    I agree. That's my experience as well.

    Andrew
     
  17. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    The 50-200 SWD was optically excellent but on an OMD, AF was terrible. The 70-300 is, I believe, cd-af like the 14-54, but the longer focal length made it slower to catch focus. Moving objects is not the strength of this system anyway. Check out the "birds in flight" thread.
     
  18. lawa222

    lawa222 Mu-43 Rookie

    16
    Mar 3, 2013
    I've found the 70-300mm to be intolerably bad (on E-M5) and was looking at this thread because I'm thinking about making a switch to the 50-200mm. Maybe it's just my copy, but I only get sharp images about 10% of the time at 300mm. AF takes forever AND misses.
     
  19. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    After a few weeks with my copy of this lens I would say it is best to think of it as a MF lens, that has the benefit of full auto exposure control, and transmits its focal length for IS. If you buy this lens wanting to only use AF you will likely be disappointed.
     
  20. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I haven't had much luck with MF with this lens and my in focus percentage is still hit and miss. I shot a bunch this weekend some were stellar, and some were just off.

    I just did an experiment out the window. 90% were perfectly in focus. A couple of shots were of things 8 km away. This lens continues to amaze me and frustrate me :wink: Very impressive when it works.