1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

How bad is the em5 focusing with the 4/3 50-200mm?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by halfhand, Jun 22, 2014.

  1. halfhand

    halfhand Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 20, 2013
    Hi, I have been reading a lot about the EM1 focusing much better the 4/3 lens, especially with the latest firmware update. But I prefer at this moment the EM5 for the smaller size and price.

    I intend to do wildlife photography and I love the idea of having a weatherproof setup with the MMF3 adapter. I have read that the EM5 isn't very good at focusing 4/3 lens but I need to ask: Is it really that bad? Will I make a big mistake matching up a 50-200mm with the em5 instead of em1?

    Thanks for your advice.
  2. Johnny_Alucard

    Johnny_Alucard Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 28, 2013
    Not used the 50-200 but I have tried using the 70-300. It was fine for my needs (a music festival), and I reckon you'd be OK as long as you're not shooting anything that moves fast. You'd struggle to do BIF with it IMHO.
  3. kenez

    kenez Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 18, 2012
    I tried to use the 50-200mm SWD on my EM-5 but auto focus was very poor. It was my worst focusing 4/3 lens. On my EM-1 it is now my best 4/3 lens for AF. If you use a 50-200mm on an EM-5 I would recommend the non-SWD version (cheaper too) and manual focus when possible.
  4. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    This is my experience as well. MF only.
  5. StirlingBartholomew

    StirlingBartholomew New to Mu-43

    Apr 10, 2014
    Short Answer: If the wildlife is moving, you need the EM-1

    Long Answer:

    I use the 50-200mm MK1 (not SWD) on my EM-5. The auto focus at 200mm near but not at infinity, say 25-50 yards out is somewhat better than at 50mm where it hunts forever. However, after shooting a few different test sessions with it at 200mm in the field were the subjects were 25 yards out, I discovered that the accuracy wasn't great. It would give you focus confirmation but be slightly oof, not bad but just enough to be annoying. This lens is very sharp so slightly OOF is kind of unacceptable. So now I manually focus all the time, no exceptions. It is not a bad lens for manual focus, the image is bright and magnified with some contrast enhancement so the image pops in and out of focus on the electronic viewfinder. I have shot extensively with the same lens on my Panasonic G2, which also magnifies and enhances contrast in manual focus mode.

    I shoot a lot with old pentax glass (35mm, 50mm, 55mm, 55mm, 135mm, 150mm, 200mm), currently testing a Super_Takumar 150mm f4 which I picked up locally last week in MINT condition for $35. While it certainly is not up to 50-200mm MK1, it is never the less a very decent performer for 50 yo glass. It also weighs 330g which makes me happy to carry it around. Shooting vintage lenses on the E-M5 is not as easy as shooting legacy 4/3 glass. The number of operations required to enter and exit MF mode increases and is more awkward than on my G2. You can get used to it but it is not a well designed process on the E-M5.
  6. halfhand

    halfhand Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 20, 2013
    Thank you very much to all, you have made it very clear. I will stick to the four thirds body at this moment, until I can afford the Em1. But if I have the chance to use the lens with the em5 I will come here to tell my impressions.

    Thank you so much!
  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.