OK how good is the CAF on the EM1MK11 firmware 3.1

[panamike]

Pretty damn good i would say, a few days ago i was using the G9 and its a fact it would not have done this.

9 point focus box with start on center, no shots missed out, no PP apart from exp adj, and done as a small subject in the frame to make the test more difficult,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[wjiang]

After struggling for so long with the E-M1 Mk1, jumping to E-M1 Mk2 firmware 3.0 was a revelation. I'm sure some DSLRs are probably better but I'm happy.

 

[panamike]

After struggling for so long with the E-M1 Mk1, jumping to E-M1 Mk2 firmware 3.0 was a revelation. I'm sure some DSLRs are probably better but I'm happy.

Possibly not as many DSLRs as you may think.

 

[masayoshi]

Comparisons between center AF start versus center AF priority would be informative.
IME, center AF start sometimes hunt longer than I want if the background is sky and center area goes to the background.

 

[wjiang]

I'm defaulting to AF center priority with the 5x5 for BIF. AF center start doesn't seem to make sense at my skill level, I can't get a tiny AF point to be so spot on initially!

For ground birds (walkers and waders) I just use the standard or small single AF point since they're generally slow enough that I can keep the single point locked on.

 

[masayoshi]

My default for BIF is cross-like 5 box with center AF priority for big birds like hawks and eagles. If the bird is small and fly from side to side (like ducks), I use 7x3 boxes without center AF priority/start (horizontally long AF area). Now, I feel only advantage of using EM1X is the ability to setup 7x3 boxes.

 

[Hendrik]

Pretty damn good i would say, a few days ago i was using the G9 and its a fact it would not have done this.

9 point focus box with start on center, no shots missed out, no PP apart from exp adj, and done as a small subject in the frame to make the test more difficult,

That's impressive!

 

[panamike]

I dont want to go to center priority yet untill i find the limit of center start.

 

[Bidkev]

Impressive but....................personally I've given up on BIFs altogether unless it's a grabbed shot with the gear I possess, gear that hasn't been bought with BIF in mind

If your photographic leaning is towards capturing "flight" then by all means chase the (expensive) gear that will achieve your aim, but personally, "flight" images rarely represent to me the features of a bird, but merely represent their beauty in flight, but if achieved with that goal in mind, then all is good. But quite often I think that the only thing that BIF achieves is the ability of the photographer/gear to capture it, albeit invariably with lack of the birds features.............a challenge that the photographer sets themselves, perhaps with disregard to the cost? The best Bifs that I have seen are invariably of slow moving, or hovering birds, such as puffins, pigeons, egrets, herons, hovering birds of prey etc .............and lets be honest here, a good photographer with his (lower budget) gear should be able to capture them

I'm not knocking BIF................I've been there...........that compulsion to "nail something," but for me, it's short lived once achieved, but whatever "floats your boat" go for it if it means that much to you, but I sometimes wonder if the challenge, both technically, and especially financially, is worth chasing when all you achieve are images that could be got with lower end gear and better technique...............of course, higher end gear is a boon when it comes to fast moving sport, but slow moving Bif?

Personally, I don't think that it is, but then again, I could be just jealous because I can't afford to purchase the gear that would give me the results that others aspire to, but on 2nd thoughts, I don't aspire to them................they're too costly and I think that (better quality) shots of a still bird hold more "representative' and technical value, but as to "artistic"? That can be left to others (owning or aspiring to own), to ascertain.

 

[wjiang]

This isn't about BIF.

BIF is just one use of C-AF. It happens to challenge the performance of C-AF a lot. I also find the dynamics and form of a bird in motion quite interesting. Freezing that form in detail is something I can't do just by looking at a bird.

One other use case I have (that I don't really post here much) is getting pictures and video of my three year old running around outside. It takes way more concentration to get anything without decent C-AF, and I'd rather not focus so much on the camera in such a situation.

Besides which, you don't have to pay that much... I used a second-hand E-M1 and 100-300 II for ages. I'm still using that consumer-grade lens and find it quite adequate. Yes, I've upgraded the body but I had other reasons for that besides BIF!

 

[Bidkev]

This isn't about BIF.

Sorry. I thought that from the content of the OP's post that it was all it was about?

 

[wjiang]

Sorry. I thought that from the content of the OP's post that it was all it was about?

I thought it was about how good the C-AF was, with examples that happen to be BIF?

I do sort of agree with one sentiment though - how many shots of a mallard landing do we really need?

 

[Lcrunyon]

Impressive but....................personally I've given up on BIFs altogether unless it's a grabbed shot with the gear I possess, gear that hasn't been bought with BIF in mind

If your photographic leaning is towards capturing "flight" then by all means chase the (expensive) gear that will achieve your aim, but personally, "flight" images rarely represent to me the features of a bird, but merely represent their beauty in flight, but if achieved with that goal in mind, then all is good. But quite often I think that the only thing that BIF achieves is the ability of the photographer/gear to capture it, albeit invariably with lack of the birds features.............a challenge that the photographer sets themselves, perhaps with disregard to the cost? The best Bifs that I have seen are invariably of slow moving, or hovering birds, such as puffins, pigeons, egrets, herons, hovering birds of prey etc .............and lets be honest here, a good photographer with his (lower budget) gear should be able to capture them

I'm not knocking BIF................I've been there...........that compulsion to "nail something," but for me, it's short lived once achieved, but whatever "floats your boat" go for it if it means that much to you, but I sometimes wonder if the challenge, both technically, and especially financially, is worth chasing when all you achieve are images that could be got with lower end gear and better technique...............of course, higher end gear is a boon when it comes to fast moving sport, but slow moving Bif?

Personally, I don't think that it is, but then again, I could be just jealous because I can't afford to purchase the gear that would give me the results that others aspire to, but on 2nd thoughts, I don't aspire to them................they're too costly and I think that (better quality) shots of a still bird hold more "representative' and technical value, but as to "artistic"? That can be left to others (owning or aspiring to own), to ascertain.

I understand what you are saying. A typical BIF against a blue background can get old, just like a picture of just about anything doing ordinary things can get old. But sometimes birds do extraordinary things in the air. Capturing them requires luck, patience, skill, and (to some degree) the right gear; but those are the images that make us go “wow!” If we don’t have our craft down, we won’t be prepared when that one in one-in-a-million opportunity fleetingly appears in front of us. So, we practice on the more ordinary.

Check out an Instagram page called Joinus12345. I wish I could capture birds like this guy...

I’d imagine you could get a used E-M1 Mkii at a pretty good price these days. I’m sure there are plenty of bodies, particularly DSLRs, that can do BIF well yet be found cheap. Good super-telephoto lenses are generally a different story, though. In any case, even if I want a nice image of a bird perched or wading, I’ll still need a super-telephoto lens, so they aren’t mutually exclusive.

 

[wjiang]

I’d imagine you could get a used E-M1 Mkii at a pretty good price these days.

Depends on the country you're in... I gave up on any showing up in NZ and my E-M1 was showing signs it was starting to die (dial skipping, grip peeling, batteries that I kept from my E-M5 losing capacity). I got my E-M1 Mk2 new with full warranty as a combo with a bonus HLD-9 and 45mm, both of which which I'll sell off.

 

[Lcrunyon]

Depends on the country you're in... I gave up on any showing up in NZ and my E-M1 was showing signs it was starting to die (dial skipping, grip peeling, batteries that I kept from my E-M5 losing capacity). I got my E-M1 Mk2 new with full warranty as a combo with a bonus HLD-9 and 45mm, both of which which I'll sell off.

New Zealand seems a tough market.

 

[wjiang]

New Zealand seems a tough market.

We're tiny and far away from everything.

 

[Bidkev]

[QUOTE="Lcrunyon, post: 1305513, member: 22072"

Check out an Instagram page called Joinus12345. I wish I could capture birds like this guy...

[/QUOTE]

I've snipped your thread and I appreciate what you say about the "ordinary" but these images are on instagram.................yes, they look good small scale, and I appreciate that they have some merit, but point me to full res

 

[Bidkev]

We're tiny and far away from everything.

Not far away from everything..............leastwise my bucket list................2 heart surgeries and NZ is the first, and last on mind mind

 

[Hendrik]

I

I do sort of agree with one sentiment though - how many shots of a mallard landing do we really need?

As consumers, WE don't need them all, but the photographer does in order to make a choice of best, most evocative frame instead of the one that is most in focus.

 

[wjiang]

I've snipped your thread and I appreciate what you say about the "ordinary" but these images are on instagram.................yes, they look good small scale, and I appreciate that they have some merit, but point me to full res

You know, maximum detail at full res isn't necessarily the primary figure of merit, especially for shots of motion.