1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

The Camera Store Pen F review part 2

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by TonyG, Mar 17, 2016.

  1. TonyG

    TonyG Mu-43 Top Veteran

    582
    Oct 15, 2012
    Ontario Canada
    The Camera Store updated their review of the PEN F regarding the subpar CAF performance.

     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Useful Useful x 1
  2. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Thanks for posting this!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    And... it's still subpar, compared to the competition.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Yep and for some reason I still want one.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  5. TonyG

    TonyG Mu-43 Top Veteran

    582
    Oct 15, 2012
    Ontario Canada

    What was Olympus thinking about the CAF performance when they released this camera? This is an expensive camera and it should be top shelf. I find their policy of keeping the EM1 as their
    top AF performer strange to say the least. Panasonic is making an attempt to incorporate improved AF performance across model lines.
     
  6. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    I never use C-AF, but it's surprising it's that much worse than the Em5 II. I'm wondering if a firmware fix is possible. It's tough when your competition is your own product line, especially given that you can grab the refurb em5 II for $530 during the current sale.
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2016
  7. riverr02

    riverr02 Mu-43 Veteran

    258
    May 2, 2011
    New York
    Rafael
    That's pretty bad AF. How can Olympus charge so much for this camera with such a glaring issue? Has to be the psychology behind brand loyalty at work. Panasonic, unfortunately for the company, has never generated such zealotry despite making excellent rangefinder cameras that work quite well. Wonder how much better the GX7 and GX8 would sell if the only difference was that they came from Olympus. I am in no way trying to be inflammatory, and I apologize in advance if that's how it comes across. And I currently own an Em10 and Em1, so I vote with my dollars when the value for the money is there. But I have also owned and enjoyed Panasonic cameras and lenses, and frankly I get concerned at times for the long term success of the MFT partnership when people consistently look past Panasonic to remain brand loyal despite such fundamental flaws.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. Tony Rex

    Tony Rex Mu-43 Veteran

    274
    Apr 6, 2015
    Melbourne, Australia.
    Tony Rex
    I tested this "issue" myself earlier this week at the shop while waiting for some Panasonic stuff, of all things..

    I suggest those who are keen beyond internet punditry, do the same. I'm glad I did.
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2016
    • Like Like x 1
  9. ean10775

    ean10775 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 31, 2011
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Eric
    Meaning what? your experience was different that The Camera Store's? Frankly I'm surprised that the Pen-F's C-AF is worse that the EM5II's. I know its a different camera and a different sensor, but I suppose I didn't think/realize that the AF performance was that tied to the sensor. I thought it was more a function of firmware and lens design/construction. I would have expected it to at least be as good as the other Olympus cameras apart from the EM1.
     
  10. DHart

    DHart Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 7, 2010
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Don
    Interesting finding. Perhaps Olympus can/will make improvements through firmware?

    For the many people to whom C-AF is of little to no importance, this isn't a problem. I never use C-AF, though wouldn't mind having that feature working well in any body that I purchase. For those who rely on C-AF, this probably isn't the camera model for them.
     
  11. riverr02

    riverr02 Mu-43 Veteran

    258
    May 2, 2011
    New York
    Rafael
    Hopefully they can improve this in firmware. I'm no engineer, but if the S-AF is fine and assuming they didn't go cheap on the processor, then I suppose a software fix could be in order. Seems like a decent camera otherwise. It may develop greater appeal to those outside the Olympus faithful once pricing is adjusted downwards to a more realistic figure and away from the stiff competition (including other formats, e.g. Sony A6300) it currently faces.

    Interesting that reviewer/Olympus employee Rob Wong goes out of his way to put a disclaimer in his review as follows: "I did not test the Continuous AF capability of the camera, because of two reasons: I do not use C-AF in my shooting much, and Olympus did not claim to have improved C-AF in PEN-F."

    Robin Wong: Olympus PEN-F Review Part 1
     
  12. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    I wish I had a shop nearby.:shakehead:
     
  13. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    Rob
    hard to understand. C-AF isnt just for sports and wildlife photography. Avoiding the inevitable negative commentary alone should have made better C-AF a bigger priority.
     
  14. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    AF is as much about software as it is hardware. They should be able to improve the C-AF since the processor should be the same as other models. Unless they used lots of resources for the new JPG modes and processing.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    CAF is a lingering Achilles heel of u43. It's not an inevitable result of contrast detect since both Nikon with the 1 series and Sony with the 6000 series show it can be done.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. BrundleFly

    BrundleFly Mu-43 Regular

    40
    May 6, 2015
    Ontario
    Does anyone know why both Olympus and Panasonic have avoided using hybrid CAF/PDAF systems like those that are now standard in Fuji and Sony land? Is it something to do with the m43 format, or more just stubbornness?
     
  17. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Both the Nikon 1 and a6000 use on chip PDAF like the E-M1.
     
  18. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    The E-M1 is the only hybrid PDAF on chip AF implementation in the m43 range. Panasonic uses DFD on some models which works well but apparently not quite as well.
     
  19. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Ah - thanks for pointing that out. Mind you, I wouldn't say the E-M1's CAF is much good either !
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    PDAF depends on physical characteristics of the sensor and Sony doesn't seem very interested in making those types of sensors. Olympus would be the only customer for them.