Why shouldn’t I “upgrade” from an E-M1X to a E-M1.3?

dpswbab

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2014
Messages
221
So after yet another relatively frustrating outing with my X and bird AF, I’ve come to the following conclusion (which I find applicable to me, not necessarily you), and that is- bird AF is just unreliable enough to make me never want to use it. So given that, why have an X? Why not “upgrade” to a mark 3 and gain starry sky AF? I seemingly loose nothing else, right?
With the price I paid for the X, and what I can get a mark 3 for, I will loose nothing on the X that I’ve owned for a year and a half, and be able to get a mark 3 and have about $500 laying around I could put towards a 7-14 or 75mm. So why wouldn’t or shouldn’t I? I ask seriously, as I want to make sure I’m not overlooking something else I’d loose by ditching the X, but by my count, I only loose one feature that doesn’t work, and gain one I’d actually like to have. Should I be patient for a fine tuned software release? I’m sure the longer I hold onto it, the less I’ll come out ahead, and I worry if the X will ever see another update.
Im not sure how I feel about the front/rear dial situation on the mark 3, but I doubt any concerns about ergonomics are warranted; I’m sure it’s great knowing Olympus. And I imagine they make a battery grip if I find myself missing that.
Thoughts?

If you are otherwise satisfied with the E-M1X, you might want to read Thomas Stirr's article at https://smallsensorphotography.com/bird-detection-ai-tips#more-27991. He seems to get remarkably good bird results with his E-M1X.
 

JDS

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 11, 2014
Messages
730
Location
San Francisco, CA
Real Name
David Schultz
If you are otherwise satisfied with the E-M1X, you might want to read Thomas Stirr's article at https://smallsensorphotography.com/bird-detection-ai-tips#more-27991. He seems to get remarkably good bird results with his E-M1X.
I agree - there's plenty of proof that the E-M1X can do a fantastic job, but birds, sports, motorsports - anything long lens is going to take some education, training & practice to do well. I would love to see a comparison between the X, 1.3 and a few other cameras done by a pro to see what their relative capabilities really are. I think there are some comparisons out there...?
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
476
Real Name
Dave Cherry
What lens are you using for your bird shots? Maybe that is part of the issue?

BTW. the word is "Lose", not "Loose." Two different words.
 

RickinAust

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
296
Location
Australia
Also, I’ve changed the focus points to a single one. It’s helped, but still disappointing. What’s the point of 121 AF points of only 1 of them actually works, and only some of the time?
I thought I read somewhere that AF+TR does not work with single focus spot. I can't seem too find the reference post but maybe someone here can confirm this? I did copy this from somewhere.
The best OM-D E-M1 II settings for birds in flight:

  • AF Target: 5×5
  • Release Priority: Focus
  • AF Sensitivity: +2
  • AF Scanner: Mode 3
  • Drive Mode: Continuous Low with electronic shutter (18fps)
 

Mountain_Man_79

Do all the interns get Glocks?
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
1,859
Location
California High Desert
Real Name
Chris
Please remember I’m asking only to enumerate the differences between the X and the M3 in this thread.

I’ve already come to my conclusions about bird AF through due dilligence and much trial and error. I’ve watched the same videos all of you have watched. I’ve read all the same articles. I’ve tried all of those things and tested them in the field. I didn’t start this thread to ask for help about how to use bird AF or to tell me all the things I may be doing wrong. I actually specified to not do that. I certainly didn’t start the thread to have it pointed out that at some point I either spelled a word wrong, chose the wrong word, or was a victim of autocorrect; that’s super helpful.

To the few posters who replied on topic and actually reminded me or taught me something about the difference I didn’t know, thanks! I appreciate it. Now I just have to make up my mind on whether or not to make the move. As it stands now, I’ll probably keep it through the summer and continue to exhaust any and all possible setting combinations (if I want help with that, I’ll start a thread), and hopefully get a feeling as to how OM solutions will support future firmware updates for the X. Then I’ll revisit market prices this fall and go from there.
 

Mountain_Man_79

Do all the interns get Glocks?
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
1,859
Location
California High Desert
Real Name
Chris
Another thing that you would miss from X to the iii is the ability to have the joystick in the vertical position. The grip for the iii won't have it.
Good call. Hadn’t thought of that one. I don’t think that’s a deal breaker at all, but I forgot they’re essentially using the grip for the M2 which never had the joystick. Thanks!
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
1,042
Location
UK
Real Name
Ovidiu
I won't repeat what everyone said already, I'm sure you got most of the difference between the two, hardware wise, software wise and control. This would be a personal opinion from observation, reviews and articles and user experience thet j have read:
*The E-M1 II, III and X share prettyuch the same sensor given that the specs are identical, the AF configuration is pretty much the same.
*The performance of the sensor is almost linearly similar for Noise and Dynamic Range.
*The difference is the processing chip in them... And here's the part that it's speculation:
Given that the AF configuration is identical the AFC performance and Tracking comes mainly from software and algorithm optimizations. The AFC on E-M1 II is pretty decent (let's say its 80% good if 100% is perfect) and the E-M1X has two of them it should be a hell of a lot better IF what Olympus declares is true that the 2nd CPU is dedicated to AF function. But from most users and reviewers it's not mind blowingly better, it's up to 10% better (so let's call it a 90% of 100%).
If the improvement is only up to 10% either the AFC does not tax the CPU all that much or the AFC optimisation is only a minor improvement (call it AFC version 1.1). And, since, the 2nd CPU is focused on AI detection you can guess where most of the grunt of the processing goes.
Now here's the cherry on top of the cake: Olympus advertised that the CPU in the E-M1 III is as fast as the 2x CPU from E-M1X.... But when you look spec wise and performance wise it does the same data throughput: 4K 30p, RAW video, 18/30/60 FPS in the same configuration.
So where is all that extra grunt going? It wouldn't be surprising IF the AFC on E-M1X and the E-M1 III is not all that dissimilar, the Mark III came after the X so it would have a bit better optimisation AND with a CPU just as fast whin would be any slower?

To sum things up, if you don't need or want (or feel like it's worth it) the AI Detection then there very little (and depending of situation possibly no) difference in AFC between E-M1 III and E-M1X.

For all the other features it's more like a side-grade then upgrade or downgrade. Think of how the features fit your needs and style:
E-M1X : vs. E-M1 III:
2x UHS-II vs. 1x UHS-I & 1x UHS-II
0.82x EVF vs. 0.74x EVF
Bigger size vs. Smaller size
1 Kg vs. 580 Gr.
870 CIPA vs. 420 CIPA
Vertical Joystick vs. Starry AF
GPS vs. Improved Eye AF
AI Tracking

PS. If I could I would have swapped my E-M1 III with your E-M1X even for a while so you can test drive it...if not for the half the world away distance... Or even just outings together and compare the two... If not for the damn Covid19.

PS Mark II. I would still be interested in a swap with you (since my main focus is wildlife).
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom