Olympus UK E-System User Group

Olympus UK E-System User Group (http://e-group.uk.net/forum/index.php)
-   Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II (http://e-group.uk.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=73)
-   -   AF not as accurate (http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=44575)

blu-by-u 21st March 2017 07:54 AM

AF not as accurate
 
It's been a few months and 1 firmware update since the launch.

I am still having problems with the EM1ii. Not sure if other users of this flagship are facing similar issues and are suffering in silence. The AF seems to work very differently from the EM1mk1.

When attach with the 40-150 or the 12-40, I am getting the same issues. The camera will focus and give a confirm AF beep and in my case a Green Rectangle flash. But when you refocus on a same object, the screen defocus and then refocus. Sometimes, it's totally off focus and yet the AF confirm beep and that blink.

I don't see that in the EM1mk1. The EM1ii is suppose to be faster in AF and more accurate but if out of focus it can still give a confirmation beep, would this also be the cause of many out of focus and not so accurate photographs?

Walti 21st March 2017 08:46 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
I've rattled off a few in the garden this morning and am quite underwhelmed so far!

I'm going to do a back to back to see what the difference is, but I'm getting a lot of out of focus and blurred photos I simply don't get with the MKi - so some settings to be investigated I think (hope)...

I'm disappointed with the my sets on the dial only as well (I've set two up onto buttons on the MKi which allows me to switch without taking my eye from the viewfinder.... I'm not sure I can manage this so well from the dial)

MikeH 21st March 2017 08:47 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
I've only just got the MK2 (Sunday) so cannot really comment as I've not had much time to test other than a few out of the window, but I haven't noticed the problem you are talking about

pdk42 21st March 2017 09:26 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
No problems with AF on mine so far. Seems more accurate with my 50-200 in fact. Since it's the ED, the focus limiter really helps since I can set it for 5m-infinity (or whatever) which stops the thing racking back and forth through the whole focus range.

Focus accuracy on the u43 lenses seems just as good as on the mk i.

Just a thought if you are having difficulty - because it's PDAF, is there a need for calibration. I see that there is a micro-adjustment feature. Personally I hope I never have to use this - it was one of the things that I was very happy to leave behind when I moved from Canon.

Ross the fiddler 21st March 2017 10:26 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pdk42 (Post 409205)
No problems with AF on mine so far. Seems more accurate with my 50-200 in fact. Since it's the ED, the focus limiter really helps since I can set it for 5m-infinity (or whatever) which stops the thing racking back and forth through the whole focus range.

Focus accuracy on the u43 lenses seems just as good as on the mk i.

Just a thought if you are having difficulty - because it's PDAF, is there a need for calibration. I see that there is a micro-adjustment feature. Personally I hope I never have to use this - it was one of the things that I was very happy to leave behind when I moved from Canon.

You've touched on the point that this model will use PD-AF (with CD-AF using DualFast AF) & would focus differently in certain circumstances to the E-M1 with u43 lenses. I had to adjust the micro AF adjustment in my E-M1 for my 50-200 SWD lens at the tele end (+3) because of the lens calibration & I would not be surprised that there might need to be adjustment needed with the u43 lenses too. I suspect it might have a lot to do with technique for the above users though as I think the two focussing methods needs to be used to each of their advantages, such as the focus area with CD-AF needs to cover the subject with contrasting detail & not the background (as much as possible), while PD-AF will tend to focus on detail in the foreground.

Since using my 40-150 Pro lens (& especially with the MC14) using CD-AF (on the E-M1), I find it may not lock onto focus as easily as the 50-200 SWD lens did (with PD-AF) in some circumstances & I have to be more careful with the size of the Focus Area, because of it. Anyhow, the point I'm trying to make is, technique &/or Micro Adjustment might need to change with the Mk II model over other models. I would think it should be more like using a DSLR for technique, but then I haven't had a chance to try one yet. :rolleyes:

*chr

MJ224 21st March 2017 11:04 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Walti (Post 409199)
I've rattled off a few in the garden this morning and am quite underwhelmed so far!

I'm going to do a back to back to see what the difference is, but I'm getting a lot of out of focus and blurred photos I simply don't get with the MKi - so some settings to be investigated I think (hope)...

I'm disappointed with the my sets on the dial only as well (I've set two up onto buttons on the MKi which allows me to switch without taking my eye from the viewfinder.... I'm not sure I can manage this so well from the dial)

Me too!!

just assume I need to get to grips with the beast better. There are so many tweaks to be made. I think I just have to get used to it..........

Walti 21st March 2017 11:43 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
I've just been out and fired off 300 photos, with the MKi I would have got a far better hit rate than I have so far with the MKii.

My head was telling me to do the test and wow before buying, and my conclusions so far is that if I had done so I wouldn't have bought it!

I need to stop and seriously look at the results and try and understand why I am so disappointed with them so far!

DavyG 21st March 2017 12:10 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Walti (Post 409221)
I've just been out and fired off 300 photos, with the MKi I would have got a far better hit rate than I have so far with the MKii.

My head was telling me to do the test and wow before buying, and my conclusions so far is that if I had done so I wouldn't have bought it!

I need to stop and seriously look at the results and try and understand why I am so disappointed with them so far!

I've been using the E-M1 II for circa 3 months now and have had no focus problems at all.

The AF speed and accuracy is amazing, I was achieving BiF and DiF with the E-M1, I think the Mark II will make these a lot easier to capture.

I think you've seen some of the images I'm capturing with this body, I'm very pleased so far.

I'd be interested to know which SD cards and lenses you're using, settings and shutter speeds, these may help identify why you're having problems.

A few example images with exif intact would also help.

Dave

pdk42 21st March 2017 12:45 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
There have been a lot of reviews of the mark II on most of the usual internet sites and I've not seen any negative comments about AF accuracy. There have certainly been some reviewers saying that it's not quite top of class in subject tracking compared to the D500 and XT2, but that's a long way from saying it's inaccurate.

It seems odd though that two experienced Olympus users are seeing problems. Would be very interested to see examples.

Bikie John 21st March 2017 02:13 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
I have used one for a few indoor music gigs, and one rugby match on a fairly gloomy afternoon. Both situations can be quite challenging, and it is very difficult to be at all precise about results. But my initial gut feel is that focussing is faster than the Mark I (and 4/3 "real" DSLRs from what I remember) and just as accurate if not better.

John

Graham_of_Rainham 21st March 2017 02:25 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Save all your settings, then do a full reset and try again...

Growltiger 21st March 2017 03:04 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
There are so many things that a user can do to make it harder for the camera to decide where to focus. Some examples:
- Use lots of focus points.
- Turn on the Face feature.
- Turn on Tracking.

So I suggest anyone new to the camera starts with S-AF, single focus point, no Face. Check it works really well.

Then set it to C-AF (no tracking), single focus point, no face, and try again. Check that works really well.

Only after that start experimenting with the other settings.

Walti 21st March 2017 03:51 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Growltiger (Post 409248)
There are so many things that a user can do to make it harder for the camera to decide where to focus. Some examples:
- Use lots of focus points.
- Turn on the Face feature.
- Turn on Tracking.

So I suggest anyone new to the camera starts with S-AF, single focus point, no Face. Check it works really well.

Then set it to C-AF (no tracking), single focus point, no face, and try again. Check that works really well.

Only after that start experimenting with the other settings.

I'm getting quite good results with the MKi so have done a similar set of settings for the MKii - much as your list but 9 point for BiF against a plain sky.

I need to look at the lens settings by the sound of it, but I will do some back to back comparisons to show why I'm so disappointed - all the reviews I've read to date suggest there's a massive improvement so I must be doing something wrong to see a decline in performance!

BreezeG 21st March 2017 04:52 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
2 Attachment(s)
Meh!, just went out today to trail the camera on birds. About 2% keeper rate!
Obviously operator error, Ive just noticed both tracking and face recognition are on.
Must do better, will try again tomorrow.
Loving the resolving power of the 14-150 f2.8 Pro though, these were taken with the 1.4 TC attached.

DavyG 21st March 2017 05:29 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Walti (Post 409251)
I'm getting quite good results with the MKi so have done a similar set of settings for the MKii - much as your list but 9 point for BiF against a plain sky.

I need to look at the lens settings by the sound of it, but I will do some back to back comparisons to show why I'm so disappointed - all the reviews I've read to date suggest there's a massive improvement so I must be doing something wrong to see a decline in performance!

I did the same, I copied my E-M1 settings to my Mark II and tweaked from there.

If you are using sequential H or Procapture H be aware that the camera only uses S-AF, it will provide C-AF on sequential L or Procapture L.

For BiF against a clear sky, try using all focal points, for BiF against a busy background try either 9 or 5 focal points.

I'd still be interested to hear which lenses you're using.

Dave

DavyG 21st March 2017 05:30 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BreezeG (Post 409255)
Meh!, just went out today to trail the camera on birds. About 2% keeper rate!
Obviously operator error, Ive just noticed both tracking and face recognition are on.
Must do better, will try again tomorrow.
Loving the resolving power of the 14-150 f2.8 Pro though, these were taken with the 1.4 TC attached.

Turn face recognition off, it slows the camera down.

Please see my reply to Walti also,

Dave

pdk42 21st March 2017 05:34 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BreezeG (Post 409255)
Meh!, just went out today to trail the camera on birds. About 2% keeper rate!
Obviously operator error, Ive just noticed both tracking and face recognition are on.
Must do better, will try again tomorrow.
Loving the resolving power of the 14-150 f2.8 Pro though, these were taken with the 1.4 TC attached.

Tracking is a waste of space - turn it off. Face recognition is very good, but only for faces ;)


I discussed CAF setup with Tesni Ward, who spoke at The Photography Show about using the mkii on wildlife (with excellent results), and her recommendations are:

- CAF Scanner - mode 2
- Tracking off
- Single focus point, with 5 or 9 point sometimes if the subject suits it
- AF Lock - tight (-5)

Technique then requires keeping the subject under the focus point (s). If Olympus ever fix tracking, it'll make this aspect a lot simpler!

DavyG 21st March 2017 05:40 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pdk42 (Post 409260)
Tracking is a waste of space - turn it off. Face recognition is very good, but only for faces ;)


I discussed CAF setup with Tesni Ward, who spoke at The Photography Show about using the mkii on wildlife (with excellent results), and her recommendations are:

- CAF scanner mode 2
- Tracking off
- Single focus point, with 5 or 9 point sometimes
- AF lock - tight (-5)

Technique then requires keeping the subject under the focus point (s).

I disagree about tracking, I used it on the E-M1 and continue to do so on the Mark II.

The camera will only track as long as the operator is keeping up with subject, I agree it's not perfect but it does work.

I also found it useful when photographing static Damselfiles and Dragonflies on windy days, the focus point moved with the subject and helped increase my keeper rate, ymmv.

Thanks for listing Tesni's recommendations, I'll compare these with my current settings.

Dave

Gwyver 21st March 2017 05:47 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BreezeG (Post 409255)
Meh!, just went out today to trail the camera on birds. About 2% keeper rate!
Obviously operator error, Ive just noticed both tracking and face recognition are on.
Must do better, will try again tomorrow.
Loving the resolving power of the 14-150 f2.8 Pro though, these were taken with the 1.4 TC attached.

Have you checked the RLS Priority settings for S-AF & C-AF? (See Cog C1).
Also AF Limiter - Priority Release (See Cog A1) - if you're using the AF-Limiter functions.
If these items are set to "On" - the shutter can be fired even though AF confirmation has not occurred.

pdk42 21st March 2017 05:49 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavyG (Post 409261)
I disagree about tracking, I used it on the E-M1 and continue to do so on the Mark II.

The camera will only track as long as the operator is keeping up with subject, I agree it's not perfect but it does work.

I also found it useful when photographing static Damselfiles and Dragonflies on windy days, the focus point moved with the subject and helped increase my keeper rate, ymmv.

Thanks for listing Tesni's recommendations, I'll compare these with my current settings.

Dave

Ah, so you have managed to get tracking to work then? That's good to know - I've always found it failed miserably. What I do know is that it's a feature that's a hang over from older implementations. I suspect it only works using contrast AF too, but I could be wrong.

BreezeG 21st March 2017 06:12 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gwyver (Post 409263)
Have you checked the RLS Priority settings for S-AF & C-AF? (See Cog C1).
Also AF Limiter - Priority Release (See Cog A1) - if you're using the AF-Limiter functions.
If these items are set to "On" - the shutter can be fired even though AF confirmation has not occurred.

Thanks for that, will check them out.

c12402 21st March 2017 11:43 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Not sure this case is connected with the discussion, but just in case it may help....

I'm currently in the process of fine tuning my settings on the em1.2 (coming from em5) for birding.

One major enhancement to my focus rate was to set lens reset parameter to OFF (default is ON). The issue is that in the time lapse between one bird and the next, the camera frecuently enters in idle mode, and this mode reset the lens forcing it to refocus the scene, making useless to pre-focus at a given place where you are expecting the bird to stop.

I was previously assuming that this reset happens when camera is switched off, but it also happens when entering in Low power modes.

With birds moving so fast, I was missing focus constantly...

Greytop 22nd March 2017 12:33 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
No focusing problems to report with mine.
Very pleased with the results both from S-AF and C-AF.

blu-by-u 22nd March 2017 03:26 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Walti (Post 409199)
I've rattled off a few in the garden this morning and am quite underwhelmed so far!

I'm going to do a back to back to see what the difference is, but I'm getting a lot of out of focus and blurred photos I simply don't get with the MKi - so some settings to be investigated I think (hope)...

I'm disappointed with the my sets on the dial only as well (I've set two up onto buttons on the MKi which allows me to switch without taking my eye from the viewfinder.... I'm not sure I can manage this so well from the dial)

Seems Me and Walti are the only 2 having issues?:confused:

I do not use the multi AF points, I have set it to single AF smack in the middle. SA-F in all my test. :) off. Question, Did I get as lemon set? Or after all these years of using an Oly camera, this is one unit that really need me to change my shooting style?:eek:

Here is an example of the error..all shots are shot with Single exposure SA-F.

The subject is practically stationary. I do not have this issue with the mk1.

The start of the sequence, is tack sharp. No complains.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2890/3...8e3d296675.jpg

Crop of the above.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2830/3...78136e9262.jpg

The camera beeps an AF confirmation and..:eek:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2857/3...52518b1cc2.jpg

Crop of the above..
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2930/3...4a6b99aeac.jpg

A few shots later..
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3950/3...ac68fa8346.jpg

Crop of the above...
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2882/3...a5194960ef.jpg

More pictures of the sequence are here.

Phill D 22nd March 2017 06:42 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Interesting comments and info here. So far on my one outing I found the Mk2 focusing to be much more assured than my mk1 especially with my Lumix 14-140. The 40-150 also seemed to work well but then it did with my mark 1. I. It's a lot better than the mk1 with my Pan/Leica 14-150. I think the main improvement is from the cross type focus points.

Daveart 22nd March 2017 09:21 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Hi I have looked at your sequence of images A your shutter speed was 1/100th

B you were shooting in Single AF mode,

C The subject is moving parts of the body i.e. arms maybe head rocking back and Forth

D.shallow depth of field ie f2.8 as s-af only focuses upon the first frame would explain first is sharp all this information would indicate that to be operator error not camera error. Any movment at these settings with a telephoto lens would show some form of out of focus blurring on shots after the first.

This is my observation of these shots and camera settings.

Walti 22nd March 2017 10:13 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
I'm still trying to work out what I've done wrong - The camera seems fine and has been subjected to a factory reset, so I'll start again!

Enthusiasm has taken a bit of a hit though!

I think I need to switch to CF+TR to resolve the issues I think I've had - I'll give it a go and report back!

Bengeo 22nd March 2017 10:14 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
No AF problems here. Been using the Mark 2 since last December and find it better than the Mark 1. It will be nice to have the smaller focus point if they reintroduce that.

Zuiko 22nd March 2017 11:00 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Daveart (Post 409322)
Hi I have looked at your sequence of images A your shutter speed was 1/100th

B you were shooting in Single AF mode,

C The subject is moving parts of the body i.e. arms maybe head rocking back and Forth

D.shallow depth of field ie f2.8 as s-af only focuses upon the first frame would explain first is sharp all this information would indicate that to be operator error not camera error. Any movment at these settings with a telephoto lens would show some form of out of focus blurring on shots after the first.

This is my observation of these shots and camera settings.

The problem is that Image stabilization is so good we take it for granted. It is easy to forget that whilst it prevents blurring due to camera shake, it has no effect upon subject movement. I suspect the subject was quite an animated speaker and 1/100th of a second was just too slow. The ISO was only 400 and I would have been inclined to crank it up to at least 1600 for a faster shutter speed.

TonyR 22nd March 2017 11:02 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by c12402 (Post 409310)
Not sure this case is connected with the discussion, but just in case it may help....

I'm currently in the process of fine tuning my settings on the em1.2 (coming from em5) for birding.

One major enhancement to my focus rate was to set lens reset parameter to OFF (default is ON). The issue is that in the time lapse between one bird and the next, the camera frecuently enters in idle mode, and this mode reset the lens forcing it to refocus the scene, making useless to pre-focus at a given place where you are expecting the bird to stop.

I was previously assuming that this reset happens when camera is switched off, but it also happens when entering in Low power modes.

With birds moving so fast, I was missing focus constantly...

Good catch! I previously thought that Lens Reset only reset the focal length of an electrically zoomed lens, not the focus distance.

Grumpy Hec 22nd March 2017 11:57 AM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Ditto on the positive side. I have been using since December and for what I do the AF is a huge improvement in both speed and accuracy. The only issues I have experienced are around very low contrast subjects which is not surprising but even then it is much improved over the MK1.

It should be said though that I do not do action/BIF so my comments should be taken in that context.

Hec

pdk42 22nd March 2017 12:43 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Walti (Post 409332)
I'm still trying to work out what I've done wrong - The camera seems fine and has been subjected to a factory reset, so I'll start again!

Enthusiasm has taken a bit of a hit though!

I think I need to switch to CF+TR to resolve the issues I think I've had - I'll give it a go and report back!

Oh dear - that's not a great place to be! Let's see if we can collectively get you back on track!

Personally, I have grave doubts over the use of tracking having had very little success with it in the past. Like a lot of fancy automation, it removes control from the user and unless it's 100% reliable it'll only likely make things worse to diagnose.

IMHO whenever there is a problem, it's best to return to the simplest setup possible and then take it from there. How about this for an approach:

- Start with single point S-AF on a static subject with a tripod. Sounds stupid, but it'll at least remove concerns around basic lens and camera calibration. Might be worth trying it with a few lenses too.

- Move to hand-held. Tests shutter speed and IS issues.

- Move to CAF, no-tracking and with a single AF point. Use first on a static subject. Maybe doesn't add much, but it gives C-AF a run. Keep to static subjects, but move aim from things near to far.

- Keep on C-AF single point and play with the C-AF settings - AF Scanner and AF Lock settings (loose/tight). Keep to same static subjects and see how the settings change behaviour.

- Bring in multi-point CAF. See how the camera chooses its selected focus point, again keeping to static subjects.

- Switch to moving subjects and repeat the C-AF tests. Start with single point and something simple such as cars or bicycles, keeping the focus point(s) over the subject by camera movement. Test movement both in parallel plane to camera (subject not changing distance) and perpendicular (changing distance). Ensure that shutter speed is high enough.

- Play around with different subjects and different movement patterns. Experiment with C-AF settings, esp CAF Lock.

- Lastly, see if tracking helps at all. It should, if working properly, remove the need to keep the subject under a focus point.

Depending on where problems begin, you'll have at least some handle on where to go looking for a fix.

Hope this is useful and not teaching anyone to suck eggs!!

Walti 22nd March 2017 01:19 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pdk42 (Post 409347)
Oh dear - that's not a great place to be! Let's see if we can collectively get you back on track!

Personally, I have grave doubts over the use of tracking having had very little success with it in the past. Like a lot of fancy automation, it removes control from the user and unless it's 100% reliable it'll only likely make things worse to diagnose.

IMHO whenever there is a problem, it's best to return to the simplest setup possible and then take it from there. How about this for an approach:

- Start with single point S-AF on a static subject with a tripod. Sounds stupid, but it'll at least remove concerns around basic lens and camera calibration. Might be worth trying it with a few lenses too.

- Move to hand-held. Tests shutter speed and IS issues.

- Move to CAF, no-tracking and with a single AF point. Use first on a static subject. Maybe doesn't add much, but it gives C-AF a run. Keep to static subjects, but move aim from things near to far.

- Keep on C-AF single point and play with the C-AF settings - AF Scanner and AF Lock settings (loose/tight). Keep to same static subjects and see how the settings change behaviour.

- Bring in multi-point CAF. See how the camera chooses its selected focus point, again keeping to static subjects.

- Switch to moving subjects and repeat the C-AF tests. Start with single point and something simple such as cars or bicycles, keeping the focus point(s) over the subject by camera movement. Test movement both in parallel plane to camera (subject not changing distance) and perpendicular (changing distance). Ensure that shutter speed is high enough.

- Play around with different subjects and different movement patterns. Experiment with C-AF settings, esp CAF Lock.

- Lastly, see if tracking helps at all. It should, if working properly, remove the need to keep the subject under a focus point.

Depending on where problems begin, you'll have at least some handle on where to go looking for a fix.

Hope this is useful and not teaching anyone to suck eggs!!

Paul,

Nice to see it all written out neatly! Many thanks.

I'm working through a similar set of tests and have found that I'm now getting better than the MKi - so that's a start - the factory reset does seem to have done something (that I can't find) which has improved things markedly, and I'm now getting reasonable performance across the board. (I ditched all my settings and started again! - to be sure it wasn't a stray setting).

I've got onto the C-AF settings and looks like the tracking is sorting most of the issue out, however trying to photograph songbirds in a tree the focussing keeps bouncing between the original subject and the nearest branch! which is fine once you've realised it's going to do it (so you use C-AF selectively).

It does look like some of my issues are grounded in the difference in the way C-AF operates across the two cameras and I need to change my work to match!

I have also had a battery out to reset lock up and a "check lens" issue though today, so I'm beginning to think I've got a rogue camera!

Walti 22nd March 2017 03:49 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Normal service has been resumed:

I think that the camera must have been out of the box and played with by the dealer at some point! I've ended up doing TWO factory resets! and re-started plugging through all the menus to get somewhere near normality!

I have also found that the C-AF definitely works differently (though that was the whole point so no real surprise) and I have had to adapt very slightly to it! Switching to C-AF+tr has solved some of the issues I was finding yesterday.

I have found that if the subject is not in brilliant sunshine, the C-AF does wander a few mm - but understanding that allows for a work around!

Anyway some straight out of the camera photos: ALL are E-M1 MKii, 300mm f4 plus MC1.4. ISO3200, 1/1000, f5.6

http://www.e-group.uk.net/gallery/da...2-P3220153.jpg

http://www.e-group.uk.net/gallery/da...2-P3220154.jpg

http://www.e-group.uk.net/gallery/da...2-P3220155.jpg

http://www.e-group.uk.net/gallery/da...2-P3220156.jpg

http://www.e-group.uk.net/gallery/da...2-P3220157.jpg

http://www.e-group.uk.net/gallery/da...2-P3220158.jpg

Walti 22nd March 2017 03:57 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
PS - I wouldn't have put ANY ISO3200 photos up for people to look at from the MKi - so there IS a difference!

Growltiger 22nd March 2017 04:05 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Now you can move on to trying ProCapture Low with C-AF.

Walti 22nd March 2017 04:06 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
And a post-processed version of one of them!

I think I'm a little happier now! ;)

http://www.e-group.uk.net/gallery/da...P3220155-2.jpg

Walti 22nd March 2017 04:13 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Growltiger (Post 409360)
Now you can move on to trying ProCapture Low with C-AF.

I'm just relieved that I've gone from a place where I thought I'd made a massive mistake with the camera to actually thinking there is an improvement over the MKi - yesterday was VERY worrying!

PRO capture and high res are on the menu for investigation!

MJ224 22nd March 2017 09:57 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/5...209_Large_.jpg
[img]

https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2869/33438235422_7188014d44_b.jpg[/img]
Black Headed Gull on a mission by Mark Johnson, on Flickr

https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3856/3...dbab2ab3_b.jpgPair of Woodies by Mark Johnson, on Flickr

https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3841/3...c83cfba8_b.jpgMr Robin by Mark Johnson, on Flickr

https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2869/3...88014d44_b.jpgBlack Headed Gull on a mission by Mark Johnson, on Flickr

First day out with the new toy. Reasonably pleased with results........

More practice and study needed.....

c12402 22nd March 2017 10:11 PM

Re: AF not as accurate
 
Nice shots, you can certainly enjoy! I'm still passing through the learning curve of this camera the same way, after three birding sessions I can see the improvements in the photos. As the camera is the very same, it's clear where is the need for improvement...


https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3696/...39b2dd22_k.jpg_3181132_DxO by c12402, on Flickr

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3666/...30cba763_k.jpg_3170402_DxO by c12402, on Flickr


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:49 AM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger