Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Cameras, lenses and system accessories > Camera conference > Micro Four Thirds > Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II The second Micro Four Thirds camera that offers phase detect focusing so you can use Four Thirds DSLR lenses normally as well a Micro Four Thirds lenses.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #166  
Old 30th August 2017
drmarkf's Avatar
drmarkf drmarkf is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 3,116
Thanks: 203
Thanked 288 Times in 247 Posts
Likes: 819
Liked 758 Times in 413 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
I think face recognition and eye focus only works on people. When it is working you should see a white square around the face and a green square around the detected eye. If you don't see that, it has not detected an eye.
I don't think that's what Alec's saying, Tony (although I'm sure he'll speak for himself...): isn't this perhaps more likely due to the large focus point issue interacting with small birds, or to using 5 or 9 points and the camera locking on to some other part of the body than the head because it happened to have higher contrast?

I believe I have encountered both of these, and when possible I choose & move 1 point, or else quickly grab manual focus.
__________________
Regards,
Mark

------------------------------
Olympus E-M1ii x2: 7-14, 12-100, 40-150, 45, 60, 75, 300, 1.4tc.
Panasonic 12-35, 15. Samyang 7.5 fisheye.
Assorted legacy lenses, plus a Fuji X70.
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 30th August 2017
TonyR TonyR is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bath
Posts: 337
Thanks: 0
Thanked 101 Times in 65 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 93 Times in 50 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by drmarkf View Post
I don't think that's what Alec's saying, Tony (although I'm sure he'll speak for himself...): isn't this perhaps more likely due to the large focus point issue interacting with small birds, or to using 5 or 9 points and the camera locking on to some other part of the body than the head because it happened to have higher contrast?

I believe I have encountered both of these, and when possible I choose & move 1 point, or else quickly grab manual focus.
Ah, could be. My bad.
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 30th August 2017
Alec Alec is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 7
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 3 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Mark, you understood me correctly but I was not very clear. I don't use eye recognition for nature shots but almost always look for the "look" to get some expressiveness, especially with mammals but birds too. I think you are correct about one point, that has often been my choice, along with manual focus but I still don't really understand why some shots appear to be doused on the body withe thresultant loss of sharpness in the eye. Your theory about using a greater contrast and the focal point kind of makes sense but I wouldn't know how to overcome that except going manual all the way which I'm not good enough to do on safari. Probably need to investigate a custom setting.
Alec
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 31st August 2017
TonyR TonyR is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bath
Posts: 337
Thanks: 0
Thanked 101 Times in 65 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 93 Times in 50 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alec View Post
Mark, you understood me correctly but I was not very clear. I don't use eye recognition for nature shots but almost always look for the "look" to get some expressiveness, especially with mammals but birds too. I think you are correct about one point, that has often been my choice, along with manual focus but I still don't really understand why some shots appear to be doused on the body withe thresultant loss of sharpness in the eye. Your theory about using a greater contrast and the focal point kind of makes sense but I wouldn't know how to overcome that except going manual all the way which I'm not good enough to do on safari. Probably need to investigate a custom setting.
Alec
I use Zoom AF in these situations but it is only any good if your subjects sits still for long enough.
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 31st August 2017
Olybirder Olybirder is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 5,088
Thanks: 2,073
Thanked 834 Times in 663 Posts
Likes: 1,236
Liked 1,756 Times in 617 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

My hands are not steady enough to use Magnify Assist at 300 mm, as the magnified image jiggles about wildly in the viewfinder rendering it unusable. It is probably better with a tripod or if there is a support for my elbows but most of the time I use Peaking instead.

Ron
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 4th September 2017
Goon525 Goon525 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Guildford, UK
Posts: 67
Thanks: 0
Thanked 16 Times in 13 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Like others here, I'm suffering from focusing issues, even on stationary birds, where even with the smallest focus box, I find it tends to focus on a branch, not the bird that is pretty much filling the box. This with the Panny 100-400.

Does anyone have any inkling as to when the much vaunted major firmware update, hopefully introducing a smaller box and improving AF in other respects, might be coming?
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 4th September 2017
TonyR TonyR is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bath
Posts: 337
Thanks: 0
Thanked 101 Times in 65 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 93 Times in 50 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goon525 View Post
Like others here, I'm suffering from focusing issues, even on stationary birds, where even with the smallest focus box, I find it tends to focus on a branch, not the bird that is pretty much filling the box. This with the Panny 100-400.

Does anyone have any inkling as to when the much vaunted major firmware update, hopefully introducing a smaller box and improving AF in other respects, might be coming?
My wild-assed guess would be that, since it hasn't arrived yet, the firmware update will be around the anniversary of the launch. So November.
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 4th September 2017
Ross the fiddler's Avatar
Ross the fiddler Ross the fiddler is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Blue Mtns, NSW Australia
Posts: 11,449
Thanks: 1,793
Thanked 1,104 Times in 870 Posts
Likes: 4,038
Liked 1,288 Times in 791 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyR View Post
My wild-assed guess would be that, since it hasn't arrived yet, the firmware update will be around the anniversary of the launch. So November.
My wild guess it would be something they would do then with possible added features as a 'kick a long' for the model about that time too, so hopefully something better can happen in the AF area. Their AF algorithms leave me a little puzzled sometimes on how to deal with some situations. I still wonder how it interprets the 'magnified' (small box) method such as using the 14 X small size as I would think it should revert to CD-AF, but it then depends on how that is handled in the camera compared to previous CD-AF models.
__________________
Ross
I fiddle with violins (when I'm not fiddling with a camera).
Cameras: OM-D E-M1 & Mk II, Olympus Stylus 1, OM-D E-M5.
Lenses: M.ZD40-150mm f2.8 PRO Lens with MC-14, M.ZD12-50, M.ZD60 Macro, M.ZD75-300 Mk II, MMF-3, ZD14-54 II, ZD12-60 SWD, ZD50-200 SWD, EC14, EC20, EX25, Sigma 150mm F2.8 APO Macro DG HSM.
Flashes: FL36R X2, FL50R, FL50.
Software: Capture One Pro 10 (& Olympus Viewer 3).
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 4th September 2017
TonyR TonyR is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bath
Posts: 337
Thanks: 0
Thanked 101 Times in 65 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 93 Times in 50 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross the fiddler View Post
My wild guess it would be something they would do then with possible added features as a 'kick a long' for the model about that time too, so hopefully something better can happen in the AF area. Their AF algorithms leave me a little puzzled sometimes on how to deal with some situations. I still wonder how it interprets the 'magnified' (small box) method such as using the 14 X small size as I would think it should revert to CD-AF, but it then depends on how that is handled in the camera compared to previous CD-AF models.
I think you are right about the Zoom-AF using CD-AF. It will focus accurately on fine detail like feather texture when zoomed in a sufficient amount which is why I usually use it for static birds.

I have been a bit disappointed by the pdaf on the MkII in respect of its inability to identify and focus on the nearest subject in the image. It seems to only be able to do this if the near subject occupies quite a large part of the selected focus area. It seems that DSLRs are still much better in this respect. Whilst I hope that this improves with a firmware update, it may just be a consequence of the sensitivity of on-sensor pdaf. Separate AF modules can use whopping great pixels that gather a lot of light whilst the on-sensor version is limited to the size of a pixel (or perhaps several pixels). So, if it is a hardware issue, it is unlikely to get much better in a firmware update. This may be related to why Olympus removed the smallest AF point.

I have also been disappointed by the apparent complete absence of any predictive AF. A cursory look at the exif files of a sequence of images seems to suggest that, when the subject is lost (AF not used), the focus just stays locked where it was. I would have expected the AF to work out, over a sequnce of pdaf cycles, the way the distance to the subject is changing and extrapolate in a half-sensible way when the subject is lost for a moment. I would also expect it to use this extrapolated distance value to help it re-acquire the correct subject when it comes back into view. I mean, how hard can it be? As an ex-software person with a background in geometry and graphics, I'd love to spend time with their firmware engineers.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
Ross the fiddler (5th September 2017)
  #175  
Old 4th September 2017
bassman bassman is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 144
Thanks: 47
Thanked 16 Times in 15 Posts
Likes: 49
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Don't know if anybody else has seen this page, from Asia Olympus ? I've not seen this myself, on our UK site and there's certainly more practical detail, regards the AF system.

http://asia.olympus-imaging.com/prod...2/feature.html


Mark
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bassman For This Useful Post:
crapbirder (3rd October 2017), DavyG (5th September 2017)
  #176  
Old 5th September 2017
Ross the fiddler's Avatar
Ross the fiddler Ross the fiddler is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Blue Mtns, NSW Australia
Posts: 11,449
Thanks: 1,793
Thanked 1,104 Times in 870 Posts
Likes: 4,038
Liked 1,288 Times in 791 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by bassman View Post
Don't know if anybody else has seen this page, from Asia Olympus ? I've not seen this myself, on our UK site and there's certainly more practical detail, regards the AF system.

http://asia.olympus-imaging.com/prod...2/feature.html


Mark
That's also on the Australian site too.
https://www.olympus.com.au/Products/...ed-Performance
__________________
Ross
I fiddle with violins (when I'm not fiddling with a camera).
Cameras: OM-D E-M1 & Mk II, Olympus Stylus 1, OM-D E-M5.
Lenses: M.ZD40-150mm f2.8 PRO Lens with MC-14, M.ZD12-50, M.ZD60 Macro, M.ZD75-300 Mk II, MMF-3, ZD14-54 II, ZD12-60 SWD, ZD50-200 SWD, EC14, EC20, EX25, Sigma 150mm F2.8 APO Macro DG HSM.
Flashes: FL36R X2, FL50R, FL50.
Software: Capture One Pro 10 (& Olympus Viewer 3).
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 5th September 2017
MJ224's Avatar
MJ224 MJ224 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Carmarthenshire
Posts: 3,643
Thanks: 254
Thanked 161 Times in 151 Posts
Likes: 1,597
Liked 671 Times in 347 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Don't really understand what its all about..............

When using my Pany 100-400, I rarely get a focus problem. If I do, I just go to manual focus, with peaking. Only for fairly static subjects obviously.

I have had bad focus with other Oly lenses, unsure why though. With the Pro lenses, all seems pretty good to me, certainly as good as my ability anyway

But I don't use the camera to its extremes, I am not that good

__________________
My Sailing Page

My Flickr
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MJ224 For This Useful Post:
DavyG (5th September 2017)
  #178  
Old 5th September 2017
DavyG DavyG is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 2,522
Thanks: 448
Thanked 331 Times in 277 Posts
Likes: 1,397
Liked 955 Times in 259 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ224 View Post
Don't really understand what its all about..............

When using my Pany 100-400, I rarely get a focus problem. If I do, I just go to manual focus, with peaking. Only for fairly static subjects obviously.

I have had bad focus with other Oly lenses, unsure why though. With the Pro lenses, all seems pretty good to me, certainly as good as my ability anyway

But I don't use the camera to its extremes, I am not that good

I've found the same as Mark.

I've photographed a number of different subjects this year and rarely have any difficulty with focussing.

When I used my E-M1, I used C-AF + Tr for wildlife, most of the time however, this doesn't seem to work the same on the EM1 II therefore, I tend to use it for BiF or moving subjects only.

In addition, I've noticed that, when using C-AF on the E-M1 II, the camera will move in and out of focus if the subject has little contrast, especially if I keep the shutter button half pressed for any length of time before taking the image.

There are a number of examples of images taken recently on my Flickr page, if anyone is interested. I think these show the focussing works well, any flaws in the images are down to me rather than the equipment.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/144249381@N05/

Dave
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
MJ224 (5th September 2017)
  #179  
Old 13th September 2017
damianmkv damianmkv is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Surrey
Posts: 326
Thanks: 19
Thanked 33 Times in 29 Posts
Likes: 20
Liked 117 Times in 48 Posts
Re: AF not as accurate

i had my first go of the mk2 at the weekend with the test&wow and found it a noticeable improvement over the mk1, specifically in terms of battery life and high ISO.

I don't see any IQ difference at all

For AF, i found it pretty consistent in C-AF. In C-AF + TR, i found that the camera would focus correctly for 5 out of 6 consecutive shots, then jump to the fence ( i was at Santa Pod ) then back to the car, all whilst the focus box was on the car. Odd.

For me, its not worth the money to go to the mk2
__________________
E-M1 + O12-40 / D500
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:28 AM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2017, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger