C-AF disappointing

[Tordan58]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Camera and lens were updated with the latest FW since the first day.

Next I did a full camera reset, and gave it a last try this afternoon, a few hundred more frames. Still, zero(!) subjects in focus, the camera failed even in the easiest situations. Strange since the acquisition feels snappy and the camera seems to re-acquire focus when lost, even is background is somewhat busy (easiest with 5 AF points). However, there is an OOF issue.

It that seems many of you are happy with the C-AF performance, so my conclusion is that this copy of the camera is a piece of rubbish (sorry for being harsh but that is exactly how I feel). Product was new when I started testing it in case you wonder. How could it have passed the quality check?

[GyRob]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Just did the same test with the 1.4tc results about the same and I see no loss of sharpness with the 1.4 either .
Rob.

[Walti]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Camera and lens were updated with the latest FW since the first day.

Next I did a full camera reset, and gave it a last try this afternoon, a few hundred more frames. Still, zero(!) subjects in focus, the camera failed even in the easiest situations. Strange since the acquisition feels snappy and the camera seems to re-acquire focus when lost, even is background is somewhat busy (easiest with 5 AF points). However, there is an OOF issue.

It that seems many of you are happy with the C-AF performance, so my conclusion is that this copy of the camera is a piece of rubbish (sorry for being harsh but that is exactly how I feel). Product was new when I started testing it in case you wonder. How could it have passed the quality check?

Tordan,

I found that my "out of the box" first use was a similar experience to yours, and ended up re-setting the camera (full reset) twice, then it jumped into working properly, I put the down to the camera having been played with by the dealer (don't know if that was true) but, I had to do multiple resets before it started working properly! NB when doing a reset you have to power off and back on with slight delays without touching ANYTHING, it really seems that the reset needs the power off without any input being made to take properly...

Give it a go - it may make difference it seemed to for me!

[Tordan58]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Thanks for advise, but is not the game I want to play. Image buying a new car, collect it from the dealer... and you find out the engine refuses to revolve above 1200 rpm except in first gear. To get the car to deliver what it is capable of you need to find how to disconnect the fuel injection control box from the DC supply. Then disconnect it, reconnect it and disconnect a few times and then hopefully...

[Miketoll]

Re: C-AF disappointing

This an interesting link about the abilities of the EM1 mkII versus other cameras for wildlife and BIF. While not up to the likes of a Nikon D500 it does pretty well.
http://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best...d-photography/

[wornish]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Thanks for advise, but is not the game I want to play. Image buying a new car, collect it from the dealer... and you find out the engine refuses to revolve above 1200 rpm except in first gear. To get the car to deliver what it is capable of you need to find how to disconnect the fuel injection control box from the DC supply. Then disconnect it, reconnect it and disconnect a few times and then hopefully...

I said this in an earlier post but will repeat.

Take it back and ask them to fix it or replace it, thats what warranty is all about.

I think you have more than enough proof it is not working to spec.

[Olybirder]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Hi Tord. In your original post you say that you have been trying the E-M1 Mark 2 this weekend. Does that mean that you haven't actually bought it at the moment? If that is the case, I think you should return it and try some of the alternatives to see how you get on with them. From the gear you already own and use, it sounds as if weight and size are not an issue for you. A dedicated action camera such as the Nikon D500 or Canon 7D II might suit your requirements better.

I bought an E-M1 MkII on Thursday as it seems to be the best option for me. I looked at the Nikon and Canon offerings while I was in the store but they are much to big and heavy for me to use. They are not an option for me at all.

I haven't had a chance to use the MkII much yet and I am sure it is not set up properly at the moment. However, my first attempts at action shots were reasonably encouraging. I am sure they can be improved upon when I know what I am doing. However, perhaps I am not the most discerning of users and am easily pleased. As a new owner your post was not what I wanted to hear but, as I explained, there are not any viable alternatives for me. Your case is different though. If you are not happy with the camera, I would return it and try something else. As you say, you shouldn't have to work so hard to get it working for you.

Ron

[pdk42]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Unless I'm missing something, the AF setup on the mkii isn't really all that complicated. If we ignore Tracking mode (and most people seem to think that is a good idea), there really are only two C-AF things that can be fiddled with (ignoring basic stuff like focus point number and position):

- C-AF Lock - sets how quickly the C-AF will re-focus when it detects the subject moves from in-focus to out-of-focus. The setting is variable from -2 to +2. +2 is "loose" meaning that it'll refocus rapidly (i.e. loose lock on the subject). -2 is "tight" meaning that it'll wait a little while before refocusing (i.e. tight lock on the subject). I would guess that for BIF where there is little chance of foreground intervention and where you are confident of keeping the bird in the focus zone that +2 is probably the best option. I can see -2 being better for sports where the rate of change is lower and where people passing in front of the subject will happen more often.

- AF-Scanner - sets how aggressively the AF runs and re-runs if it can't find focus. Seems from my testing that it only really makes any difference in extremely low lighting levels. I doubt it makes much difference to BIF.

So - I don't think that Tord's issues are to do with camera setup. In fact, my best guess is that there's some sort of lens issue. From my experience with both the 12-100 and 300 f4 the AF is pretty accurate most of the time, even for CAF on moving subjects.

Interestingly, my 50-200 (non SWD) is much worse than either of these lenses and pretty often misses focus.

[Bengeo]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Tord,

Did you see Mike's comment here: http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showpost...1&postcount=29

He makes an important point about the fps setting which is different from the Mark I.

[Ross the fiddler]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Camera and lens were updated with the latest FW since the first day.

Next I did a full camera reset, and gave it a last try this afternoon, a few hundred more frames. Still, zero(!) subjects in focus, the camera failed even in the easiest situations. Strange since the acquisition feels snappy and the camera seems to re-acquire focus when lost, even is background is somewhat busy (easiest with 5 AF points). However, there is an OOF issue.

It that seems many of you are happy with the C-AF performance, so my conclusion is that this copy of the camera is a piece of rubbish (sorry for being harsh but that is exactly how I feel). Product was new when I started testing it in case you wonder. How could it have passed the quality check?

When you review the images in camera, thumbnail size, it will show where the AF point is located. Are those AF points showing where you intended?

[GyRob]

Re: C-AF disappointing

The focus square is a lot bigger than indicated and a little movement such as pressing the shutter can make the camera grab onto something even though the center of the green square is right on the subject .
Canon is similar that is why they let you be able to make the focus square smaller for critical work .
Rob.

[GyRob]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Edit. by the way my test subject was a lamp post with writing on it about 50yds away also when I get new gear like the 300f4 I set a cereal box 50 to 60 ft away in the garden as its fine print and graphics clearly show sharpness in a real world test.

[Tordan58]

Re: C-AF disappointing

Hi Tord. In your original post you say that you have been trying the E-M1 Mark 2 this weekend. Does that mean that you haven't actually bought it at the moment? If that is the case, I think you should return it and try some of the alternatives to see how you get on with them. From the gear you already own and use, it sounds as if weight and size are not an issue for you. A dedicated action camera such as the Nikon D500 or Canon 7D II might suit your requirements better.

I bought an E-M1 MkII on Thursday as it seems to be the best option for me. I looked at the Nikon and Canon offerings while I was in the store but they are much to big and heavy for me to use. They are not an option for me at all.

I haven't had a chance to use the MkII much yet and I am sure it is not set up properly at the moment. However, my first attempts at action shots were reasonably encouraging. I am sure they can be improved upon when I know what I am doing. However, perhaps I am not the most discerning of users and am easily pleased. As a new owner your post was not what I wanted to hear but, as I explained, there are not any viable alternatives for me. Your case is different though. If you are not happy with the camera, I would return it and try something else. As you say, you shouldn't have to work so hard to get it working for you.

Ron

Hi Ron
I was intending to buy the Mark II and before doing so got the opportunity to test a copy from my local dealer as, I am a loyal returning customer. That copy was brand new and intended to be used for display and demo purpose afterwards. Returned the copy this morning explained what happened, no obligation. Have contacted Olymupus support who have offered to inspect the samples to see what has gone wrong.

Will keep you updated.

[Tordan58]

Re: C-AF disappointing

"H fps (from 8 to max)"

My understanding is that for C-AF on the mkii you have to have L fps set. In high only the first frame is focussed. Still does not explain the oof flower though.

If that was correct then at least some of the first frames would have been in focus. I got zero (sic) frames in focus, out of 500+.

[TonyR]

Re: C-AF disappointing

If that was correct then at least some of the first frames would have been in focus. I got zero (sic) frames in focus, out of 500+.

No, I don't think so. If Rls Priority-C was set to the default On, then the camera starts shooting before focus is achieved. So, if you were using Sequnetial-H mode, your results are as I would expect. You must use Sequential-L to get C-AF with burst shooting.

It can do this: