Upload & Sell: Off
Jonas B wrote:
Just did a quickie and judged the result by reviewing the images at 7 and 10x enlargement using the camera's viewfinder. E-M5, tripod, IBIS on, 12/2, f2, 5m, ISO200, AF first at 1/8s and then 1/2s, in both cases followed by a manually focused comparison shot. I got the same result as in my post above - virtually identical and in focus images in all four cases.
Again, these results are from one single try only.
I think there are several important differences between your test and my OOF shots. First of all, it's possible that ISO 200 works better since there is lower noise (but of course also lower signal). Your shutter speeds also indicate that light was much stronger, since I'm down at 1/4-1/8 or so at ISO 1600 and f/2. That's really dark. Thirdly, shooting off a tripod makes the camera stable when focusing, which could also improve performance.
Edit: I don't mind that the camera can't focus properly under those conditions, but then I want to know that before tripping the shutter so that I can choose to use MF instead. And even then, MF is worthless with the 12/2 because of only a few discrete distances to choose between. The scale is also way off and the 1 meter mark is more like 5 meters IRL.
If you want to get something close to what I got, try shooting handheld outdoors under street lights and nothing more.
I was of course just kidding (maybe ) but what's this? I'm looking to get the OM-D and shoot only MF so clue me in brother. What's the deal, something systemic with the OM-D?
The problem is the same for all similar cameras. You can't focus AND compose at the same time, which ruins the photographic experience for me. Technically, the OM-D is very good because you can use IBIS while focusing with the magnified view.
Further more, the sensor is too small to give decent results with old FF glass in my opinon. I just don't see the benefints over using an APS-C camera or modern AF lenses. All of the MFT glass I have outperforms even super expensive Leica M lenses on the OM-D.