Upload & Sell: Off
| p.7 #1 · Just announced: Canon Rebel SL1, T5i & Powershot SX-280 |
Sven Jeppesen wrote:
But how many people here never shot a moving subject? Or never shot with a tele lens?
Nearly all people take photos of family, children, pets and so on that moves.
m43 has plenty of telephoto lenses. Just not wide aperture L-quality ones. So if I'm going to shoot Billy at the soccer game with a consumer zoom there really is no difference between the m43 offerings and the Canon offerings. Now, if I'm going to do BIF or shoot sports for a living well then heck yes even the best mirrorless CDAF is the wrong answer. If you want a wide aperture telephoto zoom or any telephoto prime stick with DSLRs. But if your question is how many people here don't shoot with those you'll find the answer is a whole lot. Most folks are out there with a 55-200 or maybe the 75-300 at best and those lenses are in the same class as the m43 telephoto offerings.
As to moving subjects you need to be more specific. Moving as in a sprinter charging the camera is one thing. Your kid or dog running around the room or yard is another. Having shot both I actually now find m43 to be much better for shallow DoF shooting of kids. As much as I've personally mocked face-detect over the years now for shallow DoF I'm finding face detect AF on the E-M5 to have a way higher keeper rate than any PDAF C-AF system. The E-M5 system detects the eyes and you can even select for left, right or closest eye for focus. It seems like a gimmick until you use it compared to a PDAF system with fixed AF sensors. Of course a skilled shooter with either system is going to do way better than a spray and pray shooter on either.
Right now the CDAF systems on the m43 cameras are faster in S-AF than all the Canon DSLRs and their kit lenses and even trumping some of the USM L lenses simply because everything is up against the mass of the focus group these days and the m43 lenses are designed with very low mass groups (like the STM lenses from Canon are doing). Which is shocking given how wickedly bad CDAF was in the not very distant past. The m43 C-AF tracking works comparably to entry level PDAF when subjects are moving mostly transverse to the camera. It falls apart when the subject charges the camera. That's what you miss with CDAF. And burst shooting of moving subjects as well, OVF+PDAF handles tracking focus during burst shooting vastly better. I don't run into the shooting situation very often myself but it is definitely still the handicap of CDAF. Oh, and don't even get me started on front/back focus issues with the entry level DSLRs and a shallow-DOF lens. That is one thing mirrorless has completely made a worry of the past. Maybe the newer Rebel's are better but that was a constant problem when I shot with them. In that realm my Rebel's were pretty much always wrong, fast or slow it didn't matter, just wrong.
Anywho - I digress into what is at this point probably an irrelevant discussion. I don't think the relative merits of the two systems are the subject here. My larger point was no one should kid themselves in thinking the 100D challenges the size of the mirrorless systems. It is still too big, especially with lenses. Beyond that all the same pros and cons of each system are the same as they always were.