I would doubt it very much. Nikon and Canon have been doing this a very long time. It will take Sony, Fuji and Olympus a few more years to get to where these guys are right now.
Wilbus wrote:
Nothing to do with the E-M1 Mk II but found this video about BIF and Nikon D500, that is some serious impressive AF. Can the E-M1 come close do you think?
Worth watching even if you're not interested in the camera (I am not)
Not a deal breaker to me but not sure why they removed a function like this, specially since it's Olympus where you can customize more things than you'd normally really want to. I didn't use it much, part from focus peaking hack on the E-M5. I suspect 3xCustom settings on the mode dial should take care of MOST needs though but I guess time will tell
Not for me, either. It's far down my list of priorities. Even so, it's mildly disappointing. Instant switching via buttons was innovative; the C sets are imitative. J.T. Kirk might say that feature timidly goes where many have gone before. But I agree, it will probably take care of most needs. My main wish right now is that there is no delay in how soon time will tell.
Agreed, mildly disappointing indeed! Not sure I am gonna need it though, I don't use it on mu E-M1, I only used on the E-M5 but I can clearly see how some may use it!
On another note, found this short info as well with two movies showing the autofocus in work. Not much to be see, you can't make out much of it but interesting non the less. Looks to be very very (almost silly) fast to review the photos on the camera display though.
I don't think we'll really see if Olympus' AF improvements claims are accurate until the production versions are in the wild for reviews. I just read a German "review" where he was using the AFC settings to shoot a soccer match with mixed results, partially due to his own admitted errors. However, in the comments section in response to questions he also says it was a preproduction firmware and not all the AF modes were available.
ELinder, I believe you are correct. It will take some time with real life scenarios to determine wether it is actually OK or even good. While it will probably not reach that of a good DSLR it will hopefully be useful compared to that of the mark I.
Still, this also gets me thinking. Olympus has obviously priced the Mk II very aggressively (in a negative term).
It's closest competitor is the Fuji X-T2, they are quite similar on the paper regarding performance part from 60fps RAW with the Olympus and of course some other Olympus and Fuji oriented stuff. The Fuji is also some 300 bucks cheaper.
The other closest competitor is the Nikon D500. Priced exactly the same at the moment (at least in Sweden). Now, one could go and say the E-M1 Mk II is faster and allows for fast continues AF at 18fps, but let's be honest, I think we all rather want 10 frames a second with a high hit rate then 18 frames a second with a lot hit rate. Of course, we still don't know how it will perform but I can't help think that Olympus, with the pricing and their claims REALLY HAVE TO back it up with real life performance, specially at that price point, otherwise, what would be the point of upgrading from a MK I?
Don't get me wrong, I love my Olympus gear, E-M1, E-M5, Oly 12-40 and 40-150 PRO with tele converter, Oly 45mm and Panasonic 25mm F1.4. While not as invested as say Bobbytan I am still quite heavily invested in the system and thus would love for the Mk II to really perform but again, continues AF is what will make or break this camera if they keep the price where it is.
Compared to the Mk I, although it of course has got lots of advantages, the picture quality isn't all that much better. It's got a slight increase in pixels yes but 16mp is plenty as proven many times. More over they can't cheat physics which means they can't be leaps and bounds ahead of anyone else or even them selves with the size of sensor. The Mk I is plenty fast for everything that doesn't require tracking AF and the Mk II is silly fast for locked AF and exposure as well but let's face it, how many of us would actually have a use for 60 frames per second with locked AF?
Yes one could still claim the size advantage but again, the difference isn't all that great anymore when compared to a DSLR (depending on which one you choose). Also, DLSR manufactures have realized the importance of creating high quality lenses with slower apertures and smaller sizes rather then going full out and only creating high speed lenses. A crop DSLR with a slower lens can go toe to toe with a faster lens a m43 sensor when it comes to action, probably as some extra weight and size though.
Anyhow, it will be very interesting to see what happens and how it performs! I wish and hope it will perform great! (and I need to start saving for it).
Imagemaster wrote:
But where the hell are the BIF stills of smaller birds, or action shots of sports?
Maybe Olympus wanted the preorders first by having bloggers blogging about the camera. Once they get some much needed cash, will hire some Pro shooters?
Yes C & N have been sitting on their laurels for a while now with their DSLR phase detect., whereas Olympus, Panasonic & Sony have been pushing new technology that they probably have barely touched. From the few reports coming through of people using the E-M1 MkII for action and BIF it is proving to be very competitive with current DSLRs. Unfortunately the marketing people have chosen prominent bloggers rather than action/sport photographers to get the initial introduction sessions.
And as anyone who does action shooting knows, it depends on a skilled photographer familiar with the equipment to get the best results. Hopefully we will see that happening when the camera finally gets into the public's hands in December.
Wilbus wrote:
The argument that larger sensors should be more expensive is mostly mute these days (if you take medium format and larger out of the equation). The sensors them selves don't seem to be the big cost for the developers anymore. There are several low specification, 36x24mm sensor cameras around (Sony A7, Nikon D600/610 etc). Those cameras don't come near the EM-1 Mk I or II in any other specs though part from the DSLR's tracking performance, and that gap has hopefully been narrowed now. It's still to be proven but Robin Wong's review of the E-M1 had some pretty decent tracking shots of motorcycle racing. The Fujifilm X-T2 also fairs pretty good in this respect it would seem from different reviews so I think we've finally reached a point where mirrorless cameras, although not as good as the top pro DSLR's (canon 1 series and Nikon D5) they at least should be able to server most people well enough.
The cost now comes from all things mixed together, not the least build quality, speed, memory, processing units in the camera. Olympus said the E-M1 Mk II has got two CPU's, one for the general performance and one for the AF system. That alone brings up the cost.
I too find the price to be a bit too steep, I can't afford it at the moment so I have no option but to wait. Olympus has however gone out on a limb I think. I do believe the price will set many people off. Those of us already invested in some PRO and or expensive lenses for the system may very well look the Mk II but I think that many people looking at this price range for a new system will most likely still go the safe route of a more common make such as the Nikon D500 (which, btw, is most likely the most capable sports and wild life camera around).
The D500 and E-M1 Mk.II are the EXACT same price in Sweden and I'd say those are two cameras that should be put in the same territory as far as specs go and what you may want to use them for. ...Show more →
Bad news if people think the new GH 5 will be any cheaper - according to news at preview ... if you want performance it's going to cost!
I never expected the GH5 to be cheaper actually. If I recall correct wasn't the GH4 always a bit more expensive compared to the E-M1? I may very well be wrong but it feels as if it was, and that is held its price for a longer time as well. It's still 1300 USD in Sweden actually.
As far as action shots, couldn't agree more Wolfie. I my self suck at it but wish to get better but even with my Nikon D700 which had the same AF as the D3 I never could get very good results, I only tried a few times though but that is proof enough that a good camera with a bad operator will yield poor results.
Like I said at mu4/3.com, these guys are snapshot shooters at best, why anyone would take any of these guys seriously is a mistery to me. They are just salesmen.
When we get to hear the opinions of sport shooters or birders, THEN we will know what the new camera is capable of with its AFC/tracking.
Olympus probably hasn't allowed any earlier "reviews" by dedicated sports/action people on purpose because the firmware wasn't final. A number of people have even said not all the AF modes were available on the preproduction units they used.
