Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Olympus digital Pen E-P1  (Read 23682 times)
DaveLon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124



« Reply #20 on: June 19, 2009, 10:53:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: dalethorn
The lightning-quick autofocus of the Pana G1 is only so when it gets focus, and only half the time then, which requires good light in any case.  I read the reviews, and think it's way overrated.  Based on the specs and preliminary tests of the Olympus, I'd suggest buyers consider that manual focus may be required a lot more often than what the reviewers are saying.

Interesting you have a 50% miss. On a recent trip, I took some 600 shots in various lighting conditions and had 35 out of focus shots at the end.

Dave S
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #21 on: June 19, 2009, 03:06:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: 250swb
As the DPR preview says, the AF speed is slow because they haven't got the final firmware. It should be no slower than the same contrast detect AF of the Panasonic G1, which is lightning quick. As for MF, you would do it with the focus ring, and you can also call up a magnified image to help with critical work.

Steve

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?fo...essage=32185405

They have the final firmware.  It is still slow.

FYI
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #22 on: June 19, 2009, 06:14:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: DaveLon
Interesting you have a 50% miss. On a recent trip, I took some 600 shots in various lighting conditions and had 35 out of focus shots at the end.
Dave S

I can shoot certain genres with a 95 percent or better hit rate, but some are so bad the camera won't autofocus, period.  It's just that the genres I do have all the problems with are so common, I'm surprised more people haven't fessed up.  Probably most of them are afraid they'd look bad if they did.
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2009, 08:27:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Tonight's mostly failures at the heron site reminded me of Panasonic's own reticence about auto-focus on the G1.  They have a default setting in a non-obvious place (not on the menu) that prevents the shutter operating at all if the camera thinks it's not in focus.  So for the first three weeks I had the G1, I was getting really aggravated by the shutter not operating.  After figuring that out and disabling it, the shutter operates all the time now, but with bad photos.

The settings on today's shoot were mostly f5.6 @ 1/250 to 1/320, ISO 100, and with Panasonic's very good IS, that's plenty good for sharp photos for most people, and good enough for me with other Panasonic cameras.  So movement blur from handholding was not the problem.  And BTW, focus on most shots, in reduced daylight about 45 minutes before sunset, took about 4 to 5 seconds.  Not exactly "lightning fast".

So why won't the G1 focus?  On some shots I could guess that panning a flying bird, large and slow, might be a problem for the IS at the normal setting.  But the same problem occurs when not panning, so that seems to be a small factor.
Logged
250swb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #24 on: June 20, 2009, 06:57:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: DarkPenguin
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?fo...essage=32185405

They have the final firmware.  It is still slow.

FYI

Well I've read through the DPR preview again, and I may have missed it, but the only place I can see about slow AF is when using regular 4/3rds lenses.  Are we sure the 'slow AF' rumour isn't mis-representing the dedicated m4/3 lenses?

Steve
Logged

DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #25 on: June 20, 2009, 09:19:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: 250swb
Well I've read through the DPR preview again, and I may have missed it, but the only place I can see about slow AF is when using regular 4/3rds lenses.  Are we sure the 'slow AF' rumour isn't mis-representing the dedicated m4/3 lenses?

Steve

I'm sure it's great.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2009, 09:19:46 AM by DarkPenguin » Logged
250swb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #26 on: June 22, 2009, 03:24:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: DarkPenguin
I'm sure it's great.

Penguin, I'm sure it will be fine as well, but there are so many myths that people are happy to conflate about the 4/3 system it is difficult to know where clarity starts and over zealousness ends.

Dale, just a thought about your 50% focus failure. The focus on my G1 failed today when I was trying to make a photograph while still holding on to the dogs lead. Fingers and thumbs everywhere. At first I couldn't think what was wrong, then realised I was pressing on the lens release button, which on 4/3 cameras is a switch. Accidentally press it in and communication with the lens stops. It is why people shouldn't keep it pressed in when mounting a lens, because the lens doesn't snap into place and can go a fraction beyond the stop and exhibit the same AF problem. I know you are an experienced photographer and this may not be the cause, I just add it FWIW.


Steve

Logged

dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #27 on: June 22, 2009, 04:27:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: 250swb
Dale, just a thought about your 50% focus failure. The focus on my G1 failed today when I was trying to make a photograph while still holding on to the dogs lead. Fingers and thumbs everywhere. At first I couldn't think what was wrong, then realised I was pressing on the lens release button, which on 4/3 cameras is a switch. Accidentally press it in and communication with the lens stops. It is why people shouldn't keep it pressed in when mounting a lens, because the lens doesn't snap into place and can go a fraction beyond the stop and exhibit the same AF problem. I know you are an experienced photographer and this may not be the cause, I just add it FWIW.
Steve

They really warn you about that - no chance of missing that.  It's still pretty clear watching the focus attempts through the viewfinder that the camera can't deal with even moderately low light with the 45-200 lens at maximum zoom.  The FZ-50 P&S was no better at this, but the implications in the reviews, that the G1 would be a *lot* better than other contrast-focus cameras, were obviously directed at some other kind of camera, not the FZ-50 P&S variety.

The possible good news here is that people wanting the Olympus for the smaller body size will also be wanting a smaller lens, which will probably do a much better job of focusing than the Panasonic 45-200.
Logged
Nick Rains
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 700



WWW
« Reply #28 on: June 22, 2009, 05:12:32 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a meeting with the Olympus people on Friday to go over the new camera - I'll have a look at the autofocus speed.
Logged

Nick Rains
Australian Landscape Photographer
www.nickrains.com
iPad Publishing
www.photique.com.au
situgrrl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 342


WWW
« Reply #29 on: June 22, 2009, 05:23:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Nick - would be good to know about composing through the external vf and focussing on the screen and also about any focus scales/stops/other things those of us hoping for a baby leica would want.  Alternatively, it would be good to know how Olympus suggest we use the gear in street/documentary situations.
Logged

stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1065


« Reply #30 on: June 22, 2009, 11:29:13 PM »
ReplyReply

i would like to think that Olympus thought about using the camera in street and documentary situations, but it seems from the preliminary reviews that size and style trumped substance - another missed opportunity.

i'm still optimistic that something useful will get here one day -- just not as soon as i hoped
Logged
Deep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #31 on: June 23, 2009, 01:57:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: stever
i would like to think that Olympus thought about using the camera in street and documentary situations, but it seems from the preliminary reviews that size and style trumped substance - another missed opportunity.

i'm still optimistic that something useful will get here one day -- just not as soon as i hoped

Something useful?  When you need a good SLR body and virtually any lens you like, it's already here.  When you want that sort of picture quality and size is a problem, the E-P1 adds something useful we never had before.  It's a none compromise solution, true, and I am sure compromises will come but this is the best place to start for me.

Don.
Logged

Don
MarkL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


« Reply #32 on: June 23, 2009, 06:27:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Does anyone know if you can manually focus it? If I can't zone focus it, it is next to useless to me as a street camera!
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #33 on: June 23, 2009, 06:53:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MarkL
Does anyone know if you can manually focus it? If I can't zone focus it, it is next to useless to me as a street camera!

Of course you can manually focus, and then, a specific focus would work the same more or less as an equivalent film camera, but outside of that, I wouldn't trust zone focus on a digital camera like the Olympus to be as reliable as that of an equivalent film camera.
Logged
Jeremy Payne
Guest
« Reply #34 on: June 23, 2009, 07:11:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: dalethorn
I wouldn't trust zone focus on a digital camera like the Olympus to be as reliable as that of an equivalent film camera.
Why?  What does the capture medium have to do with zone focus?  Are you saying you expect the manual focus indicators to be inaccurate?  
Logged
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #35 on: June 23, 2009, 08:14:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Jeremy Payne
Why?  What does the capture medium have to do with zone focus?  Are you saying you expect the manual focus indicators to be inaccurate?

It's not intuitive, is it?  You would expect when you manually focus on (for example) a 20 feet distant object, then you would get the same effect as with a film camera.  I'm betting against that.  With a film camera, everything is physical, and as long as you don't bump the camera and lens, or change the focus, you'll know exactly where your zone of focus is at all times.  With digital, there are a plethora of things going on you're not aware of.  I tend to think of manual focus on digital cameras as "manually assisted electronic focus."  I've already experienced anomalies with the G1 - I can't wait to hear about the Olympus.
Logged
Deep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #36 on: June 23, 2009, 05:01:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MarkL
Does anyone know if you can manually focus it? If I can't zone focus it, it is next to useless to me as a street camera!
Actually it will be considerably better than a film camera for zone focusing.  One advantage of the four thirds format is that you shoot at half the focal length to give the same angle of view, giving a significantly greater depth of field at the same aperture/shutter speed.  This would translate to a much more forgiving experience.  Just look up what you can cover on a 17mm lens at, say, f8.  It's huge.

Of course we never looked at our film pictures gigantically enlarged on a computer screen, so shortcomings may seem more obvious with the digital format.  However, in print, the E-P1 will be much better in this respect.

Don
Logged

Don
dalethorn
Guest
« Reply #37 on: June 23, 2009, 10:33:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's an example of what I was talking about with the Pana G1 autofocus problem.  This is the original reduced in size, no cropping etc.  The bird was about 20 ft. from the camera, 45-200 lens at max. zoom (400 mm effective focal length), Panasonic "Mega OIS" setting #1, 1/160 second.  There may be a slight subject blur here, but no problem - the camera found the focus this time.

I attempted this shot about 10 times but could not get the camera to autofocus on the bird at all, until this one.  The sun was about one hour from setting, so the light was strong and the contrast is obvious.  My focus setting was the narrowest offered - Pana's G1 equivalent of spot focus.  It's interesting, though frustrating, to watch through the EVF while the camera hunts for focus and fails.  So you press the shutter halfway again, and watch another hunt-and-failure.  And on it goes.
Logged
MarkL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


« Reply #38 on: June 24, 2009, 07:01:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: dalethorn
Of course you can manually focus, and then, a specific focus would work the same more or less as an equivalent film camera, but outside of that, I wouldn't trust zone focus on a digital camera like the Olympus to be as reliable as that of an equivalent film camera.

Am I right in thinking the micro 4/3 lenses don't have any positive focus control / subject distance scale / DOF markings? This is going to make street use difficult.
Logged
Deep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #39 on: June 24, 2009, 08:11:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MarkL
Am I right in thinking the micro 4/3 lenses don't have any positive focus control / subject distance scale / DOF markings? This is going to make street use difficult.
Shouldn't matter too much.  Just focus manually on something at an appropriate distance, stop the lens down to give you an idea of your depth of field and carry on as you did before.  I appreciate the technique of hyperfocal distance is easier if you use a lens with a scale but few autofocus lenses give much detail on the barrel anyway.  As compensation, the increased depth of field the four thirds format offers will make it easier and compensate for slight errors.   I would bet that most people who shoot like this will adjust very quickly.

I note someone early doesn't trust zone focus on a digital camera but I don't get the difference.  You set the aperture and the focus manually and leave them alone, just the same.  I'm betting we start seeing a whole new style of street photography as new possibilities this format offers get discovered.
Logged

Don
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad