Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Monday 13th February 2017, 23:01   #1
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
 
Binoseeker's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 521
FT-lenses on E-M1 Mk II

According to this site FT lenses should work on E-M1 Mk II:

http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...ark_ii_review/


Focusing is one area where the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II offers a clear improvement over the original E-M1. The on-sensor phase-detection system has been completely overhauled and now includes 121 cross-type AF points covering almost the entire frame, rather than the E-M1's 37 phase-detection points, which enables better continuous AF performance especially with low-contrast subjects in low-contrast light, as well as fast focusing with “regular” Four Thirds lenses, mounted via an adapter. Low-light auto focus continues to be excellent – the system managed to focus down to -2EV (as long as there was something to focus on) even without the use of the focus assist lamp. This is seriously low light, about the same as a landscape lit only by moonlight and nothing else.

Anyone tried this in practice?

Anders
Binoseeker is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 16th February 2017, 07:14   #2
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
I have seen that too. From what I have heard the adapted Canon lenses (Metabones) focus about the same speed as FT lenses, though that is hard to compare.
By the way, the searching speed of my new 400/5.6 is the same with v2.1 and v2.6, 1.9 seconds from infinity to 3.5meters and back. Going to try 2.6 now for a while with the new lens.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th February 2017, 10:31   #3
Adey Baker
Member
 
Adey Baker's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hinckley, Leics
Posts: 4,920
Haven't got MkII or FT lenses myself but over on our sister website, World Photography Forum, one member has the 300mm F2.8 which he has used with the MkI (with presumably the Oly dedicated adapter) and has found improved results on his first outing with the MkII. Not sure whether this link will open the photo if you're not a member:http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...hp?photo=77669
Adey Baker is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 17th February 2017, 23:02   #4
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
 
Binoseeker's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 521
I tried the FT lens Olympus Digital 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 ED, with Panasonic adapter DMW-MA1, on the E-M1 Mk II today. It didn´t work great at all...as bad as on the Mk I. Maybe it will work better with the Olympus FT-MFT adapter.
Binoseeker is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 18th February 2017, 18:36   #5
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
I will be trying a Canon 400/5.6 and an Oly 50-200 (+ EC-14, MMF-3) on a Mark II tomorrow. Will report....
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 19th February 2017, 19:25   #6
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
 
Binoseeker's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 521
Dan, maybe there is a certain setting in the MkII to be used with FT-lenses?
I didn´t have time to check the meny in detail.
Binoseeker is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 20th February 2017, 07:36   #7
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
No setting. The AF systems for FT and mFT lenses work entirely differently. If you can read German, there is a very good explanation here:
http://pen-and-tell.blogspot.co.at/2...r-neue-af.html

I couldn't resist... bought it.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 20th February 2017, 17:02   #8
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
 
Binoseeker's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 521
I would like one too :-)
The mk ll would have been much more environmentally friendly if FT-lenses could have been used with good performance. Maybe in the next firmware update.....ok i will check out that URL when i get home.
Binoseeker is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 20th February 2017, 17:53   #9
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
I expect there to be improvements there. The E-M1 Mark I is not the same camera now as it was when I bought it three years ago. It is amazing how much it improved with firmware updates.
In good light, I see little difference between the two with my FT lenses. When the light gets bad, the Mark I does better than the II. But my mFT 75-300 is a rocket on the Mark II. The searching speed of the Canon is about the same on both, but it locks on much quicker with the Mark II. BiF is no comparison. The 121 cross type AF points are a big help there.
The problem with FT lenses is that they only use the phase detect cross type sensors, and they have less actual area than the contrast detect AF squares. The new mFT lenses take advantage of both systems at the same time.
The focus accuracy with the 400 and the Oly FT lenses is bang on every time on the test chart.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 20th February 2017, 22:18   #10
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
 
Binoseeker's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 521
I thougt the AF intelligence was only in the camera, which then just commanded the AF motor in the lens to focus.... well, if they have put some AF intelligence in the lens also, then I understand there is issues making FT lenses work good on mFT cameras.....

Here is some info from wiki:
Contrast detection places different constraints on lens design when compared with phase detection. While phase detection requires the lens to move its focus point quickly and directly to a new position, contrast detection autofocus instead employs lenses which can quickly sweep through the focal range, stopping precisely at the point where maximum contrast is detected. This means that lenses designed for phase detection often perform poorly on camera bodies which use contrast detection.

Last edited by Binoseeker : Monday 20th February 2017 at 22:54.
Binoseeker is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 20th February 2017, 23:28   #11
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portsmouth, Dominica
Posts: 20,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Binoseeker View Post
I thougt the AF intelligence was only in the camera, which then just commanded the AF motor in the lens to focus.... well, if they have put some AF intelligence in the lens also, then I understand there is issues making FT lenses work good on mFT cameras.....

Here is some info from wiki:
Contrast detection places different constraints on lens design when compared with phase detection. While phase detection requires the lens to move its focus point quickly and directly to a new position, contrast detection autofocus instead employs lenses which can quickly sweep through the focal range, stopping precisely at the point where maximum contrast is detected. This means that lenses designed for phase detection often perform poorly on camera bodies which use contrast detection.
Another version I have seen is that the moving lens elements of a lens designed for contrast detection has to be light to allow the back-and-forth optimization of focus inherent in contrast detection. That would not be true for the FT lenses. Even with phase detection, such lower mass lens elements could be expected to react faster?

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 21st February 2017, 07:45   #12
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
 
Binoseeker's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 521
The E-M1 mk I has 37 phase detection points, the older FT camera E3 had only 11....
Binoseeker is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 21st February 2017, 08:41   #13
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
Both true.
The brilliance of the new lenses with the Mark II is the way whey use both systems simultaneously. Best of both worlds: speed AND accuracy.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 21st February 2017, 17:11   #14
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
There are so many wonderful things about this camera, and I am just getting started. Today I figured out how to set and use the focus limiter, a great help with "slow" lenses, like the Canon/Metabones. I have set three ranges, 8m-infinity, 15m-infinity, and 3-10m. For my BiF custom set, for instance, I have it set to 15-inf, default is on, so if I see something coming, chances are it will be within this range, and all I have to do is quick turn the dial to C3 go. It cuts the searching time down a LOT.
The three ranges can be selected by holding the on-off button (I have it set to the dof preview button) and turning a dial. Works very well and I don't have to fumble around for the switch on the lens under the lens coat. Besides, it is either 3.5m-inf or 8m-inf, so now I have 4 ranges rather than just two. Brilliant.
The ONE thing I am not happy with is that it is more difficult to pinpoint focus, like on a birds eye in the branches. The Mark I is still better there. The single AF point is a little too big, and the bummer is that with lenses that only use phase detect, the box is not as selective as on the Mark I. On the Mark I, the focus is on exactly what is within the box, on the II the area covered is a good bit larger than the box. Let's hope for a solution to this!
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th March 2017, 15:22   #15
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 819
I tried out Mark II this Saturday in a London park, and had the same problem with a bird hidden behind branches (admittedly, it was a LOT of branches). I ended up using manual focus. Focus peaking helps a lot.
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th March 2017, 17:59   #16
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
I find that using MF to help the AF works pretty well. The camera "thinks" maybe too much. It wants to tell us what we want in focus, so if we get nearer to what WE want, it cooperates a bit more. My bet is that the Oly pro lenses, like the 300/4, will be very selective as they use both PDAF and CDAF.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th March 2017, 18:06   #17
katastrofa
Registered User
 
katastrofa's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 819
So if I use MF to bring the focus close to the bird, and then switch to AF and half-press the shutter, it should be easier to focus on the bird?
katastrofa is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 13th March 2017, 19:17   #18
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
That is what I have always done. With FT lenses I always used S-AF/MF, and with the Canon I just use S-AF as the manual focus is mechanical and not focus by wire. It is easy to become too dependent on AF, but fact is, no camera can think for you. The camera sees all those nice high contrast branch edges and thinks the fuzzy LBJ is just uninteresting background. Here are a few test shots from when I was learning how to use the Metabones/Canon:
Click image for larger version

Name:	22316878363_77a450afa9_b.jpg
Views:	16
Size:	141.4 KB
ID:	618470 Click image for larger version

Name:	22949145421_813081d3ac_b.jpg
Views:	13
Size:	170.9 KB
ID:	618472 Click image for larger version

Name:	23453253540_1f65b66a91_b.jpg
Views:	15
Size:	137.2 KB
ID:	618471
I was able to put the focus box right on the bird, avoiding the branches, and it locked on fine. If I try it with the Mark II, chances are it will jump foreward and lock onto the branches. So the only thing to do is try and get it more or less in focus and the camera finds the bird attractive after all and locks on. I need to practice it more, but there aren't many LBJs around yet. Too early...
Slight advantage there for the Mark I. Where the Mark II excells though is with BiF.

Last edited by DanC.Licks : Monday 13th March 2017 at 19:20.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 13th March 2017, 20:09   #19
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portsmouth, Dominica
Posts: 20,189
For comparison, using an older panasonic camera I have mostly gone the opposite way: use AF to get close and then MF to move from the branch to the bird. The Camera has a setting so that I half-press for the AF, and turn the MF wheel on the lens while holding the half-press to do the rest.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 14th March 2017, 07:14   #20
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
Niels,
I do that too sometimes. Depends on the situation. At any rate, combining AF with MF is faster and can be more selective. I don't really think about it much. I have used MF so much over the years that I instinctvely have my fingers on the focus ring all the time. It works great with the Canon 400 as I rest the lens foot in the palm of my hand and the focus ring is right under my finger tips. Only thing is I keep forgetting which way to turn the ring!
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 14th March 2017, 14:27   #21
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
Follow up to the selective focusing behavior.
I did some testing with both the Mark I (not yet sold) and the Mark II: Three AAA batteries with clear lettering and bright colors, two in front and one behind. The two in front were set just far enough apart so that the single focusing box (small sized on the Mark I) fit in between. All three batteries were well lit and set in the same position with the same lettering etc. facing the camera. I tested both my 50-200 and my Canon 400.
In such a scenario, there was no trouble with the Mark II because it saw no difference between the battery in the back and the front two. Both cameras locked on the same way. But when I replaced the rear battery with a small red plastic bottle with far less detail (practically none), the Mark II would refuse to stay focused on it and would always jump forward and lock onto the batteries. The Mark I did better, not 100%, but better for sure.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 14th March 2017, 14:54   #22
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portsmouth, Dominica
Posts: 20,189
Interesting. For completeness and to test your theory of why, what happens if you increase the distance between the front batteries with 50% or 100%?

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 14th March 2017, 19:39   #23
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
It doesn't seem to matter. Tried it. It just seems to be a mater of the detail of the subject.
Here is with the back battery about 20cm behind the front two, with the Olympus 50-200 at 200 on my Mark II. I have added the box to show roughly where it was placed. Unfortunately you can't show the focus point in any program other than PhotoMe and the thumbnail is too small and can't be copied out.
These should be self explanatory. Notice though, how the box even overlaps the front batteries and still locks onto the back one, but it has to be well centered with the vertical of the cross on the rear battery. Remember that the cross does not fill the box. Here in blue:
Click image for larger version

Name:	EM125908b.jpg
Views:	13
Size:	48.3 KB
ID:	618594
CDAF takes in everything in the box and looks for contrast edges. The PDAF only uses the what is under the cross for its calculations. With FT and adapted lenses we only have PDAF.
Click image for larger version

Name:	EM125908a.jpg
Views:	11
Size:	47.8 KB
ID:	618600 Click image for larger version

Name:	EM125909a.jpg
Views:	11
Size:	55.9 KB
ID:	618603
Here with the red bottle (red is always difficult for AF systems) it refuses unless I get the cross off of the batteries
Click image for larger version

Name:	EM125912a.jpg
Views:	12
Size:	57.4 KB
ID:	618601 Click image for larger version

Name:	EM125911a.jpg
Views:	12
Size:	47.6 KB
ID:	618602

Last edited by DanC.Licks : Tuesday 14th March 2017 at 19:49.
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 14th March 2017, 19:42   #24
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
 
DanC.Licks's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,713
If I move the front batteries far enough apart that the cross does not overlap at all, it will nail the bottle. A little overlap and it jumps to the battery even though the vertical of the cross is still on the bottle.
Click image for larger version

Name:	EM125913a.jpg
Views:	13
Size:	51.1 KB
ID:	618604 Click image for larger version

Name:	EM125914a.jpg
Views:	14
Size:	59.8 KB
ID:	618605
DanC.Licks is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 14th March 2017, 20:46   #25
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portsmouth, Dominica
Posts: 20,189
It may be the level of detail or it may be a built in assumption that usually people are trying to take images of the things that are closer rather than the more distant items.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Three EF 24-70 f2.8 L lenses are enough! Cashie Canon 7 Saturday 13th August 2011 09:42
BIF with BIG lenses swainsons Nikon 14 Friday 18th February 2011 06:37
Lenses for EOS 30D Daveash Canon 1 Monday 22nd October 2007 22:03
Anyone tried one of these lenses? Claymore Cameras And Photography 0 Saturday 30th December 2006 16:07
lenses birdbloke Canon 1 Monday 11th December 2006 21:58

{googleads}
£100 Cashback on Opticron DBA VHD Binoculars. Click to find out more.

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.24779797 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:03.