Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
OM-1: Let's talk about S-AF.
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 08. 2024
- S-AF in OM-1 is fast and accurate. In this video, I talk about how to use AF in OM-1. It works slightly differently than E-M1 Mark III.
Thomas Eisl's channel: / @thomaseisl.photography
⭐️📷 Personal View workshop: www.helsinkiphotoworkshops.fi
⭐️📷 1on1 sessions: www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
⭐️📷 Support my free content:
👉 Buy Me a Coffee: buymeacoff.ee/PeterForsgard
👉 paypal.me/peterforsgard
👉 Join my Facebook Group: / peterforsgardyoutube
My Channel membership is now open!
👉 Join: / @forsgardpeter
Get a Hoodie!
👉 peter-forsgard.creator-spring...
⏱Timestamps
00:00 Intro
00:14 Why I made this video?
02:01 Special guest Thomas Eisl
09:36 My comments
10:27 Solutions
12:09 My test results
14:07 OM-1 S-AF Speed vs. E-M1 Mark III
14:36 Conclusion
15:56 Subscribe to Thomas Eisl's channel
16:33 Watch Next
🎼Music and SFX from
www.epidemicsound.com
www.artlist.io
► Affiliate programs I am in:
► Cameras and Lenses:
👉 My Amazon Store: www.amazon.com/shop/peterfors...
👉 B&H Photo: bhpho.to/36rubIY
👉 Laowa lenses: www.venuslens.net/ref/602/
👉 Mitakon lenses: zyoptics.net/?ref=PeterF
► Filters:
👉 H&Y Filters: hyfilters.net/?ref=PeterF
► Software:
👉 Excire: excireeu.pxf.io/P069xe
👉 Excire Inc.: excireinc.pxf.io/AoXK6o
👉 Topaz Labs:topazlabs.com/ref/644/
👉 DxOLab: tidd.ly/3l31ho8
► Other:
👉 Smallrig DE: www.smallrig.com.de/?ref=da5F...
👉 Smallrig: www.smallrig.com?afmc=4a5
Getting something from these links supports my channel. I will get a small commission.
You do not pay anything extra. Win-win.
► Want to learn more about photography or use your Olympus or OM SYSTEM camera? I have coaching sessions available in my Webstore:
👉 www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
Disclaimer: I am an OM SYSTEM Ambassador. I make all my content with mirrorless OM SYSTEM and Olympus micro four-thirds gear.
Links to my Olympus gear (disclaimer: using these links when making purchases, you support this channel. You pay the same price, and I get a few bucks to finance this channel.)
📷 www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
👉 www.amazon.com/shop/peterfors...
► For Any professional inquiries, please email: peter@peterforsgard.com
Links to my accounts all around the web:
My portfolio: www.peterforsgard.com
My blog (eng): bit.ly/peterfblog
My Instagram: / jpeterf
My Olympus page: my.olympus-consumer.com/membe...
My Olympus gear: www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
My kit.co store: kit.co/PeterF
#Olympus #OMSystem #PeterForsgard
(Disclaimer: Some of the links above are affiliate links. Using these links when making purchases, you support this channel. You pay the same price, and I get a few bucks to finance this channel.)
Thanks for doing the test, or course we use the camera differently and we present different results. Good to have more data from various photographers.
What I am half mad at is the non-response from OM Digital Solutions.
Back in 2014, Ming Thein knocked on our door (I was an employee) about the shutter shock problem in the original E-M1. We presented it to Tokyo. We got a response immediately and said they were working on a solution. It came in firmware update few months later.
All cameras suffer from some kind of shutter shock, not just Olympus. Just like how everyone is saying now (all cameras struggles in low light). Many also said the E-M1 was so good, that the advantages (EVF, weather sealing, 5-Axis IS, improved image quality, fast focusing) outweighs the shutter shock problem.
But for Ming Thein, the problem was real. We did not take it lightly. We responded, and we came up with a solution. We did not do a "no response" reaction.
Ming Thein raised a valid complain (while a lot of others invalided his issue) and we got the first solution in the world for shutter shock problem. Which was the anti shock 0 sec (first curtain electronic shutter). Not even Sony or Canon had that solution until few years later. Olympus pushed and make great things happen, all from a "not so serious complain".
I sure wish the current OM Digital Solutions had the same tenacity and wisdom as Olympus did.
Agree with that: it's better to raise the difficulties than to ignore them or minimize them on principle, that makes progress.
I have had totally different experience. In my opinion OMDS is doing quite good. There was a problem with C-AF in video at the beginning. It was reported by a few users, me included. The official answer was the firmware updates. OM-1 has gotten four firmware updates in a year. Not sure that is all good, but OMDS is responding to problems quite quickly. They have also launch new products. OMDS is still kinda of a startup, we have to remember that. They also have had a huge transformation from Olympus. It has been a massive workload.
We will see how the respond. On the other i think the S-AF works as it meant to. It is a lot faster in many situations.
@@ForsgardPeter I was referring to you asking for an official response from OM Digital Solutions, and you specifically mentioned you did not hear anything from them. It should not take too long for them to have an answer. Something like "we shall look into it and if there is a problem, we will fix it" would suffice. The silence from their part, to a direct question from their own ambassador, was not something I expect, certainly not my experience with previous Olympus.
Robin, I think you are a bit harsh lately when it comes to OM System.
Regarding the points you brought up - before you published the video it was a non-issue. In my opinion, it still is a non-issue as it is a techncial decision: As you know for sure how contrast detection calculations work - you can either have precision or high confirmation, not both. It is mathematically not possible and has to do with the area you are using for calculating the contrast.
So many (including myself) would actually prefer the algorithm to stay like it is.
OMDS have to consider all these things now before doing anything in prematurely - they cannot follow every suggestion on the internet blindly.
I am sure that it took Olympus longer than 5 days to come out with the EFCS / anti shock - which was btw a real undebatable issue that many photographers not only MThein knew about (e.g. in the E-P5 as well, as you know for sure).
Maybe you can shoot with a different camera instead if you don't like the OM-1 and it's performance. Just like me, you are not tied to the company so you do not have to use their products if you don't like them.
@@ThomasEisl.Photography
It took us less than 2 hours to come up with an official reply to Ming Thein.
Which Peter did not receive in 5 days. Big difference here.
I have a lot of respect for you and your knowledge. But you lost it there when you suggested "I use a different camera". That was harsh, and uncalled for. I reported a valid problem and I have proven it. You can choose to ignore it or say it is a non issue for you. But to brush me aside and invalidate my claims and you having the audacity to ask me to give up OM-1, a flagship from OM system, that is just plain unnecessary.
I pointed out an issue, reported it with evidence. If you want to see more than that, and assert your own opinion, that's up to you. As for me I don't hate the camera or OM System. As reported by about 100 and more people now the poor AF in low contrast and low light for OM-1 does affect our photography. So are you saying ALL of us should just give up on OM-1? That is absurd!
I have nothing against you, and I want to believe you, but asking me to get rid of my OM-1 shows that you may have some personal issues with me somewhere and sorry, I don't have time for that. This is my final response to this comment.
Thank you very much for having me - it was really interesting to talk about this topic!
My pleasure. Thanks Thomas for sharing your wisdom.
@@ForsgardPeter I'm blushing 😅
Thomas...out of curiosity i ask...has OMDS not yet invited you to be an OMDS ambassador? I think you are more than deserving.
@@fuzzywuzzy8874 thank you very much for thinking I'd be worthy to do that.
To answer your question - no, they have not.
@@ThomasEisl.Photography that's insane they haven't approached you yet.
Haha I m glad that you do this video !! I have no problem at all !
Good to hear!
@@ForsgardPeter i m not just say only but I have tested myself as we have this Thaipusam Festival in Penang recently. I have taken many shots in low situations and I did not face any problem to get the focusing. Sometimes you need to adjust yourself to get the light to focus right.
Two of my favorite CZcamsrs on the MFT system and OMD cameras. Thanks!
Wow, thanks!
Thank you very much Dustin!
I'm very glad that you interviewed Thomas Eisl. I follow his YT channel for a while now and he is very knowledgeable and a great tutor.
I have set the Fn lever on my OM-1 to Mode 2, so that I can switch very easily from S-AF (single point) to C-AF (cross). Very convenient. Still very happy with my OM-1🙂
Thank you very much for your kind words!
I use my FN lever exactly like you do!
Terrific information, Peter. Thanks to Thomas as well, who I also follow. I was a bit concerned after watching videos from Robin and Rob regarding the autofocus function. I appreciate all you do sir.
Are we trying to create a problem to solve, or is there really a problem to solve?
Great to hear Alan that this cleared some things. That is excatly why i made this video. Some things about S-AF were slightly missunderstood.
TL, good question..
@@ForsgardPeter You are a good Ambassador.
Also thanks from my side Alan - there really is no problem with the camera. I've been using it under absolute crazy conditions and there was exactly never an issue.
TL - I agree 👍
That’s what I love about the Olympus community. It’s the communication and community. Thank you for this video. I have watched the other videos. Thank you for a complete explanation. 👍🏻
Thanks. I agree with you what you said about the community.
hi peter
Thank you for responding to Robin and Rob's d4ze messages and explaining the problem. it's not an AF problem, but more how you deal with the AF settings. Thank you very much for this informative video. Top👍
Thank you very much.
Agreed 👍
As Thomas says, it's about the placement of the small AF point... give it something to work with. Because the OM1 has such a precise AF point selection, the photographer must also be precise and choose an appropriate target to focus on.
Well said. It is just like that. The camera works slightly different.
Completely agree 👍
Hi Peter just saw Thomas Eisl second video on the different focusing techniques for the om1 and it really clarified a couple of wrong settings a had in my om1. I later thanked him for being a great om ambassador, which he later said to me he was flattered with the comment but he is NOT an om systems ambassador. That’s crazy, he would make one hell of a tech ambassador and I think Om systems should make him offer. He would make a great addition to the team. And trust me I would follow you all and make my om systems experience enjoyable. Om ambassador, visionary you know what I mean.
I agree.
Thanks Peter and Thomas for together discussing this and providing some clarity and further thoughts on the issue. I've watched this in conjunction with Rob Trek's clip and found your views (and Rob's results) quite interesting. I'm sure there will be a lot of back-and-forth on this issue for a while by a great many people. But as I said in the comments for Rob's clip, my conclusion is that what the OM-1 seemingly loses on the low-light/low-contrast roundabout, it gains massively on the better-light-and-contrast swings. From a relatively new user's perspective, I felt the OM-1 AF was a large step forward over my previous system.
It is optimized for pin point precision and in low light and low contrast situation PDAF or C-AF works better.
THANKS FOR THE VIDEO - YOU AND THOMAS EISL ARE HELPING GET BETTER PHOTOS WITH MY OM-1 RALPH
I have just got my OM1 and I agree with your and Robins results, but in 99,9 % of situations the auto focus is fantastic. So till all those people who focus white walls in low light without contrast, buy a older model, but for the rest of us …..enjoy the OM1
Spot on 👍
Well said.
I respect Robin Wong. I respect both you, Peter, and Thomas. It was, in fact, Robin's videos on why he *wasn't* getting an OM-1 - a decision I think was probably right for what does - that made me decide on buying one. Mainly as I could see that his and my type of photography is very different and that while the OM-1 was not for him, it was likely to suit me very well. Six months into my OM-1 ownership I beleive we were both right. I skipped the E-M1 III as it offered little or no improvments of value to me over my then E-M1 II. I didn't care about ND or video. There was practically no change of image quaity. The only things I liked the idea of were starry sky AF and an extra custom setting. That's it.
On the other hand as the vast majority of my photos are of animals, the animal detect AF of the OM-1 was tempting. That and that my well-used E-M1 II was beginning to show its age. So, when I got enough money from an inheritance as it happened, I wnet for an OM-1.Yes, it was an indulgence and I'd never recover the money by any means but I went for it just the same. I have to say the animal detect AF far surpassed my expectations right from the first shots I took with it. As the OM-1 was the only Olympus/OMDS camera to offer it (I am not sure if the EM-1X did or does following a firmware upgrade) it was a massive improvement over the E-M1. Indeed it was a revelation and has allowed me to improve my photography (which to be fair was defintely needed). It is not without issues, however. In particular when it fails to detect an animal-ish thing, it doesn't fall back to anything sensible, it either focusses on something close by, often a foregropund fence in my case, of goes unhelpfully to infinity. I do have a compromise mode, what I call "directed animal AF", which is normal small point C-AF with animal detect turned on. It helps in difficult real-world animal situations but I have never been able to really work out for certain what its actually doing. Though I can say It does appear to lock on to animal eyes outside the small point detect area sometimes/often.
I rarely use single point S-AF. I do of course, but not enough to be able to notice any specfic issues to make a comparison to the E-M1 II. I am not totally convinced by it, however and can easily beleive it can get confused in some circumstances. Indeed this would tally with some of my experiences but they have never been an issue to me personally. So, its something of a non-issue to me. Though if S-AF can be proven to be worse that some previous Olympus/OMDS cameras in some circumstances, that's a black mark against OMDS, stengthening my all mouth and no trousers impression of the OM-5 - i.e. its all but a lightly revamped repackage of the E-M5 MkIV. But then I don't have one and would not buy one, and have no use for one even if someone generously gave me one as they did for Robin.
I am a little confused. Reading some of these comments, especially those of Thomas Eisl, it sounds as if the very small point AF uses contrast detection (CD) only? Presumably others use phase detect (PD) or some balance of CD/PD? Or have I got that wrong? If that really is the case then yes, single point is likely to have some trouble with low contrast images. And this is seen as an improvement? Okay, PD is generally seen as better/more useful with moving subjects, but its supposedly useful in reducing hunting, giving faster AF even with static subjects. Or are we just saying was all the PD just marketing hype and all we needed was better CD? Tell that to Panasonic. Do we have documented proof of any of this - such as a statement from OMDS of the detection type used in all AF modes?
As a recently retired embedded firmware engineer, I suspect a firmware update could well improve the S-AF. Clearer specs could also help I suspect. Unless there is a hard reason for the difference, such as readout capabilites, which I thought were much better on the OM-1, then it may be that only limited improvement is possible by firmeware alone.
What I am saying is thqt there clearly are some problems with S-AF on the OM-1 in some circumstances. From this and Robin's videos, its clear we have not yet adequately determined what those circumstances actually are, and thus which phtoographers they are a problem for. There appear to be some, by your description Peter, clumsy workarounds. They are only workarounds, suitable for temporary use while a longterm fix is sorted and distributed, hopefully by firmware update. If OMDS really are on their game, they will quickly get to grips with this and make improvements and practically all of us OM-1 users will feel a lot better and, more importantly, potential future OM-1 buyers will not be put off; because OMDS have reacted quickly and positively to improve their product. Putting it to one side and pretending there's no issue, however small, could well become a photographer public relations nightmare. I think OMDS must respond and be seen to do something and quickly even if its a storm in a teacup that affects very few users. I think this is a test they must pass.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Always appreciate well-formulated comments. I see the "problem" can be solved by using PDAF. It can be assigned to a button. I see it like switching from S.AF to C-AF when photographing a moving subject. It is the low light low contrast option in AF system. Would be better to have that accessible like S-AF, C-Af etc. Yes, it would.
Then we have the fact that S-AF is much faster and especially much more precise than older Olympus cameras when there is slightly more light. The small AF point is key.
OMDS did react quite fast for the C-AF and face detection problem in the video. There was an occasional miss focusing for a very short time in video mode. They fixed that with firmware, and now it works as it should. We will see if they do something about this.
Thanks Peter and Thomas for your thoughtful approach and explanation of the evolution of the system, as well as for providing options and solutions. I still use and love my EM1.2, but the OM1 has also been a game changer for me and has exceeded my expectations.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I compared the S-AF with my M1 II and my G9. I was quite shocked that the older cameras performed better.
But in reality I know that low contrast is a problem so I always used to work around it, so I won‘t have a real issue anyway. Thanks for the Video Peter (and Thomas). 👍🏼
Agreed, you just have to know how it works and then you can work with it - you definitely have to try the high precision at long distances, this is really amazing with the OM-1!
I've been using om1 for a year and I come from a sony a7R3 with a 16/35 Gmaster. I do landscape photography, wildlife photography, and macro photography, I have the 12/40 2.8 proII, the 40/150 f4 pro, the 90mm pro macro, the 60mm 2.8, and the 100/400. I go to very harsh environments where weight and sealing matter, and in all situations autofocus has never failed me in any of its options. Not in low light, not in the snow, not in motion, not in macro. Each photographer has his experience, and you know that full frame has its advantages and one day I will give myself the nikon z9 but currently om system is incredible for my hobby in the mountains and I do not miss another camera with a larger sensor
Thank you for these wonderful clarifications. I was also surprised, at first, to see that the AF-S system, on smooth and poorly lit surfaces, was visibly slower on the my OM1 II than, for example, on the OM5🙃. SOLUTION:😁 on smooth surfaces without contrast and poorly lit it is to use the AF-C with the OM1 (OM1 II) here the focusing of the OM1 (OM1 II) is much faster (it is amazingly instantaneous, without hesitation, and precise than the AF -C of the OM5 (and previous models) In my experience, in 100% of situations. This was something that OM System should have clarified (I think it hasn't), because it has actually greatly improved the focusing system compared to previous models, but it involves adapting to a new configuration. Thank you for your great work and kind regards.
It was a big misunderstanding. You are right OM SYSTEM should have explained this.
It is true, using the Magnify Function (easily accessed if MultiFunction is programmed to the Exp Comp button) at the smallest area green box (14X mag setting, not at magnified view though) grabs focus reliably, for example, of indistinct wood grain where a Single or Small 9pt AF Target just hunts in both S-AF & C-AF on an unlacquered timber bifold door right where I sit at my computer. So for me the solution for difficult to focus subjects in S-AF & even C-AF using 9 point AF target is to use the Magnify Function frame at 14X or 10x for a larger area. Having Exp Comp button programmed with Multi-Function also allows me to use all the other functions available there as well when needed (& they are selectable from a list to have included prior to programming too, so only include what you want under 5.Grid/Other Displays).
BTW, to get out of Magnify Function, just press the OK button.
Great video. My experience with the OM-1 is completely in line with this video. Just know the way it works and you will get great results.
👍📸
Thanks for the clarification. Also nice to see someone other than me also uses a Pentax (K70) 😁
Yes, Pentax is awesome 👍😎
Cheers fellow Pentaxian hehe 😅
I love my OM-1, but I've taken quite a lot of flak on forums for questioning why it struggles to lock in situations that my previous Oly bodies wouldn't have hesitated over. Time and time again I'm told 'Because it works differently.' Sorry, but it's a £2000 body. I shouldn't have to shuffle settings to get it to focus. The sooner OMS put a firmware update out, and we can move on, the better.
I think it is the same thing when you switch from S-AF to C-AF Tracking or S-AF to MF. Now the switch is from S-AF to PDAF. That can be assigned to button. The precision small AF works in the other situation and PDAF works great in low light. They could add the PDAF to AF points that could be one of the AF areas like they now have, single small and so on.
If they change it, then you don't have the precision - contrast AF calculations are more precise on small areas (OM-1) and less precise on large areas (old Oly).
It is decision to have one or the other, you cannot have both in no camera, unfortunately.
Personally, I'd be very disappointed to loose the precision that makes this camera stand out from the crowd.
Let's keep in mind that not even the cricitcal testers found anything when the camera came out and suddenly the camera can't focus. It is a bit strange.
I really put the camera through its paces, and I have never noticed anything. It really is about using the camera as it was intended.
It is a specialist's tool, not a point and shoot.
Great discussion, Michael! Always great to read from you!
@@ThomasEisl.Photography Thanks, Thomas. Big fan of your and Peter’s work. The dilemma I have is that the imprecision you refer to was never something that I found to be an issue, so it’s effectively a trade-off for something I didn’t find a problem, to something I do. I guess OMS can’t please everyone.
@@michaelbaileyphotographycr9728 Yes, I know exactly what you mean.
It is a bit unfortunate.
Maybe my next video will be useful in that regard, as I will share an abundance of best practices. With those, I am convinced that you can overcome the problem and get both - high precision and super high confirmation regardless of photographic situation.
Have a great weekend, Michael!
And thanks for the super kind words, that means a lot - I very much appreciate our conversations!
@@ThomasEisl.Photography It is almost as though this is a misunderstood improvement. It seems to be more a problem of old habits and expectations, while the actual feature is actually much better in other ways.
I find AF issues blown out of proportion, generally. Perhaps my expectations are low from using autofocus Nikon film cameras in the 90s, but modern autofocus is excellent in my experience, even on my Panasonic S5!
I agree that the problem is not that big. It is more about how to use the camera since it works differently.
Agreed 👍
If the questions having been raised by Robin Wong have got an answer, the goal is reached and this will benefit to everybody...questions are interesting if the answers are bringing added value on explainig how to beter use the camera no ?
@@jean-lucsteifer4317 It's a testament to the capabilities of modern cameras, that aiming at a white wall in shade tests their focus limitations. I'm pleased that commentators perform these experiments without having any desire to do so myself. So on balance the question Robin raised was a useful one for OM1 owners.
@@borderlands6606 totally agree...
Hi Peter, thank you for this video. I actually saw Robin's comment last night and was a bit puzzled. I don't question the truth about what he saying about the S-AF, but I felt it was over the top. I like Robin's content and have bought him a couple coffees. I don't know if the OM-1 is the WOW camera, but I do think the small improvement over a wide range of features compared to the MKIII make it a pretty significant upgrade. When comparing the in auto focus in general, the improvement is significant in my opinion. My action and bird photographing improved immediately with the OM-1. I also have seen some content that OM is only scratching the service with the potential of the sensor. So I am hopeful we will see some great stuff from OM in the near future. Thanks again for level setting S-AF controversy.
Very well said 👍 the OM-1 is more than the sum of its parts, and even the parts themselves are significantly better than previous M43 cameras.
For me, it was the camera that brought back MFT into my pro work. It is just so good and allows me to get shots more easily than many other cameras 📸
Robin spoke of how worse C-AF was ,all of you people got it wrong😂
Yes he did. I got better results in my test with C-AF. I believe Rob Trek got also better results with C-AF. The best results in low light and low contrast you get with PDAF.
What Robin Wong said is a real problem. I sent OM1 back and got the refund half a year ago.
Sad to hear. It actually is not a problem if one uses the right focusing method. OM-1 has very good and precise AF. It s better than the older models.
I have om 1, and I have the same problems as Robin (one of the few users on yt to be honest). I changed the camera body 3 times but the problem always occurred (even in c-af). I use leica, fuji large format and olympus to work. I'm not a fan boy but this camera is sold as a professional camera and it's not acceptable to have an autofocus with problems. I finally bought the om 1 mk iii again. The
The thing that annoys me is that we always have to talk about others. you talked about Robin's channel, at least he was honest. I know that Olympus does not pay you, but then why do you find excuses? they made a mistake, it's normal...that they correct it right away with an update. speak your opinion, however true it is, cooperate with others, but don't be arrogant or false.
Interesting opinion. I did find a solutions to the problem. It is not an excuse, it was a solution. Tell me why you see it as a an excuse? Using different AF method the issue is gone. I have short video about the settings and how easy it is to solve.
Your state your issue was the same as Robin’s and I completely believe you. your problem was the same as Robin's which was proven by Rob Trek, Thomas Eisl, and Peter to be attributed to Robin's literally not knowing how to use the camera. You also have just stated, in writing, that you used all 3 perfectly fine and identical cameras wrongly and they all behaved identically as they should have yet you got rid of them. Brilliant...thanks for sharing
The camera has no AF problem. The AF just works differently. It would be like shooting an Autofocus camera and complaining that the rangefinder patch is not visible.
It is far superior to the previous models.
Most important, however, is that you have the camera you want.
I've been experiencing false positives in s-af since day one. The camera says it's in focus when it's not. Do you get false positives?
No I have not and that is why I was a bit surprised about all this. But I am glad it came out so that the missunderstandings can be addressed.
Till today I was very happy with the S-AF performance in all conditions of the OM-1....
Starting from today I'm still happy with it 😊. Thanks to the advice from you Peter and Thomas I know a fallback option in case it happens. 👍
When reproducing the problem, did you try to increase the AF point size?
I just realized one minor issue in combination with the 90mm macro with blinding backlight and dark foreground but wasn't able to reproduce yet. AF was hunting a bit.
I gather that you can't really increase the area of the AF point size in S-AF. What Thomas indicates, and in fact the user's manual states this, is that when you expand the autofocus area in S-AF "the camera chooses the target used for focus from within the selected group." (Instruction manual pg. 78) I was surprised by this, as it means you are not actually increasing the size of the autofocus point, just giving the camera the opportunity to pick one point within the area chosen. Thomas also suggests that, when you use zoom autofocus, something else is going on, because "you get a big detection area." Evidently, this is different than increasing the autofocus target mode. Also, when you use C-AF, the camera uses phase detection and the "area is actually just a bit wider." I'm not sure if it's possible via a firmware update to allow the actual expansion of the AF point, or this is just hardware limitation with the nature of "single point," but it would be interesting to see this addressed. Although, I'm not sure how much any of this matters, unless you shoot a lot of concerts I guess.
@@jonbarnard7186 of course you are right. The number of focus points per area is fixed on the sensor and by increasing the focus area it simply increases the number of focus points the camera is checking on the current focus position, if any of the points in the selected area is in focus already is locking the focus as is.
Maybe the focus magnifier changes something regarding selection from phase to contrast autofokus?
@@mariusm2402 Yes I suspect you're right. I suspect that the single point size is physically fixed by the sensor, and something computational is going on with the zoom autofocus. Hopefully, though, a firmware upgrade will improve the situation. Interestingly, my Nikon Z camera has two single point sizes, with the slightly wider one working faster, and the slightly smaller one being more accurate, or so the manual says. Nothing is simple any more with these cameras. (Well at least they're not running Windows😄)
I have been very satisfied with my OM-1. Once in a while I have to pull back on the clutch for manual focus, not very often. I often use CAF-T and have gotten good results. Mike P/S I feel that my work speaks for itself.
Same here - and as you've said - switching to MF is needed with every camera I've used so far from time to time, no automated system works every time.
I have the EM1 MK ii and the OM1 and I can honestly say I have have not had any problems. I shoot mainly wildlife and birds in particular and the OM 1 is miles ahead of the EM1 MK ii, very happy with my purchase.
I agree.
YESSS! Here the same, the E-M1ii was good, the OM-1 is just fantastic. A real game changer in my wildlife photography
My EM1.2 is consistently more reliable than my OM-1.
OM-1 has a lot of parlor tricks that don't perform as advertised.
Glad you're happy, at least until the next model comes out.
Does the OM-1's autofocus issue vary with lens choice? I have, as my only 4/3 lens, the 12-40mm f2.8 PRO II and do not notice any issues at all with the S-AF.
No. There is no real issue. The AF works slight different and it is much better in OM-1 than it is on E-M1 Mark III.
I think, if you must, you can find some problem under extrem conditions on any camera. I have OM-1 and 12-40 mm f2.8 and have taken photos under rather dark conditions. I have ever had any problems.
And that is not even the fastest lens for low light - so with the super fast lenses, I was able to get every shot reliably.
That is also true that all cameras have problems in some situations if you look for them. I think it is a good thing that the community looks for these. We can discuss and address the issues.
The Thomas Eisl channel is wonderful! A lot to learn with him. OM1 AF: I would not describe as a AF problem. It looks like a characteristic. I’m glad I did keep my em1iii though . I tend to use the OM-1 for wildlife and the em-1 for general purposes. But I almost never work in low light conditions. The OM1 AF is fantastic for the purposes it is intended to be used and when you know how to use it. It is another sensor and another AF system, much more capable and much more complex. Almost 10 x more focus points. And very small focus points. Anyway, I would like to see better updates for the OM-1 for the video capabilities and S-AF, because I think that the Camera is capable of more. I would like to see “Bugs recognition” AF :)
It is wonderful and he is a very nice guy too. You said it: It is fantastic for what it is meant for. That is something many do not realize.
@@ForsgardPeter And it certainly wasn't designed for white wall photography in low light conditions :)
Would you mind to explain zoom view S-AF? Many thanks in advance
You press the small box on the LDD to go to the zoom view. Then a slightly larger AF point appears and that can be used as a bigger Single AF point. Rob Trek's video C-AF has some more info. Check out his channel.
@@ForsgardPeter thanks 🙏🏻
I have both om-1 and em1ii. I found the s-af/c-af on em1ii was a bit faster and less struggling than on om-1 if using M4/3 lenses. However when using old 4/3 lenses, the af behaved much better on om-1 body. It sounds to me that the phase detection is more reliable than the contrast detection on the om-1, as the focus rely on mainly phase detection on old 4/3 lens while M4/3 lens use both focus systems if i remember correctly. That echos to the video's suggested solution to use c-af which give more weight to phase detection. Don't know if anyone has the same experience of using old 4/3 and M4/3 lenses on om-1 and the previous em1ii/em1iii/em1x?
I have not tested OM-1 with the 4/3 I have. maybe i need to check that too.
I can confirm what you noticed : the OM-1 can handel older 4/3 lenses quite well (no comparaison with the GH5 for instance on which the 4/3 lenses are just unusable). I have both 12-60 SWD and 50-200 SWD and they got a new life with the OM-1. Of course m4/3 lenses are faster but we are apeaking of lenses that are at least 15 years old... And it is good to be able to still use them very efficently, even in low light conditions
Hi Peter and Thomas, thanks for clarification by explaining the mechanisms behind the AF.
For me, I'm a very happy OM-1 user since 1 year, was a real game changer in my wildlife photography. Much more keepers than with the E-M1ii.
And good performance up to ISO 20000!
(Ask the Peltomäkis, they will confirm it)
ONE ADDITIONAL TRICK for low light S-AF.
When using the small single AF point you can quickly switch to the next larger one (probably same size as the single AF point of the older cams) by activating AF POINT HOME BUTTON
The OM-1 automatically changes to the small but not single AF poin field when pressing the AF HOME button.
I've always have one button programmed to do this. It's one of the best tipps Robin Wong ever gave, it makes workflow much quicker
And now we can use it for better performance in low light.
Thanks for the tip. I think OM-1 still uses a tiny focus area. The difference is that there are more of them. I will look into this.
I also really like the S-AF + MF tip that Peter provided. I use the same method with DSLRs all the time, very convenient!
@@ForsgardPeter Thanks, dear Peter, for exploring this. I've too few knowledge and expert contacts to figure it out. It's just a logical issue, that the AF works better if the probability finding more contrasty edges is higher.
But these are small detail's and shouldn't prevent people from buying this fantastic camera
great summary and happy to see you colab with Thomas Eisl
Glad you enjoyed it!
I find it a bit disappointing the new Olympus owners haven’t made a statement of some kind. Just so they know about it and showing some kind of concern. Robin pulled the pin and tossed it but Olympus is ignoring the carnage from this discovery.
Olympus doesnt exist
@@greysuit17 The O in OMS means Olympus. Original Olympus still owns 10% of the company. So I will continue to call them Olympus.
I am an OM-1 user and I have made my comment: There is no real issue at all, I can recomment this unique camera after 9 month of experience without any problem, it‘ s a beast and just fantastic!
@@volkerwehres5917 there is no real problem for YOU! That’s great, but there is real problems for others with this issue. There wouldn’t be a problem for me either because of the way I shoot, but it doesn’t mean there isn’t a issue. Either way Olympus should communicate with it’s customers.
@@WhoIsSerafin Olympus owns 10% of OM SYSTEMS…..a totally different company.
With the new 90mm macro the difference is obvious. S-af does hardly fix the focus, while c-af is fast and accurate. The biggest problem for me is not low light but bright light. With s-af OM-1 does not focus at all when the object is bright yellow (for instance, inside an orchid). It just searches and cannot find anything to focus on. With c-af no issue at all. So this is not only a low light problem, it is a bright light problem too, especially when the color is yellow, orange, light green etc. S-af just do not work in these situations with the 90mm macro. So the problem is not focusing on white wall, the problem is real. Maybe it has to to with lack of contrast. I have also noticed that s-af works less well with 300 mm, 40-150 mm indoors, while c-af works fast and accurate.
It is most likely about contrast. OM-1 works slightly different and C-AF is a better solutions in low contrast situations.
I'm happy to learn something new! Thanks a lot Peter for your hard work and dedication on getting this information out !
Glad to hear that!
It sounds to me like the OM-1 designers opted to bias AF to work really well in the greatest percentage of shooting situations, and the trade off was to sacrifice a little in obscure situations. To me, this is a logical and desirable approach. The question should be, 'In normal, everyday shooting situations, does the OM-1 AF perform better than previous models?' I believe the answer is 'Yes', so people need to avoid searching for an area where the camera might fall short.
Agreed 👍
I think it is also good that people push the cameras to the limit. We can then solve the issue. This issue is solved by using other methods. Om-1 works differently.
Well, Peter, I think that the problems Robin is pinpointing, it was in C_AF, not in S_AF??
No he pointed out both
Robin's video suggests it was missing in single and continuous autofocus.
He had some problems with both. They were legit on that particular test. The problem is in low light and low contrast. My results are ok with C-AF and S-AF works better and it is more precise than older models.
Thank you, Peter. As usual, it is an excellent video that works with the facts in a logical and pragmatic manner.
Glad you enjoyed it
Peter. you mention several times in this video that the OM-1's Zoom view AF works better in low light and with low contrast because the Zoom view AF AF target is bigger than the single AF target.
Thomas explained why this is wrong in your video and his own.
As I understand it, with the help of Tomas Eisl, the reason the OM-1's Zoom view AF 'seemingly' works better in low light and low contrast is because when in Zoom view Af the AF system behaves differently in that it is more concerned with locking up and less concerned with precision. The reason your EM1mkIII scored very similarly to the OM-1 (with the OM-1 being in Zoom view AF) is not because the EM1mkIII already has a larger AF target but rather that the EM1mkIII's AF is only as good as the OM1's when the OM-1 is using the less precise Zoom view AF. The OM-1's normal AF method for S-AF is to concern itself more with precision and less with lock up.
Yes I was not precise here. It is like Thomas said. The bigger size just gives more room to look for the area to focus on. It works differently.
@@ForsgardPeter Lets just say the OM-1's S-AF can be hobbled (Zoom view AF[Magnified view]).
Thus the OM-1 has two different means of S-AF, normal and hobbled.
One method S-AF (OM-1's normal/default method) is more accurate at the cost of less lockups. This is the method that has caused 'issues' when comparing to previous models' less accurate S-AF.
The OM-1's 'hobbled' S-AF method is less accurate allowing for more lock ups and is similar to the S-AF of previous cameras.
This hobbled S-AF method is the method Thomas explains and how other OMD models work. More lockups...less accuracy.
It is believed that the OM-1's normal S-AF mode is more accurate (and less lock ups) because the Af is confined inside of the small S-AF target box and not allowed to wander around outside of the target box looking for something nearby to lock up.
This is the difference in how 'normal/default' S-Af works between the OM-1 and the older cameras' less accurate S-AF.
When hobbled the OM-1's AF system works only as 'well' as previous OMD models' normal(or best) AF.
It has been, for years (with both 4/3 and m4/3), said about Olympus' small AF target that the AF system goes outside of the small AF target box when need be. The E5 actually has a "Dynamic-single target mode AF (page 56 in the E5 manual)" which is, in my opinion, an older version of Center Priority/Center Start AF long before the names Center Priority/Center Start Af were coined. I believe most/all previous OMD models S-Af small behaves in the same manner as the E5's Dynamic-single target mode and we (well most of us) simply are unaware of it.
So, regarding older models' S-AF small and the OM-1's hobbled S-AF small, we should now understand that the actual size of the shown AF target box has little, or more likely nothing, to do with the AF performance. The AF goes outside of the box.
I'm interested in how fast the focus is in good light. That's where I am most of the time. Bright sun or dead dark of night shooting stars. In those situations, the OM-1 looks good. Problem with autofocus? None for me.
It is really fast, because of the fast speed of sensor & latest processor. It's when users are using the Single AF point ('point' being the case as it is quite small) that doesn't fall on some detail in a subject, & why a larger area to use for AF is more reliable in those cases. Pinpoint AF is needed for cases that does need to be that small too though.
Thank you, Peter and Thomas, for addressing the issue! To all who think this is not a real problem, let me tell you that I own both E-M5 mk3 and the OM-1, often shoot low light and was also quite frustrated with the S-AF performance of the OM-1 as soon as it got darker, when I first tried it. I was cursing it.
I am not a professional and often shoot more casual. With the E-M5 I can just put it in mode A with aperture wide open, ISO on auto, put the S-AF small target more or less in the vicinity of where I want it to focus and it will give me a keeper rate I am used to, even if I do it less careful with a beer in one hand and chating with people. If it gets darker, AF performance will drop in a gentle and gradual way.
With the OM-1, it works quite differently: as soon as it gets dim, S-AF really needs careful positioning of the focus point onto a contrast edge with correct exposure. The much smaller focus point reduces the likelihood of still getting enough contrast to focus on significantly, when you shoot more casual as I do in such situation and do not place the point exactly where it would make sense for the composition.
Compared to the E-M5, it seems to fail earlier and much more abruptly for these reasons on the OM-1. With a lot of false focus confirmations too, so I would not second that the main reason for this problem is, that it is more critical with how exact it has focus before giving confirmation. It indeed works much more precise and has stellar performance in good light, but that does not save us from false focus confirmations and a lot of focus hunting when it fails.
From all what I have learned so far, it is indeed much less forgiving in low light. The main reason for that might truly be that it is much more precise. I welcome that much improved precision, but if this is the price, it is quite high. I would like the OM-1 to be precision instrument for professionals and enthusiasts, but also an overall better camera for all shooting styles and really hope, that OM System can do something about it. I will try and adapt my shooting style in the mean time.
Thanks for the tips on how the problem can be worked around. Another tip might be, keep your E-M1, E-M5 etc. and bring it to the party instead.
… And don’t get me wrong, I love my OM-1 and have learned a lot trying to master it. I understand that it’s a big improvement overall technically or for any serious shooting that demands critical focus. But if you look at it more from a consumer user perspective, expectations might be different - an improved AF should get you more shots with usable focus than before. It should become easier, not harder to use. Especially in challenging light.
I can say nothing about OM-1 or EM1.3 AF system but with my em5.3 i had some problems in low light. It was really hard to shoot trams and cars or any moving objects when they were moving towards you in low light conditions with their headlights on (at about 5-6 am in winter time) on 40-150/2.8. And i mean really hard coz the AF was missing 7-8 shots out of 10 - just moving glasses back and forth and gave up, it was really bad, so i took about 50 shots and got about 10 good shots with no af mistakes what were more than enough for me to made the job done but i had to stay outdoor at about -20C about 50 minutes with dying battery (switching camera on\of all the time to keep some juice for couple of additional shots) instead of 15. It was only one problem i had with EM5.3 autofocus which i could reproduce lot of times (I have a series of photos of trams in a city at morning time).
Every AF system has limitations, as you illustrated! It is really interesting to have two different camera brands to try them side by side, because they generally struggle under the same circumstances. Can't beat physics!
That's why I switched from Em5.3 to Sony A7c after having different MFT cameras and many lenses. And never looked back. When I start missing smaller and lighter lenses of MFT system I immediately start thinking how great the AF-C in Sony cameras works.
@@krzychatc That's why I many are so enthusiastic about the OM-1 - it is really a huge improvement!
I have owned the OM1 and the EM1 Mk III. Overall, in real world situations, I could see no differences between the two. I don't do a lot of bird if flight or sports photography, so I cant comment on those applications. But for the day to day stuff I do, there is little difference. That was with the original firmware. I have sold the EM1, so I cant compare the new firmware to the EM1. The far superior HHR mode, and slightly cleaner images, were great features of the OM1. I also own a Nikon Z7II, and the Om1 is actually a bit better at focusing. The handling of the OM1 is much better than the Z7II, and it is the camera I go to most often. I have yet to complain about difficulty getting the camera to focus properly.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Thanks Peter that was very interesting it goes to show you need to know your camera 😎😎
I have a pair of OM-1s no issues what so ever.
Thanks for sharing.
In such conditions would it be better to use focus assist light ?
It is one solution, but in concerts and other occasions it is not nice if the red light illuminates the scene. It might be distracting to the performer and audience. If that is not a problem, then yes it would.
@@ForsgardPeter I see that still as problem. The "real world test" had a Lego figurine in the dark with a bright background. What kind of picture will I get anyway?
Don't get me wrong, I love most of his content on his channels and blogposts but his attitude clearly has shifted from calm and friendly to kind of offensive when something is off. And everyone knows since when. From 66000 subscribers around 8500 viewed one of those videos and he counted 50 comments that shared his opinion... first of all that's not much. And if a camera is working great in 9 out of 10 scenarios and not that great in the other one and you only need that one scenario you might have a problem.
The problem I see is, he doesn't mention the 9 scenarios, he's only bashing the one.
Photography still needs light. It's physics, you can't trick that. The most stuff I've learned from the books from Joe McNally and Bryan Peterson. It's all about light in the end. However in critical situations I sometimes switch to manual focus anyway... with any camera. Most of my Fuji bodies are slower than my Olympus/OMDS bodies but I love them anyway.
Seems to me there isnt a real problem, its understanding how it works. Then use the tool knowing. Strikes me its a advantage the way it works. Asign zoom focus to the Ln lens button. Rock on. Thanks for the info. Perhaps Robin may try his low light low contrast situation differently now and be happy?
Good advice about the Zoom Focus to Fn-button!
👍
I've owned all Olympus flagship cameras and I now own the OM-1. It may be the case that it does not perform as well as previous models in one very specific, very narrow and very rare scenario: (low-light and low-contras) but in every other real-life shooting situation, the OM-1 is better than its predecessors. I think Robin Wong was wrong when he went all guns blazing in his first post
I think the whole things has gone out of proporsion.
True I felt a bit sorry for the person who donated the OM-1 to him
Robin’s did never say the OM1 is a bad camera no? He has repeated it is a good camera....he just said what he has seen...and who can say that it is not true?...nobody!
@@ForsgardPeter True, but Robin made things worse by over-reacting to those who disagreed with his post. Unless criticism is abusive or otherwise inappropriate (in which case you just ban the poster) youtubers ought to "agree to disagree" and move-on
As a Whitewall-Photographer I'm very sad about it. Glad that Robin found this problem and made it public!!!
😞
Warning: First sentence irony included.
I don't care about S-AF. Never had a problem since over a year of using the OM-1.
😇
Thomas is the best. Been following him for a while now.
I agree. He is great!
Thank you very much 📸👍
Nice video, I am following this with great interest, after all OM-1 and OM-5 are cameras that will, most likely, set position of and decide if OMDS and Olympus legacy survives as important brand or even at all.
Issue with low contrast low light is serious cause OM-1, like all m43 cameras is perfect for non obtrusive work within closed areas, like clubs, pubs etc or street work. So exactly the situation when you need high precision, fast single point AF and you often don't have enough light and/or contrast and light conditions are constantly changing. Unless OMDS wants to push m43 into wildlife/action photography where this is not important, but then it was not communicated clearly which is also not a good thing.
Going by my history with brand I am using (not OMDS) I think it can be solved by firmware upgrade. PDAF points are already there, so I suppose there could be a single AF /low light sort of setting added that will use bigger AF area or PDAF instead of CDAF.
I think you are right about the communication about the camera. Good point about the PDAF and firmware updates. they could do that, I think... not sure if it is possible.
@@ForsgardPeter It isn't only a question of communication but of overall strategy.
'Release the ambassador, defend our product'
Truth is in my use of the OM1 and the EM1 Mark iii I found the older camera much more reliable when the light dropped. The OM1 was then sold. At the high price I expected much better especially when you can pick up cheaper, much more capable full frame cameras from Canon and Sony. The OM1 really isn't the great flagship camera I was hoping for from Olympus but I'll hold off for a mark 2 and hopefully an improvement.
I also just sold my OM-1. My first real test I struggled to get focus, asked for tips in forums, sought out videos. The feedback much like to Robins video was a lot of negative fan boyism. People telling me I don't know what I am doing, I need to rely less on the camera's auto focus blah blah blah blah. I bought the camera to increase my keeper rate and it did not perform. I had hundreds of great photos at the same event from the prior year so I cannot accept it was me. I have been an Olympus user for 17/18 years and I am now moving on. I still have my E-M1mark III. But my main camera is going to be Sony or Canon. Have not decided yet.
If you refer that OMDS has asked for this video, you are wrong. They do not say anything about the content. Just to make things clear. OM-1 works a lot more precise and faster than older models in S-AF in most cases. In low light and low contrast situations you just need to use either C-AF or PDAF. Problem solved. OM-1 works a different way. It is about the settings.
@@ForsgardPeter my experience is that it doesn't. My EM1 Mark iii is a more reliable system for autofocus in S-AF from my experience. The OM1 just didn't cut it and was a huge disappointment. I love the Olympus system but their flagship now, in comparison to other systems at the same price point just isn't in the same league. If anyone was wanting to get into the system I would recommend the EM1 Mark iii for now and use the savings on glass or if they want a newer body and are happy to spend the cost of an OM1 I would say don't bother and to look at other brands.
@@Jgatti41 sounds exactly like my experience. I had a similar backlash to my questions and complaints. I've been shooting professionally for over 20 years with various systems starting with Nikon DSLRs so I know what I'm doing and I know when a system's autofocus just isn't up to speed and the OM1s just isn't for the situations I need it for. It is a shame as I do like the company and their cameras but I didnt feel confident enough with the OM1 to take it on my shoots. What people don't seem to grasp is I shot the exact same way with the EM1 Mark iii and the keeper rate was much much higher than the OM1 and when people say well it's because you haven't got x, y and z set or if you do these five things you will improve your keeper rate I've lost interest as a camera system should work without having to ensure various settings are in place. I shoot fast so don't have time to worry about that. Sometimes fanboys just don't like to hear their 'best' camera is actually not all that great compared to others out there.
Alex, in all situations? I show on my video how the S-AF is faster when precisions is needed. The very small AF area is an advantage in many situations. That also is my impression in real life situation. In low light PDAF or C-AF is a better choice for OM-1.
...yeah, but Robin's CAF video shows the struggles the camera has - in CAF. I mean, he's SHOWING it. Eisl doesn't show anything. He just says it's amazing. And if he hasn't had any problems, then that's cool - that's his experience and I have no reason to doubt him. But it's strange to discount someone else's struggles with that camera. And Robin isn't alone in noticing this either.
Robin has no reason to lie about this. His recent videos show M43 cameras in low light getting good results, his favourite M43 lenses....he clearly loves the M43.
If the OM-1 does have a tiny focal point and you can work around it by zooming into magnify mode, like how Rob Trekk showed....in a lot of real world scenarios this might not always be feasible. Hopefully, OM smooths this out - everyone having a good focus experience with this camera can certainly only be a good thing.
why would you expect Robin's videos not to show poor AF performance when Robin has proven he doesn't understand the OM-1's AF system and isn't using said AF system appropriately?
it seems you'd like to dismiss Thomas' data because there aren't enough pictures provided to help you understand it. well fine, as long as we are all clear about that.
However, both Peter and Rob Trek are in agreement with Thomas' findings and they both provide lots of pictures in their videos. All three, Rob, Peter, and Thomas have thouroghly refuted Robins assertions. Do you believe the three are wrong and Robin is correct?
I agree 100% that Robin isn't alone in not understanding how the OM-1 AF works and how it differs from previous models and that those users are also using the camera inappropriately.
Many folks believe Robin has a very big reason to lie.
I do not think that Robin is lying. He showed the problem he had. It is totally legit. However there is a solution that makes the problem go away. That was the whole point of my video.
Robin's test is flawed. Simple as that. (The Lego is 1 stop darker in the OM-1 compared to the EM5m3.)
@@ForsgardPeter I'm super confused. I might be missing the point of your video - the solution is CAF when in low light...is this correct? If so, then Robin also has a video *using* CAF and it still hunts. I'm not saying that Robin's test is the be-all-end-all, but I do think that for some users, and there are lots of examples online, of people struggling with low light focusing with the OM-1 and they're trying to find solutions.
Hearing about CDAF being given more weight with the small AF reminds me of the DFD autofocus from Panasonic. I find that it struggles a bit more in low light, low contrast situations. On the other hand, the S-AF speed in other conditions is so fast that I can't keep up with the beeps. The behavior of AF reacquisition from your speed tests is also similar, but a bit slower.
Yes, you cannot have precision and high confirmation at the same time. I had the same experience with the G9 - it is not a problem, it is just a design decision.
It's the first stacked sensor in the system and so people who have almost zero experience with the way these systems work and try to make it function just the way all the previous bodies worked are going to be disappointed. Any of my associates who have been shooting Sony A1 and A9 for a couple years or more seem to adapt much easier to the OM-1 than they ever could to the previous OM-D bodies. On the other hand, people I know with no experience shooting cameras like that, can experience initial frustration. Robin really needs to figure out if he wants to adapt to a different way or just acknowledge that this camera isn't for his style of working. Not a big deal. But most people can adapt to this sensor tech successfully with some help from others perhaps. It took me a month or so to change my custom settings of the OM-1 bodies to be appropriate for this sensor tech. I think a lot of folks think the firmware is all created by the camera company, but actually the bulk of it comes with the sensor and developed by the sensor manufacturer. So for non-Sony stacked sensor shooters, it's a whole lot different. Now eleven months later and more than a million photos later, my own real world experience has been positive overall. However, if I were a street shooter in low light conditions and such, it would be quite a leap from OM-D E-M1 Mark III to om-1 and maybe not worth the effort for someone like Robin.
And it wouldn't have been so bad if he hadn't put out videos with such provocative negative titles either. As a 'professional' he showed an unprofessional response, more like a 'Toneh' response instead. 😏
@@rossthefiddler5890 an accurate judgement I agree. Click bait. A better title might have been “OM-1 may not be the best low light street shooter’s option in micro four-thirds cameras.” Or something to that effect. A more accurate subheading could include an admission “my first impressions with OM-1 suggest I may more time to properly assess its strengths and weaknesses for my type of shooting”
@@JeffreyMcPheeters Yes, well he got my back up with his attitude & negative presentation. Didn't like the grip, didn't like S-AF, didn't like not having 'pinch' enlarging in reviewing (I think that would be a disadvantage when reviewing with long tele lenses on anyhow), being so critical saying "in this day & age" it should have it.
I have the OM-1 since 9 month now and I use the camera often with my 25mm 1.8 in low light without any kind of problem at all! No issues at all.
I have had the same experience, no issues in real life photography.
Yes 👍
And the 25mm 1.8 is not even the fastest focusing lens on the market - so I don't see an issue here.
Sorry if I'm wrong , but I thought the issue was with C-AF in Robin's video!
No. Robin's first two (of his latest Trilogy of slagging OMDS) OM-1's S-AF sucks videos were related to him having troubles figuring out how to use the OM1's S-Af and wrongly comparing the OM-1's AF system apples to oranges with his older camera's AF system.
It was suggested to Robin to use C-AF instead of S-AF. So, Robin erroneously laid claims that all those whom suggested C-AF was a better choice, were wrong. The C-AF slagging OMDS video is his third of the recent OM-1 AF slagging trilogy.
@@fuzzywuzzy8874 Unfortunately, you are spot on.
@@ThomasEisl.Photography Appropriate use of the word 'unfortunately'.
Robin Wong has a large and extremely supportive following because he is, in no contrived way, an exciting, joyous, and positive person. He also is a very talented photographer. I regarded his advice and opinions as thoughtful and honest. All of this is why I followed him for many years. I would not believe in or respect any ambassador who never offered any criticism to the products/company they were representing unless that company, and it's products, were magically and uniquely perfect and impeccable. I absolutely do not wish Robin Wong abandon his followers, photography, nor stop creating social media content. What I do hope for Robin is that he stop his tirades against OMDS, and OMDS users, and simply be Robin Wong. A positive person by nature behaving entirely negatively, with or without any valid point to 'report', has got to be extra stressfull and damaging to that particular type of person and is the position I believe Robin has put himself in as of late.
@@fuzzywuzzy8874 I agree.
The OM-1 is a "flagship" Camera that costs about $2500. It is to be expected that these cameras will be scrutinized, as all top of the line cameras get their fair share of criticism. Especially now after the Olympus OM Digital buyout , the new company will get the extra attention from users because they expect nothing but the best quality as had been provided by Olympus. It doesn't seem like the OM-1 camera is quite OM's best effort. Maybe with the mark 2 version they will give their best.
The price of the body is $1999 at the moment. It works really well for it is meant for. S-AF is a lot faster than the previous models. The "problem" can be solved by using different focusing method. I got better results with C-AF. Also the PDAF works better. It is about the settings for the most part.
Yes, & isn't it funny that one complains because he can't photograph with S-AF focussing on plain white walls! 😂
Yes, I'm also furious about that 😜
Yes I was perplexed by this "criticism" in other reviews, and was going to say the same thing in the comments here.
What if a photographer is photographing walls? Shouldn't should work under all conditions? Or are you OK with companies telling you what you can shoot?
@@formermpc10 If it is a plain white painted brick wall with no side light to create shadow in the brickwork but full sun lighting it, then it is going to struggle to find focus, simple as that & that was how it was with Robin's case. He used another camera that actually has a much larger small AF target area & it was finding some detail somewhere to focus on. The camera is a tool with various adjustments available & if isn't adjusted appropriately then it won't perform as expected. A much larger AF target area would have made the difference, if there was some detail to actually lock onto.
formempc10 Then just use the PDAF and everything is fine. It is about the settings for each type of photographing. It is like switching from S-AF to C-Af when photographing a moving subject.
I picked up my E-M1 II for a look. I have a grid of small AF points, a grid of larger AF points, and the we progress to clusters of AF points.
I am not familiar with the OM 1, but perhaps there's something here to check.
Thank you for (10:30) cutting to the chase.
This is a huge asterisk on the OM-1's abilities, and reinforces my belief that the OM-1 was released before all the bugs were worked out.
But I'm sure the cult will continue to make excuses.
This is a huge asterisk on the your intentions, and reinforces my belief that you have no understanding regarding the issue being solved before releasing your comment.
You see a solution as an excuse? :). This is quite typical, defining new meaning to words when there is no real argument against it. Changing to PDAF in low light low contrast is the same thing as changing to C-AF+TR when photographing a moving subject. Or is that also an excuse?
Yes, I'm in a cult - it is called: "cult of photographers who actually know how to use cameras".
I recommend joining it, as it is about using cameras and learning from each other.
It is a fun cult, believe me! Hope to see you their soon 😊 there are many cool members, all of them take real photographs, it's a blast!
It is way better than the other one, the "cult of make-believe camera problems"
Robin Wong is a Guru when it comes to Olympus or OM-S cameras so please don't t undermined this gentlemen as he has done so much for the community much more than any Olympus + OM-S ambassadors.
Hello,
If i remember correctly Robin’s test, he does not get beter results with C-AF mode ...?
Am i wrong?
I did not. I said a few times that his findings are correct. Then I gave a solutions to that. Jen-Luc, yes on that particular test. Rob Trek got similar than I did with C-AF. In very hard lightning and low contrast situation small changes can make a difference. It is the same way in real life photographic situations. There of course we try to solve the problem to get the images we want.
@@jean-lucsteifer4317 Actually if you watch his latest video he said C-AF is even worse and i agree.
@@ForsgardPeter Hello Peter.
Maybe you didn’t but that Thomas guy was trying to explain that you need to change the focus points to a larger size in order to get better results in low light, if you was talking to an amateur photographer like myself than that’s expectable but we are talking to Robin who is no amateur, so when he says there’s an issue with the focus than we as a community need to speak out and get companies to do better than to correct some guy who is a guru on Olympus + OM-S cameras.
I would have agreed with you 3 years ago when Robin was their brand ambassador and had access to their engineers for answers to questions. He got me hooked on Olympus products, so I thank him for that. However, since he was dropped as an ambassador, Robin has publicly engaged in nothing but sour grapes towards the company, which shows a lack of maturity for a "professional".
For example, only last year when the OM-1 was released, he issued a provocative video titled "Why I'm not getting an OM-1". That was before he had even tried it, and his primary rationale was that he could not afford it as a professional, so how useful and objective was that?
While some may doubt the integrity of those officially engaged by camera companies as ambassadors, many of us who have had a great experience upgrading to the OM-1 will continue to question Robin's true intentions. Perhaps, it's time for him to return his OM-1 gift and move on to another brand.
Thomas, said that he only used C-AF, then he said that he used S-AF at his advantage. Seem contradicting.
That was a misunderstanding.
1) I use S-AF whenever I need maximum precision - that is what this mode is meant for.
2) I also use C-AF whenever appropriate.
Drop by my channel, I've got a very in-depth video on the OM-1's AF - there, I illustrate when to use what and why in great detail.
Best wishes 📸
@@ThomasEisl.Photography I have subscribed to your channel and will watch your videos.
As expected its working as designed its a user usage fault
Yes, the AF works differently than other Olympus cameras.
I haven't been following this issue much because, frankly, I don't use my OM-1 very much.
After nearly a year I find my EM1.2 to be much more reliable than the OM-1.
Yes, the OM-1 has a lot of novelties that would be great if they worked consistently as advertised. But they don't, I have found.
As you bring this up so many times, also on my channel, I would really love if you could share a single example of the OM-1 's features failing compared to older models.
Maybe you could shoot me an email at some point.
You are basically the only person that brings this up - so this is really strange and I'd be happy to learn more!
Unfortunately, you never replied to my questions so far.
This really surprises me as I find it superior to my Em1iii. How has it failed? I haven't noticed any issues with focusing, but I'm usually in C-Af and bird detect.
Breaking news: focusing on low contrast surfaces in extremely dim light is difficult!
This is a manufactured issue by a CZcamsr for clicks. The real issue is thresholds. The OM-1 has a higher quality control and won't falsely tell you are locked in focus when it's not. The EM5iii will. Take that as you will and around your shooting preference, but if you have a sub 20% keeper rate in real world conditions wouldn't you rather know that and switch to manual focus instead of false positives only to realize you didn't get the shot in post?
LOL.....apparently you did not see Robin's last video smashing the idea that C-AF will improve performance. Let's face it if you want the best autofocus available you will need to get either a Sony or a Canon camera. I am sure that the OM1 performs good enough in most situations. I would not hesitate to buy one if I were in the market for a M4/3 camera.
Exactly, following Robin,’s tests, CAF mode does not improve anything !
Lol exactly Robin was not happy with C-AF 😂
Yes Robin did struggle with C-AF. I got different results and so did Rob Trek. The whole issue is solved when using PDAF. It works perfectly and works the same way as the previous model. The problem is gone when using the right settings. OM-1 works differently.
@@ForsgardPeter Thanks for you explanations, from my point of view, any device operating mode must be clearly known to be able to use it correctly if this camera works differently, people should take that into account and may be the user manual is not explaining well the behaviors of those different focus mechanisms...?
@ John Huff, I shoot with the OM-1 until 1-2 hours after sunset every week over the past year, and everyone has left by that time because all their Sony, Canon and Nikon cameras cannot AF in that dark. Go ahead and try your Sony and Canon at those hours.
I believe everybody beside Thomas talks about a problem and solutions to a problem where there is no problem in real life… Who tries to photograph a white sheetbof anything…
Exactly! Well said. Reminds me of my project management days. People complain about rubbish software, until they learn how to use it as it is designed!😄
I like Robin's videos and find them informative. However, am left wondering in this instance whether finding a relatively obscure use case scenario and blowing it way out of proportion is a bit of sour grapes with no longer having an OMDS affiliation, and attempting to drive additional traffic to his channel 🤔
You have a twisted mind to think that🤔
Hard to say for someone else. He found a problem while photographing. The tests he made gave same results. I made video about it gave some solutions. I am not speculating what others think.
@Peter Forsgård , appreciate the work you and Thomas put into defining the issue and suggesting workarounds
I guess if you focus on a blank sheet of white paper in very low light, virtually all cameras will have difficulty in focussing on S-AF! We just need to know how to use our gear properly.
Ambasadours defence speach, its Big humor
Glad I was able to entertain you.
I'm not an ambassador - it is more of a reality check than a defence speech.
@@ThomasEisl.Photography i bought the om1.. took a few weeks before i returned it and went back to my Em1x.. the om1 hunts.. alot in low contrast situations and low light its almost Fuji bad..and why try to defend it tooth and nails when its obvious? it nothing to do with the af point area its due to the well known issue with every stacked sensor in any camera..this video may well not have been intended as a "defence" speach but its the way it comes across.. you are gonna get pats on the back from the people who wants to justify their purchase as usual and the others are gonna giggle and move along.. its a squarespace ad short of beeing a Northrup Sony video.
Um...Robin has put out a video on C-AF in low light and shows it works poorly in low light. Worse than S-AF. The problem for evaluating opposing claims is deciding which test is most applicable to one's own usage. How the OM-1 focuses and how the various EM1 versions focus is besides the point. The user wants the camera to autofocus quickly and accurately. If it can't do that in some situations when another camera can...that's not a positive. All the explanations and work arounds can't fully make up for the simple fact of perfomance. I don't want to hear what Panasonic m4/3 camera's do well with regard to focus. They don't autofocus as well as Olympus/OM Systems in general. And it looks like the OM-1 doesn't autofocus as well as the EM1's in low light. Yes, the OM-1 appears to focus much quicker and maybe better in certain good light situations. But we don't solve problems by pretending they don't exist or finding a slow workaround. That said, I was happy when someone found a workaround to Sony's star-eater problem which worked on some older models. Unfortunately, Sony's solution was to prevent the workaround on the newer models by making the star-eater function more universal!!!
Robin's test is flawed. The Lego in the OM-1 shot is 1 stop darker than the EM5m3. Under exposed subjects degrade AF performance on the OM-1. At that light level, Rob's test shows the OM-1's C-AF outperforms the EM5m3 in all cases. Speaking from experience of having used the OM-1 for a year of shooting in the dark 1-2 hours after sunset, the OM-1's C-AF works down to 6-7 stops darker than in these tests.
@@tntytube If the Lego is one stop darker for the OM-1, then why is the shutter speed faster than the EM5? Maybe the problem is with the OM-1's light meter. in addition, Robin also compares OM-1 with C-AF and S-AF...and the S-AF wins. As for your OM-1's C-AF working in 6-7 stops darker conditions than Robin's test, I'm not buying that. You'll have to prove it.
@@tntytube yes
what a wonderful way you can push your clicks, with completed unimportend "problem" ... influencers ... take on everything
This is pure undermining what other well informed photographers said . Playing " god of the system " here !
The best way to prevent this issue is : Use another brand ! - Thats simply and clear to understand ... and much cheaper !
Photographers want to have a camera for grab and go and not making hours of experimetal test with autofokus !
Does it work : OK - Does ist not work : Back to the shop and never back home again .
But this big influencer show here must go on 🤣
@@rossthefiddler5890 🤣🤣🤣
very funny Wald. thanks for sharing.
c-af and s-af are totally different ways of shooting, is not just a setting you will change
I do not think it is. In this situation it worked better than S-AF. We need to rethink the way we shoot with OM-1.
Up to Robin's video, I never ever used SAF always CAF. And after his video I will not change that. I feel he is a little too much looking for flaws in the OM-1.
Let's not do that....
I focus and recompose, this is not possible with c-af
If you believe using a camera in C-AF mode will not permit the user to ‘focus and recompose' then you have embarrassed yourself by commenting on a subject to which you obviously have no knowledge of. watch one or two of the 4000 BBF videos and then come back here and apologize for yourself.
@@fuzzywuzzy8874, I think the issue originated from the refusal to use BBF and the assumption that S-AF was always better than C-AF.
It looks to me Wong's pissed on your chips
I would be surprised if they think any bad about Robin or him bringing up this problem. It is an interesting challenge to find out and present why the new S-AF behaves this way.
it looks to me that Robin has pissed on his own chips.
S-AF behaves the way it behaves because it is optimized for fast and precise focus for what the camera is meant for. In low light and low contrast other that S-AF is better. PDAF works perfectly in those situations.
So far I can see. It's far away from a flagship camera. A camera with this price tag have to perform on every circumstance. Menus not touch sensitive. Old USB connector. After seeing all this I'm not surprised they constantly give discounts.
You obviously don't have the OM-1 & knowing very little about, going on others complaints & getting them mixed up. First of all, it is NOT an old USB connector. It uses USB-C PD connector, as did the E-M1 III before it.
at the end of the day if it focused at night on the older em1's and 5's then it should do so on the newer flagship. It would seem to me they have pushed the focus towards birds etc and the lower light stuff has suffered accordingly. To say it is different or the nature of the focus point may be different on the om-1 is just another way of fudging the issue. OM Solutions needs to prove its committed to its products and users and addresses any concerns. Those of us who purchased OLYMPUS new what service was, OM SOLUTIONS needs to work very hard to keep loyalty of customers and for them to trust the new brand.
100% agree with this "It would seem to me they have pushed the focus towards birds etc".
its "Birders" (and wildlife shooters) that spend the very biggest bucks on Pro level gear. Birding/Wildlife has become much more popular these past few years due to Covid. Birding and wildlife is where the money is amongst the rest of the rapidly dwindling photography market.
So, why shouldn't it make sense to you, or offend you, that the manufacturers of Pro level gear are concentrating their rapidly dwindling resources towards primarily developing their Pro level gear as best they can to compete as best they can for the big money offered by Birders and wildlife shooters?
If you were a business owner I'd guess you'd prefer to sell 100 high profit units per month at $10 000 more than 100 low profit units per month at $100. How would you drive the sales of the $10 000 units?
The Pro level gear has to perform as well as possbile to attract and keep the users whom spend those biggest bucks.
the improved precision of the OM-1's AF is very welcome and appreciated by some at least.
I implore OMDS not to make any backward and harmful changes to the OM-1s AF system simply to make it less precise in order achieve more lockups in absolute garbage shooting conditions. The users have to know how best to use the gear too of course.
OMDS is doing a great job...far better than Olympus has ever done.
I've never seen so many training and learning resources from Olympus as I have from the very new OMDS.
I've been using Olympus cameras since before the E1 and I still have the E1 (had two, gifted one), E3, (gifted an E5), E510, OMD EM5, OMD EM1, OMD EM1mkII, EM1X and the OM-1. Among other lenses I have the 4/300 and the 150-400. I have put my money where my mouth is.
"lower light stuff has suffered accordingly" how's that then?...Robin says the older, far less expensive, Olympus cameras work better in low light than OMDS's new camera. Low light m4/3 shooters are blessed, no?
The problem is solved if you use PDAF. It can be assigned to a button. It is mostly a matter of settings. Ys that info could be shared by OMDS. Not sure they need to fix this with a firmware. If they do, that is great.
The OM-1 works much better in low light for birds. I shoot owls that go hunting after sunset, and from what I've seen over the past year, everyone around me has left by that time because no other cameras can AF in that dark.
Indeed. I was out last evening shooting perched owls at 1/10 with the OM-1 and 150-400.
I was with a friend who had with him a Canon R5 and 100-500. I was reasonably confident my gear was outperforming his so, for fun, I showed him a (LCD monitor) pic, zoomed in on the owl’s face. I rarely do this as I don’t like to rub FF’ers “nose in it” too much. Well, he did not reciprocate by showing me a screen shot from his camera. He said wow…that is a lot of detail showing. I am definitely not getting that much detail.
Stay good OMDS.