k-hawinkler
Well-known member
E-M1 + M.300mm F4.0 @ FL=300 mm, F/5.6, ISO=160, 1/1250 s.
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
It will definitely have better AFC performance, I am sure!The Olympus OM-D cameras E-M1, E-M5, E-M5.2 all have the same pixel pitch of 3.7 µm, whereas the Sony A7r2 has 4.5 µm, and the Nikon D800E has 4.8 µm.
When comparing a D800E + 400 mm lens with an E-M1 + 300 mm lens we find (400/300) * (3.7/4.8) = 1.03 that the D800E + 400 mm lens has 3 % more resolution than the E-M1 + 300 mm lens.
Similarly comparing a D800E + 400 mm lens with an E-M1 + 420 mm lens we find (400/420) * (3.7/4.8) = 0.73, 1/0.73 =1.36 that the E-M1 + 420 mm lens has 36 % more resolution than the D800E + 400 mm lens.
Of course the FF Nikon system also has a larger Field of View that should make it easier to frame a Bird in Flight (BIF). I think I will give the FF Nikon system a try and see whether it has better AF-C performance.
It will definitely have better AFC performance, I am sure!
Having said that I would try out the new D500/D5 as these cameras have the latest AF system with 171 AF points over a large area as well as top low light AF performance. The D500 might be even better suited for wildlife or BIF as the AF system covers almost the complete field of view as it is an APSC camera.
If the D5 is to massive and expensive, I would wait for the next incarnation of the D810, which should have the same AF system then and be a smaller FF body with high resolution. Or you simply could try the D810, which is already pretty perfect in all disciplines, especially also in AF - Group AF would be a great setting for BIF.
Combine that with a 80-400 VR2 or the 200-500 and you should be all set ....
Peter
K-H,Thanks for the feedback Peter.
It seems to me going the D5 route would be advantageous from an AF-C but not from an resolution point of view.
I agree with you, the prospective D820 would be a better way to go.
However, if I can avoid buying another DSLR with an OVF, that would be my preference.
I definitely prefer an EVF over an OVF as it is more convenient for my aging eyes. :facesmack:
In my experience, taking a BIF picture, faces two challenges, namely • framing the bird and then • getting the bird in focus for the exposure.
For a given focal length, for the m43 format with its narrower FOV it is more difficult to put the focus point on the intended subject.
If one doesn't get that sufficiently accomplished, then an m43 camera begins to focus hunt, exacerbating the problem by completely obscuring the view of these fast moving Turkey Vultures. And one has to start over, searching the sky with the naked eye or via an Olympus EE-1 Dot Sight.
The EE-1 seems to work well if one has adjusted it correctly with the help of a tripod for the anticipated distance to avoid parallax errors. Pointing the not stabilized EE-1 on the subject then should point the stabilized focus point on the subject as well, more or less precisely.
In contrast, with my Nikon D800E + Nikkor AF-S 80-400/4.5-5.6 VR lens I don't have much of a framing or focusing problem as its FOV seems sufficiently large and its AF-C focus fast enough.
Following, are some images illustrating the topic. First, a shot with E-M5.2 + 300/4 lens + EE-1, un-cropped, only reduced in size.
The Turkey Vulture is close enough to fill a fair fraction of the image height. Without the EE-1 it's very easy to lose the bird out of the frame or never even get it into the frame.
Next a similar size Turkey Vulture at about the same distance captured with D800E + AF-S 80-400/4.5-5.6 VR @ 400 mm, un-cropped, only reduced in size.
Here framing and focusing is much less of a challenge and I don't feel the need to use the EE-1.
Rotating the bird a bit and cropping yields this image.
Of course, I am very curious how a Sony A7r2 + FE 70-200 F2.8 GM OSS lens + 1.4x or 2x Teleconverter Lens would perform in this situation. :grin:
Well, the longer I follow this FF versus APSC versus m43 I come even more to the conclusion that I want overall larger sensor than m43. I think it would be great to have a combination of FF and APSC and say goodbye to m43. I am sure lot of people will disagree especially in a m43 forum, but this is what I am coming back again and again.Thanks Peter.
I can't disagree with your conclusion for some of the images, but not all of them. The OM-D cameras would certainly benefit from better IQ sensors, especially for available light scenarios, needing high ISO. The Oly 300/4 lens no doubt deserves a better sensor IMHO.
FF cameras certainly have a natural IQ advantage. As you well know, that is not the only criteria people, including me, use when choosing a sensor format.