Micro 4/3 Olympus om d em 1

lucien

Legend
I have this camera, I use it mostly for monochromes. Would it be able to shoots sports? What kind? Can it be used for birding? BIF? Or is it regulated to a standby still/workaround shooter which it's quite good at.

Thanks, only have 2 lens for it 14-42 II and 40-150 both kit lens.

I know it's a bit dated.
 
If you are talking about the Mark 1 version, it is still a relatively capable camera.

Can it be used for sports? yes, but the implementation I find, is limited. For sports where the subject motion is predictable or linear (baseball, where the runners are going between bases, cars on a race track) it can work. The biggest issue is going to be the lag in initial subject acquisition. Would work better with Oly PRO lenses for sports as well due to better light gathering at f/1.8 and the better focus motors.

Birds in Flight - yes, possibly - but see the same reasoning in sports above. If you wanted to be semi-serious regarding sport then I'd say the Mark II is the baseline and even then it still had issues for me and never made it as a main shooter on those subjects. Not that it was really fair, but I put it up against the Nikon D500 and the Em1.2 was not that level...and in some ways was not the level of a D7200 either. In 2 areas it lacked was low light IQ and in AF. You can make it work, but it is a lot more work on your part for tracking subjects.


I have had a lot better luck with the Fuji XT3/XT4 shooting low light sports than the m43 equivalents. The EM1.3 or OM-1 may have closed the gap some what, but I have no experience with those.
 
Tennis, specifically. Yes mark I And thank you very much. That settles that then. Walk around, monochrome shooter. I'm not plunking money down on better glass on a dinosaur. And the second reason, I might not stay m4/3. I have the Sony slt A65 24mp for that, and it's showing it's age as well. The D7500 will serve me for sports and birds til I get the D500 ;)
 
The D500 is a killer sports and BIF camera. But the D7500 is not really that bad either. It's got a great AF system. If I had the D7500 I'd have to find it lacking before I'd bother upgrading.

As for the E-M1.1? You can find second-hand Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 for under $500. That might be enough for tennis unless you're talking the stands at the US Open.
 
Well, there is a huge difference when it comes to the number of cross hair sensors, which come in handy if/when you have t leave the centre point,


While the D7500 has a 51-point AF system which is capable of focusing in -3EV, the D500 has a more advanced 153-point system

99 of which are crosshairs, and everyone knows the more crosshairs the better. Add the joystick..... I know someone that I have written to that can vouch for the upgrade. In fact he's right above both us. Gryffie to me. They even share the same battery. I did notice something I don't like though. The lack of U1 AND U2 aaah well none of the 100 series have that function ie 200, 300
 
The D500 is a killer sports and BIF camera. But the D7500 is not really that bad either. It's got a great AF system. If I had the D7500 I'd have to find it lacking before I'd bother upgrading.

As for the E-M1.1? You can find second-hand Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 for under $500. That might be enough for tennis unless you're talking the stands at the US Open.
Unfortunately the entire focus system is a bit dated by now. And that's USD right? Add another $120 = Naaahh
 
Unfortunately the entire focus system is a bit dated by now. And that's USD right? Add another $120 = Naaahh
Yes USD, not sure where you are.

Dated? Well, you could say that about all DSLRs couldn't you? But metering and some of the other subsystems in the D7500 are from the D500. So if I were not shooting professionally and wanted a sports and wildlife setup, the D7500 would be where I would start. The new OM-1may be as good, but (for me anyway) the Nikon would just be easier.

It all comes down to your personal needs. You started asking about the E-M1.1, a 9 year old camera. Then went to the A65, an 11 year old camera. Then the D7500 and finally the D500. That's a pretty big jump and investment in gear and the glass to go with it. So I'm a little confused about the goal you're trying to reach. Hard to recommend anything without understanding that.
 
Well, there is a huge difference when it comes to the number of cross hair sensors, which come in handy if/when you have t leave the centre point,


While the D7500 has a 51-point AF system which is capable of focusing in -3EV, the D500 has a more advanced 153-point system

99 of which are crosshairs, and everyone knows the more crosshairs the better. Add the joystick..... I know someone that I have written to that can vouch for the upgrade. In fact he's right above both us. Gryffie to me. They even share the same battery. I did notice something I don't like though. The lack of U1 AND U2 aaah well none of the 100 series have that function ie 200, 300

Yes, for some reason, Nikon thinks that the "Pro and Pro-sumers" don't want U1/U2. They buried the PASM functions in a MODE button/command dial turn structure.
 
I used my EM1 for sports.

For ME, it had three issues, two directly sports related.
#1, when you shoot a burst, the EVF freezes for about 1/2 to 1 second, before going live again.
This makes following action difficult, as you don't know where the athlete moved, during that short freeze. So follow up shots were HARD.
It drove me nuts shooting sports. And that is the #1 reason why I upgraded to the mk2.
But when not shooting sports, I did not notice that "problem." So it was and still is a great camera to use.

#2, the implementation of the eShutter was poor.
I could not use the eShutter at HIGH ISO (like basketball in the gym). I think it maxed out at ISO 3200. At HIGH ISO, I could only use the mechanical shutter.

#3, There is a bug in the firmware. Auto ISO does NOT behave properly with the eShutter.
The shutter has to drop down to about 1/13 sec, before the ISO starts to rise. Which makes Auto ISO + eShutter in lower light, like at a concert, unusable.
 
Last edited:
At the risk of being a contrarian, Lucien, I have an Olympus E-M1.1 - and it has become my favorite camera for birds and birding. If there is sufficient light - and if I am close enough and have a quick enough shutter speed - the camera has continued to give me results which I consider quite decent.

Here are a pair of ducks, racing across Lake Euwana, outside of Klamath Falls, Oregon--

EM1_Feb25_22_racing_ducks.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Here are some Canada geese, one of whom I caught in mid-flap, in an irrigation pond near my old farmhouse in rural southern Oregon---

EM1_Feb28_22_Canada_geese_flapping#5.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Here is a soaring red-tailed hawk, in the plains and high desert east of Bend, Oregon---

EM1_Mar22_22_soaring_red-tail_east_of_Bend.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


And here is a flying blackbird, in the reeds that surround a local pond---

EM1_Mar31_22_flying_blackbird.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


All of the preceding were taken with the relatively inexpensive 'consumer-grade' Olympus 75-300mm telephoto zoom lens. Obviously having a decent telephoto is an advantage, in that it allows the photographer to get a bit closer to their subject matter.

When I first got my E-M1 v.1, I spent some time looking at and studying the photographs taken by a number of relatively experienced wildlife and birding photographers, most of whom seem to be currently shooting with the much more capable newer OM-1 Olympus camera, and the significantly more expensive Olympus Zuiko 300mm f/4 prime lens. But the really interesting part, to me at least, was-- half a dozen and more years ago, many of them were also shooting with E-M1.1 - and were regularly creating phenomenal photographs with the same camera that you have.

Go figure ;)
 
Hi Miguel, Can you give me your focus settings? I might pick up that 70-300mm and give it a shot. ie focus hold settings. focus point settings, continuous I presume. How many focus points are you are using. All relating to focus.

Thanks in advance.

off the bat. I think 1] cont. autofocus 2] group focus points 3] the release settings I don't know low, normal, high and the shutter stuff ie silent shutter, electronic. Aperture priority or Manual? Thanks
 
In my experience, the lens has excellent S-AF (single autofocus) - but the C-AF (continuous autofocus) is nowhere near as good. So I continually keep it on S-AF. (Btw I think some users of newer Olympusus - the E-M1 mark III or the OM-1 - have had success with C-AF, but it isn't reliable on the older, original E-M1.

I honestly can't remember what focus settings I have used - I think I vary between the maximum possible (whatever that is) and selecting a square group of focus points (which I can't really remember how many, either). I go back and forth between those. But definitely I don't pick spot focusing.

In terms of the so-called Drive settings, for sitting birds I often just shoot one frame at a time - but I randomly switch back and forth between the sequential modes, either the L (Lower) amount of frames-per-second, or the H (higher amount) but usually the L (lower).
I almost always pick the Silent option, for multiple reasons: first because it makes less noise (thus less likelihood of scaring away birds or whatever), and second because my ancient E-M1 occasionally exhibits the dreaded stuck shutter phenomenon in either normal or so-called anti-shock modes - whereas in Silent mode, it always functions perfectly 100% of the time.

If the bird is sitting and not moving - then I will occasionally shoot in Aperture mode (which also allows me to stop down a little from wide-open aperture, for more depth of field - say up to f/8). But more of the time I will pick S or Shutter mode - allowing me to pick a faster shutter speed - both in case the bird is flying or takes wing - and also because (and maybe this is the hardest part) if you're trying to shoot at 300mm i.e. the extreme telephoto end, it's sometimes (often) challenging to hold the camera perfectly still - and a higher shutter speed theoretically helps freeze the action.

I've also read that it occasionally helps to move the camera framing around a bit, forcing the camera to refocus in autofocus mode - which supposedly (according to some expert birders) helps. Don't ask me why, please, I can't remember. But speaking of difficulties, the hardest part for me is actually following and framing flying birds and hoping that some of your pictures will be in (acceptable) focus. The keeper rate varies wildly. Sometimes I've also tried following a distant bird with a wider angle initially, then zooming in but trying to keep the bird sort of in (auto)focus before actually pressing the shutter. Long story short: it ain't easy. And, almost assuredly, the newer (and more more expensive) versions of the E-M1, have better and more capable autofocusing.

But I like my old E-M1 - and it is still my main (and pretty much only) 'weapon of choice', when trying to take pictures of birds or distant wildlife. And the inexpensive 75-300mm Zuiko (I have version II) focuses quite quickly and nicely, in my opinion.

Good luck! (something we all need, I think)
 
Thanks alot. Why didn't you switch to backbutton auto focus [AEL] button? I use it for everything stills etc. Way more convenient.
 
Back
Top