Something I have been noticing, Most of the SLR's are now going Live View with Contrast detect AF. Just curious, Isnt that what Point and Shoot's been using all this while?
I was under the impression that Phase detect is the fastest AF available and that Contrast detect by nature is very slow in focussing. Have they improved up the contrast detect AF over the years to make is as good as the phase detect, or Am I missing something here?
yes, contrast detect is what P&S uses, and yes it is still slow; reports at DPR state that on the same camera it is typically slower than phase detect for live view that offer both, even with the mirror flipping involved for phase detect. For those migrating from P&S without much research (or those who might use it enough to wear out the mirror prematurely) the contrast detect could be a nice option though.
So far I have only used the Live View on my 40D on a tripod and with manual focus.
You need the normal autofous sensors for Phase Detect AF, means mirror down, means no live view while focusing. So there is not other option as the normal P&S contrast detect focusing in live view.
Or a fancy mirror setup like the Sony A350, where it can use the phase detect AF in Live View without mirror slap. Pity it comes at the cost of a horrific viewfinder.
IMO Live View is very usefull if you have a tilt/swivel/turn LCD so you can see the LCD when shooting over crowd of people. But that only helps with framing the picture in some situations.
For precise focusing you still need a nice bright and clear viewfinder with either split prism or quality fresnel focusing screen.
So Live View is usefull, but only in marginal situations (at least from my point of view).
I also have mixed feelings about the usefulness of Live View in a DSLR, but the ability to zoom in on the LCD and touch-up focus - as you can do on many of the new Live View cameras is terrific for critical macro and tripod shooting. It is a VERY useful studio-type feature.
The tilt screens and tilt-swivel (like used on the Oly E-3 and Panasonic L-10) are incredible tools for high and low angle shots that are extremely difficult "real-time" with an optical viewfinder stuck to your eye or an LCD screen that only faces straight back.
My point is there are real situations on a DSLR where Live View is indispensible. Like you, I basically considered it a gimmick, but I have found it very useful in several shooting situations.
I find it boils down to Live View being useful *if* a bunch of boxes are ticked. Like, articulated LCD, which is also very high resolution and visible in sunlight, as well as fast AF without mirror slap, as WELL as all this being doable without ending up with a miserable viewfinder or battery life or other such drawbacks. Oh, and the Live View lcd needs to cover 100% of the frame of the shot too.
I suppose in the future that will occur, but at the moment I still class it as somewhere between a gimmick and a minor feature. In other words, not something to base a DSLR purchase on. :)
These 4/3's cameras do look nice but the small "tunnel" optical viewfinder on them are a deal breaker in my opinion. Not to mention the higher noise due to the small pixel size.
While I agree that the optical viewfinder may not be as big as the competition, it's by no means looking through a 'tunnel' as you have been quoted saying.
The E-510/410 sensor has great ISO performance up to ISO400 and usable images at 800. Most of the time you can get by with ISO400, want brighter images? You would be better off with a faster lens instead, and that goes with any camera brand.
I'm not sure what you are talking about necessarily, but it would seem no camera is instant auto focus. It's important to hold the button half way down prior to your shot(not sure if that's something you are doing or not). I have the e510 the model prior to this one and with the exception of very low light the auto focus is very quick. With a shutter speed above 1/50, at low ISO in normal or day time lighting I can achieve a maximum burst around 3 shots per second. If your concerned about action shooting the Olympus SLR probably isn't the camera for you anyway, although in my opinion it won't be because of it's AF. It's smaller size viewfinder, it's limited burst rate of 3 fps, and it's reduced depth of field make it not the ideal camera for that situation. If you are looking for a camera to take absolutely stunning shots of landscapes, family and friends, and general vacation type photography the E520 or 510 are excellent cameras.
I have been looking at many cameras to make a step up and am very excited with what I see on the new Olympus E-520 that is coming out. I have been using a little Sony DSC-H1 and have actually taken some gorgeous photos and for what I have been using it for has been a great camera. I mainly want to advance to something where I can get in closer, take action shots, wildlife and landscapes. The action I take so far is only HS level Field Hockey and actually the little Sony does great however I'd like to be able to zoom in from one end of the field to the other. Do you feel your E-510 would do good on the type of photos I want to take? If so I assume the new E-520 will do as well.
I really don't need a super perfect camera right now for this next step up and I figure if the little Sony takes such clear and nice photos with the Hockey I am bound to be incredibly surprised and happy with the E520 as my next step up?
Any comments?
Thanks so much and have a great day!
marina
What I want to know is when is Olympus going to improve the speed of their auto focus in their 'entry' level DSLR cameras? I have been an Olympus fan for years and my two cameras have been Olympus, however, I havn't even been considering an Olynpus as my first DSLR because I've been so unhappy with focus and shot speed on my c-450 ( i think that's what it is, it's at home, not at school with me).
When are they going to get their stuff together and offer a camera with competetive shot speed (by this I mean lag between when the button is pressed and the camera decides it's able to take the picture)?
From what I've read, I'd buy an update the the now 520, partially because of the kit lenses, but they're really going to have to do something about speed, or lag if you would rather.
Mate with autofocus you need speed and accuracy. The lens bundled with all DSLRs do not have super-sonic motors therefore they are slower to focus. It's not the aufocus system's problem. It's like you blaming your trainer 'cause you cannot run the 100m sprint in under 9s. The Oly AF speed & accuracy is good enough with the kit lens. For professionals who shoot high speed sports you need the extra speed of the super-sonic motors to make sure you capture the full action such as two player playing tennis, you want capture a number of frames of each the shot and subsequent return from the other player. I shoot high speed sports football, motor racing, skate-boarders etc...Without supersonic motor equipped lens, it take a bit more concentration and skill, you anticipate the actyion rather than just react...Equipment is no substitute for photographic skill...
You realize of course that your c-450 is NOT an SLR. Therefore your camera, as well as every other non SLR will have that lag. That is one of the main reasons I upgraded to an SLR in the first place. I have compared the Nikon D40 to the Oly 510 and Oly 300 and can assure you there is no difference in this so called 'shutter lag'. You should do your homework before trying to sway people with your opinion.
Here is a thought, go to a camera shop and try an E510 out, see if you notice any lag between shutter press and shot, I think you will be surprised.
In the quest to find a camera that I feel would be something I would like to have for quite a number of years, I have been looking at the Pentax (previously the K10) K20.
I've looked around at a few sites as preliminary info gathering and the reviews about it's build quality, it's dust removal, the image stabilization in body rather than lense and the drastically improved auto-focus (Supersonic Drive Motor) have led me to believe it will possibly be my camera. The only problem is that the SDM lenses (super fast auto focus) are viciously expensive. However, you get what you pay for. Cutting edge is always outrageous, and good camera lenses have always been on the pricey side.
And I wasn't trying to sway people with my opinion. I simply am looking for a camera which is noted to have very fast auto focus and other features which makes it better than normal entry level.
Except SDM is hardly cutting edge. Canon Ring USM, Nikon SWM, Sigma HSM (at least some versions) are the same thing, and have been around for a while.
The prices have come down though. B&H now has the DA* 16-50 for $699, it was over $800 last year when I suggested it as an option (with a K10D) to a friend looking for an SLR. I'd guessed the price would be in the same ballpark as the Tamron 17-50, not double.
Actually the K20D isn't super fast autofocus, neither are SDM lenses.
They also aren't viciously expensive, they are actually a lot cheaper than the top end lenses available in other ranges, so you get a lot of value for money.
I own a K20D and a DA* SDM lens btw. :)
On topic, Olympus always have attractive features and innovation, but I can never get over their 2x crop, relatively noisy sensors. Pity.
You really should do a little research, and you will discover that it is quite common to see a marked shutter lag on point and shoot cameras, however, the DSLR variants do not have the same problem. This applies to most brands, not just Olympus. This camera is capable of shooting multiple frames at >3 frames per second. Auto Focus speed is another issue, and is to some degree a function of cost. Entry level cameras and lenses are normally not as fast as their higher priced brethren, better technology costs more money.
I am well aware that there is some shutter lag on point and shoot (and I always have depressed the button half way to focus when trying to take pictures, for anyone else). I've been doing some research, and what I have read is that the Olympus entry level DSLR's are terribly slow on the auto focus. I don't have any experience with them, however, and I'm am (probably mistakenly) applying my poor experience with a fairly expensive point and shoot camera to the entry level DSLR's that are made by the same manufacturer. I have read in another article by Wesley that the auto focus has improved on the C-3, in terms of speed, but that the improved technology has not yet made it down to the entry level cameras, even though they have been improved somewhat as well.
From what I have read, as of now, my ideal camera would be something like the Pentax K20, but something that sounds a little more beginner friendly, like the Sony 350, or perhaps by the time I am ready to purchase (it'll be another 1 1/2 years before I'm out of grad school) an improved auto focus entry level Olympus. I was expecting something like a 610 based on previous model numbering. We'll have to see.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
Back to Article
punchkin - Saturday, May 17, 2008 - link
... nobody edits these articles. The writer should enroll in the closest community college English program post-haste.allajunaki - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
Something I have been noticing, Most of the SLR's are now going Live View with Contrast detect AF. Just curious, Isnt that what Point and Shoot's been using all this while?I was under the impression that Phase detect is the fastest AF available and that Contrast detect by nature is very slow in focussing. Have they improved up the contrast detect AF over the years to make is as good as the phase detect, or Am I missing something here?
strikeback03 - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
yes, contrast detect is what P&S uses, and yes it is still slow; reports at DPR state that on the same camera it is typically slower than phase detect for live view that offer both, even with the mirror flipping involved for phase detect. For those migrating from P&S without much research (or those who might use it enough to wear out the mirror prematurely) the contrast detect could be a nice option though.So far I have only used the Live View on my 40D on a tripod and with manual focus.
haplo602 - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
You need the normal autofous sensors for Phase Detect AF, means mirror down, means no live view while focusing. So there is not other option as the normal P&S contrast detect focusing in live view.Maxington - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
Or a fancy mirror setup like the Sony A350, where it can use the phase detect AF in Live View without mirror slap. Pity it comes at the cost of a horrific viewfinder.Live View is a waste of time on DSLR imo anyway.
haplo602 - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
IMO Live View is very usefull if you have a tilt/swivel/turn LCD so you can see the LCD when shooting over crowd of people. But that only helps with framing the picture in some situations.For precise focusing you still need a nice bright and clear viewfinder with either split prism or quality fresnel focusing screen.
So Live View is usefull, but only in marginal situations (at least from my point of view).
Wesley Fink - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
I also have mixed feelings about the usefulness of Live View in a DSLR, but the ability to zoom in on the LCD and touch-up focus - as you can do on many of the new Live View cameras is terrific for critical macro and tripod shooting. It is a VERY useful studio-type feature.The tilt screens and tilt-swivel (like used on the Oly E-3 and Panasonic L-10) are incredible tools for high and low angle shots that are extremely difficult "real-time" with an optical viewfinder stuck to your eye or an LCD screen that only faces straight back.
My point is there are real situations on a DSLR where Live View is indispensible. Like you, I basically considered it a gimmick, but I have found it very useful in several shooting situations.
Maxington - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
I find it boils down to Live View being useful *if* a bunch of boxes are ticked. Like, articulated LCD, which is also very high resolution and visible in sunlight, as well as fast AF without mirror slap, as WELL as all this being doable without ending up with a miserable viewfinder or battery life or other such drawbacks. Oh, and the Live View lcd needs to cover 100% of the frame of the shot too.I suppose in the future that will occur, but at the moment I still class it as somewhere between a gimmick and a minor feature. In other words, not something to base a DSLR purchase on. :)
GTVic - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
At the bottom of the page you mention "is available in Live View on the $599 E-510". Should that be "E-520"?Wesley Fink - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
Corrected. Thanks.frombauer - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
These 4/3's cameras do look nice but the small "tunnel" optical viewfinder on them are a deal breaker in my opinion. Not to mention the higher noise due to the small pixel size.7thSerapHim - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
While I agree that the optical viewfinder may not be as big as the competition, it's by no means looking through a 'tunnel' as you have been quoted saying.The E-510/410 sensor has great ISO performance up to ISO400 and usable images at 800. Most of the time you can get by with ISO400, want brighter images? You would be better off with a faster lens instead, and that goes with any camera brand.
Stop pixel peeping, people!
Mavtek - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
I'm not sure what you are talking about necessarily, but it would seem no camera is instant auto focus. It's important to hold the button half way down prior to your shot(not sure if that's something you are doing or not). I have the e510 the model prior to this one and with the exception of very low light the auto focus is very quick. With a shutter speed above 1/50, at low ISO in normal or day time lighting I can achieve a maximum burst around 3 shots per second. If your concerned about action shooting the Olympus SLR probably isn't the camera for you anyway, although in my opinion it won't be because of it's AF. It's smaller size viewfinder, it's limited burst rate of 3 fps, and it's reduced depth of field make it not the ideal camera for that situation. If you are looking for a camera to take absolutely stunning shots of landscapes, family and friends, and general vacation type photography the E520 or 510 are excellent cameras.marina - Sunday, May 18, 2008 - link
I have been looking at many cameras to make a step up and am very excited with what I see on the new Olympus E-520 that is coming out. I have been using a little Sony DSC-H1 and have actually taken some gorgeous photos and for what I have been using it for has been a great camera. I mainly want to advance to something where I can get in closer, take action shots, wildlife and landscapes. The action I take so far is only HS level Field Hockey and actually the little Sony does great however I'd like to be able to zoom in from one end of the field to the other. Do you feel your E-510 would do good on the type of photos I want to take? If so I assume the new E-520 will do as well.I really don't need a super perfect camera right now for this next step up and I figure if the little Sony takes such clear and nice photos with the Hockey I am bound to be incredibly surprised and happy with the E520 as my next step up?
Any comments?
Thanks so much and have a great day!
marina
teldar - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
What I want to know is when is Olympus going to improve the speed of their auto focus in their 'entry' level DSLR cameras? I have been an Olympus fan for years and my two cameras have been Olympus, however, I havn't even been considering an Olynpus as my first DSLR because I've been so unhappy with focus and shot speed on my c-450 ( i think that's what it is, it's at home, not at school with me).When are they going to get their stuff together and offer a camera with competetive shot speed (by this I mean lag between when the button is pressed and the camera decides it's able to take the picture)?
From what I've read, I'd buy an update the the now 520, partially because of the kit lenses, but they're really going to have to do something about speed, or lag if you would rather.
T
Haider - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
Mate with autofocus you need speed and accuracy. The lens bundled with all DSLRs do not have super-sonic motors therefore they are slower to focus. It's not the aufocus system's problem. It's like you blaming your trainer 'cause you cannot run the 100m sprint in under 9s. The Oly AF speed & accuracy is good enough with the kit lens. For professionals who shoot high speed sports you need the extra speed of the super-sonic motors to make sure you capture the full action such as two player playing tennis, you want capture a number of frames of each the shot and subsequent return from the other player. I shoot high speed sports football, motor racing, skate-boarders etc...Without supersonic motor equipped lens, it take a bit more concentration and skill, you anticipate the actyion rather than just react...Equipment is no substitute for photographic skill...Abdar - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
You realize of course that your c-450 is NOT an SLR. Therefore your camera, as well as every other non SLR will have that lag. That is one of the main reasons I upgraded to an SLR in the first place. I have compared the Nikon D40 to the Oly 510 and Oly 300 and can assure you there is no difference in this so called 'shutter lag'. You should do your homework before trying to sway people with your opinion.Here is a thought, go to a camera shop and try an E510 out, see if you notice any lag between shutter press and shot, I think you will be surprised.
teldar - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
In the quest to find a camera that I feel would be something I would like to have for quite a number of years, I have been looking at the Pentax (previously the K10) K20.I've looked around at a few sites as preliminary info gathering and the reviews about it's build quality, it's dust removal, the image stabilization in body rather than lense and the drastically improved auto-focus (Supersonic Drive Motor) have led me to believe it will possibly be my camera. The only problem is that the SDM lenses (super fast auto focus) are viciously expensive. However, you get what you pay for. Cutting edge is always outrageous, and good camera lenses have always been on the pricey side.
And I wasn't trying to sway people with my opinion. I simply am looking for a camera which is noted to have very fast auto focus and other features which makes it better than normal entry level.
strikeback03 - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
Except SDM is hardly cutting edge. Canon Ring USM, Nikon SWM, Sigma HSM (at least some versions) are the same thing, and have been around for a while.The prices have come down though. B&H now has the DA* 16-50 for $699, it was over $800 last year when I suggested it as an option (with a K10D) to a friend looking for an SLR. I'd guessed the price would be in the same ballpark as the Tamron 17-50, not double.
Maxington - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
Actually the K20D isn't super fast autofocus, neither are SDM lenses.They also aren't viciously expensive, they are actually a lot cheaper than the top end lenses available in other ranges, so you get a lot of value for money.
I own a K20D and a DA* SDM lens btw. :)
On topic, Olympus always have attractive features and innovation, but I can never get over their 2x crop, relatively noisy sensors. Pity.
rgsaunders - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
You really should do a little research, and you will discover that it is quite common to see a marked shutter lag on point and shoot cameras, however, the DSLR variants do not have the same problem. This applies to most brands, not just Olympus. This camera is capable of shooting multiple frames at >3 frames per second. Auto Focus speed is another issue, and is to some degree a function of cost. Entry level cameras and lenses are normally not as fast as their higher priced brethren, better technology costs more money.teldar - Wednesday, May 14, 2008 - link
I am well aware that there is some shutter lag on point and shoot (and I always have depressed the button half way to focus when trying to take pictures, for anyone else). I've been doing some research, and what I have read is that the Olympus entry level DSLR's are terribly slow on the auto focus. I don't have any experience with them, however, and I'm am (probably mistakenly) applying my poor experience with a fairly expensive point and shoot camera to the entry level DSLR's that are made by the same manufacturer. I have read in another article by Wesley that the auto focus has improved on the C-3, in terms of speed, but that the improved technology has not yet made it down to the entry level cameras, even though they have been improved somewhat as well.From what I have read, as of now, my ideal camera would be something like the Pentax K20, but something that sounds a little more beginner friendly, like the Sony 350, or perhaps by the time I am ready to purchase (it'll be another 1 1/2 years before I'm out of grad school) an improved auto focus entry level Olympus. I was expecting something like a 610 based on previous model numbering. We'll have to see.
T
Deadtrees - Thursday, May 15, 2008 - link
Your ideal camera wouldn't be Pentax K20D as it has quite slow AF under low light.