I know you will call me crazy or fanboy but I seriously believe mirrorlesss cameras are the future. DSLR still have some clear advantages and one of them is known to be the faster autofocus performance. Today TheCameraStoreTV team posted this autofocus shootout video to see how close the latest generation mirrorless camera are compared to the king of sports photography, the $6,500 Nikon D4s. Chris tested the Fuji X-T1, Sony A6000, Olympus E-M1 and Panasonic GH4.
Well according to their tests the Panasonic GH4 autofocus performance is damn close to the Nikon which is a huge surprise in face of the massive price difference. Yes, the day will come when a Mirrorless camera (maybe a GH5?) will match the best DSLR autofocus.
GH4 North American preorders, shipping date and price:
GH4 camera at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Ritz Camera and Panasonic. Price: $1,698. In Canada at Vistek.
GH4 camera with interface unit at Adorama and BHphoto. Price: $3,298
Interface unit only at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Panasonic. Price: $1,998
GH4 Europen preorders, shipping date and price:
Germany: Wexcameras, Marcotec-shop.de.
UK at Wexphotographic, CameraWorld, UKdigital, CVP, TipTop.
Holland at Fotohanskeuzekamp.
Belgium at Fotokonijnenberg.
Norway at Fotovideo.
Sweden at Cyberphoto, Skandinavianphoto.
Finland at Telefoto, Topshot, Verkkoauppa.
France at Photocineshop.
Spain: Fotoboom.
Asian preorders, shipping date and price:
Digitalrev and Digidirect Australia.
4K cards
Kingston 16-32-64 GB SDHC UHS-I Speed Class 3 at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
Sandisk 16-32-64 GB Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II Memory Card at Amazon (Click here), Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
Transcend 64-128 GB High Speed 10 UHS-3 at Amazon (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
Panasonic 16-32-64 GB SDHC-UHS-I U3 Card (90MB/s) at Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here).
224 Responses
Olympus is really slacking. They are getting spanked by Pana on stills and video front now. The next GH or GX series camera will have much improved IBIS and there will be no reason to stick with Oly
why would that be a problem? IN most cases one is always better then the other. If you want the best pick the one which fullfills your needs.
There are two word that annoy me when comparing cameras: “spank” and “kill”. Really? Does a camera need to assault its rivals? Any of these cameras will be good enough, better than most photographers anyway (myself included).
I bought the E-M1 this year. Main reason for my upgrade was to photograph my kids sports. Have been very happy with the performance on outdoor sports, such as rugby and netball, but not so much indoors. Still, that’s mainly a lens issue, and the new Olympus 40-150/2.8 should sort that out.
A couple of points to make:
-when shooting sports, you usually use C-AF, not S-AF, so the second part of the test was a bit meaningless, to me. Especially as the E-M1 uses CDAF only in S-AF, but a combo of PDAF/CDAF in C-AF.
-It’s also a good move to turn the review completely off in C-AF, then there is no noticeable screen blackout.
One noteable sequence I took soon after getting the E-M1 was a try scored in 2 phases from the 22: using the Olympus 75-300, I was able to zoom out (from 230 to 75mm), taking around 50 images of the play with about 40 of them in perfect focus. Most of the out of focus images were due to the subject moving out of the centre zone, because I hadn’t learned to turn the review off at that stage.
I’m happy with it. Would the GH4 be better? Possibly, but I’ve no urge to spank or kill my E-M1……
When OMD EM-1 came out, Panasonic was getting the same kind of critics.
But really, what do you mean by “slacking” ? How do you know that Olympus’s R&D is taking it easy?
The beauty of m43’s shared ecosystem is that no matter who is doing better at one point in time, in the end it’s every user who benefits from it, being a pany user or an Oly user, it does not matter. I have Oly and Pany bodies, I have Oly and Pany lenses, all of this back and forth bickering between so-called fanboys is utter nonsense and makes me LOL because it’s quite clear from their duopolist mentality that they came from either a canon or nikon background, which makes them struggle with the concept of a shared-ecosystem.
Ah, i wont go that far, but still, the pany is awesome!
Pity they did not test Oly with Oly lens. Focusing speed quite depends on lens used.
Yes, definitely!
Yes, that’s a really weird choice. I can’t even understand why they didn’t notice it… the comparaison is not very fair…
They can use Olympus Zuiko 40-150mm f/4-5.6 ED… but is that lens really what you want it to test with???
no there is no Oly 70-200mm equivalent zoom out yet, and even if there is a mythical Oly lens like that , I am pretty sure the GH 4 focuses better than the EM1.
when there isnt an Olympus lens with a focal length / aperture that was needed, what else should they do?
I personally would be still doubtful of the GH4’s DFD. Probably until I handle it myself. Pana can convince me of DFD’s superiority by adding it to GX7 via firmware update. 😉
But the biggest surprise to me is the A6000: so Sony has finally fixed their AF system. It’s rather sad (and ironically, un-surprising) though that that happened at the same time as they have effectively abandoned APS-C lens development. They have finally got it right – down to the price point, but just as they did they waved a hand and said “oh fsck it, we don’t want to do it anymore”. I expected more considerate strategy from Sony.
do you think the dfd could be put to gx7 via firmware ?
and even if yes…I would say they will keep it for the new model of GX rather then put into 7 …
Considering the GX7’s price, and devaluation of S/H gear, few of current GX7 owners would jump on the GX8.
OTOH Pana can earn themselves few points by updating older cameras so that the GX7 owners would rather buy the GX9 rather than something from the competition.
“Look after the customer and the business will take care of itself.”
Hardware-wise I kinda doubt it, the camera body needs to analyze the entire lens profile catalog and each particular lens OOF characteristics, it would be nice if it could be done with a FW update but I kinda doubt the GX7’s dual core processor can do all of that as efficiently as the Gh4 quad-core’s.
You are not crazy, only the stubborn ones will think that cameras with mirrors will continue to exist. once the technology makes the gap small enough, and pros will be able to get choice in long fast FL for the mirrorless, and possibly Canon & Nikon give in to make mirrorless versions of their top of the line models, a switch inside the brains of the masses will see it as a new trend.And suddenly mirrors are only used in mediumformat cameras which will get the transformation later on. But we know mankind is a mix of flexibility and stubborness, so only time will tell hehe.
yeah you got it all right. I have the D4s , GH4 , D800E ,A6000 and A7R, and I have to say the D4s is just slightly better in tracking C focus mode, but the GH4 is far more accurate and it is super small in comparison. with the excellent 4k video combined with excellent still camera capability, there is no doubt that most of people just appreciate the GH4 and pick it over anything mentioned above( unless you don’t really care for any of GH’s video capability, in that case , then the Sony A6000 is your pick).
all that having said though, I really really wish the A7R gets the A6000 AF and the gH4 class video……. then it would be the ideal one camera solution for me.
but I think I much prefer the small form factor of the mirrorless bodies and It won’t be very long for me to decide finally going all mirrorless , I think if next gen A7 gets at least the AF speed of the A6000 or GH4 , I would sell all my D-SLRs…….But Panasonic needs to work much harder at developing great flash system like the Nikon CLS.
anyway, this is again another well done video that honestly showing how much life left in Nikon Canon loud mirror craps and only die hard Canon Nikon fanboys still look down on the GH4 kind of camera.
The GH4 or any mFT for that matter are all sadly lacking in the image quality dept. If you actually owned the cameras you claim you wouldn’t be claiming otherwise.
The problem with being a liar is that you need to remember what you have previously claimed . So you state that you own the D4s at the beginning of your post a $6300 camera that became available less than 3 months ago .Then at the end you comment on the crap Nikon and Canon gear lol.
I wonder what is more likely A: you paid $6400 for a D4s that you think is crap or B: you are a lying mFT fanboy who doesn’t own any of the gear listed. I know what I think.
From the rather fundamental aspect of image quality even the best mFT falls behind even the cheapest DSLR.s from Nikon , Pentax & Sony it also lags behind the Sony and Fuji mirrorless cameras.
BobTB. Wide ranging statements like…
“The GH4 or any mFT for that matter are all sadly lacking in the image quality dept.”
and…
“From the rather fundamental aspect of image quality even the best mFT falls behind even the cheapest DSLR.s from Nikon , Pentax & Sony it also lags behind the Sony and Fuji mirrorless cameras.”
are meaningless. You need to be specific and qualify what you are saying. If you’d tried the cameras you are commenting on you’d realise this.
@woofwoof I have been using mFT since it began alongside my FF Nikon gear. There has been no worthwhile gain in image quality in mFT since the E-M5 which puts it firmly behind the best APS and well behind the best FF.
In every image quality category you care to mention mFT lags behind the best APS & obviously FF. For me personally the weaknesses are low ISO shadow/sky noise , poor high ISO ,along with some seriously overpriced gear { in an image quality to price ratio} . For video I am very happy with my GH3 and have just ordered the GH4. My points were more to do with the BS posts of JK , who has clearly never touched let alone owned any of the cameras he claims.
I am happy to post links to RAW files taken with any of my gear { GH3/GX7 ,D800 A7r } it would be nice to see some of JK’s shots .I think I will wait a while for that he has posted in every rumour site claiming all sorts.
Is any of that DXO-wankfest going to make a difference to the people who SEE your images ? Are DXO scores going manifest themselves in your prints or flickr/facebook/whatever ? Can your tablet even show those differences to people ? are you going to carry a state-of-the-art monitor to show your pictures around ? Do photography contests ask for 100% crops ? Do normal consumers even know about sensor sizes ?
JUST WHERE IN THE WORLD DOES ANY OF THOSE NUMBERS MAKE A DIFFERENCE ? Let’s get real people, the only place where people wank to this stuff is niche forums/websites like this, the end consumer does not give a nut about any of it, they only hear megapixels and zoom ratios…And even if they did, if you showed them m4/3 and APS-C/FF photos side by side they wouldn’t be able to tell the difference (as a matter of fact, not even DPreview forum dwellers can reliably tell them apart), Now, if you showed them m4/3 lenses against mirrorless APS-C/FF lenses, now THEN they could clearly see an actual difference.
What matters most to users is CONVENIENCE! otherwise smartphones wouldn’t be such a success right now. That means size:weight:IQ ratio and both APS-C and FF loose on both size and weight, specially on DSLRs. I really pity APS-C/FF trolls because they’re still hostages of canikony’s marketing departments just as much as the most ignorant of P&S users, they’re still prey to spec sheets and meaningless numbers. What matters most in the end is the actual photos and for them to exist there needs to be a camera around and nowadays that camera is a smartphone not a Full Frame D4s. The remaining 0,0000001% declare themselves pros, that means they WORK with their gear, that means traveling outside of their neighborhood or town, and I bet ANYTHING they would rather have to carry less weight 100% of the time (weight limits and strain), or for that same weight carry more gear; APS-C cannot deliver that nor can FF, they will always remain big and heavy.
The only thing with which canikony can still praise themselves on kicking Panasonic and Olympus’s ass is marketing. PanOly have utterly failed to use CONVENIENCE as a marketing tool in their campaign to introduce mirrorless to the masses and pros, that’s the only failing of this system : ADVERTISING.
Bob, Is any of that DXO-wankfest going to make a difference to the people who SEE your images ? Are DXO scores going manifest themselves in your prints or flickr/facebook/whatever ? Can your tablet even show those differences to people ? are you going to carry a state-of-the-art 60inch monitor to show your pictures around at 100%? Do photography contests ask for 100% crops ? Do Dxo mark win you worldpress photos or Natgeo contests ? Do normal consumers even know about sensor sizes ?
JUST WHERE IN THE WORLD DOES ANY OF THOSE NUMBERS MAKE A DIFFERENCE ? Let’s get real people, the only place where people get off to this stuff is niche forums/websites like this, the end consumer does not give a nut about any of it, they only hear megapixels and zoom ratios…And even if they did, if you showed them m4/3 and APS-C/FF photos side by side they wouldn’t be able to tell the difference (as a matter of fact, not even DPreview forum dwellers can reliably tell them apart), Now, if you showed them m4/3 lenses against mirrorless APS-C/FF lenses, now, THEN they could clearly see an actual difference.
yeah yeah, DOF this DOF that…when did good photography sudenly become all about blowing every contextual content out of a photo ? Only on portraits does that become desirable SOMETIMES, and even then, you can still use f0.95 lenses or speedboost already fast ff glass which you won’t be able to use to speedboost on their native mounts.
What matters most to users is CONVENIENCE! otherwise smartphones wouldn’t be such a success right now. That means size:weight:IQ ratio and both APS-C and FF loose on both size and weight, specially on DSLRs. I really pity APS-C/FF trolls because they’re still hostages of canikony’s marketing departments just as much as the most ignorant of P&S users, they’re still prey to spec sheets and meaningless numbers. What matters most in the end is the actual photos and for them to exist there needs to be a camera around and nowadays that camera is a smartphone not a Full Frame D4s. The remaining 0,0000001% who declare themselves pros WORK with their gear, that means traveling outside of their neighborhood or town, and I bet ANYTHING they would rather have to carry less weight 100% of the time (weight limits on planes and/or strain), or for that same weight carry more gear; APS-C cannot deliver that nor can FF, they will always remain big and heavy, meanwhile sensor tech will keep getting better.
The only thing with which canikony can still praise themselves on kicking Panasonic and Olympus’s ass is marketing. PanOly have utterly failed to use CONVENIENCE as a marketing tool in their campaign to introduce mirrorless to both the masses and pros, that’s the only failing of this system : ADVERTISING.
the A7R beats the D800E everybody knows it , compare them at IR comparameter. unlike DXO IR is honest, showing just images not silly over all scores. in fact if DXO did not rank them just show us the detailed numbers , then they should deserve a bit more respect, but since they do the ranking thing, they lost all due respect from us.
anyway, the problem with DXO is they do not take resolution detail micro contrast ,etc into serious consideration. I do not care how good Nikon DR is only at base ISO but I do care DR at ISO1600 and resolution at ISO50. the A7R at ISO50 is truly amazing almost as good as Leica S2 or similar MF camera, the D800E is a bit better than the A7R at higher ISO, but at the base ISO100 the A7R beats it , I know then Thom or many Nikon fans talk about the posterization or Sony 10 bit RAW thing to demean it….but you won’t see it in real print. so for me the A7R is the true winner in 35mm format and the gh4 is the best most veratile ILC camera ever made , period. but I am not just selling my D800E since I have the Zeiss 21mm , Zeiss 35mm f1.4 and 135mm f2 Sonnar, they are the only reasons why I still own that camera aside from the NPS thing. to me video is becoming more and more important these days, and I know by 2016 ,we will have 8k cameras and we just take a few images out of 60p 8k images.
I cannot get my A7r to beat my D800E at base ISO. So I’d have to suspect that you’re either not seeing something or you don’t have totally optimized post processing.
You’re trying to make an argument that is self contradictory here. You claim that the A7r is the best, but then you also equivocate by using terms like “you won’t see it in print.” In essence, that boils down to the “good enough” argument. If that’s your point, that the A7r is “good enough,” then I won’t debate you. It probably is for most people. If your point is that the A7r produces a better data set that can produce the best possible images, then I will debate you, because you are incorrect.
As for the “take images out of 60p 8K cameras” you need to learn more about video. At 60p your shutter speed is going to be something like 1/80. While you can crank that up higher, doing so takes the intraframe blur out and makes the video look too edgy. Moreover, you may have rolling shutter issues. So you can’t always do a frame grab to get your still. Indeed, Sony themselves offer a solution: they will do a between frame still grab if you press the still capture button (e.g. see the AX100). We need a bit more flexibility on that, and ultimately, it would be nice to have that automated so that we have, say, 60p video and 6 fps stills captured simultaneously, but just grabbing the video feed isn’t going to always work.
Typical DSLR fanboy speech lol…
Facts are facts for a fraction the price of the best mFT gear you can get better results . Even the cheapest lowest end Nikon DSLR will easily outperform the best mFT can offer. As for FF lets not even go there!
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D3300-versus-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-versus-Nikon-D800E___928_909_814
I could care less about AF speed mFT is fine for me I have been using mFT since the 2009 GF1. Sooner or later = JK ? lol
I meant, sooner or later mirrored cameras will be niche only. Hopefully you restricted it to nikon (dxo) cause canon is already behind most mirrorless cameras.. lol
and the mirror shock and loud slapping mirror making sound really scared tiny bugs which I shoot most of morning. the GH4 has complete silent mode and it really works. and Panasonic is now working on organic sensor and it may allow an APS-C to actually better a so -called FF some day very soon. the first organic sensor camera from Fuji is coming end of this year(I am not sure it will be called XT2 or Xpro2 , though).
not many informed people trust DXO after their D800E vs D800 result came out , and Thom Hogan is a big Nikon supporter , so why do you trust him saying the Nikon is indeed better than the Sony. I know the Sony A7R beats the D800E at least in the area of sheer resolution or resolving power, the problem with the DXO testing is that they do not signify resolution, they are too partial to base ISO DR, so for many it is useless test.
I’m a big photography supporter. That I make some money from documenting Nikon cameras–and in particular their complexity and foibles–is irrelevant. I’ll use the best product for any given situation, regardless of brand.
Given the A7r’s mirror slap problems and lack of lenses, I’d say you’d have a real problem getting better images out of yours than I do out of my D800E right now. Moreover, you’d have 11-bit data that’s compressed and produces artifacts and I’d have 14-bit data that isn’t compressed.
My suspicion is that you’re shooting JPEGs. Nikon OOC JPEGs are notoriously soft, and it has to do with the way they encode the Fourier transform, which is different than most other companies, but also doesn’t tend to put JPEG artifacts into the data stream.
Lots of pros switching to the GH4 for video work ( especially from the Canon camp. I switched from Canon 3 years ago ), and some still-photo pros are switching to m43 for a compact professional system.
If still-photo is your ONLY thing, then nothing beats the Nikon D800 for maximum detail, or the Canon 1DX / Nikon D4s for sports and action photography, but these FF systems are anything but compact.
have you ever tried the A7R?
if you haven’t try it and compare it to the D800E (I have both the Sony and the Nikon), the A7R is always sharper regardless of ISO speed or aperture used than the D800E. the A7R has no AA filter , the D800E just has cancelling filter not ture AA-less.
He didn’t say that he bought them. He said that he had them.
right , many people just use D4s at Nikon SC or like that , and many use rented Phase for his or her work, nothing wrong with it.
Would be important to know that. Someone renting a Nikon D4s isn’t likely to be mastering its autofocus system, which is quite complex and nuanced.
This is actually one of the reasons why I haven’t written about the mirrorless autofocus systems all that much. It takes time and practice to learn how to extract the best possible performance out of every one of them. Just expecting “magic” is a good way to mis-evaluate what they can and can’t do well. Many autofocus options are situational, at best.
But this is what I expect from a good review site: first make yourself acquainted with the system, then make a well thought out test and report. This test seems more to be about getting clicks. However, as a scientist I approach things differently and want t expect the same from the reviewers.
D4s does not cost 6300, for most maybe, we have long time NPS connection and this is the only one reason I still shoot Nikon main.
Have you ever thought about donating some funds to a well worth charity instead of buying so many useless consumerist goods?
actually none of your business.
When it gets to the point when mirrorless are being sold at best buy. Most people(masses) will not even realize the mirror is missing from the camera. They don’t even know they have mirrors right now.
Best Buy sold Panasonic micro Four-Thirds equipment for a while, but they kept finding places to hide it. It reminds me of when they were first selling Apple’s iPods. They would put them on a shelf that was nearly on the floor, as there was apparently no money in selling them.
Even Sam’s Club gave mirror-less equipment more respect than Best Buy has.
Agreed. I remember when BB carried the PM2 and you could tell they had no idea what to do with it. Didn’t help that the Oly kit lens looks cheap. On the endcap they had a nice NEX display though, so I’m sure they move some of those.
isnt DFD only supported by the 14-140mm and the 12-35mm? if they used the 35-100mm lens, this should be good news for anybody with olympus lenses
DFD is supported for Panasonic lenses.
Wrong. Let me quote the Panasonic GH4 Press Kit:
The high-precision Contrast AF system in the GH4 is further enhanced by Panasonic’s integration of DFD (Depth from Defocus) technology which shortens the time to focus to achieve ultra high speed AF of approx.0.07 sec. *3
*3: In AFS, With LUMIX G VARIO 14-140mm / F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / POWER O.I.S. or LUMIX G X VARIO 12-35mm / F2.8 ASPH. / POWER O.I.S.
so what you saw in that video wasnt even DFD, because it doesnt work with this lens and neither does it work in AFF/AFC mode.
No, you are wrong. The *3 quotr refers to the measured speed which was apparently 0.07s only with 14-140 and 12-35. Panasonic said that DFD works with all their lenses and future lenses will have the data on their chips.
They meant body chips not lens chips, It’s not lens-dependent, they meant future lenses will be supported because their profiles can easily be incorporated via firmware
No, thy said current lenses are supported by GH4 only because they don’t have the data on them and GH4 has them in its memory. But future lenses will incorporate the data in themself and the camera will receive the data when you turn it on and the lens is mounted. This involves the less hussle for everyone. This means that DFD will work properely on bodies even after the don’t receive FW updates anymore (I guess they will start to put this in lower end models as well).
All the better then.
How do you know that I even saw the video? I didn’t mention it.
I was referring to several Panasonic managers on video mentioning that all Panasonic lens profiles are available in the GH4 for DFD.
Would have been interesting with test of autofocus when recording video.
It would probably be a disaster.
The Canon D70 would win the video AF test, but it has it’s own set of imaging problems ( i.e. moire, aliasing, etc… ) when shooting video.
like the video a lot
what impress me 1st was how the sony lens is big…basicaly its huge :-)…the pana 35-100 looks accurate on em1 and gh4 too…its so nice lens
than I am happy we have 2 superb bodies in m43 stable 😉
By Nikon’s own admission a mirrorless camera already out-performs their flagship DSLR in terms of focus speed. Strange that The Camera Store didn’t include the Nikon1 in their test/show-down.
I was just about to mention this. I wish he had tested the 1 series. I know the sensor is smaller but it is pretty amazing. All of these cameras kick ass. We live in a great time as camera dorks.
Maybe because there are more, and more important, reasons to select and use a camera and camera system than just autofocus speed.
But this test was all about autofocus, so why not include a Nikon 1 camera?
Do you think they should add Pentax Q?
Pentax Q isn’t known for its great AF performance, but Nikon 1 is.
I know NIkon 1 is best AF in mirrorless. Just my guessing The camera store TV isn’t interested in Nikon 1 for comparing, I don’t know reason why.Maybe Everyone knows Nikon 1 is best for AF in mirroless, so don’t need compare.
They chose SYSTEM cameras, the Nikon 1 is indeed unbelievably fast but it has not develop a large enough ecosystem of its own yet , it’s just a line of cameras with a couple of lenses, there’s very little system around them (much like NEX in the beginning). Sony, Fuji and specially m43 are already there which is why they tested them against another well established system camera. The whole point of the test was to compare for the reliability factor that system camera users (pros for the most part) usually look out for.
The Nikon 1 doesn’t have a high end telephoto zoom, so it couldn’t properly compete.
Nikon 1 doesn’t have ANY high-end lenses. Period.
Adapting high-end Nikon FX lenses doesn’t count.
You sound like a full frame user making fun of m4/3.
kinda, but then again he’s not talking about sensor size, which is ALL aps-c/ff trolls do, but actual lens catalog, which in this case is a valid point.
Come on brother. I like how nobody on the internet can’t give a compliment to a system that they do not own. It is ok to not be the best in all aspects. Facts are facts. The nikon 1 stinks in areas but speed is not one of them.
I do recognize that nikon’s 1 system is a speed demon, their bodies are fast as light but as a ¨system¨ they’re not competitive, and they’re not meant to be, nikon is making sure of that, otherwise they would cannibalize themselves. The fact that nikon themselves are actively crippling their own timid attempt at mirorless doesn’t give me any sense of projection for the future or any confidence for that matter. I say timid not because of the sensor size, that would be hypocrite, but in terms of systematization. The cameras themselves are very nice but they don’t take the mirrorles concept very far, they’re not as versatile or adaptable to as many conditions as m4/3 or other systems. I put it in a niche similar to Leica’s T system, it’s just there to avoid loyalists from becoming critics who would otherwise criticize the company for not joining mirrorless.
The ways in which Nikon “cripples” the Nikon 1 are twofold: price too high, and lack of compatibility with the CLS flashes. That’s about it.
I can put more different lenses that autofocus on my Nikon 1 than I can on any of the other mirrorless systems right now. Canon’s not far behind. While there are gaps in the Nikon 1 native lens lineup (as there are in virtually all the mirrorless camera lineups), it has as many native lenses as Fujifilm, for instance. They’re just targeted slightly different.
I’d consider the 32mm f1.2 relatively high-end.
Adapting high-end Nikon FX lenses DOES count, as the AF-S lenses DO autofocus, and support VR, and autoexposure.
Possibly true, though even with the 30-110mm the Nikon 1 would have held it’s own in this test.
What are you talking about? Fujifilm: 12 lenses. Nikon 1: 12 lenses. Nikon 1: GPS, underwater housings, flash units, more. So how is the Nikon 1 not a system?
A sane opinion in the midst of this joyous chorus! 🙂
(at least under the 43 rumors it can be understood but the mirrorless rumors guy is boasting about nothing)
Are you sure about that? The typical line Nikon uses is “With a blazing-fast Advanced Hybrid Autofocus System and the world’s fastest continuous shooting frame rate…” which is not the same thing as “out-performs…DSLR…in focus speed.”
Where the Nikon 1 has a place in my sports bag is because of the 20 fps with focus and 60 fps with focus fixed on initial point. My D4s can’t do either of those things (well, it can take video, but then I’d be at 2mp ;~). Also because it’s electronic shutter means I can do 60 fps without noise (e.g. shoot golf swings).
Note that V3 isn’t in stock on their site, either. So it may simply be that they didn’t have one to use in the test.
Good point Thom – I guess there are various ways and conditions we might measure AF speed. Have a look at these tests though when you have a chance. Are they ‘real world’ valid? Love to hear your thoughts.
—
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fdsxYFW-6Y
The original article here in German
http://www.pdfmagaz.in/46260917-foto-magazin-august-2013/
The summary of the result:
1st: Nikon1 V2 91% accuracy.
2bd: D4 72%
3rd: 1Dx 71%
4th: 7D 63%
5th: G6 57%
6th: NX300 56%
7th: K-5II 48%
8th: D7100 47%
9th: EM5: 38%
10th: A99 33%
11th: Nex-6 32%
12th: A77 9%
Okay, look at page 56 and you’ll see the problem with autofocus testing: inconsistent position of the subject.
It appears from that particular example that they start with the center focus sensor, too, so how the camera is actually set to look for focus beyond the starting sensor is going to come into play. Moreover, there’s another problem that will appear in that situation: if you DO keep the subject dead center you’re going to eventually hit a low contrast and problematic area with the focus sensor (reflections off windshield or hood).
Note as the subject drifts left of center we get the first misfocused shots in their extended sample. Back in the old F5 days you could set your camera to prioritize left-to-right use of focus sensors, so it wouldn’t have had any problems with the left subject drift if you had set the camera that way. On the other hand, if you had one of the other priorities set, you might have had a real problem. I’m not sure how they had the Canon set in this sequence, so I can’t say for sure why they got the results they got other than to say there’s likely a subject/photographer component that’s getting in the way of clarity.
The other thing that’s potentially a problem with that test is that I’m not sure what they’re doing about equalizing frame rates. They apparently repeated each camera six times, which is why we get percentages of a picture sharp (;~), but I’d be extremely interested in seeing the entire data set, because I think that there are answers there that aren’t communicated in the article.
Note further that if they set the D4 and D7100 identically in terms of Dynamic AF, the D7100 would be seeing further away from the initial focus acquisition point than the D4 (and that assumes yet another problem: that they managed to frame the car exactly the same size in every test shot).
In other words, focus testing is difficult. Damned difficult.
Thanks Thom – greatly value your input, and always look forward to your Sans Mirror posts!
Why don’t we start calling them “mirrorfree” instead of “mirrorless”? The “less” implies the lack of mirror, while these cameras don’t need it. And yes, I also believe mirrorfree cameras are the future. 🙂
I’d even take it a step further and leave out the word “mirror” entirely.
That’s like saying wingless fish. 😉
Maybe use words like… electronic, solid-state… Something along those lines.
Electronic System Camera, ESC.
Solid-State System Camera. SSC or SSSC. Or 3SC.
Direct View System Camera. DVSC.
Live View System Camera. LVSC.
The word mirror needs to be tossed out WITH the mirror!
Or ILC… Both mirrorless and dslr are mature enough to compete in the same category, yes?
These are good because you are not naming the system based on its predecessor. They should be named for what they are, not what they are not!!!!!
I liked LVSC, makes a lot of sense, although it’s not entirely a catchy marketable term, on the other hand DSLR wasn’t either and even the most ignorant consumer is able to recognize it, maybe it’s just a matter of marketing muscle.
Right! Like sugarfree, where sugarless sounds like the sugar is missing, mirrorfree sounds just right.
Thanks for supporting my MIRRORFREE campaign!
http://www.43rumors.com/gh4-pre-sales-doing-well-at-amazon-us-panasonic-markets-it-as-dslr/
My comment a bit down on the page:
“EnPassant • 3 months ago
MIRRORFREE is the name that should be used instead of mirrorless!!”
Forget the word ‘mirror’
DSL : digital single lens – without reflex.
even the words ‘single’ and ‘lens’ are pointless now since they were only used to differentiate the design from TLR cameras.
ILC is the most fitting term in my opinion, but it doesn’t have a nice marketable ring to it.
ILC is just to general a term, it does not distinguish what kind of camera you’re referring to as it implies pretty much every camera with a lens mount ever, quite a useless term to describe a particular system.
How about DSOL?
Digital
Sensor
Optical
Lens
sounds like ADSL VDSL…
3,4 letter words are all overloaded.
Isn’t it time to lose the word “digital” from camera names? Every new camera is digital. I don’t need to see a “D” in a model name to clue me in anymore.
They just need a name for a given category. Most people do not know what a mirror does in the camera. In video mode the mirrors are dysfunctional anyway they just take the place away.
I think the designation I like the most is ‘Compact System Camera’
For me this is perfect. Anything with interchangeable lenses and other add ons that are shared between different bodies is a “system camera” and if the sensor/lenses are too small for FF then they are a “compact system camera”.
I’ve always liked EVIL. Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens.
Thanks to DFD technology .
The technology are late for GX7 otherwise GX7 should have it as well .
DFD isnt supported by the 35-100mm. what you saw wasnt DFD.
Are you sure?
DFD is supported by all Panasonic M4/3 lenses.
How can that be if DFD is a body-reliant technology not a lens-based one ? DFD is nothing but a built-in body database of lens profiles and OOF characteristics which the camera uses to recognize and predict subject-to-sensor distance and speed-up AF, how could the lens not be compatible, it’s entirely body dependent, unless the GH4 somehow does not support the 35-100 which would be surprising to say the least
you say one thing and your reasons point in the opposite direction. its not just up to the body as you said yourself, but also of the included profiles of lenses. and no, the 35-100mm profile isnt included. read the GH4s press release before acting smart.
I’t may difficult, because GH4 got 4 cpu, GX7 got 2 cpu.
It seems to be needed cpu power.
There are many ways to do testing – depending on what result you want.
Listening to real professionals who actually shot wildlife and sports, their information is different. After using EM1 and XT1 (but not DH4) none did hold up to prosumer APS-C DSLR cameras. It is ridiculos by the Camerastore to use the D4s: Everybody understands it must be better.
Finally, I do not care if it is mirrorless or with mirror as long as the camera does what I want it to do. I own both! Oh you silly “istas”……….
Show us this test please…!
“Everybody understands it must be better (Nikon D4).” . . . Not really, . . . Even the testers from the camera store couldn’t make a factual claim like that! Certain gearheads who want to justify their purchases presume, such but the gap is surely closing.
Any minor perceived advantage of FF frame will be shortly overcome by technological breakthroughs from m4/3 and smartphone technology.
Isn’t that a good thing. Maybe the D4 will get cheaper than 🙂
Lol this is ridiculous! Cameras compete on sensor size. No consumers choose between cameras based on other performance factors, features or size. It’s all about the sensor, a camera is a vessel for a sensor. This is why FF cameras so completely dominate the market. Medium format would do the same, if they weren’t so expensive.
You play with your fast AF mirrorless toys if you want lol!
this trolling is so obvious, that I’m not even sure, if you’re mocking people who say things like this, or if this is your own opinion. Especially, because APS-C DSLRs are actually the ones who dominate the market. Only a few pros and enthusiasts buy FF.
Dominate what? The trolling is so obvious… Do you drink a lot?
Admin, when will you ban these lifeless losers?
Hm. I have +1’ed it since I thought it was a thin veiled sarcasm.
Why would m43 users need fast autofocus when all they photograph is flowers and sleeping cats??
STHU troll. Pretending to be a “girl” now, are you>?
If anyone actually WATCHED the video, they will see that the EM-1 bested the GH-4. The admin is just trying to direct sales for the GH-4.
It seems you didn’t watched the whole video. Conclusions start at 11:53.
Huh? Chris says clearly that the GH4 performs better.
He actually said that the E-M1 was better at CAF and the GH4 at single point AF. I would like to see that test again when the new Oly 40-150/2.8 is available.
They are both crap, get a 3200D and live happily, or a phone.
They didn’t test an EM-1 and GH-4 but the E-M1 did better at tracking and the GH4 was close to the D4s, according to the video.
i liked the test, overall it shows what a top system camera should be able to do and thatball of them can deliver. and Fuji is still appealing to me, though I’ll stick with Oly/Pana formthe near future.
Biggest point for me is that the 70D or 7100 are pretty pointless now – aren’t they?
No…
They are still nice cameras…
They are still nice camera’s indeed. Offering the same IQ(d7100 with expensive lenses maybe a little better) then the more expensive m43 camera’s, but they are also bigger(with lenses the difference becomes quite substantial) and feel more “dated” while also lacking for example the wifi features E-M1 and GH4 have.
No bad choices though. I chose for m43 because of the lighter/compacter(but still great IQ) lenses.
Great test, really showing what mirrorless can do today. I would personally like to see a low light test. I´ve seen some videos suggesting GH4 is really good to AF in low light situations. I´m interested in A6000, because Sony AF used to be crap in low light (at least NEX-5 and 6 I tried).
hmmm…this got me thinking. I do not have ANY of those cameras and I do not usually shoot sports, etc…but I do own an Olympus E-P5, E-PL6 and a Canon 5D Mark III. I decided to do the last test (single-point close-focus then far-focus etc.)…with my E-P5 and the Canon. The Canon locks on about twice as fast. VERY positively. I E-P5 is not a tortoise or anything…but definitely not in the same AF realm as my 5D III. I did the test indoors in moderate light so the E-P5 may be faster out in bright light..but it is fine for my needs. Interesting that I thought the GH4 was all about the video..and here it is the AF winner!!!! Not a camera I would buy (for me my MFT system is a SMALL system that compliments my FF If it is important to me I am shooting FF. Period)…if I am going that large..just give me my 5DIII with all the cachet and the superior still file….but it is cool that the little cameras that could keep getting betterer and betterer!!!! 🙂
The size difference is still substantial when comparing a FF SLR body to the GH4. Granted, if you want full frame, you want full frame, but the GH4 in my mind is still adequately “small.”
Yes…..good point…I have just committed to maintaining two systems because if you are going to print there is nothing like a FF image. I don’t ever shoot video, different discipline as far as I am concerned.
With that in mind, the whole point of MFT is small. Compare my E-PL6 to a GH4 size wise it is considerable.
..but if you are shooting only one system and you choose MFT as that system it looks like the GH4 is your camera of choice…I am an Olympus guy…so I chaff a little bit at that reality…but it is what it is. The M1 has a way to go, but that is too large for my purposes, too.
I have the 5DmkIII and a GX-7 and the GX-7 matches the Canon in speed. More importantly it gets the focus right more frequently.
Interesting! I like my Olympus cameras so much it is not a deal breaker for me. Hmmmm did anyone ever compare the E-P5 AF to the GX7?
Can’t tell about the 5D but the GX7 indeed has an outstanding AF. Well, that is not exactly news – it has been reported in all the reviews. I have been able to compare it with the D610 and I’d say they are on par. Put another way: there is nothing that could prevent me from investing in a stabilized zoom lens and become more serious about video shooting.
As others have said: mirrorless cams have gone a long way and (in the case of Panasonic and Sony) are strong competitors in the video domain.
I looked into this a little bit..and it is kind of funny…one reviewer says the GX7 has faster AF than the E-P5 and the next reviewer says EXACTLY the opposite. So I guess they must be even? LOL!
And I am a pink striped whale.
Well … 1. Olympus mirrorless AF system is not famous for fast (compare with other mirrorless system), Panasonic is, and 2. EP5/EPl6 is not exactly flaghship model, compare with Mark 3
How is 2010 doing ? everything alright back then ? Just so you know Olympus AF issues disappeared a long time ago in case you didn’t notice the past 20 or so reviews out there in the past 2 or 3 years. Pany did indeed have the better AF from the beginning but they both are pretty much on the same level now with the EM1 PDAF and the GH4 DFD. This is no fanboy-talk btw, I have both Oly and Pany cameras and lenses i just wanted to update things for you.
Golly. There must be some really serious money being pumped in to promote this GH4 horse. First, we see loads of comparisons to the (who cares?) GH3, saying it’s way better than that (funny how the GH3 was being extolled in almost similar fashion when it was the latest), and now a comparison to a seriously expensive full frame.
Why stop there? Why stop at full frame?
Compare it favorably to a $50,000 medium frame. Hell, drag in some Hollywood cameras off the lot and compare the video imagery to that.
Amazing.
Main problem with mirrorless cameras is that lenses designed for them are most of the time unbalanced for lens they mount on, making the camera mostly front heavy. But I can see that issue being fixed in some system. The current autofocus fullframe mirrorless isn’t quite nullifying the size advantage aside from body size…
> making the camera mostly front heavy.
A 360gm lens (35-100) makes a 400-560gm camera (G6, GH4) unbalanced??
I’m pretty sure you have no idea what you are talking about.
Not ALL mirrorless cameras. m43 being the first modern mirrorless system had its flange distance, sensor size and image circle designed from the ground up around the mirrorless concept and so were its lenses, it was meticulously designed to be the sweetspot between body size, lense size and IQ, it was not an afterthought or adaptation in reaction to a growing market trend as it was with APS-C/FF, which, regardless of no mirror or prism, will still feature large lenses.
Sounds like you need to learn how to handle a camera properly.
M4/3 cameras are NOT point & shoots like the ones you’re obviously used to using. Support the lens with your left hand.
Camera Handling 101…
+10
Perhaps you’re are refering to APS-C/FF mirrorless because contrary to them m4/3 was designed from the ground up for mirrorless, it is not an afterthought nor an adaptation in reaction to market demand as it was with apsc/FF. Every aspect of this system was designed to deliver the best possible compromise between body size, lens size and IQ, from the flange distance, to the image circle and lens designs, every technology inside these cameras work in favor to deliver a sweetspot between performance and ergonomics. APS-C and FF mirrorless literally just removed the mirror (and prism) and shoved the same unwieldy lenses in front of their sensors.
Shame its tiny, blotchy sensor will never – even remotely – match the full frame system. However the price of Nano Four Thirds is more than a match for the full frame system!
It just doesn’t matter what you say or how many different ways you repeat yourself OR how many different login names you hide behind. Nobody is convinced by your trolling.
Full Frame is being rejected by photo buffs everywhere. Canikon have lost the initiative. They offer zero excitement or innovation. You can still carry all your heavy equipment, no one will care nor emulate you.
No one really cares about the price of the Panasonic GH4; it is on back-order and pre-order all over the world. I can’t even get one without pre-ordering. Nikon and Canon don’t have such problems.
Times they are ‘a-changing.
Full frame DSLRs will still have their place for a while, but it’ll increasingly become a niche. The D4S is an incredible camera that only pros need.
SD (or whatever he happens to call himself in his latest post) knows that. It upsets him for some reason. You can ignore him or pity him. Or just make fun of him, but don’t waste any anger on him 🙂
Uh, let’s be careful about making incorrect and vague generalizations. Full frame cameras probably still outsell m4/3 cameras, especially given the Sony A7 models. The Nikon D800 alone outsells any m4/3 model. So “being rejected” is not exactly a truism.
Look, RIP is wrong. His characterizations are usually all wrong, his facts wrong, and he clearly has his ego invested in full frame and can’t deal with people who don’t share his opinion. But be careful of then returning the favor by doing the same thing about m4/3.
This RIP is a really bad boy. Good job we have some smart blokes here as well.
SD! Haven’t seen you in a while buddy. I was worried you finally got banned.
Would someone summarize the highlights of the video above? Obviously SD’s dial up connection can’t stream it.
PS – How do you like the new name?
PPS – It’s not related to your beloved Nikon 1
PPPS – It is related to full frame! Which is why it’s not like your Nikon 1. I’ll explain it to you later.
Cheers.
Haha! Poor kid. Do you really exist? If yes, then prove it by answering this: 2+2= ?
+1 also the size matches the larger system’s, if you take equivalent lenses. Lenses that are less capable by design might be smaller…
I don’t understand the horrible comments here.
It’s called the internet. many people use it to get and share information. It seems almost as many use it like an antidepressant to boost their mood and ego. The good news is, that instead of taking pills (many of them may do this as well) it gives them a way to cope with a life that might be less rewarding than it could be if they had a good self esteem. While their comments may be frustrating, just remember you are helping them make it through the day and possibly keeping them out of a clock tower.
You are like a guardian of humanity, so keep up the good work and maybe some of them will live a happier life than they would have without this outlet.
It’s easy to understand.
Just as it happened with the transitions from manual to autofocus and film to digital, the introduction of new, more convenient technologies scares some people. The same is happening with mirrorless, and in this website’s case, with m43. Those kind of (insert witty insult) people are clinging to the old like their life depends on it, the success of formats other than what they have invested in makes them feel like their opinions and choices are somehow being invalidated, which is nonsense. People still choose to manual focus, there are people still shooting film and there will still be people shooting big, heavy, cumbersome and bulky DSLRs in the future, but within a VERY small niche.
You’re witnessing a paradigm shift and as always there’re people who surrender themselves to fear and ignorance .
“the success of formats other than what they have invested in makes them feel like their opinions and choices are somehow being invalidated” . .
Some are lulled into complacency by their own pride. FullFrame simple-mindedness is a typical example, (like “Democrats are for the working man”), and other nostrums which might have seemed true long ago but have since been become more nuanced.
Some have thousands of $$ invested in heavy FF lenses and fear loss of their investment value.
Some are hired guns whose ravings are the rattling last gasps of a dying genre of camera technology. Yesteryear’s technology is giving way to a new Hybrid format and certain large manufacturers are resorting to negative campaigning to discredit challenging new-comers.
Our flaming FF troll who seems to have no life and atrocious manners is one such hireling . . . it is his full time job to trash this forum so as to drive decent people away and stifle polite conversation because we are one of the very few websites where photo newbies and FullFrame crossovers can learn of m4/3 camera technology. Since m4/3 has no visible marketing, m4/3 can be mostly marginalized by making this site smell like a pig sty.
I am atrocious and fear loss of my investment value, now that pricier and inferior products have come out. Atrocious and flaming.
See, this forum is regularly hijacked by camera maker employees who use it for publicity. So we get wonder messages such as “M43 is going to save the planet” or “paradigm shift”, and in general a lot of biased messages that have nothing to do with reality. Some see through those claims and take the mickey. The paid marketing folks take it hard. It’s kind of funny, if you don’t expect good information anyway.
See, if that were true, the ‘camera maker employees’ would be working the Canikon/Sony/Samsung/Pentax/Fuji sites. They wouldn’t be here preaching to the choir.
Also, those ’employees’ would be pushing their individual brands, not ‘M43’.
Silly rabbit.
Really? And why? Have you got a clue at all?
Now that’s snappy rejoinder.
It’s pretty clear. Which part didn’t you understand?
Takeaway from this video is that regardless of which mirror-less system you use, the progress made last 5 years has been amazing.
Because the competition is so fierce among the many players it has created so much inovation compared to DSLRs which basically is a (slow) two horse race.
What Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus, Sigma, Samsung and others have done is somewhat remarkable. I would suggest next time someone on these boards make snarky comments about the “other” system (competing mirror-less camera manufactories) which is junk and sucks, you better hope they stick around and forces “your” system be so much better.
Yes, the progress in mirrorless focus has been amazing. It got very amazing in 2011 when the Nikon 1 appeared. However it’s taken another almost three years for the others to come close to matching that.
Frankly, any additional progress in mirrorless autofocus is just going to help Canon/Nikon down the line. You are correct that competition makes everything better. I support that fully. The problem is that we have four long-term unprofitable camera companies, two breakeven ones, and two highly profitable ones. And the breakeven ones benefit from other products in their group (e.g. video gear and pro video for Sony). There’s a good chance that some of the competition will eventually go away.
That’s because it’s not good enough to be good enough against the duopoly. You have to reinvent the camera completely in a way that the duopoly can’t easily do. And get lots of traction for that.
A good example of that occurred in video, where the GoPro took off to the point where even once the market leaders challenged it, they could only claim a maximum of 6% market share against GoPro’s 50%. To weak a response, too late.
Thom
Yes, the Nikon 1 entry in 2011 was a revelation in AF with a somewhat letdown in available lenses and IQ. That is not to say they were bad but not as revolutionary as its AF.
The profitability (or the lack of) of most mirrorless manufactures has been well documented, including in your excellent blog/site. However, I am confident that neither Canon nor Nikon have made any profits in this segment. Yes Nikon’s 1 has been well received from a technical point, but from a profitability stand point, a disappointment.
Canon’s entry to mirrorless can only be seen as a disaster. Horrible AF, a new mount without any lenses (only 2 I believe) and much to expensive.
I am of the opinion that neither Nikon nor Canon can make the transition to mirrorless system in a profitable and painless way. So, I am not sure what your reason is for saying…”additional progress in mirrorless autofocus is just going to help Canon/Nikon”.
On the other hand, the longer the big six (Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus, Sigma, Samsung) can continue produce cameras, even at break even at a loss the closer mirrorless cameras will come to DLSR performance and price points, the more difficult it will be for the big oil tanker (CaNikon) to change direction and produce a mirrorless camera who can compete.
In terms of making money on mirrorless, the only company that might have done so under some reasonable set of accounting assumptions would be Sony, and even then I have my doubts. Fujifilm would also be close, though on very low volume.
Canon and Nikon are certainly in a tricky place. Given how high their DSLR volume still is, they are going to mostly protect that for as long as possible: it drives their profitability. But be careful of thinking that they won’t have a strong response if DSLR sales tank and mirrorless sales rise. I was a little surprised to see Nikon show part of their hand with the Nikon 1 in 2011. I knew they had that focus system working, but I didn’t think they’d put it in a camera on the market, as it didn’t make a lot of sense to. Rumor has it we’ll see another piece of the puzzle from them late this year.
The real issue for everyone is whether or not the camera market continues shrinking. If it does, there will be enormous pressure on everyone, starting with Sony and Olympus, mostly because of shareholder agitation. Fujifilm and Ricoh only have to deal with internal pressure at the moment due to the small size of their camera operations compared to everything else, so basically they’re in it for the long haul. Panasonic has already started their transformation, and it remains to be seen how much totally still camera product they commit to. The GH4 demand is mostly about video, which is the profitable part of that group. Nikon is the odd man out. 75% of their current business is cameras, so they have no choice but to make it work or die. Canon will be watching what they do more carefully, because that’s the biggest challenge to Canon as the market shrinks.
Again, I love seeing competition. It makes all the players have to do better. But I’m wondering about Olympus and Panasonic at the moment. Olympus, in particular, seems to be a one-trick pony with OMD. I worry that the E-M10 will simply compete with the E-M1 and put them deeper in the hole.
Admin: Nice to see that you have the time to delete some of my posts but you don’t have the time to actually ban and moderate trolls like RIP Nano Four Thirds who has CONSTANTLY sieged this website under numorous logins for MONTHS. I know I’m acting like ungrateful child but c’mon, seriously ? I know you have better things to do than to attend to anonymous people over the internet but please, please take a look at this place, there are people who’ve been here for more that 3 or 4 years (me included), we’re trying to contribute to this site in every new thread and this guy gets out of control in every one of them and now you delete our posts ? what gives ?
I dont know what the comments were about, but thinking Admin is a very reasonable and modest person, he probably had good reasons to do what he did?
I’m thinking Surab might be right, there was nothing inflammatory about the comments themselves IMO, having said that, there’s still the problem with our resident troll Mr. A-thousand-logins, there has to be a way to geographically ban him, I’ve tried to help Admin by posting Disqus tutorials and videos but so far nada.
Disqus has artificial intelligence? lol yikes. Regarding socalled troll comments, the best way is to ignore, not reply, because that means you bite the bait. How hard can it be to ignore the ones who just want yuo to reply. Being ignored is not something a troll likes.
Yesterday, he told someone that DISQUS thinks the comments are spam and that he approved them later on. Maybe that was the case for you as well.
I am liking this little comparison. It only shows how good mirrorless cameras are that they all have come a long way. Who cares if the GH4 has advantages in single AF or the E-M1 tracks faster in AF-C mode. If you are looking at some of the resulting shots they all look promising and accurate. We should stop discussing about different brands or technologies and just embrace the new possibilities and enjoy photography – whether it is our business or our passionate hobby or both 🙂
Just get over it Gh4 has a better AF than Olympus, that’s it! LOL
It is a newer camera in about the same price region. So it should have better AF
Of cource you are right @Mr.Chainsaw, I was just teasing @Michael.
I’m sure both cameras have very good AF, and the little bit better AF on Gh4 part is because of the double sensor reed out data (video related).
I’m happy that Panasonic finally made a proper Photo camera, but I think almost everybody is buying GH4 mainly for video side.
Thanks to TheCamera Store! I would like to see more of these tests. But neither stores nore test sites / magazines have interest to compare. They all fear to loose sales.
That ist the reason why they compared with a D4s. It is non-competitive!
Imagine what would happen if they concluded: “better than 70D or D7100”!
People would go crazy.
Most innovations happen in DSLMirrorfree and DSLR is on a high level at the end of live cycle. That is why DSLR Fans are trolling around here.
I spoke with many wildlife photographers and read many threads about it (Thom Hogen will follow up with an EM1 and XT1 review, especially concerning BIF) and they said they get much less shots with those cameras than with a D7100, for example. I can’t argue with it, since I’m no expert in wildlife photography. And looking at other pros reviewing the D4s and its capabilities (see e.g. http://www.ronmartblog.com) I still feel they are not quite on par. Time and further reviews will tell, there are so many showing different results already.
In the meantime I acquired three cameras (XT1, EM1, D610) and whenever a shot is critical I pick the DSLR. I still don’t fully trust my mirror less cameras, it’s weird. The OMD I use only for macros right now, since the 2x crop + Ol 60 + IBIS gives a great combination I don’t want to miss. Image quality might be sufficient, but I always compare to the D610 and the latitude I have in working with the RAW files gives me more satisfaction. Let’s see what future generations of mirror-free cameras (I like the phrase) will give us. I pelage for a peaceful coexistence of DSLRs and mirror-free cameras.
I will have much more to say about this subject shortly on sansmirror and dslrbodies.
But in examining the Camera Store video closely I would say they have very loose standards. Even in the few shots they included in the video I saw a lot of what I would call “near miss” shots, almost all from the mirrorless cameras. More importantly, by shooting at f/4 you have varying depth of field between the contestants. The full frame D4s is fighting a narrow depth of field that the m4/3 cameras don’t have to, for instance. Many of their D4s shots were also tighter on the subject than the mirrorless shots, too.
I’d also point out that cycles on ground is a different problem than birds in flight. If you’re looking down at cycles on ground–as was the case in the first test in the video–if the focus system misses the subject it will likely focus on the ground next to it. The distance differential in that is minimal, so those near misses look like “acceptable focus” to some. With a bird flying against a busy background, when the focus sensor drops off the bird to the background, you won’t get a near miss, you’ll get a BIG miss.
The test of panning on the rope to demonstrate tracking performance is a joke. Sure, the camera is changing where it is focusing as they pan, but is the focus in the place where it should be when it should be? Can’t tell from the way they both set up and demonstrate that test.
Do current mirrorless cameras focus better than older ones? Absolutely. And many are VERY usable for most types of shots people might want to take. However, none match what current state-of-the-art DSLRs can do. I think to try to say that is actually doing a disservice to the camera companies. Fujifilm in particular had a high number of returns on the X-T1 when it shipped because people had bought into the “focuses as well as any DSLR” marketing line, but when they received their pre-order, it didn’t live up to those expectations.
Finally, I wonder why the Nikon 1 wasn’t in the test. Given that this is a camera store doing a video you have to wonder about intentional bias to promote what they want to sell. Whether or not there is any, given that they are claiming that the mirrorless cameras match a D4s and they didn’t include a Nikon 1, it makes me wonder if they’re really just trying to sell Fujifilm, Olympus, and Sony cameras and not Nikon. Obviously, they won’t sell many Nikon D4s’s even if they said it was the best camera in the world.
Most of us have no chance for comprehensive tests. Light has its influence on AF-Performance. I would like to see a E-M1 with a adopted 43 2.0 Zoom or 2.8 Tele. And a GH4 with 2.8 for 35-100.
It should become clearer which level of performance we have achieved for usual consumer use of C-AF.
The arguments we hear to often: “can I make Fotos of my kids a sports like Football, Horse Riding (indoor)..?”
Some of us have no desire in this lifetime to shoot “Birds in Flight”. It is possible that for esoteric needs, 5lbs. of huge camera might do it best.
It is also possible that for normal picture taking and social photography, that FullFrame is overkill bordering on silly.
No doubt. But for “normal and social” photography the majority of people have decided that a dedicated camera is overkill. That’s the problem the camera makers have: the ever rising bar of smartphones at the bottom versus the pro costs at the top. This is the same problem they faced in the 90’s when instant and disposable cameras took away the biggest piece of their market. With things like the Lytro, they also are facing a competition that can ignore focus performance completely during shooting.
As to birds in flight, I used that as an example, not as a everyone does this. One of the reasons why focus is tough is because there are an infinite number of situations that come up. You can design a system that works well for one particular situation, but it might not work well for another. The reason why we pros gravitate to the high-end systems is that Canon/Nikon have over the years given us a wide range of controls to tailor the AF system to a situation we encounter.
Having just used a D7100, X-T1, and E-M1 side by side for two weeks in tough focus scenarios, my conclusion is a bit different than the Camera Store’s. If getting focus right in challenging situations and sometimes low light is the need, I’d tend towards the D7100, as I didn’t find that the X-T1 or E-M1 could match it’s performance. I got fewer keepers and less timely keepers from them.
On the other hand, were someone to force me to shoot the same trip with only one of the mirrorless cameras, I could do it. But I’d be fighting the focus system at times, and generally with tools I don’t want to be focusing too much on the tool, I want to be focusing on the composition/timing. Timing is the one area where the mirrorless cameras have a ways to go to catch DSLRs where continuously moving subjects are concerned.
Gee, Thom, I sure didn’t intend to draw you into a dissertation about D7100s and X-T1s and E-M1s because I’d rather not “focus too much on the tool” . . . I also don’t care to consider the vagaries of the market which is the province of shallow men plagued with short term vision.
I have been watching camera development very closely for the past 42 years, in which time I have seen the prominence of Full Frame and mirrors and huge cameras diminishing around the world.
I don’t care what gear someone uses and I wish all formats and manufacturers well. I am not opposed to 135mm or Medium Format nor Cinema gear . . . . whatever floats your boat. I am merely stating that the “full frame” camera is far less universal than it was 40 years ago and smaller mirrorless forms of photography are now a much bigger player.
And yes, I do expect to see m4/3 make huge technology gains (as they already have), and I expect to see Canikon eventually shed the mirror. I too believe Canon & Nikon will be challenged near to the breaking point. No malice, . . . just my observations and speculations.
> Gee, Thom, I sure didn’t intend to draw you into a dissertation
about D7100s and X-T1s and E-M1s because I’d rather not “focus too much on the tool” . . .
People need to distinguish between focusing on CHOOSING a tool versus what happens when you USE the tool. It’s an important distinction, especially for fora that are dedicated to gear. You can spend as much time as you want choosing a tool. When you’re shooting situations that require snap focus, you don’t have time to focus on the tool if you want to get the shots timed right.
> I have been watching camera development very closely for
the past 42 years, in which time I have seen the prominence of Full
Frame and mirrors and huge cameras diminishing around the world.
Nonsense. The facts contradict you. Canon/Nikon have sold far more DSLRs than they ever did film SLRs. And the numbers this past year were 13.8m cameras shipped with mirrors, 3.3m cameras without, so you have a very strange notion of “prominence.” Peak sales for DSLRs exceeded peak sales for film SLRs, and I believe that’s true cumulatively, too, though we don’t have statistical data that’s reliable going back far enough to say so with authority.
As for full frame, if your comparison point is 40 years ago, it would be a close call. Both full frame DSLR and old film SLR would be in the low seven digits of shipments for a year.
> I don’t care what gear someone uses and I wish all formats and
manufacturers well.
Neither do I. But let’s not exaggerate the actual data to make a point.
> I too believe Canon & Nikon will be challenged near to the breaking point.
The entire industry is challenged at the moment. On 1.1t yen worth of “sales”, the overall profitability of the industry appears to have been negative last year. It’s tough to get an exact count of that, as you have to assign some SG&A expenses against income numbers and a few other odds and ends to be fully accurate, but if the overall profitability was not negative, it was barely positive, and mostly because of Canon and Nikon, both of whom publicly admit to more challenges ahead.
forget it. If you are too stubborn to see that smaller formats and smartphones are claiming an ever larger portion of pictures as well as camera sales, then we don’t need to continue.
I said that: “I am merely stating that the “full frame” camera is far less universal than it was 40 years ago and smaller mirrorless forms of photography are now a much bigger player.” There isn’t a thing you can say to dispute that.
As to your falling back upon sales figures, SG&A expenses, Income numbers, profitability, yada, yada,
Once again, I prefaced my conjecture with, “I also don’t care to consider the vagaries of the market which is the province of shallow men plagued with short term vision.”
Sorry Thom. good day.
Autofocus used to be the only plus of those clunky FF cameras over our beloved M43. Now that the last hurdle has been sprung, who will ever buy FF again? Wait a minute – reality check:
1) Best and richest camera systems on earth (Canon and Nikon)
2) Far superior AF, funny publicity is irrelevant
3) Tiny blotchy sensors are no match for even the cheapest DSLRs
4) Blotchy, slow and fake looking EVFs are no match for any mid-to-hi OVFs – maybe for the very cheapest, but then only the very best EVFs come into question
5) Larger sensor intrinsically has better optical properties
6) Tried and tested usability
7) Equivalent lenses are the same size
8) No stupid marketing scams like M43 has introduced – like this video for example.
This is my very own opinion, you may flame it but you will always be wrong – and dumb. I happen to know “a little” more than marketing scammers here…
BS from 1 to 8, only 5 is still valid. But wait, what sensor size has to do with mirror?
Dear little “Severino”, dumb comments like yours are expected. Are you in the marketing scammer camp or in the imbecile consumer camp?
LOL…. dumb comments are expected from an idiot like you, a$$hole… I ask myself all the time, what imbeciles like you are doing here?? Just checking if it’s already time to switch??
Language, language… You are surely not the brightest here, keep it polite at least…
Please, please… Read, understand, ask. Use proper English. All the rest is rusty scalpels.
M43 has been a joke ever since. Cheaper to produce, pricier to sell. I could never stand it, nor the prats who cry miracle, whenever a new piece of plastic is thrown into the market.
SD/JTC/JOL you’re back! And up voting your own aliases and comments more than ever. I thought you’d finally been banned.
You made 2 legitimate points out of 8. That’s a huge improvement, attaboy. Keep working at it and stop name calling. Cheers.
Read it again, imbecile. You will find the right points are 8 out of 8. I am probably asking too much…
Oh boy SD. Didn’t you just type ‘language, language’ below? You’ve regressed to name calling again and that’s a shame. Sorry that I made you mad.
I was being generous with 2 points. And number 8 isn’t even coherent.
Keep trying buddy.
This comment is a joke, GH4 has better image quality than any Canon or Nikon APSC, and it turns out than the AF is also much better LOL.
LOL I like your sarcasm.
Thank you 😉
If the size of the sensor is so important, why not use Medium Format?
You really don’t get it? M43 might be right up your alley.
I get that plenty of people don’t know what they’re doing with a camera, and if they had to deal with a manual-only camera, they wouldn’t get even reasonable photos.
I get that many people are spending loads, but use their camera completely on Auto.
I get that photography is about getting the shot, not comparing the size of our…equipment.
Do you really?
Because digital MF is backwards and overpriced. Ever tried?
Don’t get all the DSLR is dead chest thumping. Sales numbers show mirrorless has carved out a piece of the pie, but its not getting larger. Shoot with what you have and be happy.
I’m all in on mirrorless after being a Canon shooter for years with the A7, A6000, and GH4. In good light they are ridiculously fast as the video shows, but if I were still shooting lots of indoors events, I’d still be using the 5d3. Just walking around my house at night with a few lights on, they all struggle to lock focus. D4s files are also much cleaner at high ISO’s. I use video lights for studio portraits so it’s not an issue for my paid work.
One camera can’t do everything, pick the right tool for the job.
Its not a fair shootout, if you have noticed they used a pana lens on the oly. every mft enthusiast knows that the af slows a bit when you do not use a native lens.
I thought it was a proper system with proper specs and compatibility. Oh well, I will stick to my EOS M.
There is currently no high end telephoto zoom in the Olympus M4/3 lens line-up.
This is one of the silliest comparisons I’ve ever seen or heard. They forget to mention the GH4 is also lighter than the D4s. Smaller too. Let’s see, is there anything else we need to consider when choosing a camera?? No, I guess that’s it.
As for the test itself, they varied the lenses but made it a point to say they used the same SD card throughout. I’ll take a pass ion anything these guys say or do.
Incredible! The tiny sensor apologists are out in full force here. Don’t you realize that you’re standing on the barricades screaming “We deny the laws of physics!”. You look like fools defending your silly toys.
Real photographers know the mighty power of the full frame.
Particularly when a properly sized sensor and its system cost less than equiv nano sensor systems.
Yes the m4/3 companies make a living out of cheating. More money for equivalent (or less) performance is the business model.
SD / FFFE / PF / Yabo, you forgot to up vote your last alias here.
Funny that you think you’re dealing with one person. I used one of those names, and am absolutely certain that I never used the other three.
Of course it’s all you SD, don’t be silly.
Just have the courage of your convictions and register a name. I think you already registered ‘Samuel’, right?
Real photographers know the power of photography. They’re not worried about the size of their sensor.
And they don’t waste more money on inferior tools, either…
…no matter the brand name.
Like you, SD / SDK.
Sorry, you left yourself wide open there buddy 🙂
Are you a real photographer? Or a tiny sensor photographer?
Wow, it surprised me that there would be so many whiners showing up in the comment section. I guess I’m underestimating the Internet whining power.
Finally a scientific video, taken by real pros, to show us the light. It’s a pity they are no photo pros, but telesales pros…
Yes, you are right. Don’t trust camerastore. Pure telesales and most of these pseudo scientific films are about Canon DSLR. lol
You pity us? LOL have you got enough neurons for that?
“damn close” LOL. Not in a million years marketing girls…
Can someone moderate the comments. It’s getting ridiculous.
“it’s getting” LOL. But I think it’s fine to have a laugh.
Amazing how all the large-sensor girlies pile screaming out of their playpens when anyone dare even suggest that mirrorless cameras have a place in the real world.
Can anyone point me to the place where they say the GH4 replaces the D4s as a professional tool? That its AF on the GH4 is as good as the D4s? The answer is nowhere….he makes a bang-for-the-buck comparison. It would certainly be interesting to see a comparison of those mirroless cameras against their more likely rivals of the D600 or the D7200.
Also bear in mind In many wildlife situations you are limited not by sensor size or lens focal length but where you can stand to take the picture and whichever camera you have (MFT, APS-C or FF) you will need to crop so the important thing is pixels on the subject not pixels on the sensor.
I am one of those who are particularly interested in this comparison because I have a Canon 7D for action and birds in flight. I also have a E-M5 and GX1 which I now use for all other situations and the only thing stopping me going whole hog into MFT is the tracking AF for fast action – and this video merely illustrates that the MFTs are a damned site closer than they were even 12m ago. Will I sell my 7D? Not yet, but maybe for all but the fastest movement the MFT would be OK for me. In other words I am keeping my 7D to handle what in reality is about 5% of my photos and it is hard to justify 4grand on a 1Dx of 1DMk4 when the gap is getting so close so quickly.
So get your head out of your butts and realise that even for you, MFTs will probably do almost everything you need.