A User experience of the Pro capture (ProCap) Mode in Olympus OMD Em1 MII

Continuous Auto Focus on Micro- Fourthirds; My experience

Daniel Cox, a very highly accomplished photographer (Naturalexposures.com) has helped numerous photographers,  myself included, to lessen the load of my photo gear while traveling. However, smaller form factor can bring about other limitations and compromises. Foremost, among them has been the criticism that micro four thirds (MFT) cameras were not capable of fast action photography... This myth has been shattered by the introduction of newer models of MFT cameras (Panasonic and Olympus) capable of continuous autofocus for shooting fast action. The speeding pooch test outlined by Dan (http://naturalexposures.com/panasonic-lumix-gh4/) poses a significant challenge to the photographer and  the predictive autofocus system of any camera. I ran these tests on my MFT equipment for the following reasons:

• to understand and optimize the settings of the equipment I own
• compare the performance of the 2 cameras, so that I can pick up the best tool for the job when the time comes
• Practice my skills to shoot action
• Any excuse to play with my dog! 

Equipment

OMD EM1 M2, Lumix G85, Panasonic Leica DG 100-400mm f/4.0-6.3, Olympus Zuiko 40-150 f/2.8 PRO

Settings:

OMD EM1 MII settings

• Af area- center 9 points, with and without tracking
• CAF- lock +2 (loose); 
• AF scanner runs once (mode 2)
• RIs Priority C-on (shoot when camera is not in focus in CAF)
• electronic shutter L 18fps
•  all images in RAW format
• Shutter priority mode
• Shutter=1/2000
• focal length on all lenses=100mm
• IS on ; lens IS priority

Lumix G85 settings

• AF area- 13 points in the center (diamond), 49 points, CAF, CAF tracking
• CAF sensitivity=+2
• High continuous shutter, electronic
• shutter release- focus priority in CAF
• IS- dual IS 2 on Pan Leica lens; in body on zuiko
• Shutter speed 1/2000, 
• Shutter priority mode
• focal length =100mm on all lenses
• Image quality =RAW

Processing : All images were in RAW format and inspected at 100% , no sharpening or any other adjustment done in software (on1 photo RAW)

• Picks: had to be super sharp (the best possible from the lens/camera combination)
• OK: reasonably sharp, images can be published, but one knows that the lens and the camera could have done better
• Reject: unacceptable for publication

Results:

Description	G85 PL 100-400 CAF center diamond 13	G85 Zuiko 40-150 CAF Center Diamond 13	G85 PL 100-400 Single point CAF	G85 PL 100-400 CAF  49	G85 PL 100-400 CAF Tracking	OMD Em1 M2 Zuiko 40-150 CAF	OMD EM1 M2 PL100-400 CAF	OMD Em1 M2 Zuiko 40-150 CAF tracking	OMD EM1 M2 PL100-400 CAF tracking
Picks (green)	35	23	37	36	41	130	151	274	30
OK (yellow)	26	26	25	17	15	47	37	89	8
Rejects (red)	11	28	18	33	9	25	15	71	20
Total frames shot	72	77	80	86	65	202	203	434	58
Percent Picks	49	30	46	42	63	64	74	63	52
Percent rejects	15	36	23	38	14	12	7	16	34
% useable (Picks +OK)	85	64	78	62	86	88	93	84	66

My Observations- YMMV:

Lumix G85 

Center 13 point focus (diamond) may have  a slightly better keeper rate than 49 AF points

DFD while using PL 100-400 probably helped increase the hit rate

CAF with tracking might have increased the number of picks.

OMD EM1 MII

CAF tracking did not help and sometimes was a detriment (happened while PL lens was mounted on the olympus body)

-tracking the ball at times when it was too close to the dog

My take on the olympus menu:

more complex, but really not that much; however, you can set all the preferences to a custom menu (including AFC and frame rate) and access by turning a single dial. On the G85, you will have 

to remember to change to the custom dial , turn to high frame rate on another dial and flip a lever to AFC …Both cameras have all the essential functions accessible in a “supermenu” on the touch LCD.

Overall, I am happy with the hit rates considering the shooting conditions:  the dog was excited while playing fetch, bouncing all around the place, quickly and erratically. It was quite a challenge to keep the dog in the frame.

There was also non uniform lighting with some very dark shadows under a tree as well as sunny areas around it.

Based on these conditions and the results obtained, I think it is reasonable to assume that future results with these cameras/ lenses will likely fall in a distribution that could very well be within the variability of statistical measures. However, I will have to continue to work on the human factor.

Thanks to Sumith Murthy for helping me capture this picture!