Is the E3's AF that fast ?

[claude-mtl]

<p>I have been using the E3 with the 50 - 200 mm lens for 2 winter seasons to do winter sport photography. My capture of choice is ski competition. It is common to hear that the E3 has one of the best AF mechanism available. I love the camera and the lens. The form factor is also great: holding a 400 mm equivalent zoom lens for a complete day is not a small task.<br>

I have tried over numerous ski competitions all kind of set-ups to come to the conclusion that manually setting up my shooting conditions is the best way to insure predictable results, including speed, f-stop, ISO, white balance and focus. Is it not ironic that I have to be manually configured in these days of high performance cameras? I don't mind setting up manually all my conditions, but the focal distance is a real challenge since sharpness is dependent on a precise focal adjustment.<br>

I love shooting on manual mode, but doing so on a fast moving subject creates many constraints. I need to choose a fixed shooting point and all shots are framed the same, unless I decide to redefine my focus, which requires some doing and a few lost shots until I have it set up perfectly.<br>

From my experience the E3's AF is not fast enough to keep up with a fast moving subjects. It is fast enough if my subject is slow: for instance, I do great golf pictures on AF. Any attempt to be on C-AF with my fast moving subjects has been a disappointing experience, even under best lighting conditions. Thus my approach using manual focus.<br>

I notice that my Canon and Nikon friends are shooting the same subjects on AF and are generally providing sharp images. I have seen some soft-focussed images, however, i do not feel I could match their quality of dynamic focus with my E3.<br>

<img src="www.sosltice-image.ca/CG_278782-view.jpg" alt="" /><br>

E3 with 50-200mm, f 6.3, 1/800 s, 200 m</p>

[claude-mtl]

<p>Second attempt to load my insert.<br>

<img src="www,solstice-image.ca/CG_278782-view.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<div></div>

[SCL]

<p>It looks like you've really nailed the technique. Before AF cameras/lenses, that's how we all learned to take action shots.</p>

[Greg M]

<p>I don't know if it's Olympus AF system or the lack of enough processing power to run everything that's going on at the same time, from AF to exposure to the image stabilization system.</p>

<p>I think they've done a pretty good job putting their system together. It's probably at least as good as either Canon or Nikon's AF system were 7 years into development, and that's what I think we need to remember. They both started their systems 25 years ago and Olympus started theirs in 2003 but the systems today are not 20 years apart in ability.</p>

<p>When I am at the track shooting thoroughbreds with my Olympus DSLR's I do a couple of things to try and keep the processing load at a minimum. I turn image stabilization off. At a 1/500 to 1/1000 second shutter speeds or faster IS is not needed, and I only use single AF and feather the release, shooting short 2-3 image bursts at a time, maybe 3-4 sets of those as the horses pass me by so the exposure system can re-set itself in case lighting conditions change. The process works for me both in shooting horse races..</p>

<p><a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=35156335">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=35156335</a><a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=35156313"></a></p>

<p><a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=35028562">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=35028562</a></p>

<p>and NHL action at the local teams' stadium..</p>

<p><a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=34852510">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=34852510</a></p>

[godfrey]

<p>@ Claude:</p>

<p>This past Wednesday evening I attended a presentation hosted by the San Francisco Bay Area Press Photographer's Association (SFBAPPA). The presentation was a panel of five credentialed professional photographers (AP, US Press Wire, SJ Mercury/Hearst, European Press Photo Agency affiliates) who were amongst those assigned to shoot the Winter Olympics events this past year. Their work from this event has been published both nationally and internationally. The discussion presented their published photos and involved both lecture discussion and Q&A regards shooting practices, equipment, etc, for the events. </p>

<p>To a person, all of them said the very same thing regards this question. I paraphrase:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><em>"Fast moving sports like speed skating, luge, toboggan, and downhill skiing are way too fast to rely upon the autofocusing and tracking capabilities of the equipment. You have to learn when AF is useful and when it's not. Most of the time, shooting the faster parts of these activities, it's not: you then have to learn how to focus and anticipate where and when to make the shot. And do it over and over and over again so that you get it right." </em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>All of them were shooting with top of the line Nikon and Canon gear, supplied by their affiliates. The fastest focusing systems around, in other words. And all of them reported that they used manual focus more than 60% of the time for their work. </p>

<p>To me, this says it's simply not appropriate to expect tracking and autofocus to keep up when you're pushing the envelope like this. Whether the E-3 is as good as the competition or not is mostly irrelevant if even the competition's equipment cannot do the job. I know I get my best sports shots when I know the sport well and can anticipate what's going to happen ... I then lock the camera's focus and exposure to meet the scene needs and catch the action when it arrives. </p>

[claude-mtl]

<p>Thank you Greg for sharing these technical points and your experience in sports photography. As well, Godfrey, I appreciate the perspective you bring to my question.<br>

<br /> Job well done.</p>