what's the difference ?

[blackfox]

over the last couple of years since the inception of the OM1 I have heard various complaints re the camera , some so bad it took me nearly two years to bite the bullet .. a lot concerning AF in particular . I bought mine used just before xmas and honestly can't fault it .... it's not even on a up to date firmware version 1.3 and as I use a Mac i'm wary of updating ..
but in total honesty I have absolutely NO problems with AF at all the kestrel shot I posted today in flight came from a burst of 29 shots all in focus , likewise with the GW egret shots in flight far to many to post them all . and as yet I haven't delved into SH2 shooting just using 20fps burst mode .
so what am I doing different to others who can't get it right ??? makes me wonder .. is it that newcomers from DSLR cameras are importing there personal way of doing things instead of starting from scratch .. the first thing I dumped was BBF as I find the front two stage shutter is more than adequate ,but im pretty sure there's other things .. like with computer set ups and PP everyone has there own way of doing things ..so I will assume everyones camera is set up differently as there's literally hundreds of variations in set up .. just me thinking out loud ?

[Geo]

There is and always has been a problem with the OM-1 AF, not so much with BIF, especially large birds, but static birds especially when using C-AF and SMALL birds. This has been well documented on this forum and on web reviews by experienced professional photographers. I have been critical of this ever since I bought my first OM-1 almost a year ago, changing from Sony. I never had this problem with Nikon gear or Sony so it is not me!! I have 3 OM-1 bodies and the same fault is in all.

David Smith from OM advised me that C-AF is variable his explanation for slight movement of focus for static birds was "When using single point and CAF mode, the camera is able to see around that point in cases of user movement"., i.e. it can move and change resulting in soft slightly out of focus images, not always but it happens.

I believe this is why OM are now promoting much improved AF with the Mk2. I asked David "is the AF much, much better on the Mkll to make I worth changing to?" David replied "I can only say what I have experienced, and when they say perfected - They mean it."

It's also worth mentioning these changes can be very subtle so it does depend on what you view your pics on. I use a 27in Retina display and view at 100% and often at 200% if I might want a heavy crop. Maybe I am over critical but that's how I was trained!!

[shakyHands]

Without being self-deprecating, I miss focus because I'm not very good at it. However the technology in the OM-1 camera actually gives me a reasonable chance of getting a decent shot quite often. No AF complaints from me about the OM1-mk1. I've only picked up the mk2 because a) I was hankering for a second body; b) I was hoping to get a higher percentage of in focus shots (i.e. hoping that the new subject detect - AF would further compensate for my inadequacies - and I think it actually might a bit); c) the sticking dials were starting to give me the s**ts - but the moment the new body arrived, the old dials feel fine.
I liked my em-1 mk2 but the OM-1 was on a different plane.