Micro four thirds for sporting action?

Plumtreelad

Plumtreelad

Messages
364
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
I have just purchased an Olympus OMD EM 1 and now getting some "normal range" lenses.
I have done a lot of sports photography in the past with my Canon gear but have not seen much in the way of comment or experiential reports of people who have used micro four thirds for sports action. I'm thinking particularly about faster sports like football, rugby (Union or league) and field hockey.

My initial research indicates that continuous focus modes are not yet very well developed in the micro four thirds segment but I am hoping to find some photographers who can provide first hand experience, either good or bad, to help me to decide whether or not to invest in 150mm or 300mm gear. Because if the tracking is not up to par, there is little point in investing in the lenses

Thanks
 
There is probably a reason you haven't heard many sport pros talking about it...

The good news is that you have the best m43 camera for continuous AF, the bad news is that it isn't a patch on a decent DSLR. The other thing is you need the good lenses to get the best AF performance.

I've not used mine for sports but it coped reasonably well at an airshow and BIF are ok if not sensational, getting initial lock can sometimes be a bit tricky with small subjects and definitely practice and technique help but it is possible (a limiter switch on the 40-150 would be a useful addition as it can stall at close focus). However, it isn't point and lock like my D700 used to be.

That said, 9 FPS really helps for me as although they might not all be in focus a good number of them are, which for my occasional use is fine.

All in all, it's good enough for occasional use, look elsewhere if it's your main subject.
 
Nawty said:
There is probably a reason you haven't heard many sport pros talking about it...

The good news is that you have the best m43 camera for continuous AF, the bad news is that it isn't a patch on a decent DSLR. The other thing is you need the good lenses to get the best AF performance.

I've not used mine for sports but it coped reasonably well at an airshow and BIF are ok if not sensational, getting initial lock can sometimes be a bit tricky with small subjects and definitely practice and technique help but it is possible (a limiter switch on the 40-150 would be a useful addition as it can stall at close focus). However, it isn't point and lock like my D700 used to be.

That said, 9 FPS really helps for me as although they might not all be in focus a good number of them are, which for my occasional use is fine.

All in all, it's good enough for occasional use, look elsewhere if it's your main subject.
Click to expand...
Thanks Ned, you are the first to reply and you have said what I feared. I was mainly a DSLR sports photographer but decided that I wanted to move into a new phase in my photography and at the tender age of 67 I felt that it was time to stop lugging about heavy equipment and sitting outside in the cold wet weather! So goodbye sports photography. Hence the move to micro four thirds. However, I had hoped to keep the sports photography as an occasional venture but I am beginning to doubt that the equipment is up to the challenges even for just the odd outing.

I am looking forward to purchasing the 12-40 f2.8 next week at the Photography Show but I might just forget about the new 300mm unless I want to get into BIF or similar!

I await further responses
 
The 40-150 f/2.8 is quite a spectacular lens and gives 80-300mm f/2.8 FF equivalent or with the TC 420mm f/4 all in the size of a regular 70-200 f/4. Razor sharp wide open across the whole frame with instant SINGLE AF and as good AF tracking as you can get on m43. It might be worth a try - for sports I think it would be fine, it's just BiF that are a bit more challenging.

That and the 12-40 could be all the lenses you need, I have pretty much all the primes and the 12-40 is welded to my camera unless the 40-150 is.
 
I'd agree with Ned - for larger subjects, you should still be ok with the e-m1. I use mine at drag racing and get as many keepers as I did with the d7000 ( admittedly, drag racing is pretty predictable generally whereas sports tend to be less thoughtful :) )

If the O40-150 2.8 is out of budget, you could try the Panasonic 35-100 2.8 which could be bought for well under £500 used
 
damianmkv said:
I'd agree with Ned - for larger subjects, you should still be ok with the e-m1. I use mine at drag racing and get as many keepers as I did with the d7000 ( admittedly, drag racing is pretty predictable generally whereas sports tend to be less thoughtful :) )

If the O40-150 2.8 is out of budget, you could try the Panasonic 35-100 2.8 which could be bought for well under £500 used
Click to expand...
Thanks Damian. As you say, drag racing is a little more predicrptable than the "erratic" movement of players on the pitches. I am worried that there has been no immediate rush of members who want to tell me that these cameras cope well with fast moving sport. Looks like I will be leaving sport behind as I get to grips with the OMD EM 1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top