EM1x update on firmware 2 bird AF operation and settings

ByDMcA
EM1x update on firmware 2 bird AF operation and settings

If you would rather head straight to a concise summary, the TL;DR is at the foot of the page — or jump directly to the FAQ.

If you are a happy user of an EM1x for birds in flight, you probably know a lot of the material in this post. But there are also a lot of things which are probably lurking in the back of your mind, or you might not have thought about the set-up strategy to get the best out of the camera system. This is an attempt to fix that by sharing my approach to the EM1x and firmware 2.0 operation when shooting birds in flight.

TL;DR
  • EM1x firmware 2 AF settings: enable Bird-in-Flight AF with Zone select (small zone), C-AF+TR (continuous + tracking), and custom button for AF mode switching.
  • Optimised settings: AF/MF lever to AF, AF Target Mode = Zone (small), C-AF+TR enabled, tracking response = Medium-Fast, focus area = Flexible/Custom.
  • Shutter speed minimum: 1/2500s for takeoff/landing, 1/1600s for level flight at 300mm f/4 and ISO 200–400.
  • Back-button AF on custom button: faster subject acquisition and mode switching compared to half-press shutter.
  • ProCapture enabled: catches pre-shutter bursts for split-second moments; combined with firmware 2 AF = highly competitive with A9 and A6400.

Back to the article.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between C-AF and C-AF+TR?

C-AF: continuous autofocus, but no predictive tracking. C-AF+TR: same, but adds Subject Tracking and Predictive Tracking. For birds, C-AF+TR is essential—the camera anticipates subject motion during shutter lag.

Should I use Zone select or Full AF?

Zone select (small zone) for birds in flight. Full AF area causes focus hunting and lags. Small zone forces priority on the bird; combined with tracking, it outperforms full-area AF.

What’s the optimal focus area for a small zone?

Flexible/Custom AF target mode with a small zone centred in the viewfinder. Allows repositioning the focus point with joystick while maintaining AF lock. More effective than fixed-centre AF for compositional flexibility.

How does back-button AF help?

Assigns AF activation to a custom button (not shutter half-press). Decouples focus from exposure—allows focus lock while recomposing without relocking focus. Faster mode switching and subject acquisition than shutter-button AF.

Is firmware 2 AF competitive with Sony A9 / A6400?

Yes. Firmware 2’s cross-type PDAF is now cross-type full-frame; Subject Tracking rivals Sony’s AF-animal detection. ProCapture adds 35-frame pre-capture—actually ahead of Sony for BIF. The gap has closed entirely.

Back to the article.

Similar Posts

  • Noise on Olympus vs Sony cameras for birds in flight

    ByDMcA

    The EM1x’s sensor has 0.5–1 stop higher read noise than the Sony A9, but system-level noise — accounting for lens speed, IBIS, and in-camera processing — is within 0.5 stops at the ISOs relevant to birds-in-flight shooting. The comparison most people make is unfair: they compare the A9 with a fast prime against the EM1x with a matched prime, where the Sony gathers more light per pixel, and then attribute the cleaner result entirely to sensor size.

  • OM5 custom settings explained

    ByDMcA

    The OM-5 has only one ‘hard’ custom setting on the mode dial (C), with three additional ‘soft’ settings (C2–C4) that can be recalled from buttons but are lost as soon as you press the Menu button — a behaviour that initially baffled me. The practical solution is to store landscape/base settings in C so they can always be recalled as a clean baseline, and use C2–C4 for specialist genres with the understanding that pressing Menu exits them.

  • APSC vs Olympus noise and dynamic range -which is best?

    ByDMcA

    Full-frame cameras used in APSC crop mode lose their full-frame noise advantage entirely — the cropped area has the same noise characteristics as a native APS-C sensor, which is identical to the Olympus cameras. Since the OM system’s faster lenses cancel out the remaining sensor noise difference in direct comparisons at matched apertures and focal lengths, the noise case for choosing full-frame over Olympus for birds in flight effectively disappears.

  • OM and Sony wildlife zooms – lens handling

    ByDMcA

    The rotational inertia index for the Sony 400-800mm is 3.2 times higher than for the OM 50-200mm f2.8 without its tripod collar, which translates directly into how hard each lens is to swing when tracking a fast-moving bird. Neither Sony zoom has a focus preset function, and the Sony 400-800mm’s minimum focus distance of 350cm makes close subjects impractical; the OM 50-200mm with MC20 focuses to 78cm and delivers 2:1 FFE macro capability.

  • Sony Zooms vs the 600mm f4 Prime—comparative image quality

    ByDMcA

    Using standardised test data from The-Digital-Picture — the only widely available source with controlled lab comparisons of both the 600mm f4 GMaster and the wildlife zooms — the £12,000 prime shows minimal perceptible image quality advantage over the £1,600 200-600mm or the £2,400 400-800mm at 600mm. Independent numerical resolution data comparing exotic primes to wildlife zooms essentially does not exist, because manufacturers provide early samples to YouTube influencers rather than to test houses that might measure the difference.

  • OM1 vs R5, A1 and Z8: which is the best all-round system?

    ByDMcA

    Testing the Canon R5, Sony A1, and Nikon Z8 paired with lightweight telephoto lenses at 600–800mm against the OM-1 and 300mm f4, none of the full-frame alternatives produced better BIF output — all three had worse net noise when the slower lens apertures were factored in, and most lacked pre-capture RAW or live exposure blinkies. The least-worst full-frame option was the Nikon Z7 or Z8 with the 500mm PF f5.6, which reached approximate noise parity with the OM-1 at 750mm in crop mode but still could not match the frame rate or pre-capture capability.