Will phase focusing go the way of the dinosaur?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Historical Center at night
Next: Forget Dpreview's B.S., "diplomatic language" NEX 16mm lens is not good
From: RichA on 6 Jun 2010 16:04 Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing, such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses, doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this compensation not even been enough, or consistent?
From: Bruce on 6 Jun 2010 17:27 On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:04:27 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing, >such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main >important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or >contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the >constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses, >doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that >contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the >incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with >compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the >elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this >compensation not even been enough, or consistent? Only one brand has significant, systematic problems with AF accuracy and repeatability, and that is Canon. With all brands, there are of course the usual quality control issues, especially with tolerances that can cause problems. But only Canon has a system in which the problems are inherent in the design of the AF system. Canon has worked very hard to minimise these problems with firmware updates and more careful calibration of cameras and lenses. They haven't been eliminated, but they have been minimised to the extent that the vast majority of Canon users are not even aware of them.
From: Twibil on 6 Jun 2010 18:14 On Jun 6, 1:04 pm, RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote: "Will phase focusing go the way of the dinosaur?" You mean "will phase focusing eventually evolve into birds and remain very much on the scene for the forseeable future?" Seems unlikely.
From: Ray Fischer on 6 Jun 2010 18:19 RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing, >such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main >important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or >contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the >constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses, >doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that >contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the >incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with >compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the >elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this >compensation not even been enough, or consistent? And how many contrast-detection focusing systems can track moving objects at 10 frames per second? -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: GMAN on 6 Jun 2010 18:24
In article <7055b134-9c54-4649-b6d4-cb3b3edf4826(a)q36g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Twibil <nowayjose6(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Jun 6, 1:04=A0pm, RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >"Will phase focusing go the way of the dinosaur?" > >You mean "will phase focusing eventually evolve into birds and remain >very much on the scene for the forseeable future?" > >Seems unlikely. There wasn't any T Rex's left after the great extinction to evolve into the chicken!!! |