G3 heralds the end of APS-C DSLRs

Started May 13, 2011 | Discussions thread
Lee Jay
Forum ProPosts: 44,312Gear list
Like?
Re: and that's before we talk AF micro-adjust! ;-)
In reply to Anders W, May 14, 2011

Anders W wrote:

Why on earth should I consider the DPR an authority on this.

Of course, it's not irrelevant because "static subjects" are often less than perfectly static.

Then the CDAF system fails.

On what grounds?

It can't keep up with or predict focus position.

Does focus change when a person changes his or her facial expression?

If the facial expression is what changes, they they are "perfectly static" in this context (focusing performance).

Third, most compacts can achieve similar numbers. They're all dirt-slow.

What compacts go equal with the GH2. And which DSLRs are faster?

Most compacts issued in the last 5 years or so are similar, and all DSLRs are faster.

Lots of hot air. Claims and claims but not a shred of evidence. Where are your figures and measurements? I am waiting.

I make my own. All three of my compacts can achieve initial focus in less than half a second.

Focusing speed is important for tracking moving subjects, not for achieving initial focus.

See above.

Reports on the forums are not a good overall cross section.

Why not?

Because a much higher percentage of people with problems complain than people with no problems report success.

And? Please carry out the argument to its completion and I'd be happy to prove its lack of validity.

If a hundred million Toyotas are sold, and a hundred report "sudden acceleration", you hear about it all over the news. The other 99.9999 million are silent. And we know how that turned out.

The fact that these cameras have sold in the tens of millions over the years indicates that they are staying sold, which they wouldn't if they didn't work. So they do work.

It just indicates that until now there has been nothing better.

There still isn't.

Please try to stay on the subject. You have great difficiulties with that. In what way does your argument stay valid in view of my counterargument. Old cars and old cameras have sold in the millions. How does that prove that they are superior to modern cars or modern cameras?

You're the one wandering. You're claiming PDAF is unreliable. If it were as unreliable as you claim, people wouldn't use it. But they do, as evidenced by the sales numbers as well as the usage of all those people.

Then it's broken or horribly poorly designed, or you don't know how to use it.

Nope. There's systematic, publicly available evidence to the contary, and you already know which.

Never seen any, and it's contrary to my personal experience.

PDAF is worse for accuracy than CDAF because it is a) subject to more systematic error ( the multiple path problem), b) subject to more random error (because its sensors and and control system aren't as accurate as those of CDAF). I have a lot evidence for both conclusions. Where's yours?

I have used both extensively under lots of conditions (hundreds of thousands of shots from 6mm to over 3000mm from sunlight to EV-6) and PDAF is far, far more reliable. CDAF is accurate when it hits, but it misses badly far more often. I'd much rather get a nearly-perfect shot nearly all the time with slight misses on rare occasions than a dead-perfect shot sometimes and total misses other times, which is what I get with CDAF. And with CDAF, I get virtually 100% misses on fast-moving subjects.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 Lee Jay's gear list:Lee Jay's gear list
Canon ELPH 500 HS Canon PowerShot SX260 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS 550D +23 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Nah,New
Ahh,New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow