What is the best m43 for focus tracking?

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Questions thread
PerL
Forum ProPosts: 12,520
Like?
Re: Another true believer
In reply to JamieTux, Apr 3, 2013

JamieTux wrote:

I guess you also believe that you can buy a GF5 and get the same AF-C performance as a Nikon D4. I just feel sorry for those people who actually base purchase decisions on what they read here.

This is a forum for the true believers, I realize that now.

I would hope that anyone that does read this conversation reads that no one is saying that the g5 is as good at tracking focus as a D4, and that it is definitely not as good a system as a high end Nikon or Canon for shooting sports.

On the contrary, the forum seems to be invaded by "true believers" from outside. What Richard pointed out was exactly what distinguishes "true believers" from those ready to evaluate new evidence not on the basis of whether it matches some preconceived notion of the truth but on the basis of the quality of the evidence itself.

What is the quality of the evidence? Just because there are numbers and graphs?

Per, the point here is that a true believer cannot be swayed and does not have an open mind.  You seem to have it in your head that all of us are trying to convince people that mft is better at af tracking than a high end slr, but actually Anders points to a test where they found that mft are comparable in one area, an object coming straight towards you.  That shouldn't be so unbelievable as it is something that pdaf does not find easy (look up Canon 1D mk 3 focus issues) then also look at the fact that the high end slrs are shooting at a higher frame rate and so have less time to focus between frames and all of a sudden you start to see things that could explain the results if mft is still improving (having been a user of the system since the G1, it was only the OMD that convinced me to sell my SLR gear, so I think its improving).

You keep misreading that as G5 is better for sports (even after Anders categorically disagreed with that) and its the constant correction and reframing of the same argument that I think is confusing for people.

I mention the G5 vs D4 as just one example of many very odd results. I can say a few more: Panasonic GX1 - best of all cameras in AF-C? Panasonic G3H - worst of all m43? Anders took out the OM-D values, because he thought they were flawed. That is 3 out 5 cameras in the m43 group with strange results.

Lets go to the DSLRs. Best of all - Canon 650D? The super cheap Canon 1100D - very close to 5DIII and Nikon D800, better than all medium DSLRs, including Canons own? Lets look at the SLT Sonys. The top of the APS-C line, Sony A77, slower than a NEX 7? The results are all over the place, contradicting AF system sophistication and processing power.

And finally - m43 CDAF vs PDAF DSLRs. Judging from this, the low end m43 Panasonics are now in the class of pro or semipro DSLR cameras in AF-C performance (Nikon D4, Nikon D800, Canon 5DIII, Nikon D600) and also better than all Sony SLTs and capable DSLRs like Nikon D7000 and Canon 60D.

You mention that the test may be a special case where CDAF works better - AF-C head on. Well, here good DSLRs perform excellent - at least on real targets. This is a series from a Nikon D300S (green indicates sharp)

I am getting out of this discussion now since it leads nowhere, too much waste of time and energy.

Happy shooting,

PerL

P.S. Apologies for any typos, this is on my mobile phone and the cursor keeps jumping

-- hide signature --
-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow