A6000 vs. A77ii Continuous AF - Very confused

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
abortabort
Senior MemberPosts: 1,140Gear list
Like?
Re: Still the f/3.5 or smaller aperture restriction on low light continuous AF?
In reply to 123Mike, 7 months ago

123Mike wrote:

d I think it is possible to do better. Also, it's known that when you rig a Minolta 50mm f/1.7 lens to be forced wide open, that the SLTs auto focus during video just fine! It means much better low light performance. Shallow DOF of course, but this could be ok. And then given that f/5.6 works fine (kit lens), and that probably it can handle at least f/8 (guessing here) without too too much trouble, I think that simply dictating f/3.5 and nothing else is just too draconian. I think that if a hacker group hacks that camera like some did with the Canons, one of the first things they'd do is fix these still things.

Yeah I kind of think it is lousy too, but we are likely to accept it's limitations in the field and realise where 'we' went wrong given the power allowed to us by the manufacturer (ie use at your own risk) but not many people are, especially those using ANY sort of AF in video (AF in video is patchy at best), so they will be less forgiving.

The A6000 does video with AF very well.

For you maybe.

Just have a look how many threads of people complaining about the tracking of AF on the a6000, seems to me it works very well if you have some clue what you are doing, but many buying the camera expect every shot to be in perfect focus every time regardless of shutter speed or any other factor, like a mindreader because it is 'supposed to have great AF, worlds best they say!

The auto settings work reasonably well. Pick manual settings, and things get even better.

Honestly don't care about your love of the a6000. It is a great camera, I was making a point about the plethora of people who complain about it not meeting expectations. I am NOT saying it is no good, I am saying if you give people power then they still need to know how to yield that power. This is NOT a discussion on whether the a6000 is any good or not. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with that AT ALL. I am being quite distinct here because I know how much you have railroaded this thread already with your a6000 enjoyment. Please ACTUALLY read what we are talking about.

Well it sucks!

It's probably better than the A77 is. It might even be better than the A77ii is, in terms of AF. It's got many more PDAF points, and it has CDAF to supplement as well.

I don't care. Not on topic of what I am discussing. We are talking about the limitations of the A77 (and other SLTs) for video AF performance. Go love up to your a6000 elsewhere.

My daughter ran at the camera as fast as she could and all the pictures are blurry, this camera sucks'... Set at 70mm f5.6 1/10th ISO 100.

I think you're assessment sucks. Clearly, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I've used it for a few weeks now, and tracking works pretty well. Perhaps if you picked something a little faster than 1/10th of a second, it wouldn't suck so bad. Again, clearly, unless you made a typo or something, your claims are flatout wrong.

Clearly you didn't read very well. Again I was clearly making a point about 'joe average's' impressions of what they 'think' they should be getting, but without actually knowing what they are doing and then blame Sony. Read it again mate.

Is it over the top? Maybe. But as I say, most professional use video will not use AF at all, in which case they can use any exposure values they want, the 'idiot proof' video with AF gets locked down to attempt to get the best results possible.

Most people that record video are normal every day people that shoot casual video around the house and on outings, of things like their family and the surroundings, the kids playing sports. AF needs to work well. The AF of the A6000 works very well.

AF has NEVER worked well for video. The a6000 sucks, the A77 sucks, the RED Epic sucks, the GH4 sucks, iPhone sucks. Get it? Got it? Good. YOU might be happy with it, but that doesn't make it good enough for professional applications. I have outlined why the a6000 has a greater level of control to the A77 for AF in video due to the limitations of that particular design, which is what is actually being discussed.

The other issue as I mentioned before is that the AF sensors aren't all sensitive to larger apertures, nor smaller ones. They detect phase differences (like a split prism VF), but on larger apertures these are often 'too wide' for them to 'see' so they can't detect the difference and will hunt. Additionally they are often not 'that' sensitive to smaller differences which is what you will get with smaller apertures. So those AF points, even if they have enough light may not be able to 'see' properly the phase difference and will hunt until they can closer see the differences, hunting is not ideal in video. I would say that under testing f3.5 would be the optimum to maintain the best tracking with as little error and that is why they chose it. They allow smaller aperture values within reason but these are probably a compromise that they are willing to allow to enable as many lenses as possible to be used.

On the A6000 I can choose something like f/8 and track AF just perfectly fine.

I DO NOT CARE. When was this a conversation about the a6000? I have OUTLINED multiple times WHY the a6000 is different and can do different things to A77. Go read them. Don't reply until you have something USEFUL to contribute. This WHOLE section is about SLTs. But I am sure you can come back and tell us your opinions on how wonderful the a6000 is in response to another completely off-topic discussion.

 abortabort's gear list:abortabort's gear list
Sony RX100 Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Nikon D700 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Sony Alpha 7 +33 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
f/8New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow