Focus peaking on x100s

[il_alexk]

Wesley Wong wrote:

Hopefully I don't get nuclear'd here, but I had the chance to play with the latest Fuji X100s, and tested the focus peaking....it's no where near the K-01/K30.

X100s is a different camera which gets either "love it" or "hate it" comments.

I wonder if you've managed to find anything where X100s was better than your K-01?

• How about the indoor/low light AF accuracy? I can use the X100 at F/2 and pinpoint the AF focusing where I want, no need to use focus-peaking for me
• Were you not impressed by a razor sharp pancake 23mm/F2 lens. As far as I know none of Pentax lenses in that range comes even close to it.
• What about optical/electronic viewfinder?
• How did you find the range-finders split-screen manual focus?
• What about the gentle fill flash which never produces pale/shallow faces?

Anyway, here is my X100 performing indoor (wide open, fill flash, AF on eyes).





Here is my K5, same place another day (wide open, no flash, AF on eyes).




I love both my X100 and K5. But I didn't like the K01 when I tried it indoor in a shop. Even the recent price drop didn't help so I bought X100 instead.

Cheers,
Alex

 

[temama]

[No message]

 

[Cane]

ET2 wrote:

JoeDaBassPlayer wrote:

Xerox invented the mouse but they never really got the PC thing down. Ricoh Pentax has the Focus Peaking quite developed as well as some other areas.

There is nothing much to "develop" here. All focus peaking does is highlight edges on the screen that are sharpest. Sony was able to do it just with a firmware upgrade on the original Nex-5/3.. This technique has been around for years. There are third-party monitors (also around for years) that can do this with any camera. You can do this on Canon cameras with Magic Lantern (which is free firmware) (http://www.magiclantern.fm/ ).

Pentax/Ricoh was neither the first to bring it to still cameras, nor is their version any better (as it doesn't work in video mode).

There is much ado about nothing here. For a still camera (especially a DSLR) PDAF auto focus performance is far more important. Isn't that one of the main reason to buy a DSLR over mirrorless?

And here's ET2, his bat signal calling to make sure to put Pentax in it's place and knock it down all the while tooting Sony's horn. Are you on a constant vigil or something? How do you pop up in every thread to do this?

 

[Cane]

il_alexk wrote:

Wesley Wong wrote:

Hopefully I don't get nuclear'd here, but I had the chance to play with the latest Fuji X100s, and tested the focus peaking....it's no where near the K-01/K30.

X100s is a different camera which gets either "love it" or "hate it" comments.

I wonder if you've managed to find anything where X100s was better than your K-01?

• How about the indoor/low light AF accuracy? I can use the X100 at F/2 and pinpoint the AF focusing where I want, no need to use focus-peaking for me

As long as nobody moves?

• Were you not impressed by a razor sharp pancake 23mm/F2 lens. As far as I know none of Pentax lenses in that range comes even close to it.

I'll take the da 21mm against it.

• What about optical/electronic viewfinder?
• How did you find the range-finders split-screen manual focus?
• What about the gentle fill flash which never produces pale/shallow faces?

Anyway, here is my X100 performing indoor (wide open, fill flash, AF on eyes).



Here is my K5, same place another day (wide open, no flash, AF on eyes).

Cheers,
Alex

I love both my X100 and K5. But I didn't like the K01 when I tried it indoor in a shop. Even the recent price drop didn't help so I bought X100 instead.

How is it changing lenses?

 

[fakuryu]

Cane wrote:

How do you pop up in every thread to do this?

Just put Pentax and Sony in a sentence.

 

[Wesley Wong]

Hi il_alexk,

You have a nice photo there!

Generally, my experience with the X100/X100s is limited but I like the lens performance. I was quite amaze at the level of performance on the 18-55 f/2.8-4 on the XE-1 too. Nevertheless, to put it fairly, neither the K-01 or X100/100s' CDAF are fast. Nevertheless when it locks, the focus is accurate. The problem with a slower CDAF (sans Olympus OMD) is when shooting a moving subject's almost useless. That's when I favour the use of manual focusing with peaking.

I have tried this technique on fashion show (see my posting in 2012) and it works out fairly well, better than AF-C via CDAF, at least on my K-01.

Dynamic range is good on the Fuji's (since the time I use S2 Pro), but the K-01/K30/K5 are not lacking either. Pentax has implemented an excellent firmware for highlight and shadow recovery esp. on the K-01/K30 (faster too!)

Focus peaking is a little piece of software that does wonders. I love it on the K-01 because it elevate the joy of using manual lenses, esp. all those old gems.

It will be wonderful to see Fuji implementing it on their XE-1 and X-Pro1.

Cheers...Wes

 

[Tom Caldwell]

paulkienitz wrote:

Wesley Wong wrote:

Pentax/Ricoh still holds the crown on the implementation of focus peaking, making it so attractive for manual focusing. Wondering why they stop the development of K-01 where others are still playing catch up.

Hah, and I was thinking the focus peaking on my Q feels a bit vague and mushy, so I have to open up to focus and then stop down to shoot, or it's not fully accurate. Maybe that's just because the Q is exceptionally demanding.

I guess it honestly wouldn't surprise me if other makers were worse. But focus peaking in general could use some further work -- make it both more visible and more sensitive to the really fine focus differences, like have the halos change from orange to green as it gets really exact.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

ET2 wrote:

Wesley Wong wrote:

Pentax/Ricoh still holds the crown on the implementation of focus peaking, making it so attractive for manual focusing.

Nonsense.

Wondering why they stop the development of K-01 where others are still playing catch up.

Focus peaking has been a standard feature on camcorders before Pentax even started making digital cameras. It was never implemented on still SLR cameras as the mirror is usually in the way. Sony brought it to still cameras with Nex as they saw many people were using those cameras with old manual focus lenses. To somehow claim Pentax is inventor of focus peaking (LOL) is outright silly. .

Unlike focus peaking (which has been around for a a decade), Fuji X100s does have something original that helps in manual focusing. It's called split screen focusing. Look that up.

I am still trying to get a handle on focus peaking. My experience is Ricoh GXR, Pentax Q and Sony NEX6. I believe the Pentax K-01 and the Q use variations of the RICOH Mode1 focus peaking. RICOH also have a Mode2 which is an entirely different system.

The K-01 probably has a high enough resolution screen to make Ricoh's mode1 work well, It is a good system. However the problems with focus peaking and a lower resolution screen are clearly shown in the Pentax Q. It works, is quite useful up to 2x magnification but has to be "interpreted" by 4x magnification whereas the Ricoh GXR version is as clear as a bell right up to the cameras magnification limit of 8x.

The Fuji screens are not up to the same level of resolution and probably would give a similar result to that of the Pentax Q if it were ever implemented on their cameras. I did play dpreviews little Fuji split screen video over and over again and was somewhat flabbergasted at what all the fuss might have been. Even if it did work - think focus peaking as whole screen focus exercise that also shows a visual indication of dof for the image you are about to take. Split screen: back to the future, sounds great.

There seems to be some thought about the web that "focus peaking" is a single system and they are all the same. Ricoh proves that this is not by incorporating two separate systems in the GXR - choose the one that suits you best, they are quite different. Sony uses a completely different system on their NEX cameras - so much for it having been around for years - which version are we talking about?

The Sony system is quite good but it does not seem to be scaled for either lenses in use or for screen magnification. The adjustable line thickness and colours are not there "as a nice extra touch" they are "very necessary" in order to be fiddled with to enable the highlights to be seen (at all) in many instances. For example I can set up glorious "fat" ink blot type peaking lines with in-focus screens in normal mode but be struggling to see any in-focus lines at all once the screen is magnified. Luckily Sony has a wonderful very high resolution screen anyway and therefore focus by eye is usually quite possible when their focus peaking indication has died. It does not work in AF, it can delineate dof to a point when actually being seen, but the indications are more blotchy where Ricoh has fine flickering highlights that give a ripple effect when the focus is moved - you can see the ripple moving to wards the point you wish to be in focus. Open up the lens, focus on the eyelashes if need be and stop down again for perfect focus.

Oh, back to Sony, magnify the screen, focus by eye probably because the focus peaking has disappeared, soft press the shutter and you get the full screen (with focus peaking lines all over it!) but you loose the magnified screen - if you want to have another close look start all over again. Contrast this with Ricoh - focus peaking in magnified view - up to 8x with soft vibrant highlighting clearly seen, soft press and you get the capture screen without the focus peaking fluff, then if you release you can go instantly back to your magnified screen with focus peaking to fine tune if necessary - exactly the opposite way to the way that the Sony system works.

There is "focus peaking" - been around for years and then there is "focus peaking" that works well - from Ricoh.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

temama wrote:

anthony mazzeri wrote:

temama wrote:

anthony mazzeri wrote:

ET2 wrote:

Wesley Wong wrote:

Pentax/Ricoh still holds the crown on the implementation of focus peaking, making it so attractive for manual focusing.

Nonsense.

Pentax Ricoh does indeed hold the crown, but not with the K-01.

In my own personal experience, Pentax's focus-peaking on the K-01 is better than Sony's on the RX100, while the Ricoh GXR's Mode 2 focus-peaking with non-digital full-screen magnification easily beats all.

It may be, or then it does not. However Sony's focus peaking works also during Video recording, and that's great.

There is simply no may be or may be not be about it. In my personal experience, the GXR Mode 2 with magnfication is the clear-cut hands-down beat-all crown-holding winner when it comes to focus-peaking. Have you actually tried it yourself to claim others may be just as good or better?

I've used Pentax K-01 and NEX-6 focus peaking features. I have not tried GXR Mode 2 magnfication , only read about it. But also Sony's focus peaking works with magnfication. Actually it's very handy in DMF (direct manual focusing override during AF ) magnfication mode.

I actually use my Sony RX100 with focus-peaking turned off because it's more a hindrance than a help, especially during video where using my naked eye to judge focus actually works better for me instead of having practically everything on the screen shimmering with highights. So not so great as you claim.

Do you think so?

Well, I have not used the RX100. But I really like how focus peaking works with NEX-6, I use it all the time, never off. Have you actually tried NEX-6 focus peaking?

I have, see my other posts. The NEX6 system is useful but in my opinion both focus peaking modes on the Ricoh beat the NEX system. The NEX system is awkward, the highlights range from thick ink blot lines through to almost impossible to be seen to disappeared on magnification, the magnified view is not sticky, soft press the shutter and you lose it - more often than not the focus peaking had disappeared on magnification anyway - then the shooting frame - focus peaking pops up right at the moment when you are looking at final composition (and you don't want it to be there). Sort of a help - it confirms that your eye-based focus on magnification was sort of right but it is too far away and too "thick" to give any real idea of whether focus is finitely good or otherwise.

My impression is that the NEX system is not scaled to magnification of the screen whilst the Ricoh systems (plural) are. The Ricoh highlighting seem quite fine at all levels allowing very clear appreciation of just what points are in focus - right down to some delicate highlighting to indicate eyelashes in focus. Sometimes I wish that the Ricoh focus peaking indications could be captured in the image. Anthony and I might have a laugh if the mode2 focus peaking image could be captured in camera (grin) Split screen focus - hah! - mode2 focus peaking is a crazy invention all on it's own and not for retro purists - eh? But is sure works if you are in a hurry.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Wesley Wong wrote:

ET2, don't get me wrong, in my original post I never claimed Pentax to originate the technology. We all know the technology was long used in video cams, however, I'm just sharing the experience of it on the X100s vs Ricoh/Pentax.

I tested the new X100s with full anticipation of something exciting but it just fall short of expectation. The digital split screen is a good attempt (sincerely) however in actual use, it's just harder to use.

I also have a Ricoh GXR on hand, and yes the Peaking Mode 2 (monochrome) is really awesome. Fastest ever to achieve focus manually with the lenses I tested (Voigtlander 40/2, from f2 to f8).

The omission of peaking during video mode on the Pentax K01/K30 has been discussed at length for a year, and we can only hope somehow, things get improved in future products. Even the omission of this feature from the K5 II/ IIs is mind boggling.

Cheers...Wes

Wesley,

As far as I can see both modes of focus peaking on the Ricoh are new. The Pentax K-01 (apparently works well) and the Q (lower res-screen not so good) seem both to be clones passed over from Ricoh to Pentax.

Much talk of focus peaking being around for years. If the current Sony digital cameras have a version of the old video-cam focus peaking then it is a much different implementation of the same principle but not as good as the ones now originating form Ricoh. Therefore talk of focus peaking as being a universal principle that is always similarly implemented is not right.

It is hard to discuss focus peaking sensibly unless they have all been tried. My experience is limited to Sony NEX6, Pentax Q, and of course the Ricoh GXR in both modes, which are quite differently implemented to prove the point that they can be devised differently. From my experience Ricoh has the best handle on the process. Mode1 for absolute point-specific precision at 8x magnification, surely the most precise point of focus can always be found. Mode2 for speed whilst retaining good accuracy.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

ET2 wrote:

JoeDaBassPlayer wrote:

Xerox invented the mouse but they never really got the PC thing down. Ricoh Pentax has the Focus Peaking quite developed as well as some other areas.

There is nothing much to "develop" here. All focus peaking does is highlight edges on the screen that are sharpest. Sony was able to do it just with a firmware upgrade on the original Nex-5/3.. This technique has been around for years. There are third-party monitors (also around for years) that can do this with any camera. You can do this on Canon cameras with Magic Lantern (which is free firmware) (http://www.magiclantern.fm/ ).

Pentax/Ricoh was neither the first to bring it to still cameras, nor is their version any better (as it doesn't work in video mode).

There is much ado about nothing here. For a still camera (especially a DSLR) PDAF auto focus performance is far more important. Isn't that one of the main reason to buy a DSLR over mirrorless?

Obviously you have not tried Ricoh focus peaking, if it was known to others then Ricoh was the first company to get a proper handle on it. Ricoh focus peaking might be "the same principle" but it is not the same in use, believe me. I use the NEX6 and the GXR.

And yes, Ricoh also upgraded all their GXR modules with one single firmware upgrade. It can also be optionally used in AF mode as well.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Wesley Wong wrote:

Focus peaking is a little piece of software that does wonders. I love it on the K-01 because it elevate the joy of using manual lenses, esp. all those old gems.

It will be wonderful to see Fuji implementing it on their XE-1 and X-Pro1.

Cheers...Wes

They can't - the lcd screen res is not good enough. (see FP on Pentax Q)

So they give the wonderful new invention of split screen focusing.

 

[ET2]

Tom Caldwell wrote:

The NEX system is awkward, the highlights range from thick ink blot lines through to almost impossible to be seen to disappeared on magnification,

You can increase the peaking level in menu

the magnified view is not sticky, soft press the shutter and you lose it

That's not a negative. That's a plus. You get to see the entire composition once you half-press the shutter button.

Obviously you have not tried Ricoh focus peaking, if it was known to others then Ricoh was the first company to get a proper handle on it.

That's your opinion contradicted by other reviewers (for example Steve Huff and Michael Reichmann)

 

[ET2]

Tom Caldwell wrote:

Much talk of focus peaking being around for years.

Which is undisputed fact. How do you think video people were focusing for years? Like this

The monitors itself had focus peaking, regardless of cameras

 

[Tom Caldwell]

ET2 wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

The NEX system is awkward, the highlights range from thick ink blot lines through to almost impossible to be seen to disappeared on magnification,

You can increase the peaking level in menu

If you read my other posts you can see that I said that the Sony focus peaking is not auto scaled - delving into the menu to change the level of peaking is not"a feature", it is "a make do" because the focus peaking is not scaled to the screen magnification. Ricoh's focus peaking is perfectly legible and much the same thickness from unmagnified right through 2x, 4x and 8x magnification which can be selected on the fly, and magnification changed directly on the fly (not a two stage circular toggle that has to be cancelled to exit or, annoyingly cancels itself on soft press of the shutter). With Sony focus peaking it ranges from what can only be described as "ink blots" to "effectively disappeared" at full magnification.

the magnified view is not sticky, soft press the shutter and you lose it

That's not a negative. That's plus. You get to see the entire composition once you half-press the shutter button.

Magnified view sometimes, but not always shows focus peaking, but rarely at highest magnification - it simply disappears. Then you half press the shutter and you get composition view (hooray) but the composition view is then encumbered by the ink-blot focus peaking. Then if you release half press the screen reverts to full frame and not the last magnified view (start all over again).

Would it not be better to have a clearly legible scaled focus peaking magnified view right up to 8x with stages at full control by the user all at discretion. Half press the shutter and you get normal view with no focus peaking - something we agree is a plus. Then if you decide to re-check your point of focus - then release the shutter press and the camera reverts automatically to the last magnified focus peaking used. Soft press the shutter again and you are back in final composition view once more - toggle back and forth to your hearts content.

Obviously you have not tried Ricoh focus peaking, if it was known to others then Ricoh was the first company to get a proper handle on it.

That's your opinion contradicted by other reviewers (for example Steve Huff and Michael Reichmann)

With respect to these honest gentlemen. Were they discussing "focus peaking" in general terms or were they discussing different focus peaking implementations by manufacturer. As far as I know there has been no direct comparison of the various focus peaking systems available.

I have stated the limitations of my own personal knowledge of focus peaking - Ricoh GXR, Pentax Q and Sony NEX6. Again, with respect, my personal testing cannot be worthless.

My finding is that the Ricoh systems (both of them) are a better implementation of focus peaking that the one used by Sony on the NEX6. To give Sony its due - their system is very useful and if they work on it a bit more it might be nearly as good as Ricoh Mode1. That still leaves Ricoh one mode ahead.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

ET2 wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

Much talk of focus peaking being around for years.

Which is undisputed fact. How do you think video people were focusing for years? Like this

The monitors itself had focus peaking, regardless of cameras

Don't chop my words out of context - that quote does not reflect my original meaning. I did not dispute that focus peaking was previously available. What I was saying that it has been around for years but of the current systems that I have seen and used in my own personal experience the Ricoh version is the best implemented for actual use. I have a NEX6 and can vouch for how it works. I also have and use a Pentax Q with focus peaking - it suffers from the lower resolution screen - but it is usable up to 2x magnification (only) with some success imho. Because of the lower-res lcd the Sony system as implemented is much superior to the Pentax Q implementation.

But don't get me wrong - the Sony focus peaking is indeed very useful even if the Ricoh versions are better implemented.

I am not about to trail around looking at what others have done or trot up what the experts have said. When I get into video cameras I might decide which video camera focus peaking system suits me best. Right now how it might work or has worked in video is completely irrelevant to me.

 

[Wesley Wong]

It is hard to discuss focus peaking sensibly unless they have all been tried. My experience is limited to Sony NEX6, Pentax Q, and of course the Ricoh GXR in both modes, which are quite differently implemented to prove the point that they can be devised differently. From my experience Ricoh has the best handle on the process. Mode1 for absolute point-specific precision at 8x magnification, surely the most precise point of focus can always be found. Mode2 for speed whilst retaining good accuracy.

 

[audiobomber]

Tom Caldwell wrote:

The K-01 probably has a high enough resolution screen to make Ricoh's mode1 work well.

The K-01 screen is 921,000 pixels, same resolution as the GXR.

Oh, back to Sony, magnify the screen, focus by eye probably because the focus peaking has disappeared, soft press the shutter and you get the full screen (with focus peaking lines all over it!) but you loose the magnified screen - if you want to have another close look start all over again. Contrast this with Ricoh - focus peaking in magnified view - up to 8x with soft vibrant highlighting clearly seen, soft press and you get the capture screen without the focus peaking fluff, then if you release you can go instantly back to your magnified screen with focus peaking to fine tune if necessary - exactly the opposite way to the way that the Sony system works.

It seems the K-01 focus peaking is not exactly like Ricoh mode 1. Magnified view on the K-01 is 2X, 4X or 6X, and focus peaking lines remain visible when focus is zoomed in. They are definitely scaled, and take up no more of the subject proportionately than they do in full frame view. The magnified view releases when the shutter is half-pressed. To return to the magnified view, you must press the OK button again. I like having the FP lines visible in magnified view, so this system suits me best.

--
Dan

 

[abluesky]

Tom Caldwell wrote:

A second benefit of the Ricoh system is to show dof. When I first used it I tended to play with the focus ring on my manual lenses simply to watch in wonder as the dof rippled in and out with the focus ring movement.

Yes! I use this "feature" with the K-01 to zone focus the 40mmXS which has no distance scale. Great for street.

 

[temama]

A well-written, Tom. But...

Tom Caldwell wrote:

The Sony system is quite good but it does not seem to be scaled for either lenses in use or for screen magnification. The adjustable line thickness and colours are not there "as a nice extra touch" they are "very necessary" in order to be fiddled with to enable the highlights to be seen (at all) in many instances. For example I can set up glorious "fat" ink blot type peaking lines with in-focus screens in normal mode but be struggling to see any in-focus lines at all once the screen is magnified. Luckily Sony has a wonderful very high resolution screen anyway and therefore focus by eye is usually quite possible when their focus peaking indication has died. It does not work in AF, it can delineate dof to a point when actually being seen, but the indications are more blotchy where Ricoh has fine flickering highlights that give a ripple effect when the focus is moved - you can see the ripple moving to wards the point you wish to be in focus. Open up the lens, focus on the eyelashes if need be and stop down again for perfect focus.

Oh, back to Sony, magnify the screen, focus by eye probably because the focus peaking has disappeared, soft press the shutter and you get the full screen (with focus peaking lines all over it!) but you loose the magnified screen

No. Actually focus peaking "lines" are there, even in magnified screen (Sony NEX-6) ! I just tried that. But it seems that the lines are less visible than in full screen mode. Anyway, I can clearly see them when I focus carefully. Sony's system isn't perfect, but very useful as such. Sometimes I wish that the lines would be more strongly visible. It could easily fix with firmware update.

- if you want to have another close look start all over again. Contrast this with Ricoh - focus peaking in magnified view - up to 8x with soft vibrant highlighting clearly seen, soft press and you get the capture screen without the focus peaking fluff, then if you release you can go instantly back to your magnified screen with focus peaking to fine tune if necessary - exactly the opposite way to the way that the Sony system works.

There is "focus peaking" - been around for years and then there is "focus peaking" that works well - from Ricoh.

--
Tom Caldwell