Reading mode: Light Dark

Manufacturers should pull resources away from sensors and put them onto autofocus

Go to last post
S

sportyaccordy

Forum Pro
Messages
21,424
Solutions
2
Reaction score
17,172
Location
US
For all intents and purposes, sensor tech is "good enough". OK, Canon could use more base ISO DR, and all the Sony/Toshiba sensors could do better in making noise less splotchy at higher ISOs. But I think the real gap right now is with autofocus. Seems there are a lot of issues there that make super duper sensors a little pointless.
  • FWIW live view on DSLRs seems pretty bad aside from Canon's OSPDAF bodies. And the MILCs I've used get lost once things get just a little dark.
  • A lot of low end DSLRs don't have a ton of cross points. 6D only has 1!
  • Lower end DSLR mirror AF coverage is less than great.
  • Even cameras with a lot of points don't have many that are rated for very fast apertures
  • Canikon makes you pay out the nose for AF micro adjust (how much could this feature seriously cost)
More and more sensor IQ is great but it doesn't mean a ton if you can't get focus under all the conditions the sensor can yield nice photos. What innovations are you hoping to see in AF going forward? I think the D5/500's auto AF adjust is brilliant and the kind of stuff that will set camera makers apart from each other.
 
There are many photographers who require advanced AF for their chosen subjects and scenes. There are many who don't. Landscape and portrait photographers, for example, would probably prefer sensor advancement over an increase in AF cross points.

I found the AF on my camera is "pretty good", and despite its age (3 years) is probably in the middle of the pack of cameras you might see in use today (so a fair amount of room for improvement). The sensor has probably held up a little better, room for improvement but not as much as for AF. Nonetheless, I would prefer a camera with a more advanced sensor and the same AF, more so than the reverse. But that's just me— I shoot a lot in MF and when I use AF it seems to get me the shots I want.

I appreciate that other photographers have different priorities; and if it helps, you can take solace in the fact that none of them are probably listening to me anyway :)
 
I will say you can’t have too much DR, resolution, focus accuracy, focus speed, low light focus capability, battery life and FPS. We gearheads want it all! Let’s say the D5/D500 came with that amazing new focus but similar sensor improvement as D4S to D4 or D810 to D800e, that would have been a huge disappointment and likely couldn’t have justified the new price and 4 year development cycle. Of course on the DX side with long suffering D300s a D7200 sensor with the D500 focus/FPS would have been welcome with great fanfare just because of the total lack of D400 and 7D MK new generation staring them down, LOL.

I don’t see how improvement on sensor stands in the way or takes away from improving focus. Unless it’s a money/people resource issue. Are we talking about trading off sensor IQ versus sensor based focus?

Now if you shoot Sony mirrorless I agree, they better get working on focus, that is still a big gap, as is lens selection, flash, batterylife, EVF lag and on and on an on :D
 
I thought the Sony mirorrless lineup in terms of AF was the best out right now?
 
Mengmeng said:
I thought the Sony mirorrless lineup in terms of AF was the best out right now?
Click to expand...
I've played with it in the store.. very good. When I pick up a DSLR it's mostly for sports / action and there mirrorless still a tad to slow, EVF not as good, battery life still short.

If I was don't more landscape, portrait.. I see no reason why I wouldn't buy one of the Mirrorless.
 
chipmaster said:
Mengmeng said:
I thought the Sony mirorrless lineup in terms of AF was the best out right now?
Click to expand...
I've played with it in the store.. very good. When I pick up a DSLR it's mostly for sports / action and there mirrorless still a tad to slow, EVF not as good, battery life still short.

If I was don't more landscape, portrait.. I see no reason why I wouldn't buy one of the Mirrorless.
Click to expand...
 
I think you have a point. Focusing accuracy and speed do seem to be lagging behind sensor performance. Perhaps a shift in emphasis is in order.

DLSRs are generally fast and the high-end models have good tracking, but even with built-in adjustments many models still struggle for accuracy. Plus in most cases focus points are confined to the central image area. Mirrorless can be very accurate and flexible, and are gaining in speed and offer refinements such as eye detection, but most struggle with tracking. Some have problems in low light.

What good is high ISO and super resolution if you can't focus to take advantage of it?

Gato
 
sportyaccordy said:
For all intents and purposes, sensor tech is "good enough". OK, Canon could use more base ISO DR, and all the Sony/Toshiba sensors could do better in making noise less splotchy at higher ISOs. But I think the real gap right now is with autofocus. Seems there are a lot of issues there that make super duper sensors a little pointless.
  • FWIW live view on DSLRs seems pretty bad aside from Canon's OSPDAF bodies. And the MILCs I've used get lost once things get just a little dark.
  • A lot of low end DSLRs don't have a ton of cross points. 6D only has 1!
  • Lower end DSLR mirror AF coverage is less than great.
  • Even cameras with a lot of points don't have many that are rated for very fast apertures
  • Canikon makes you pay out the nose for AF micro adjust (how much could this feature seriously cost)
More and more sensor IQ is great but it doesn't mean a ton if you can't get focus under all the conditions the sensor can yield nice photos. What innovations are you hoping to see in AF going forward? I think the D5/500's auto AF adjust is brilliant and the kind of stuff that will set camera makers apart from each other.
Click to expand...
I think that cannot be separated for couple of reasons: if you look at the MILC, the AF is part of the sensor, thus any improvements made there will directly affect AF. DSLR on the other hand have dual system - off-sensor PDAF (where we can see Nikon really improving the system) but in LV sensors are holding global AF lagging behind - so they effectively must go MILC route in sensor design. We end up on the square one. I guess you didn't word it correctly - instead of increasing MP, they should concentrate on further improvements of AF systems. Self-micro AF adjustment is more than welcome and surely could be further improved. Yet for mass-audience, bigger numbers still sell - proof is in Canon forums blaming Canon had not done much with sensors, primarily based on MP count. Nikon D500 was a long awaited and had brought some nice stuff along, the target audience is more photo-educated to be bothered with the fact it brings 'only' 20MP. Nikon couldn't do that with consumer models, period. People want 36, 42, 50, 100MP - not because they need it, just because it sounds better. So, game on...
 
Last edited:
sportyaccordy said:
For all intents and purposes, sensor tech is "good enough". OK, Canon could use more base ISO DR, and all the Sony/Toshiba sensors could do better in making noise less splotchy at higher ISOs. But I think the real gap right now is with autofocus. Seems there are a lot of issues there that make super duper sensors a little pointless.
  • FWIW live view on DSLRs seems pretty bad aside from Canon's OSPDAF bodies. And the MILCs I've used get lost once things get just a little dark.
  • A lot of low end DSLRs don't have a ton of cross points. 6D only has 1!
  • Lower end DSLR mirror AF coverage is less than great.
  • Even cameras with a lot of points don't have many that are rated for very fast apertures
  • Canikon makes you pay out the nose for AF micro adjust (how much could this feature seriously cost)
More and more sensor IQ is great but it doesn't mean a ton if you can't get focus under all the conditions the sensor can yield nice photos. What innovations are you hoping to see in AF going forward? I think the D5/500's auto AF adjust is brilliant and the kind of stuff that will set camera makers apart from each other.
Click to expand...
I suspect the reason that mfgs do not focus on AF (pardon the pun) is because so many photographers are landscape and/or studio where it doesn't matter as much. If most photographers shot street/action/wildlife, I bet a lot more emphasis would be placed on AF. Still there are some good advances to AF anyway, and we will get there eventually.
 
sportyaccordy said:
For all intents and purposes, sensor tech is "good enough". OK, Canon could use more base ISO DR, and all the Sony/Toshiba sensors could do better in making noise less splotchy at higher ISOs. But I think the real gap right now is with autofocus. Seems there are a lot of issues there that make super duper sensors a little pointless.
  • FWIW live view on DSLRs seems pretty bad aside from Canon's OSPDAF bodies. And the MILCs I've used get lost once things get just a little dark.
  • A lot of low end DSLRs don't have a ton of cross points. 6D only has 1!
  • Lower end DSLR mirror AF coverage is less than great.
  • Even cameras with a lot of points don't have many that are rated for very fast apertures
  • Canikon makes you pay out the nose for AF micro adjust (how much could this feature seriously cost)
More and more sensor IQ is great but it doesn't mean a ton if you can't get focus under all the conditions the sensor can yield nice photos. What innovations are you hoping to see in AF going forward? I think the D5/500's auto AF adjust is brilliant and the kind of stuff that will set camera makers apart from each other.
Click to expand...
I don't think you can realistically separate the two areas or ignore one to the benefit of the other - on sensor PDAF points that know which way the focus needs to adjust in are the future - not only for mirrorless, but also for dSLRs which need to confirmation from the sensor surface to calibrate their primary AF systems, which otherwise will always be likely to be slightly out... This was not so evident in the past, but with higher megapixel counts and pixel peeping, we now can see focus inaccuracies that would have passed without notice before.
 
... on producing a dream camera exactly to sportyaccordy's dream specs.

Just one copy, mind :-)

While he is then out creating masterpiece by masterpiece the rest of us can stumble along with our sub-spec gear :-) :-) :-)

More seriously - no, I have no need, really, for improved autofocus. Landscapes don't move so fast that focus is a problem :-)

Regards, Mike
 
sportyaccordy said:
For all intents and purposes, sensor tech is "good enough".
Click to expand...
For whom? By "all" intents and purposes you mean your own personal purposes. Strangely, there are many photographers who don't think that sensor tech is yet good enough.
sportyaccordy said:
OK, Canon could use more base ISO DR, and all the Sony/Toshiba sensors could do better in making noise less splotchy at higher ISOs. But I think the real gap right now is with autofocus. Seems there are a lot of issues there that make super duper sensors a little pointless.
  • FWIW live view on DSLRs seems pretty bad aside from Canon's OSPDAF bodies. And the MILCs I've used get lost once things get just a little dark.
  • A lot of low end DSLRs don't have a ton of cross points. 6D only has 1!
  • Lower end DSLR mirror AF coverage is less than great.
  • Even cameras with a lot of points don't have many that are rated for very fast apertures
  • Canikon makes you pay out the nose for AF micro adjust (how much could this feature seriously cost)
More and more sensor IQ is great but it doesn't mean a ton if you can't get focus under all the conditions the sensor can yield nice photos.
Click to expand...
Better and better AF is great but it doesn't mean a ton if you can't get great colours under all the conditions the camera needs to focus automatically. And AF is no use at all for all the times focus is best done manually.

So even in principle I don't agree with you. And when we come to the details you forget that sensor and AF are typically from different manufacturers. Nikon and Pentax - that's 2/3 of the DSLR makers - buy their sensors from third parties. So stopping development of sensors would have zero effect on AF.
 
Improvements should go in all directions and many of the issues don't even seem to be addressed. The amount of complaints about poorly designed menus, reports of significant shutter shock even in high-end models -- I have no idea how much attention they get inside the manufacturing companies but I don't recall this ever coming up in any interview with company representatives. These are the real problems, not that you just have a quarter bazillion focus points instead of full bazillion.
 
I forget how pedantic this board can be :-D

When I said sensor development I meant in the realm of IQ. Canon users have a legitimate gripe with regards to dynamic range. 5DSR is cool but D810 gets sharp photos from the same lenses with like 2-3 stops more base ISO DR. That's significant. But overall, if you want to talk about what is more limiting for photographers getting great pictures, AF is way higher on the list than IQ for most current generation non MFT ILCs. There is much more room for improvement on the AF front.
 
MinAZ said:
I suspect the reason that mfgs do not focus on AF (pardon the pun) is because so many photographers are landscape and/or studio where it doesn't matter as much. If most photographers shot street/action/wildlife, I bet a lot more emphasis would be placed on AF. Still there are some good advances to AF anyway, and we will get there eventually.
Click to expand...
Maybe some manufacturers have not been working hard on improving auto focus, but Sony certainly have. The speed of focussing in their mirrorless cameras has improved greatly over the past few years, and they are certainly still working hard on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top