something i'd expect from a sony user because you don't have a basis of comparison.
the 80D AF is VERY similar to the 45 point array of the 1D Mark II - N, III and IV days. even going back to the 1V and 3 days.
and no one complained about them being able to do BIF.
according to dpreview, everything MUST use iTR or it's equivalent to do AF now. which is a pretty ridiculous assertion.
It's probably wrong to focus on BIF - and I put my hands up and note I am as much to blame as anyone for taking the conversation down that route.
The problem is there is not a single use case for BIF just like there isn't for any other photographic scenario.
Clearly pro/enthusiast Canon bodies excel at many/most BIF requirements, as do their lenses.
However, in my case I was pointing to a specific use case of mine that just happened to be a BIF that was similar to the cyclist test performed by DPR.
I don't think tracking is the issue - its more a case of 70/80D not being able to adjust focus fast enough.
"...I noticed something interesting: while many of the frames were out of focus, the correct AF points were often illuminated over the subject. This indicates that while the camera is able to detect and track where the subject is in the frame, the AF system is simply unable to acquire focus quickly enough during the burst."
That's my experience too of the 70D. Some settings might improve that, at the expense of fps. I have tried them, but I can't say the improvement was great. Also different lens combinations might work better if they have faster focus motors.
My disappointment is that the 80D doesn't appear to improve much on this - but I am more than happy if someone other than DPR can show me it does. I may well buy one then.
Moreover, I just reflected that it was interesting how well a MILC like the A6300 can do now in this regard. But I am not about to switch to Sony just for that one feature.
Of course there are lots of areas in which the 80D excels. There are plenty of sound reasons to buy one. I would just have loved it if it had excelled in this use case too, or at least improved over the 70D.
So I am now waiting to see what the next wave of pro/enthusiast Canon's bring. If they can meld the sensor improvements of the 80D and improve on their already good AF, then they should be on to a winner.
In the meantime, though I could, I am reluctant to buy a 5DMKIII or 7DMKII given what lies around the corner. I will just have to be patient
and a sony user coming in here touting off canon issues? shall we run though the wobbly mounts, overheating cameras, bricking on updates, lossy raw, crappy non existent service, cameras that can't af with longer focals in moderate light, flash mount issues - hell flashes in general,etc,etc..
Hence why I haven't bought a A6300 or A7RII... I am just stuck waiting for the 'perfect' camera
)
) I'm not biased in any way (only towards the consumer) and I actually just commended the AF of the 7D mark II (from what I've read about it). Lots of things wrong with Sony. But that's not an excuse for Canon not to do better. How can you keep on bashing Sony for poor handling and clumsy ergonomics (which is true) if you need to have four hands and the IQ of Einstein to get the 80d to track properly (if in fact it can?)? And then ask for more than 1 k? That's an insult imho.
