-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
M50 Autofocus improvements
- Thread starter justmeMN
- Start date
-
- Tags
- pentax optio m50
Form your linked page: "Canon’s outstanding and proven Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus technology is used on the EOS M50. From the start, this is a tremendous technological foundation for strong focus performance, for both still and video shooting."
"HD video recording is an area where the Dual Pixel CMOS technology has proven to be especially effective, with both moving and non-moving subjects."
And still Canon chose not to use this fantastic feature for 4K. But for some reason that wasn't discussed in this "article".
They basically said the same about the EOS M100: "Equipped with phase-detection, it offers fast, smooth and precise autofocus that stays locked onto your subject, even if it is in motion, for both photos and videos.".
Have you tried the EOS M100 AF in real life, in less than good light (not pitch dark, just low light)? I guess not. Yes, it's really, really bad.
Canon marketing is very good, but actually a big waste of time, IMHO. But I do understand it's comforting to read uplifting stuff about your favorite gear, whether true or not.
"HD video recording is an area where the Dual Pixel CMOS technology has proven to be especially effective, with both moving and non-moving subjects."
And still Canon chose not to use this fantastic feature for 4K. But for some reason that wasn't discussed in this "article".
They basically said the same about the EOS M100: "Equipped with phase-detection, it offers fast, smooth and precise autofocus that stays locked onto your subject, even if it is in motion, for both photos and videos.".
Have you tried the EOS M100 AF in real life, in less than good light (not pitch dark, just low light)? I guess not. Yes, it's really, really bad.
Canon marketing is very good, but actually a big waste of time, IMHO. But I do understand it's comforting to read uplifting stuff about your favorite gear, whether true or not.
Last edited:
Alastair Norcross
Forum Pro
I find that surprising. I judge AF capabilities of a camera by using the camera. I have the M6, and have used it in all lighting conditions. In good light, it's excellent. In low light, it's very good. In extremely dark conditions, it struggles, but those conditions are darker than any I have ever wanted to take photographs in. I've only tried it out for the sake of testing it in such dark conditions. I'm talking about a small study, with blinds closed and no lights on. Even then, I had to pick a spot under a table, in order to find lighting so low that the M6 didn't lock on. What's surprising is that I thought the M100 had the same AF capabilities as the M6. But if you're correct, it seems the M100 isn't as good in that respect. What lens were you using on your M100, and just how low was the lighting?
The lens that Canon sells with the camera: EF-M 15-45, subject in the room was lit by a normal incandescant light-bulb, circomstances in which I could easily read a book, camera in P-mode, AF-S. My iPhone had no trouble focussing, though its jpeg was really noisy. Which is why I tried the EOS M100. I had to resort to manual focus to get the subject in focus. Despite plenty of contrast in the focus box, AF did not work at all.
But my point was that Canon marketing is just that: marketing, not real life.
Last edited:
Irrelevant if you're mostly only using one of them, the central one.
See above.
I'm not blinded, I'm actually using some of the gear we're talking about in real life. Are you?
Last edited:
Alastair Norcross
Forum Pro
Well it does appear as if the M100's AF is worse than the M6's. Either that, or the 15-45 was at fault. I don't have that lens, but I do have the 18-55, 18-150, 11-22, and 22. None of those lenses have any trouble focusing on the M6 in the conditions you describe (though I never use P-mode, but I wouldn't think that would make a difference to AF). I presume your subject had sufficient contrast, and you were using single point? I'm not surprised that the iPhone had no trouble focusing, though. The much smaller sensor and very short focal length lens make focusing easy. But, as you say, you pay for that with the high noise that comes with a tiny sensor.
I just happen to have my M100 sitting by me with my 15-45 on it. I'm in my lounge with some Philips Hue lighting around. Not over bright.
The plant you can see is about 6 feet away from me. Focussing was very quick.
The plant you can see is about 6 feet away from me. Focussing was very quick.
Last edited:
Yes, and yes. Small box, larger box, didn't make a difference.
Again, just pointing out that real life is not as rosy as Canons marketing would want you to believe.
But let us give the M50 a chance and await real life reviews... There's always hope.
Last edited:
Alastair Norcross
Forum Pro
Agreed, but Canon is hardly unique in that respect. Every manufacturer makes exaggerated claims. I would be interested to know how the M100 does with lenses other than the 15-45, though. It seems very strange that the M100 AF would be so much worse than the M6 AF. So the most likely culprit is the lens. I'm used to really excellent AF on my 7DII, so I have pretty high standards. And the M6 more than lives up to those standards. Which isn't to say that it performs the same way as the 7DII. We all know that PD AF on a DSLR has different strengths and weaknesses from ML AF, even DPAF. The M6 is better than the 7DII for some things, and worse for others. But all-around, it is excellent.
adventurer69
Senior Member
Honestly , I see nothing wrong with M50 , it's regarded as entry level but heck , I am gonna get me one .
aftab
Forum Pro
Canon also claims
Better tracking mainly due to Digic 8 and improved algorithm.
Improved low light AF sensitivity to - 2 EV, one stop improvement over previous Ms
Eye AF for portrait
I am not into video, not having DPAF in 4k video doesn't bother me.
I don't own a M camera or any other mirrorless ILC. But I have been thinking about a small mirrorless for general use and as a second camera for travel. I am really interested in M50 (I love flip out screens). I will wait for some review.
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/catch45/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/aftab/
Last edited:
davel33
Senior Member
Whats interesting about that White Paper is the term " as of February 2018" is used 4 times and once for Jan 2018. The M5 II must be coming soonPeople here are so outraged about the 4K limitations, that they forgot to notice the alleged autofocus improvements.
What's New: EOS M50 Autofocus
https://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2018/eos-m50/eos-m50-autofocus.shtml
I tried the same photo as the one above, but this time at 45mm, not 15mm. It still focussed OK, but it took about a second to work it out. So, yes, slower, but still did it.
I haven’t bothered to upload it - but I can if you want. (O.4 second at F6.3, ISO 800 if you want to know)
Alan
Wanderinglaurence
Member
- Messages
- 32
- Reaction score
- 2
It's a whole different deal with the 22mm f 2.0. I got an 18-55 open box just to have more range and I couldn't believe how bad it sucked in low light-to the point of having to turn off AF entirely. Who wants to press the shutter and have nothing happen?
Manual focusing with my two ef-m lenses is also a major PITA. I never seem to turn the focus ring in the right direction. And the default magnification is too much to easily find and edge especially if you're way out of focus to begin with. And you can't zone focus.
As much as I'm enjoying the color of the Digic 8, I may dump the system for a more shooter friendly system (Fuji/Leica). Or decide to get a pro DSLR body and forget about the M. I suppose I'll start adapting some MF legacy glass and try that.
But come on Canon-is it too much to ask to have a depth of field scale in ft/mtrs on the barrel of the lens? And a responsive, prominently placed focus ring? And how bout hiring some staff and coming up with a release plan for ef-m lenses? (Uh-hum, anybody notice how Nikon's handling the lens issue for their brand new Z's?)
Phew
Manual focusing with my two ef-m lenses is also a major PITA. I never seem to turn the focus ring in the right direction. And the default magnification is too much to easily find and edge especially if you're way out of focus to begin with. And you can't zone focus.
As much as I'm enjoying the color of the Digic 8, I may dump the system for a more shooter friendly system (Fuji/Leica). Or decide to get a pro DSLR body and forget about the M. I suppose I'll start adapting some MF legacy glass and try that.
But come on Canon-is it too much to ask to have a depth of field scale in ft/mtrs on the barrel of the lens? And a responsive, prominently placed focus ring? And how bout hiring some staff and coming up with a release plan for ef-m lenses? (Uh-hum, anybody notice how Nikon's handling the lens issue for their brand new Z's?)
Phew
thunder storm
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,663
- Solutions
- 7
- Reaction score
- 5,952
It might be irrelevant for you if you are only using the central one.
Someone thinking every user makes compositions with the main subject in the center of the frame is maybe not the best reference for judging auto focus capabilities of a camera.
If you want to focus in lowlight you will need a bright lens for that. The slower zooms focus perfect in bright light conditions, but are limited in low light situations.
Before you can compare focusing capabilities of cameras you should keep some factors equal: aperture (or actually the T-stop), direction&speed of movement of the subject, distance to the subject, contrast on the subject, size of surface of the subject covering the frame, and last but not least how low the amount of light actually is.
Sittatunga
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,317
- Solutions
- 33
- Reaction score
- 5,390
The EF-M lenses focus in the same direction as all Canon lenses do - turn them anti-clockwise as you look through the viewfinder to focus towards infinity.
STM lenses don't have focus scales just because the focussing ring is not mechanically connected to the actual focus mechanism. All the Canon EF-M lenses have STM focussing. If you want to use zone focus with any EOS M series camera you have two choices.
- Use an EF lens with a focussing scale, such as the 24mm, 28mm or the 35mm f/2 on the adapter. They're probably bigger than you'd like on the M50. The EF-S 24mm and EF 40mm pancake lenses don't have focussing scales. Zoom lenses with focussing scales tend to be big and expensive and the focussing scales generally aren't terribly accurate. Cheap autofocus zooms aren't all that parfocal and their depth of field scales are almost useless.
- Use an adapted manual rangefinder lens or third party lens mirrorless lens. You will have no contacts, so there will be no EXIF data and you may have to calculate and mark on a depth of field scale. At least the lens will be in scale with the camera.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum