Can Canon AF do real time tracking of objects (not just faces,eyes,cars,animals etc)?

Rudy Pohl wrote:

As a new R5 owner I have been following this thread with interest and doing my own little tracking tests here at home as I've often done since buying the camera 3 months ago. I really don't know enough yet to add anything useful to the discussion, but I do have a question.

What would be required in order to make the tracking functions more sticky on the R5 or on most other mirrorless camera? Would it be that more processing power is needed, better algorithms, or whatever?

I'm wondering why Canon can't make some firmware improvements to these tracking functions in a camera as expensive as the R5, unless of course the lack of processing power is the obstacle. Nikon did some amazing firmware updates to the Z9.

I am getting consistently terrific results tracking and shooting birds in flight still images, but with video not so much.

Thanks,
Rudy

Hi Rudy.

My feeling is that the R5 certainly has the horsepower to run these subject recognition algorithms in real time, however Canon's idea of a major "firmware upgrade" is actually the next body release. 

We shall see what Canon implements in the upcoming R5 Mark II!

R2

Joe Reynolds wrote:

>>>And I too use Spot with BBAF, but I keep it in Servo so I can track that spot if need be (and if I need to lock focus, I just lift my thumb from the back button). Works tremendously well.<<<

R2,

The problem is if one becomes accustomed to servo tracking while holding the bb down continuously, it is too easy to do so when not wanting to track if in servo. Thus I keep servo off on the other bb so I can hold the button down continuously and the focus point stays fixed at initial distance even when recomposing. So I am always holding either bb focus button down continuously.

Hope that description makes sense .

But, whatever works.

So you have "Subject Detect" (with servo tracking) on one back button, and "One Shot" (with Spot) on the other, correct? And you want the pressing action to be the same for both buttons, right? That certainly works.

Except one would be missing out on Spot AF with Servo (no subject tracking). Which I use a LOT, but you may not.

Otherwise, our focusing actions are actually very close.

I keep "Subject Detect" (with servo tracking) programmed to the AF-ON button, and Spot AF with Servo programed to the ( * ) button. I usually can tell beforehand which I'll need to use, and then implement the appropriate method. With either button, if I feel that I want to stop focus (lock it at a particular distance), I just lift my thumb and it locks (press again to re-activate AF), etc etc etc.

For instance with say a Landscape shot, I'll just put the spot on some bushes, rocks, fences, houses, just about anything, and then do a quick press and release (and focus is locked at that distance), no matter how many shots I take or how much I recompose. Voila!

Having both Servo and One Shot's functionality on a single button (and entirely separate from Subject Detect with servo tracking) really is powerful. Highly recommended!

R2

Rudy Pohl wrote:

Joe Reynolds wrote:

Rudy, the R5 is an excellent camera, even if not perfect.

I’d like to see better tracking of random objects but in most cases the focus/recompose without servo tracking of the fixed object does the job and is certainly faster than manipulation of a joy stick

And when it comes to people/eyes, the servo focus/recompose from center focus location is as good or better than any other.

I use one bb for servo face and another bb for single spot without servo.

Hello Moderator, can you please delete this post. Thanks very much,
Rudy

R2D2, I didn't see your answer to my post on the previous so I wrote this post here thanking Joe for his reassuring words. Thanks to you as well.

The r4est of the stuff I wrote was not really needed anymore but the website wouldn't let me withdraw (delete) the post.

Cheers,
Rudy

No, keep the post Rudy!  I wanted to see the video anyway! 

Or even add the post to one of your threads.  I'd be interested.

R2

Rudy Pohl wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Rudy Pohl wrote:

Joe Reynolds wrote:

Rudy, the R5 is an excellent camera, even if not perfect.

I’d like to see better tracking of random objects but in most cases the focus/recompose without servo tracking of the fixed object does the job and is certainly faster than manipulation of a joy stick

And when it comes to people/eyes, the servo focus/recompose from center focus location is as good or better than any other.

I use one bb for servo face and another bb for single spot without servo.

Hello Moderator, can you please delete this post. Thanks very much,
Rudy

R2D2, I didn't see your answer to my post on the previous so I wrote this post here thanking Joe for his reassuring words. Thanks to you as well.

The r4est of the stuff I wrote was not really needed anymore but the website wouldn't let me withdraw (delete) the post.

Cheers,
Rudy

No, keep the post Rudy! I wanted to see the video anyway!

Or even add the post to one of your threads. I'd be interested.

R2

Hi R2, I'll post the little video clip as a separate thread in a couple of minutes.

Rudy

Yeah, video AF is a completely different creature than still AF (as you've obviously discovered!). In general it's slower to respond (on purpose). I have to shoot some video of the mayor tomorrow, but fortunately he's not as fast as a Snowy!

R2

R2D2 wrote:

Laqup wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Laqup wrote:

and a teaching on how to do it differently and why this method is not relevant anyway. In my eyes the disrespectfulness is coming "from the other side" and his observation is spot on.

Well what relevant method do YOU use for shooting your landscapes?

R2

Try to think a bit outside the box.

Here, let me first post what the OP actually wrote...

Jens H wrote:

AF point selection in landscape photography has never been so easy for me. This works with any object that has even a bit of contrast, which can be bushes, rocks, fences, houses, just about anything.

Thinking outside the box is exactly what I'm asking of the OP!! They are stuck on ONE way to achieve focus for their landscapes. I pointed out another method that's just as fast, takes less effort, and locks on indefinitely.

You are focusing very much on landscapes and "still lives".

That's what the OP asked about! Just re-read what they wrote. (pssst. I re-posted it above for you).

The method the author describes is useful in general, without the focus on landscape. Read the initial post and you will see that first of all the method itself was described and only later landscape was mentioned as one example were the author is using this technique.

Here's their OP again for easy reference...

Jens H wrote:

But currently I use the Sony a6600 mainly for one reason: AF Real Time Tracking. All I have to do is aim my AF field at any object whose position in the later image I consider suitable for AF selection, gently hold the shutter button down, and the camera tracks the object I'm aiming at in the AF field absolutely reliably while I compose the picture. AF point selection in landscape photography has never been so easy for me.

OP writes about NO other types of photography than Landscape. In fact, "Landscape" is mentioned in the same paragraph as his description of the method.

But as you can also read in the initial post it can be used for "just about anything".

Here:

Jens H wrote:

AF point selection in landscape photography has never been so easy for me. This works with any object that has even a bit of contrast, which can be bushes, rocks, fences, houses, just about anything.

The "just about anything" is posted in the same sentence as "bushes, rocks, fences, houses." You removed this phrase from its context! In fact you removed it from its sentence.

Anyone can clearly see that "just about anything" does not refer to some other type of photography. It refers to the types of objects in his landscape photography (they're listed right there)!

So try to keep that in mind while suggesting different methods or before "condemning" the method.

I never condemned the OP's method. I merely offered an alternative that was just as fast, takes less effort, and locks on indefinitely (BBAF). I was trying to help the OP to shoot his landscapes. Simply that.

Think about the possibilities for various use cases.

No "various use cases" were inquired about by the OP (that's something that you wrote). Only landscapes. I can post their OP again.

For many years I was a "Canon only guy"...

Seriously. Then you go and recommend a much more cumbersome method of shooting Landscapesfor the OP to use. You both should try my method. It's always been hugely popular. I bet it'll turn a frown into a smile!

R2

I gave you perfectly fine use cases where this methods can be handy and all you can do is ramble about landscapes and interpeting text so that fit your narrative? No comment at all to the examples shown in the video? Okay thanks for the discussion.

Except for very few members of the board there does not seem to be an actual basic understanding of the concept of "performance evaluation" (and the quantification of results) and a complete lack of interest to discuss such things. Instead only their own agenda is being pushed ("my camera can do it all", "of course it works", "latest bodies are certainly much better", "your settings are wrong", "your camera is defective", "method is not necessary for landsacpes" etc etc..)

Let's better avoid any topic that might indicate an existing potential on Canon bodies as this seem to be too sensitive for most owners of Canon cameras. I get it.

And btw, I wouldn't use this method for classic wide angle landscape either. It gets more interesting when you get (much) closer to your subjects. The method you describe is viable for landscapes. Are you happy/unstuck now?

Laqup wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Laqup wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Laqup wrote:

and a teaching on how to do it differently and why this method is not relevant anyway. In my eyes the disrespectfulness is coming "from the other side" and his observation is spot on.

Well what relevant method do YOU use for shooting your landscapes?

R2

Try to think a bit outside the box.

Here, let me first post what the OP actually wrote...

Jens H wrote:

AF point selection in landscape photography has never been so easy for me. This works with any object that has even a bit of contrast, which can be bushes, rocks, fences, houses, just about anything.

Thinking outside the box is exactly what I'm asking of the OP!! They are stuck on ONE way to achieve focus for their landscapes. I pointed out another method that's just as fast, takes less effort, and locks on indefinitely.

You are focusing very much on landscapes and "still lives".

That's what the OP asked about! Just re-read what they wrote. (pssst. I re-posted it above for you).

The method the author describes is useful in general, without the focus on landscape. Read the initial post and you will see that first of all the method itself was described and only later landscape was mentioned as one example were the author is using this technique.

Here's their OP again for easy reference...

Jens H wrote:

But currently I use the Sony a6600 mainly for one reason: AF Real Time Tracking. All I have to do is aim my AF field at any object whose position in the later image I consider suitable for AF selection, gently hold the shutter button down, and the camera tracks the object I'm aiming at in the AF field absolutely reliably while I compose the picture. AF point selection in landscape photography has never been so easy for me.

OP writes about NO other types of photography than Landscape. In fact, "Landscape" is mentioned in the same paragraph as his description of the method.

But as you can also read in the initial post it can be used for "just about anything".

Here:

Jens H wrote:

AF point selection in landscape photography has never been so easy for me. This works with any object that has even a bit of contrast, which can be bushes, rocks, fences, houses, just about anything.

The "just about anything" is posted in the same sentence as "bushes, rocks, fences, houses." You removed this phrase from its context! In fact you removed it from its sentence.

Anyone can clearly see that "just about anything" does not refer to some other type of photography. It refers to the types of objects in his landscape photography (they're listed right there)!

So try to keep that in mind while suggesting different methods or before "condemning" the method.

I never condemned the OP's method. I merely offered an alternative that was just as fast, takes less effort, and locks on indefinitely (BBAF). I was trying to help the OP to shoot his landscapes. Simply that.

Think about the possibilities for various use cases.

No "various use cases" were inquired about by the OP (that's something that you wrote). Only landscapes. I can post their OP again.

For many years I was a "Canon only guy"...

Seriously. Then you go and recommend a much more cumbersome method of shooting Landscapesfor the OP to use. You both should try my method. It's always been hugely popular. I bet it'll turn a frown into a smile!

R2

I gave you perfectly fine use cases where this methods can be handy and all you can do is ramble about landscapes and interpeting text so that fit your narrative? No comment at all to the examples shown in the video? Okay thanks for the discussion.

Except for very few members of the board there does not seem to be an actual basic understanding of the concept of "performance evaluation" (and the quantification of results) and a complete lack of interest to discuss such things. Instead only their own agenda is being pushed ("my camera can do it all", "of course it works", "latest bodies are certainly much better", "your settings are wrong", "your camera is defective", "method is not necessary for landsacpes" etc etc..)

Let's better avoid any topic that might indicate an existing potential on Canon bodies as this seem to be too sensitive for most owners of Canon cameras. I get it.

And btw, I wouldn't use this method for classic wide angle landscape either. It gets more interesting when you get (much) closer to your subjects. The method you describe is viable for landscapes. Are you happy/unstuck now?

Yes thanks!  I’m very happy with the excellent solutions I’ve put forth for the OP.

I had no agenda other than being helpful, and will continue to do so with more of the same.  We each contribute what we can here.  That’s what constitutes a community!

R2

Leigh A. Wax wrote:

Laqup wrote:

I gave you perfectly fine use cases where this methods can be handy and all you can do is ramble about landscapes and interpeting text so that fit your narrative? No comment at all to the examples shown in the video? Okay thanks for the discussion.

The OP's primary point of this thread was how favorable this method was for Landscape photography, and nothing else, which he stated more than once, and that's what the follow up discussion was based upon; not weather the method is useful for any other given situation, as it most likely is!

Maybe you don't realise this, but a discussion can branch out. In this branch of the discussion I explained the usefullness for OTHER use cases and even gave detailed examples and even demo videos and asked one of the other forum members to think outside the box. Why do you think we should still stick to LANDSCAPES in this branch of the discussion?

For sure we could open another thread, but as already stated this forum does not seem to be aimed at in-depth technological discussions, so I don't see any benefits to do this. Btw, R8 looks like a great backup camera, will probably buy one just for fun and do some testing myself. Unfortunately in the DPReviewTV video the tracking algo was drifting again, even with the latest option to focus only on detected subjects only, which is not a good sign (11:58 ). Canon still has to do a lot of catching up to do here. (maybe only in video mode? :-))

As a bonus a reminder to help you understand why I replied in the way I did:

Laqup wrote:

Try to think a bit outside the box. You are focusing very much on landscapes and "still lives".

The method the author describes is useful in general, without the focus on landscape.[...]

Just to give an example: Imagine a scene where you are shooting portraits. Your camera is not static / on a tripod but you are moving freely around. You have a thin DOF and snap away happily with subject/eye detection. Suddenly you see the opportunity to focus on a different detail in the scene (e.g. the person holding some flowers or some details in the outfit) and you want to quickly snap different compositions with the additional detail (that can't be detected by the subject/eye detection algorithms), maybe even while the face is still visible. With Nikon or Sony you just hit a button, "lock in" the other detail, freely move and snap happily away.

With Canon that is much harder to achieve in my experience. If the face is still visible you will have to deactive subject detection or use different focus methods. But when not being static, moving around and re-composing you will typically have to adjust the area you are focusing on. I do this by switching to single point AF, using the EVF and selecting the focus point via the touch screen ("touch and drag AF"). Depending on how fast and often you recompose this is serious work. And if you want to use subject/eye detection in between you will always have to cycle through the AF methods. With Nikon you can jump from subject detection to fully controllable "any object tracking mode" and back again with only one additional button press. It is quite a bit faster. To be honest, it is hard to explain and to get excited about if you have never used it. Here is an example video (should start at 6:42):

https://youtu.be/GbCTwetu_n8?t=402

He is using the joystick at the beginning to shift the position of the tracking focus field, this is of course not necessary (guess he is doing it because his camera is on a tripod and he wants to start with the figure in the center). And of course this is again a somewhat static setup, in realworld usage you will be moving yourself much more for e.g. weddings.

Here another very quick example on how to switch really fast between any object tracking and subject detection (3:41) (just watch the next 10 seconds):

https://youtu.be/Unc0k_H6KXQ?t=221

Another example, well explained (6:07):

https://youtu.be/Wy8iXtoxa24?t=367

Update: This is actually the best video, at 7:50 he demonstrates fast toggling between eye AF and tracking.

Maybe you can see the usefullness to have this mode and kind of tracking performance.

Laqup wrote:

Just as a reminder to help you understand why I replied in the way I did:

This is not going to be a friendly post.

Just a reminder why we don't take kindly to your propaganda. You're complaining loudly because you took the trouble to attach a video camera or recorder to your camera, and we don't want to do that because it's a nontrivial project to do it right. Then you complained because the handheld videos people have done weren't good enough for you. Then you're loudly proclaiming the supposed superiority of your camera.

I repeated your tests with all your use cases, but my word wasn't good enough for you either.

I have on my computer a series of 7 images of a dove on the ground, under conditions of low contrast and moderately low illumination. I was able to move the camera rapidly between shots, to add fast motion to the mix. The camera tracked the dove, and the images show the focus point locked to the dove.

Then, with no change in settings, I focused on faces and eyes on the covers of books, using eye detection. I was able to select which face and move the camera around rapidly without losing the focus point. The camera kept tracking the whole time. The response was not instantaneous, but certainly good enough for people.

It's a bit of an effort to present all that while showing the focus areas. I have to take screen shots from DPP, then transfer images in a couple of steps to a canvas on a graphics program, then do the same with cropped images, in order to display this for DPR. I also have a life, and things I need to attend to.

For display purposes it's also much better through the viewfinder. Maybe if you all say pretty please and buy the bracket(s) I will need, I will attach a video camera to the viewfinder and record this in action. Or maybe not.

In the mean time, be assured that my camera does manage to focus, in spite of armchair opinions to the contrary.

Laqup wrote:

quite a bit faster. To be honest, it is hard to explain and to get excited about if you have never used it. Here is an example video (should start at 6:42):

https://youtu.be/GbCTwetu_n8?t=402

He is using the joystick at the beginning to shift the position of the tracking focus field, this is of course not necessary (guess he is doing it because his camera is on a tripod and he wants to start with the figure in the center). And of course this is again a somewhat static setup, in realworld usage you will be moving yourself much more for e.g. weddings.

Here another very quick example on how to switch really fast between any object tracking and subject detection (3:41) (just watch the next 10 seconds):

https://youtu.be/Unc0k_H6KXQ?t=221

Another example, well explained (6:07):

https://youtu.be/Wy8iXtoxa24?t=367

Update: This is actually the best video, at 7:50 he demonstrates fast toggling between eye AF and tracking.

Maybe you can see the usefullness to have this mode and kind of tracking performance.

Canon cameras actually do it better than these videos. Set subject detection to Auto (or Face+Tracking on RP) and Initial Servo AF point to center, and it will focus properly on anything in the center box without having to press any "function" buttons.  Focus and recompose with full tracking.  The OP said this doesn't work on Canons, but it does on mine.

gscotten wrote:

Laqup wrote:

quite a bit faster. To be honest, it is hard to explain and to get excited about if you have never used it. Here is an example video (should start at 6:42):

https://youtu.be/GbCTwetu_n8?t=402

He is using the joystick at the beginning to shift the position of the tracking focus field, this is of course not necessary (guess he is doing it because his camera is on a tripod and he wants to start with the figure in the center). And of course this is again a somewhat static setup, in realworld usage you will be moving yourself much more for e.g. weddings.

Here another very quick example on how to switch really fast between any object tracking and subject detection (3:41) (just watch the next 10 seconds):

https://youtu.be/Unc0k_H6KXQ?t=221

Another example, well explained (6:07):

https://youtu.be/Wy8iXtoxa24?t=367

Update: This is actually the best video, at 7:50 he demonstrates fast toggling between eye AF and tracking.

Maybe you can see the usefullness to have this mode and kind of tracking performance.

Canon cameras actually do it better than these videos. Set subject detection to Auto (or Face+Tracking on RP) and Initial Servo AF point to center, and it will focus properly on anything in the center box without having to press any "function" buttons. Focus and recompose with full tracking. The OP said this doesn't work on Canons, but it does on mine.

Yes.

Laqup mounted a phone on a hotshoe, then because we don't do the same, he gets to complain that we can't provide a video so our cameras must not work. Anyone going to do that? No, me neither.

But he's clearly trolling, as he shows in his next post.  At some point it borders on breaking forum rules because of blatant commercialism.

DON'T FEED THE TROLLS, FOLKS.

ThrillaMozilla wrote:

I repeated your tests with all your use cases, but my word wasn't good enough for you either.

My car drives 500mph. Trust me, I do it daily on the autobahn. Takes only 2 seconds to accelerate too. You should really trust me, I'm a regular poster at dpreview forums. I will get mad and aggressive if you don't believe me.

See the flaw?

Btw the videos in itself were great, I just derived my own conclusions from them, which do not seem to match with your perception. And that is totally fine. But please don't expect from me to lower my standards (what counts as 100% reliable, what as 0%, what in between?) just because someone posted a video.  As I have stated multiple times now the pure availability of a feature does not make it perfect. And as already stated: I have learned that most people seem not to be able to quantify results.

And btw, as you seem to think that I have to defend or hype any of my cameras: The Z6 has terrible AF speed. All modern Canons are lightyears ahead. The Z6 is terrible at detecting animals. Nikons current gen body lineup is ridiculous (only Z9 on par). The Z9 is a behemoth (and not in a positive way). Canons touch and drag AF is unparalleled. Canons bodies are great in a general sense. The R8 looks like terrific value, etc. etc. etc..

To be fair I don’t think he is trolling.

he’s just like this

😂😂

expro wrote:

To be fair I don’t think he is trolling.

he’s just like this

😂😂

Let's just say earnest.

There are many good ways of setting the focus point properly in landscape photography. It is in comparison an easy task. So there is no real reason to discuss it so argumentatively. Even without real-time tracking, there are no real limitations in this area.