G2 Focus?

[Jason Hutchinson]

No, no you're right. The camera has a random number generator for that part of the exif field.

Do yourself a favor:

http://www.dudak.baka.com/dofcalc.html

Choose your COC wisely.

OK, yeah, you're right......

 

[jbstrick]

Thanks John. I have read that, and it helped alot.

No problem =)

It is not very nice that I have to babysit the autofocus all the
time, when I know that it could be better. I just sold my S40 and
bought the G2 knowing that it has the same issue. I loved the S40,
but I wanted the 420EX and the flipping LCD. I know how to minimize
the AF issue, but I wan't Canon to come out and do something if
there is something to do.

I can only comment on my observations. I have had a Nikon E880 and now a G2. I have several good friends with Nikon 990's. Focus problems abound with these cameras also.

What I do not understand why people are OK with this. All of us
regognize that the G2/s30/s40 autofocus needs some babysitting.

I dont have any real problems with the focus. I really dont have to think about it when I shoot.

How come the competion can do it? I

See my second comment.

One thing to remember, It is possible Canon has released a bad batch of G2's. I do not have any of the problems we have discussed. There are MANY others who do not have these problems either.

Good Luck! =)

 

[Jason Hutchinson]

By the way, although I get 90% in focus shots (according to Exif as well as the eye).. friends and family that use my camera and are used to active infrared focusing systems probably have a 30% OOF rate. I don't know if it's contrast based or if they don't even point the center square at the subject.

Jason

There are complaints in every forum of bad focusing, the G2 is
worse than average but to say none of the others have problems is
silly.

Jason

Start rant mode:

It is not very nice that I have to babysit the autofocus all the
time, when I know that it could be better. I just sold my S40 and
bought the G2 knowing that it has the same issue. I loved the S40,
but I wanted the 420EX and the flipping LCD. I know how to minimize
the AF issue, but I wan't Canon to come out and do something if
there is something to do.

What I do not understand why people are OK with this. All of us
regognize that the G2/s30/s40 autofocus needs some babysitting.
Some of you think that both of my pictures are sharp, but that is
because of the huge DOF and the fact remains that the G2 was
clueles about the subject distance.
Everybody is giving these expanations: "The subject is this or that
or the lightning was bad". How come the competion can do it? I do
not wan't make my subjects to hold still and keep vertically
striped black and white papers in their hands while the G2
autofocuses.

It would be nice if Canon would give us a AF improved microcode so
that the G2 could "grow up". But if we as consumers just let it be,
they will not put any resource into it.

There is allways something you can do with clever software
engineering

End rant mode:

Kristian "the frustrated Finn" Salo

1. Do NOT trust the EXIF data for subject distance.
2. Read below.....

---
http://www.iki.fi/steelduck

 

[ImaShooter]

Here we go again...

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=2761672

and part 2

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=2779629

My experience is, don't take photos of people! If you do, don't attempt to focus on their face. If they're wearing clothing with verticle contrast, focus on that and recompose, otherwise FORGET IT! Ignore 95% of the responses you get here, they'll blame you instead of placing the blame squarly on Canon where it belongs.

The AF misses its target all the frikkin time. You get focus lock on a subject that takes up 70% of the frame only to find out that it actually locked on the background! And that was no where near the selected AF point!

The G2 is a great camera, just don't attempt to photograph people!

Hello you G2 owners. G2 has the same internals as the S30/40. Do
you have the same focus problem that is discussed in this thread:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=2906914

--
---
http://www.iki.fi/steelduck

--
Know when to use Film! Its all about expectations!

 

[Jason Hutchinson]

If you do, don't attempt to focus on their face.

I agree with this for sure.

You get focus lock
on a subject that takes up 70% of the frame only to find out that
it actually locked on the background!

I do agree that the focus lock is not always right for sure.

However, a subject that takes 70% of the frame doesn't help the chances of focusing and actually can hurt them in some cases. I find the best focusing when you pick out the edge of an object at the boundry between it and the background. You can't do this with an object that fills 70% of the frame unless you recompose after focusing.

Jason

 

[Kristian Salo101843]

I find the best focusing when you pick out the edge of an object at
the boundry between it and the background.

Do you mean that you point the focus square the edge of a shoulder. In a way that you get half subject and half background to the square.

I hope you understand what I mean. English is not my native language ( as you might have guessed allready
--
---
http://www.iki.fi/steelduck

 

[Jason Hutchinson]

Do you mean that you point the focus square the edge of a shoulder.
In a way that you get half subject and half background to the
square.

Yes, although it's not always 50-50. I usually put about 3/4 of the subject in the square and 1/4 on the background. Seems to work for me. This assumes the background is significantly far away. If the background is right behind a person or thing, then I wouldn't do this.

I hope you understand what I mean. English is not my native
language ( as you might have guessed allready

No, actually I didn't. Your English is almost perfect.

--
---
http://www.iki.fi/steelduck

 

[Paulo Abreu]

Hi Jason,

You say that G2 focuses for the distance it reports on EXIF. I can agree with that for 99% of my pics (i am posting after 1 hour of browsing several hundreds of pics...).

For the rest 1% i can assume i am suposing wrong, but focus distance just doesn´t seem to match. Well, i don´t care as long as picture is focused! I guess that only now I am looking close to the VERY large DOF DC´s are "famous" for...

I think that to produce unfocused pics, G2 would have be complety foolen, focusing at infinity for very near objects or, (most probable considering the facts) to focus at neareast point (70 cm?) for far objects.
Regards,

Well I agree with you a bit but you're definitely wrong that the
Exif data is wrong. The exif data is where it focused. Due to the
large DOF it sometimes doesn't seem that way, but it's right. I've
heard this explanation before and it's totally wrong.

Jason

--
Paulo Abreu
http://www.pbase.com/psergio

 

[Kristian Salo101843]

Yes, although it's not always 50-50. I usually put about 3/4 of
the subject in the square and 1/4 on the background. Seems to work
for me. This assumes the background is significantly far away. If
the background is right behind a person or thing, then I wouldn't
do this.

Oh... I have to try that, thank you.

Kristian

http://www.iki.fi/steelduck

 

[DWillens]

I have learned to get around the "family and friends" problem by manually setting the focus to a reasonable estimate and then letting the large DOF of my S40 take care of it. My biggest problem has been that I am usually standing with my wife and people tend to focus through our heads to the background. Also, they don' seem to understand that they need to press halfway on the shutter and wait for the green light...so my manual method solves these issues (as long as my focus distance is fairly accurate!)

Damon

Jason

There are complaints in every forum of bad focusing, the G2 is
worse than average but to say none of the others have problems is
silly.

Jason

Start rant mode:

It is not very nice that I have to babysit the autofocus all the
time, when I know that it could be better. I just sold my S40 and
bought the G2 knowing that it has the same issue. I loved the S40,
but I wanted the 420EX and the flipping LCD. I know how to minimize
the AF issue, but I wan't Canon to come out and do something if
there is something to do.

What I do not understand why people are OK with this. All of us
regognize that the G2/s30/s40 autofocus needs some babysitting.
Some of you think that both of my pictures are sharp, but that is
because of the huge DOF and the fact remains that the G2 was
clueles about the subject distance.
Everybody is giving these expanations: "The subject is this or that
or the lightning was bad". How come the competion can do it? I do
not wan't make my subjects to hold still and keep vertically
striped black and white papers in their hands while the G2
autofocuses.

It would be nice if Canon would give us a AF improved microcode so
that the G2 could "grow up". But if we as consumers just let it be,
they will not put any resource into it.

There is allways something you can do with clever software
engineering

End rant mode:

Kristian "the frustrated Finn" Salo

1. Do NOT trust the EXIF data for subject distance.
2. Read below.....

---
http://www.iki.fi/steelduck

 

[Robert Beacon]

Yes, although it's not always 50-50. I usually put about 3/4 of
the subject in the square and 1/4 on the background. Seems to work
for me. This assumes the background is significantly far away. If
the background is right behind a person or thing, then I wouldn't
do this.

Oh... I have to try that, thank you.

Kristian

http://www.iki.fi/steelduck

Kristian, my reply to you might have sounded BS but it was accurate After looking through the posts it seems you have still some learning to do (i don't mean to be sanctimonious) Some inexperienced posters have in the past complained about focusing issues and later on confessed (after a learnig curve) it was them rather than the camera that was at fault If experienced posters are getting their pics properly focused then surely there is little wrong with the camera Trusting your eye rather than the EXIF data is a better way to go!

Robert (still learnnig) Beacon