Panasonic’s proprietary DFD (Depth from Defocus) autofocus system has both critics and fans, but Chris and Jordan think the system might have received a bad rap. In this episode they compare DFD to Canon's Dual Pixel autofocus system. Might the results surprise you?
I don't own one, but it seems from most comparisons the reviewer people think that Nikon's 3D tracking is the best of all. (And they don't like it that the Z cam's don't have it.)
canon dual pixel is good and reliable for both stills and video. canon should really try releasing a pro level fullframe SL3 with an EVF (or jampack the 5Dm4 in an SL3 sized-body with an EVF). i know a lot of people are in love with canon dslr ergonomics and have a huge investment in canon EF lenses. RF bodies with an adapter doesn't really cut it. its just not the same.
What is your issue with an adapter? Adapter works great on a Nikon Z6 with latest 70-200mm FL lens (better than Canon's btw, finally). Canon's crippled video will gradually drive me to Nikon. Have to say I loathe Canon management and how they are out to milk their users for every last penny over decades of incremental upgrades and crippled cameras.
It seems to me that DFD can't yet achieve its potential with current gen sensors. To use all feature of the lens that can move at 240fps, it is technically should be possible to have video that does not go focus hunting back and forth. However, there has to be enough light for 240fps. So say we are shooting at 60fps, then exposure should be bright enough that 1/240 is well exposed. So we shoot 1 frame from position 'a' at 1/240, then allow lens to explore forward for 'b' and 'c' additional shots and then immediately return back to make another 1/240 frame in 'a'. So each second we can have one primary focus sample and 2 additional focus samples - is it possible that our current M4/3 sensors just can't deliver enough read speed to get to 240 native fps? Or is it just CPU that can't process this much data? Or may be sensor should allow sampling from any random rectangle within its area so that just that small area is analyzed for focus. We didn't reach pinnacle of DfD I think.
The thing is, there are a zillion options for subject tracking and prediction on the G9/GH-5 that were not explored in this article. Frankly, it is daunting to know what to use, so it could use some AI assistance... but the default tracking is fairly conservative and slow. There are much faster rate options available, but I believe you then run the risk of going too far out of focus when the subject is lost. Also DFD performs very differently on different lenses. For example it is very fast and accurate on the newer 100-300mm II lens I just purchased, and almost unusable on the 45-200mm I (read OLD) lens I have retired. It is also slow on the 20mm f1.7 ver I but works well enough. I assume on-sensor phase detect would be more consistent across all lenses in-system, and DFD requires lenses capable of supporting it, thus an annoying limitation.
When commenting yesterday made an error, not for "for each second" but "for each frame". So 2 measurements per frame or 120 measurements per second. In addition to primary full frame capture. So should be about 180 focus measurements per second with lens that supports 240fps.
However in insufficient light where 1/240 is impossible, that's where we get down to only 60 actual exposures and we see this hunting. I've analyzed bright daylight footage from my G9 and I don't see ANY hunting, but as soon as it is even somewhat dark - we get the hunting back. What I didn't test in G9 is if I force higher ISO to see if hunting would ago away at the expense of noise. I wonder if some future sensor can work in full readout 240fps at 4k then even frames that are used for focus hunting can be used for temporal noise reduction for each individual frame actually recorded, like HDR+ for video kind of approach.
I find it strange that no one has noticed or commented that the video recording mode in the Lumix cameras is done with the iris closed (stopped-down), which affects not only the luminosity that receives the sensor but also the variable depth of focus which the AF system has to work in continuous mode.
Ridiculous comparison. Take the budget models of two systems, and then make sweeping generalizations that all cameras with that technology act similarly.
My G9 is the fastest focusing camera I've ever used. Having used the GX series, I can definitely say there is a noticeable difference between the two.
Shadow, yet I have seen some pretty amazing results for the G9 and BIF. It apparently needs the advanced focus modes used for predictive tracking, and a lens capable of the DFD and high frame rates (mo' light). Take a look in the advanced manual for more information.
In other words, some of those PRO lenses mere mortal like me cannot justify for a hobby.
Chris - great video, as always, but a few suggestions:
I'd really appreciate it if dpr included screenshots depicting the various AF zones available on every model you review. Often these are not accurately depicted in instruction manuals, and video reviews seem to concentrate on eye-AF while ignoring other focus zones and modes.
On another point, bright green squares dancing all over the EVF in response to subject movement can be very distracting, so it would also be nice if dpr could report whether these can be turned off, reduced in brightness or be assigned different colours.
The viewfinder experience is at least as important as any other aspect of a camera, so it would be great if reviews presented more information and screenshots as guidance.
DFD will always need more processing power than dual pixel. It needs more processing cycles to hone in. Dual pixel can provide (near) accurate depth information by measurement instead of calculation. Canon could do the exact same thing as dfd does if they wanted but with the aid of dual pixel info from the chip. The only reason the s1 is quick for photo is an old trick, brute force powerrrrrr. Larger body, larger battery, more processing power. This also means the Lumix s camera's will always be a little bigger, more expensive etc. They have to include more power to do the same as pfaf and dual pixel.
Dual Pixel AF in general is pretty amazing. With my 5D Mark IV, it focuses on things in low light with speed and accuracy that constantly surprises me.
Nothing new here. Its physically impossible that a focussing system that has to move back and forth to find the correct focus point, can never beat one that knows right away where to move. I actually wondered why Panasonic brings out a dedicated video camera (S1H) with this AF anyways. Its like a F1 car with square wheels.
Did you watch the video? It does beat the dual-pixel autofocus in a few areas. It fails in video tracking. Panasonic's focusing system continually beats other systems in speed and accuracy for Photography. e.g. the s1 beats the nikon z6 for tracking according to dpreviewtv.
I think they should probably figure out something dramatically different for video, but their development has been about photography in the past, I'm sure if they put their engineers to solving the video auto-focusing problem they will make big improvements. It seems the arrival of good video auto-focus and great photo tracking is a relatively recent phenomenon....
An F1 car with square wheels wouldn't work. DFD works, very well, and nearly as well as Dual Pixel. So that's Canon beat for dynamic range, portability, design, and IS, all Panasonic has to do is keep developing DFD and newer sensors to take the crown.
*** Continuous Video Tracking (not still) *** is the future of photography. Sony Real-time AF, Nikon & Fuji Eye AD, and Canons DualCMOS AF is highlighting (M43 horrible C-AF weakness in video). Gone are the days that MF is acceptable in Video. I wish M43 take EyeAF more seriously. *** Request Full Comprehensive EyeAF tracking comparison *** Sony vs Fuji vs Canon vs Nikon vs Panasonic vs Olympus.
So True, I used to vlog with a Canon T3im Today I find smartphone yield better AF, sharper 1080p micro-contrast, and just overall better exposed video without the fuss
@cosinaphile nailed it technically. But the average smartphone use who tries a real camera will be disappointed from the user experience point of view. In a highly technological environment and at the doorstep to AI human tend to get more and more lazy and convenient. It's the way it happens. If I shoot a picture on my A6300 and on my iPhone 8 Plus of a landscape scene and share it on Instagram to Facebook the iPhone would win hands down with its right away edited picture. The dull camera JPEG wouldn't stand a chance.
I'd love to see a focusing test between a Panasonic G9 (with DFD) and an Olympus EM1 II (with hybrid PDAF/CDAF focusing.) These two cameras sit at the high end of M4/3 with a very similar feature set and price point.
Does anyone know of a test like that has been done?
What a great idea- a long overdue test imho. I can only say that I do industrial reportage work under very harsh conditions, and my G9 does a mighty fine job. I find the AF to be very reliable and super accurate. A few years back I found myself in the situation to produce some images during the Swiss Motocross & Sidecar Motocross Championships. That wasn‘t planned, I was there in my free time, and the only camera I had with me was my GX8, with my Pana 12-34 f2.8 and an Oly 45mm f1.8 lens. Motocross is fast and dusty. The AF tracking worked so well and reliable that I got several hands full of great hits. With a camera that is anything but a sports camera. For still photography, I‘m more than happy with Panasonic‘s AF system. I find it to be very accurate, extremely fast, and it‘s my preferred AF system for everything but the most demanding sports shootings (which I don‘t do) or shootings in near darkness (which I don‘t do).
Thanks! That was a really comprehensive test. It pays to read the entire article, since each camera can excel at something, so it just depends on your shooting style and needs.
I still want one of these two to be my next camera. It just is hard deciding between them.
Marty as you own mainly Olympus lenses I would go with an Olympus body .Though you can of course use any m43 lens on any m43 body , both Olympus and Panasonic have sneaked in a few features that either only work with their own cameras or work better
Between my Pana GX9 and Sony a6500, the GX9 has better AF in every respect. In sensitivity, camera response, and most importantly, accuracy. Comparisons were made with native brand and format lenses. And obviously, neither camera should be compared to pro league machines.
M43 enjoy superior S-AF for photography, faster than Canon Nikon Fuji Sony in ten of 1sec snapshot. But M43 quickly fall apart when U need (continuous Video tracking) where it's C- AF was never reliable. Today in 2019, the metric for AF has shifted toward Continuous Video. In this context, M43 is now at the bottom, even the once-horrible-Nikon now has a Sticky EyeAF that runs circle over M43. I owned & shoot M43, but it's is getting more uncompetitive everyday. It used be just the sensor, but now C-AF in video is also way behind the competition. The blame reside with Panasonic & Olympus for never addressing it's poor C-AF performance for years. Poor C-AF was a problem when I had my GF2, it is still a problem in today's Gh5.
Make it a bit more challenging between the two camera's, do these test with zoom lenses and take a subject like a car thats driving by. I see a lot of difference between the two systems ! Coming from a GX8 (and G80) and now using a R (both in 4K), the R dus a far better job. The zooming action makes it a very difficult job for the Panasonic system
Where? Sony's EyeAF is slightly better but for other object tracking in video Canon's DPAF is smoother and on Canon's LCD it is actually easier to select what to track. If your subject is a person and he/she is turning and jumping continuously then Sony will track better. For all other scenarios I'd prefer Canon's DPAF.
No matter what content to review, give it to Christ and Jordan, you can watch it relax and enjoyable. When Jordan rolled on the car hood, I couldnt stop laughing even I had prepared for something funny happen as usual.
I'd LOVE a three way battle, Sony A73 (or A9), Canon something or other and Pana GH5 (or similar) for video AF.
I've found, with my limited testing and not side by side, that the A9 can't be beat, I'd love to know if this is true, also, if a cheaper camera could get close.
Great job as usual Chris, but I do think Jordan should have been made to wear a leather jacket and aviator sunglasses, it would throw off the AF a little not having eyes to present to the camera but it would have been funnier ;)
I would hope that a 4.5k camera can’t be beat compared to the others which are about half the price or cheaper. But I would like to point out a situation where it can be beat.
Very low light, when the sonys inevitably switch over to CDAF, and the EOS R keeps going full DPAF, and at very narrow apertures. Shooting the A7III once at high noon, to capture a performance at the beach spontaneously, so I didn’t have any ND filters on me, resulted in very bad AF results. Shooting at ISO 50 and FPS set to 24, required me to have the lens stopped own to f16. With that DOF the wobble was extremely bad. Had to switch to manual AF. As we know sony’s AF system or rated to f11.
Now that I have the R I was curious about its behavior. Down to very low light... no issues. Stopped down to the narrowest aperture of f22... no issues.
As someone mentioned though, for a subject that is jumping around like on a trampoline the Sony tracks better. For me low light is a more common situation
This just demonstrates bad photography. Why did they not try single auto focus? Yeah we all know Panasonic is not good at AFC. Stills or video it’s pretty much the same. But single AF is very fast and accurate. I like back button focus method.
Panasonic has always been good with AF-S even in very low light. My old and tiny GM5 could focus where my A7R II would hunt like crazy (due to low light).
In good light, though, most modern cameras are excellent at AF-S. It's the AF-C performance that is the great differentiator currently, and that's why so many tests are focusing on that.
as much as l love fuji cameras .... if ever i was accidentally set to afc it would seems as if focus was going haywire i do not even like multi focus zones
central focus and recompose as necessary was always my choice
simple direct controls ...or simplistic controls that insult the intelligence
he was a simple man , but not simple minded , that would be a simplistic analysis of the mans true nature
a simplistic understanding of politics can be remedied by learning ... a simple approach to study is best unburdened by over-complication or oversimplification
Great video chaps! When's Jordan moving into law enforcement?
I have the Lumix G9. There are a variety of settings for use in tracking subjects available to me, across all focus types (single-point, area, custom, tracking, face-detect). I've found that the default one works reasonably well at keeping a running toddler in focus with face-detect - the greater difficulty is actually keeping him in frame!
I did have the opportunity to test tracking at the Royal International Air Tattoo in 2018, before the firmware update was out. Tracking worked, but I found AFF worked best in hitting focus on fast-moving jets. If I get another opportunity, I'll try to work through some of the other tracking-setting available to me.
Is it even possible to get pleasing results with AF when shooting video? Robotic focusing might not be pleasing to watch. It is like teaching computer to play music instruments. There is so many things which will change in each situation. Try to code that. Even all humans don't agree what is pleasing.
Panasonic should just focus to give more tools to aid manual focusing in video recording. Maybe some kind of AF scripts where you can preset different focus points, curves for focusing speed and change direction. It is like recording your focusing pattern and then execute it later. This way you can carefully fine tune precise focus for different points. Might not work well with random action, but pleasing results often require some kind of staging.
Using a camera with better processing and a faster focusing lens also helps quite a bit too. Many vloggers have used 80D's and M50's successfully for handheld / gimbal stabilized video on the cheap.
Fellow Canadian Gerald Undone does a nice presentation, discussing to-day's basic three AF systems. He also discusses the hybrid A/F systems and explains why for some kinds of shooting, the Sony's with superior processors, are often the best. <The Evolution of Autofocus - Canon EOS R vs Sony a7 III vs Panasonic G9> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaJFOH_gmGM&feature=youtu.be
CDAF has been better than any PDAF system when it comes to focusing speed and accuracy.
But where the old PDAF lenses didn't perform fast on the CDAF system, the modern lenses designed for both does so extremely fast.
The old way done CDAF limitation did come when you needed continuous focusing with very short time between frames to get focus, the PDAF won as it got in that same short time the info to move lens about right range.
The modern CDAF speed even in C-AF is beating even best PDAF systems there, but their change to get focus in time can be limited in very high framerates.
The CDAF systems has had the fastest AF like almost decade now. They has as well been more accurate. But their accuracy or their speed was limited in the high framerate shooting, as either it doesn't have time to get focus and skips the frame, or it takes the frame and might lack the focus. But things change in that part as well dramatically.
Tommi K1 "But their accuracy or their speed was limited in the high framerate shooting, as either it doesn't have time to get focus and skips the frame, or it takes the frame and might lack the focus. But things change in that part as well dramatically."
I think this was a fair comparison, but I wish the review compared the GX9 not to the 2.5 year old GH5 but perhaps something newer, like the G9 or G90/95 which have the latest and fastest DFD hardware.
sony has the best hybrid pdaf/cdaf system on the planet, but there are a number of shooting situations where e-mount does not use hybrid af at all, including with native e-mount lenses, it's strictly using ospdaf.
you can get an idea of how well pure ospdaf works when using certain adapted lens situations on the a9; it can be stunningly accurate with af-c, due to the stacked sensor making up to 60 af/ae measurements a second.
more measurements and less prediction is where future af systems are headed.
Yeah, GX9 was not a particularly good candidate. The GX series is a bit behind (it even only has Dual IS 1 and not Dual IS 2). The GX9 although got the JPEG engine upgrade, some of the menu updates of the newer cameras, and a sensor update, but seems to still have the old DFD system from the GX85 (or at the least a step back from the G series).
I would have liked to see the G9 or G95 as they actually have the newer processing hardware and software.
It's tough when you have to negotiate a minefield of patents. Canon's for DPAF, Sony (and others) for OSPDAF/Hybrid. DFD is a clever way of deriving the additional phase information quickly without direct phase detection using split-pixel or dedicated-row phase detectors. It has the virtue of not having phase detection row artifacting, like DPAF, but without the signal loss of splitting pixels. On the other hand, there's simply no substitute for a focusing scheme that can produce two dimensions of focus information instantaneously. It's not that Panasonic engineers aren't clever...it's more that, aside from using light field imaging (with all its image resolution problems), there's not a lot of alternatives to PD and CD based AF technologies. DFD is an extension of what Panasonic knows how to do quite well.
Maybe the RP, then. But DPAF in Canons is generally very competent, even the low end ones. And if an entry level Canon DSLR with DPAF embarrasses a DFD camera, I'm not sure that you'd learn much more from testing it against a higher-end Canon mirrorless camera with DPAF.
I the DFD have suffered in a FZ1000 and now in an LX100, and honestly it is something that I do not want to suffer again if I can avoid it, it is not that it is useless in AF-C with its "eternal search", it is that it gives me false positives with easy situations even for a simple contrast AF system. I made 15 photos to a tree located about 50 meters a few minutes before dawn, I got only one shot in focus I tried with spot focus and fine focus. With another tree located about 150m in broad daylight something similar happened to me. It's really bad, I do not know how it will be in the flagships of the brand, but in FZ1000 and LX100 it stinks (LX100 even more).
What were you actually shooting at? Where was your focus point? That is hard to believe. I have had no such problems. And I have both of these cameras.
My focus point was on the treetop in both shots (one of them is on my Flickr). False positives has happened to me with LX100 (not with FZ1000), it is not a defect of my unit, I have tried several, it only happens in certain conditions and especially in the longer focal (70mm equiv), but it is very frustrating. The search for the AFC is terrible, I thought it was a problem with my unit and I even contacted the Panasonic technical service, if you make a burst you will catch shots in the fuzzy moment of the "breathing" of the focus. I have also noticed in both cameras that they are very obstinate when it comes to identifying a subject that is slightly darker than the background, however large it may be, in a detailed picture it costs me a lot (despite that "80s" button in the one that you choose AF Macro for close objects) the LX100 is even more stubborn than the FZ1000. But both do worse than a competitive model with 25 points of simple focus by contrast (despite its 49 DFD points).
DFD produces visible warbling during video recording because it requires two delta frames (plus a 3rd final focus-movement frame) at slightly different focus positions to perform its depth calculations and naturally those frames will be captured as part of the video. I wonder though if this could be minimized or eliminated by synchronizing the intervals of the DFD frames relative to video frames, in possible combination with over-oversampling the video frames so that the camera can toss-out OOF DFD frames. For example, when the camera is configured to shoot at 24p, shoot at 48p/60p instead (or 3x to eliminate both DFD frames), and based on the DFD calculation result, toss out the DFD frame (1st or 2nd) that is further OOF so that it’s not encoded in the resulting video.
Why can't the camera do its focusing in camera & then tell the lens to move to that point. DFD will work eventually but will need much more horsepower under the hood. Using the lens for calculations is the wrong way to do it.
DfD can determine phase differences, depth map, and find focus with much fewer frames/iterations than traditional contrast detect, but it will still always need to take multiple frames to generate that information. This is from the original IEEE paper where DFD was first presented
"A new method named DFDlF of determining depth (range) from image defocus and rapid autofocusing of a camera is presented. It requires only two images in theory (but three images in our implementation). "
Maybe Panasonic is still using more than two images for a given focus calculation, so there could be room for significant improvement, but it's never going to be like phase detect where you get your phase information from a single frame.
That is something the Pana heads will try to sell you but I WORK with a GH4 and A7r2 and I have to tell you. The r2 performs BETTER than the GH4 in video AF with adapted Canon lenses. THATS CRAZY MAN!!!
So the outcome of the video is that the GH5 with the faster processor keeps up with a SL3?
Please don't sugar coat the issues around DFD and the Panasonic cams. There is a reason why those with Panasonic cameras shoot video on MF instead of relying on AF as with Sony, Canon, Fuji and EVEN Nikon.
Panasonic can try as they want to say DFD is great but its just GOD AWFUL as it was plenty evident on the video. I know you said you had only those 2 cams on hand but a better comparison is A7III, Z6, GH5, XT3 and EOS R.
To be fair we all know the outcome here of such a test. Canon/Sony leading the way with Nikon/Fuji slapping each other for third place and the Panasonic asking when is the race STARTING.
Panasonic AF is a PIG with lipstick. A pretty one, even sexy. One that I would introduce to my mom. Marry it. Could have few piglets and perhaps grow old together. LOL!
Panasonic AF isn't pig. AF-C during video is (maybe, depending on what you need). And no, not everyone takes video with AF-C as you claim. I use AF-C in casual family videos in EOS R and A7 III but switch to MF when things get serious.
You are contradicting yourself. You say DFD is god awful, but it performed better than the DPAF in the SL3 (which is generally considered good).
So what if it uses more processing power? If Panasonic can brute force their way through, that's still a viable method. As others mentioned, it would be nice to see the cameras with the never versions like the G9 or the G95.
JakeJY, in the video, G95 oscillates slightly but visible enough in the background blur even with quite a static face at the foreground. at least in one example, I have seen.
so........... ".........Panasonic AF is a PIG with lipstick. A pretty one, even sexy. One that I would introduce to my mom. Marry it. Could have few piglets and perhaps grow old together........."
yikes dude , move to the city as soon as you can .....you are spending way too much time on green acres
Do we really need the latest and greatest cameras? To find out, DPReview TV host Nigel Danson swapped his Nikon Z7 and pro lenses for an entry-level Canon DSLR with a $100 kit lens. How did it measure up to his top-of-the-line gear? Tune in to find out
Canon's EOS Rebel SL3 / EOS 250D is the latest in the company's line of diminutive DSLRs. Despite its compact dimensions and fairly modest price, it has a modern sensor and produces great photographs - find out if it's right for you in our full review.
Chris and Jordan take a look at Canon's latest, tiniest Rebel and get a serious sense of déjà vu as they take a look at its still and video capabilities.
Canon's diminutive Rebel SL3 (also known as the EOS 250D and EOS Kiss X10) is currently the smallest DSLR on the market, but it comes with a proven sensor, an updated processor, and more. We've taken our review copy to New Orleans and back, and put it in front of our studio test scene – see how it stacks up.
Chris and Jordan are enjoying some well deserved time off this week, so we're taking a trip in the wayback machine to revisit the launch of Canon's original full-frame mirrorless camera, the EOS R. Give it a watch to see how far Canon's mirrorless line has come.
The a7R V is the fifth iteration of Sony's high-end, high-res full-frame mirrorless camera. The new 60MP Mark IV, gains advanced AF, focus stacking and a new rear screen arrangement. We think it excels at stills.
Topaz Labs' flagship app uses AI algorithms to make some complex image corrections really, really easy. But is there enough here to justify its rather steep price?
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
There are a lot of photo/video cameras that have found a role as B-cameras on professional film productions or even A-cameras for amateur and independent productions. We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.
Family moments are precious and sometimes you want to capture that time spent with loved ones or friends in better quality than your phone can manage. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens.
What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.
Tall buildings, expansive views, and tight spaces all call for an ultra-wide lens. Here we round-up four Micro Four Thirds-mount fixed-focal-length examples from Laowa, Panasonic, Meike and Samyang.
Chris and Jordan are enjoying some well deserved time off this week, so we're taking a trip in the wayback machine to revisit the launch of Canon's original full-frame mirrorless camera, the EOS R. Give it a watch to see how far Canon's mirrorless line has come.
While peak Milky Way season is on hiatus, there are other night sky wonders to focus on. We look at the Orion constellation and Northern Lights, which are prevalent during the winter months.
We've gone hands-on with Nikon's new 17-28mm F2.8 lens for its line of Z-mount cameras. Check out the sample gallery to see what kind of image quality it has to offer on a Nikon Z7 II.
The winning and finalist images from the annual Travel Photographer of the Year awards have been announced, showcasing incredible scenes from around the world. Check out the gallery to see which photographs took the top spots.
The a7R V is the fifth iteration of Sony's high-end, high-res full-frame mirrorless camera. The new 60MP Mark IV, gains advanced AF, focus stacking and a new rear screen arrangement. We think it excels at stills.
Using affordable Sony NP-F batteries and the Power Junkie V2 accessory, you can conveniently power your camera and accessories, whether they're made by Sony or not.
According to Japanese financial publication Nikkei, Sony has moved nearly all of its camera production out of China and into Thailand, citing geopolitical tensions and supply chain diversification.
A pro chimes in with his long-term impressions of DJI's Mavic 3. While there were ups and downs, filmmaker José Fransisco Salgado found that in his use of the drone, firmware updates have made it better with every passing month.
Landscape photography has a very different set of requirements from other types of photography. We pick the best options at three different price ranges.
AI is here to stay, so we must prepare ourselves for its many consequences. We can use AI to make our lives easier, but it's also possible to use AI technology for more nefarious purposes, such as making stealing photos a simple one-click endeavor.
This DIY project uses an Adafruit board and $40 worth of other components to create a light meter and metadata capture device for any film photography camera.
Scientists at the Green Bank Observatory in West Virginia have used a transmitter with 'less power than a microwave' to produce the highest resolution images of the moon ever captured from Earth.
The tiny cameras, which weigh just 1.4g, fit inside the padding of a driver's helmet, offering viewers at home an eye-level perspective as F1 cars race through the corners of the world's most exciting race tracks. In 2023, all drivers will be required to wear the cameras.
The new ultrafast prime for Nikon Z-mount cameras is a re-worked version of Cosina's existing Voigtländer 50mm F1 Aspherical lens for Leica M-mount cameras.
There are plenty of hybrid cameras on the market, but often a user needs to choose between photo- or video-centric models in terms of features. Jason Hendardy explains why he would want to see shutter angle and 32-bit float audio as added features in cameras that highlight both photo and video functionalities.
SkyFi's new Earth Observation service is now fully operational, allowing users to order custom high-resolution satellite imagery of any location on Earth using a network of more than 80 satellites.
In some parts of the world, winter brings picturesque icy and snowy scenes. However, your drone's performance will be compromised in cold weather. Here are some tips for performing safe flights during the chilliest time of the year.
The winners of the Ocean Art Photo Competition 2022 have been announced, showcasing incredible sea-neries (see what we did there?) from around the globe.
Venus Optics has announced a quartet of new anamorphic cine lenses for Super35 cameras, the Proteus 2x series. The 2x anamorphic lenses promise ease of use, accessibility and high-end performance for enthusiast and professional video applications.
We've shot the new Fujinon XF 56mm F1.2R WR lens against the original 56mm F1.2R, to check whether we should switch the lens we use for our studio test scene or maintain consistency.
Nature photographer Erez Marom continues his series about landscape composition by discussing the multifaceted role played by the sky in a landscape image.
The NONS SL660 is an Instax Square instant camera with an interchangeable lens design. It's made of CNC-milled aluminum alloy, has an SLR-style viewfinder, and retails for a $600. We've gone hands-on to see what it's like to shoot with.
Comments