April 19, 2014, 08:19:24 AM

Author Topic: Is the future USM or STM? Or both..  (Read 3710 times)

axtstern

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 93
  • EOS M(ediochre)
    • View Profile
Re: Is the future USM or STM? Or both..
« Reply #15 on: September 13, 2013, 05:30:01 PM »
Question: from time to time I hear that the high end Canon models with their battery grip would Focus faster because of the higher voltage delivered to the Lens!?!

Always more than doubted that. If it is true however, would that not be deadly to STM lenses?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is the future USM or STM? Or both..
« Reply #15 on: September 13, 2013, 05:30:01 PM »

polarhannes

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
Re: Is the future USM or STM? Or both..
« Reply #16 on: September 13, 2013, 06:18:28 PM »
It is true. While a 85 1.2 is really slow on the 5D3, this lens can work fine for indoor sports using a 1DX. The 40mm pancake works just fine with the 1DX.
"The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera." - Dorothea Lange

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • *******
  • Posts: 12779
    • View Profile
Re: Is the future USM or STM? Or both..
« Reply #17 on: September 13, 2013, 07:16:53 PM »
Question: from time to time I hear that the high end Canon models with their battery grip would Focus faster because of the higher voltage delivered to the Lens!?!

Always more than doubted that. If it is true however, would that not be deadly to STM lenses?

It's true for 1-series bodies, but not true for standard bodies with an accessory grip holding two batteries.

It is true. While a 85 1.2 is really slow on the 5D3, this lens can work fine for indoor sports using a 1DX. The 40mm pancake works just fine with the 1DX.

+1  I previously tested the 85L II on the 1D X vs. 5DII and 7D with and without their battery grips. The 1D X was faster, the grip made no difference.

Also, I just went and checked the 40/2.8 STM, and it racks back and forth from infinity to the MFD faster on the 1D X than on the EOS M.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Mt Spokane Photography

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 7711
    • View Profile
Re: Is the future USM or STM? Or both..
« Reply #18 on: September 13, 2013, 09:21:00 PM »
I don't think we'll be seeing STM used in L-series lenses. AF during video is a consumer 'feature' - pro video shooters focus manually (often with a whole host of accessories to facilitate that - looking at a complete dSLR video rig, it can be hard to spot the camera!).

According to the professor at RIT's Imaging Arts & Sciences school that I asked, that isn't always true. For documentaries, where subject/talent motion isn't tightly controlled, AF is routinely used. Where the motion is controlled, yes, MF is used. At the time, he was conducting a shoot with two of his students at a local historical village, using a Canon XF305. Because of the subject matter (static Civil War cannons being fired) AF was used to set focus, then MF was used to hold it. Without MF, the camera kept trying to shift focus from the Cannon to the smoke.

Some high end camcorders do have autofocus, and for TV and documentaries, they use AF.
 
However for Cinema or high end commercial use, the use of autofocus is rare, in fact, few if any Cinema cameras or lenses have autofocus.  I don't think Panavision makes a autofocus lens, for example, and the Zeiss Compact Primes are manual focus.  Sometimes there is a bit of footage inserted into a movie taken with a camcorder, but its not the rule.
 
Its just a matter of what level of professional use you are dealing with.  Does the professor belong to ASC?

Bob Howland

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: Is the future USM or STM? Or both..
« Reply #19 on: September 13, 2013, 10:33:16 PM »
I don't think we'll be seeing STM used in L-series lenses. AF during video is a consumer 'feature' - pro video shooters focus manually (often with a whole host of accessories to facilitate that - looking at a complete dSLR video rig, it can be hard to spot the camera!).

According to the professor at RIT's Imaging Arts & Sciences school that I asked, that isn't always true. For documentaries, where subject/talent motion isn't tightly controlled, AF is routinely used. Where the motion is controlled, yes, MF is used. At the time, he was conducting a shoot with two of his students at a local historical village, using a Canon XF305. Because of the subject matter (static Civil War cannons being fired) AF was used to set focus, then MF was used to hold it. Without MF, the camera kept trying to shift focus from the Cannon to the smoke.

Some high end camcorders do have autofocus, and for TV and documentaries, they use AF.
 
However for Cinema or high end commercial use, the use of autofocus is rare, in fact, few if any Cinema cameras or lenses have autofocus.  I don't think Panavision makes a autofocus lens, for example, and the Zeiss Compact Primes are manual focus.  Sometimes there is a bit of footage inserted into a movie taken with a camcorder, but its not the rule.
 
Its just a matter of what level of professional use you are dealing with.  Does the professor belong to ASC?

Haven't a clue if he belongs or not. I didn't talk with him all that much. All I know is that the documentary is supposed to appear on PBS nationally some time next year (confirmed by a museum employee). I explicitly asked him about AF vs MF because I'd already concluded what he confirmed, that it isn't a matter of amateur vs professional but rather a question of how much subject motion can be anticipated and/or controlled. It makes sense that, for an expensive feature film or commercial, greater efforts would be made to control everything possible, not to mention putting their expensive talent through multiple rehearsals and takes.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Is the future USM or STM? Or both..
« Reply #19 on: September 13, 2013, 10:33:16 PM »