Just came into my mind before the launch of 5Dmk2, were there a lot of disappoint on the 5D AF focus? If yes, why there isn't much improvement done on the mk2? I wonder will mk3 be given at least the 7d AF system.
BlueMixWhite said:Just came into my mind before the launch of 5Dmk2, were there a lot of disappoint on the 5D AF focus? If yes, why there isn't much improvement done on the mk2? I wonder will mk3 be given at least the 7d AF system.
briansquibb said:BlueMixWhite said:Just came into my mind before the launch of 5Dmk2, were there a lot of disappoint on the 5D AF focus? If yes, why there isn't much improvement done on the mk2? I wonder will mk3 be given at least the 7d AF system.
The AF system on the 5DII may have its limitations but it is still an accurate AF system so does job in the environment which it was expected to work - weddings, studio, landscapes etc. It also has the ability to AF in low light (on the centre AF point) where others give up.
The AF system is pretty much the same as the film cameras (except the top pro versions) which is where a lot of the customers came from as the 21mp gave 'film resolution in digital'. At its launch the 5DII the AF system was 'middle of the road' but has now fallen behind in peoples' expectations after 4 years of significant progress (like in the current 7D, and even the 40D had (minor but significant) improvements)
I think to sum up I would say that in my opinion the 5DII AF is not flawed as it works reliably and accurately but has limitations that current models have long surpassed for general use. In my opinion to 5DII should have been designed with the same AF as the 50D. I had a 50D at the same time as my 5DII and in day to day use in good light there was nothing betwen them, it was just in poor light when the non central points of the 5DII started to struggle.
I think the skills of the 5DII user base has changed so that they now are less able than the film users who would have found the AF system very acceptable (I am one of those)
With the next generation 5DII I am sure we will find the AF will be significantly improved - it is one area which Canon can make major improvements on the 5DII. Perhaps we will get autofocus for film users as well. The sensor is very close to the magic (for video people) 2k, so perhaps an updated sensor will come in too (perhaps also with better high iso performance too). The introduction of the Digic 5 processor might mean a small increase of fps to 5. These changes would mean the new generation 5D would have a higher spec than the venerable 1Ds3
Just looking back at the dpreview - I would imagine not too many reviewers would have really tested it in low light conditions.BlueMixWhite said:Just came into my mind before the launch of 5Dmk2, were there a lot of disappoint on the 5D AF focus? If yes, why there isn't much improvement done on the mk2? I wonder will mk3 be given at least the 7d AF system.
the 5D Mark II would never be mistaken as a camera aimed at sports or action photographers (thanks to its rather pedestrian AF performance and overall shooting performance)
While there are still other cameras in its class with marginally higher resolution, marginally better high ISO performance, more advanced AF, faster performance, better weather sealing and more solid build quality... the 5D Mark II is certainly one of the best value for money propositions on the market for image quality - especially in RAW, where you really can see the benefit of all 21MP
The Canon EOS 5D is equipped with a newly developed 9-point AF unit with 6 invisible Supplemental AF points. Results include improved AI Servo AF subject tracking and improved focusing from a defocused state. I find the 5D's autofocus to be both fast and accurate - even in low light situations. Although not quite as good as the 1D Mark II and 1Ds Mark II, the 5D performs well for real AF challenges such as action sports photography. My AI Servo AF hit rate through several soccer games was slightly less than what I generally see with the 1Ds Mark II, but still very good.
More focus points isn't necessarily better, but if all of those points work well, then it gives you more options compositionally. If only the centre point is reliable, then you have to focus and recompose. This can cause problems in two main ways. The first is the more obvious, in that you can miss the moment while recomposing, but the second is potentially a greater problem. Many lenses (but by no means all) suffer from a change in the focal plane if you recompose. This is ok at narrower apertures, as the depth of field will mask the focus inaccuracies, but with the wide aperture lenses, the depth of field can be extremely narrow, resulting in out of focus images. The only option then is to manually focus or put up with a low hit rate and of course, in low light, manual focus is awkward. Essentially, you could say then that more usable focus points are better.nicko said:Would anyone here be able to explain what it really is that the 7D does differently from the 5D that makes it so much better? Like many people here (probably), I learned to take pictures with a manual camera, and I am still surprised that the camera will do all that work for me. I don't understand why more "focus points" is any better.
Mt Spokane Photography said:The 5D MK II was aimed at wedding photography, not action or sports. Those who wanted it to be something else, were disappointed. The camera has so many other good attributes, that if Canon were to put in a more sophisticated autofocus system, it would have undermined 1D/1DS MK III sales, so Canon did not.
Its no different than holding back high end features in a automobile that is targeted to the low or middle price range, manufacturers want you to buy the higher profit model with the nicer features.
However, Canon did listen, and came out with the 7D a year later, and it had greatly improved autofocus. Its very likely that any new 5D ?? model will also have greatly improved autofocus. If it sells more cameras, they will do it. We likely would have had new bodies last year, except the earthquake and other disasters spoiled the plans.
nicko said:Would anyone here be able to explain what it really is that the 7D does differently from the 5D that makes it so much better? Like many people here (probably), I learned to take pictures with a manual camera, and I am still surprised that the camera will do all that work for me. I don't understand why more "focus points" is any better.
wickidwombat said:After coming from a 1D to the 5D2 i was massively dissapointed with the AF on the 5D2
especially the AI servo and outer point ability to even get a lock in low light let alone track anything