6D Autofocus not impressive

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chuck Alaimo said:
how often do you do shots like this? and, at what time of day? There is the option of using a less shallow DOF.

Well, yes, but one point of putting 1700€ (€!) into a ff and a f2.8 lens is to shoot with shallow dof, if I need to crop for that or revert to a smaller aperture one ff advantage is lost.

Chuck Alaimo said:
Either way, if your doing extreme corner focusing, nothing out there other than shooting in live view and manual focusing will get you there because as far as I know, there is no such camera that has AF points in the extreme corners--

Please not: I wasn't talking of the extreme corners, of course not, but simple *near* the edge of the frame, say 3/4 to the side or corners... and here the real 5d2/6d vs 5d3 af spread tells the whole story. I suppose the crammed af points are good for tracking though, that's when the 40d/50d/60d-style compeletely fails vs. 7d.

ashmadux said:
The lack of a proper joystick is also a terrible loss, as the directional pad is mushy as all hell and imprecise.

My 2ct: You don't need a joystick for 9 or 11 af points, you can easily select them with the multicontroller.

Hannes said:
What the 40/50D does well at least is how the middle points on the diagonals are located spot on in the intersections for rule of thirds and that is after all where a good amount of shots will want the focus

+1, that's one thing I like about my 60d's af points, I often use the diagonals for macro shooting.
 
Upvote 0
Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.
 
Upvote 0
CarlTN said:
Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.

I dunno, looks reasonably close to me; closer than the former anyway. And for the record, I'm a proud 6D owner. I love the camera and after several months of ownership I'm positive it was the right choice for me (over a 5d3). I just wish the spread was larger. In fact, while we're all bitching about what we want, just give me this:
 

Attachments

  • Capture.PNG
    Capture.PNG
    41.1 KB · Views: 1,028
Upvote 0
Skirball said:
CarlTN said:
Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.

I dunno, looks reasonably close to me; closer than the former anyway. And for the record, I'm a proud 6D owner. I love the camera and after several months of ownership I'm positive it was the right choice for me (over a 5d3). I just wish the spread was larger. In fact, while we're all bitching about what we want, just give me this:

+1 ... My thoughts exactly about the placement of the AF points.
 
Upvote 0
CarlTN said:
Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.

The one thing I've learnt with photography is that close is never close enough. The spread of the array is not that small but not particularly larger either.

Carl ... how are you getting on with the outer focus points in low light. Mine just seem to go bonkers so I'm left to focus recompose using the center focus point.
 
Upvote 0
:o 14 pages......
Let me try my way:
1) Honda civic is a great car
2) In heavy bumper to bumper traffic civic moves as fast as Ferrari
3) Civic has state of the art fuel efficient engine
3) Civic has more boot space than Ferrari
4) You can commute to work with civic happily without a hitch
5) Ferrari is traffic ticket magnet, civic gets by without attracting attention
Logical conclusion on lines of arguments here: I am proud owner of Civic and its far better car than Ferrari

Plenty of people were happy and have got by with even manual focusing or 5DII autofocus.......
 
Upvote 0
Skirball said:
CarlTN said:
Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.

I dunno, looks reasonably close to me; closer than the former anyway. And for the record, I'm a proud 6D owner. I love the camera and after several months of ownership I'm positive it was the right choice for me (over a 5d3). I just wish the spread was larger. In fact, while we're all bitching about what we want, just give me this:


If you put the outer points there is would give new meaning to the phrase:

"My outer focus points are useless in low light" ;)
 
Upvote 0
Maybe I am just thinking about the 6d's AF from a different place, because I also have a 5d3 - I can use the 6d up to the point where the mk3 has to take over (my 6d can be the machete and the mk3 is the scalpel!)

Either way, I am happy with the purchase! :)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5219-Edit.jpg
    IMG_5219-Edit.jpg
    823.8 KB · Views: 814
  • IMG_4990.jpg
    IMG_4990.jpg
    524.8 KB · Views: 840
  • IMG_4932.jpg
    IMG_4932.jpg
    799.6 KB · Views: 857
Upvote 0
Skirball said:
comsense said:
3) Civic has state of the art fuel efficient engine

I’m sure there’s an analogy in there somewhere between Civic owners who think something on their car is state of the art, and camera owners who frequent camera forums.
Pls don't be confused with power (aka muscle), torque or acceleration,. Most entry level cars these days (if not all) have advanced design and technology for basic engine fuel efficiency. You can ask Prof. Google if you want to know more...
 
Upvote 0
J.R. said:
CarlTN said:
Actually Neuro, that last image that shows the autofocus spread that looks so small and narrow, is the one I was referring to as being incorrect. Frankly both of those are incorrect. Just pick up a 6D and do a side by side comparison. True the viewfinder is not 100%, but in reality it is very close to 100%. The spread of the AF array is nowhere near as small as that second image.

The one thing I've learnt with photography is that close is never close enough. The spread of the array is not that small but not particularly larger either.

Carl ... how are you getting on with the outer focus points in low light. Mine just seem to go bonkers so I'm left to focus recompose using the center focus point.

I never use the outer points in low light. I thought according to Canon, it was the center point that was meant for low light. So that's what I use. It seems to do at least as well as my cousin's 1DX, in low dusk light outdoors on relatively still subjects...center point only selected.

The only problem I have with the 6D's autofocus, is that it will choose the brighter, more contrasty subject matter (usually behind a bird on a limb or something)...rather than the darker less contrasty subject. I am of course using only center point in this situation too...because I want the bird's eye to be in sharpest focus, etc. It's possible the 5D3 and 1DX would have a slight issue in such a situation also, but no doubt they would be better.

J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.

Are you in shutter or aperture priority, or manual? I assume you're at some event or wedding with a wider angle lens or something?

To all those who are happy to bash the 6D, you are ignorant, that's all. To say that the D7100 "kills the 6D", that's wrong. The D7100 is killed by the 6D starting around ISO 1250. The D7100 is only a crop camera, and thus has extremely limited light falling on its sensor to begin with.

If you don't like the 6D, don't buy it. It's not meant for you. It's meant for people who know how to make use of a camera's strengths and compensate for its limitations, like me. It's not meant for people who like to pick a certain weakness and harp on it, or who expect the camera to do the thinking for them.

I will state again, the 6D has superior image quality to all other Canons and Nikons currently in production...within a narrow ISO range from the mid 1000's up to 8 to 10,000...which is where I often like to use it. This range is where all low light, sports and wildlife "available light" photography lives. Above that, the D4 and 1DX are superior, but not the 5D3...it's still inferior. The only thing better about the 5D3 is the autofocus and the fps. Both the D800 and D600 have worse noise above ISO 2000 than even the 5D3, let alone the 6D. They still deliver more resolution up to a point, of course.

As for landscape-only (low ISO, under 1000) photography (perhaps on a tripod...or else studio photography with flashgun or strobes)...yes the D800E is your best choice for a few more months or so, and certainly the best choice under $4000. I suspect Canon's big MP body will be priced well above $4000.

For available light photography between ISO 1600 and 8000, the 6D produces the best image with the most detail, the least noise, and similar if not superior dynamic range (in RAW anyway, but the jpegs are decent too). Perhaps it's not pulling ahead in resolution of the D800 series until ISO 6400 or so, and the D600 at ISO 4000 or so....but the 6D is way ahead regarding both luminance and chrominance noise at the native pixel level, as in viewed at 100%...and not tipping the scales by downsampling all comparisons to 8MP, or whatever bullcrap DXOmark does. I could downsample smartphone pictures by that much of a percentage from their native, and get decent noise performance too, but so what?

I am astonished that my shots done from ISO 1000 to 1600, need no noise reduction in post of any kind. I'm also astonished that the 1DX's files have a similar large grain luminance noise structure like the 5D3's. I can understand why some I have read on here, don't want to shoot the 5D3 above ISO 1000.

The 6D has autofocus that is plenty responsive, depending on just how good and fast the lens's autofocus system and motors are. Most of the reviews I've read of the D600 say it's autofocus is not noticeably superior to the 6D's. So I don't see it as "the better camera" at all. But if you have a lot of Nikon glass, then by all means, buy a Nikon. You'll help them stay independent a while longer...delaying the inevitable.
 
Upvote 0
CarlTN said:
J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.

Are you in shutter or aperture priority, or manual? I assume you're at some event or wedding with a wider angle lens or something?

The biggest trouble I face is when I'm shooting at wide open apertures. In low light you need those wide open apertures and I find too many of my shots out of focus with using the center point focus and recompose - kills the fun of it.

As Chuck mentioned, one can always crop later to get the composition right but it lessens the fun a bit so I am predominantly use WA on the 6D and wide aperture lenses on the 5D3.

I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better.
 
Upvote 0
J.R. said:
CarlTN said:
J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.

Are you in shutter or aperture priority, or manual? I assume you're at some event or wedding with a wider angle lens or something?

The biggest trouble I face is when I'm shooting at wide open apertures. In low light you need those wide open apertures and I find too many of my shots out of focus with using the center point focus and recompose - kills the fun of it.

As Chuck mentioned, one can always crop later to get the composition right but it lessens the fun a bit so I am predominantly use WA on the 6D and wide aperture lenses on the 5D3.

I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better.

I'm not convinced the 6D's AF is not improved over the 5D2. I've not compared them side by side. But Canon has said the center point has more sensitivity than all other AF systems they have produced, and I see no reason to doubt it. Did the 5D2 allow so many different levels of customization via the menu, in servo mode, etc? My cousin owned a 5D2 a while back, but I never played with the menus on it. He even bought the original 5D when it first came out.

My 6D certainly can AF in very low light, even with a 70-200 f/4...in fact it seemed to AF in a very, very dark candle lit room with it...on something on the opposite side of the room, that even ISO 100k was too dim for, at like 1/2 second exposure at f/4. It was kind of troubling that it would AF as good or better in this dark room with that lens, than with my favorite...the 135 f/2. Kind of defies physics, but then sheer amount of light apparently is not the only factor in the equation, I guess. There are electronics there in the lens too (obviously haha).

All I know is, I need more info to take me into the situation where you're having trouble with the 6D's autofocus in low light, and having to recompose. What is the subject matter, what's the distance, what's the focal length of the lens? Are you really close to the subject? Are you saying it's a 50mm f/1.4 or something? Seated head and shoulders portraiture? (In that situation I don't really see a problem if you need to use the center point and then recompose, even at f/1.4. If it's just the head and no neck, maybe I could see a problem.) Or is it longer focal length than that, or is it shorter? Is it available light, or is it with flashgun or strobes placed somewhere? (Must not be, because they usually have a focus assist beam or "modeling light"...in which case there's ample light for focusing with any of the points).

Unless both you and the subject are extremely still, have you tried using servo mode, and perhaps setting it for a slow response?
 
Upvote 0
CarlTN said:
J.R. said:
CarlTN said:
J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.

Are you in shutter or aperture priority, or manual? I assume you're at some event or wedding with a wider angle lens or something?

The biggest trouble I face is when I'm shooting at wide open apertures. In low light you need those wide open apertures and I find too many of my shots out of focus with using the center point focus and recompose - kills the fun of it.

As Chuck mentioned, one can always crop later to get the composition right but it lessens the fun a bit so I am predominantly use WA on the 6D and wide aperture lenses on the 5D3.

I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better.

I'm not convinced the 6D's AF is not improved over the 5D2. I've not compared them side by side. But Canon has said the center point has more sensitivity than all other AF systems they have produced, and I see no reason to doubt it. Did the 5D2 allow so many different levels of customization via the menu, in servo mode, etc? My cousin owned a 5D2 a while back, but I never played with the menus on it. He even bought the original 5D when it first came out.

My 6D certainly can AF in very low light, even with a 70-200 f/4...in fact it seemed to AF in a very, very dark candle lit room with it...on something on the opposite side of the room, that even ISO 100k was too dim for, at like 1/2 second exposure at f/4. It was kind of troubling that it would AF as good or better in this dark room with that lens, than with my favorite...the 135 f/2. Kind of defies physics, but then sheer amount of light apparently is not the only factor in the equation, I guess. There are electronics there in the lens too (obviously haha).

All I know is, I need more info to take me into the situation where you're having trouble with the 6D's autofocus in low light, and having to recompose. What is the subject matter, what's the distance, what's the focal length of the lens? Are you really close to the subject? Are you saying it's a 50mm f/1.4 or something? Seated head and shoulders portraiture? (In that situation I don't really see a problem if you need to use the center point and then recompose, even at f/1.4. If it's just the head and no neck, maybe I could see a problem.) Or is it longer focal length than that, or is it shorter? Is it available light, or is it with flashgun or strobes placed somewhere? (Must not be, because they usually have a focus assist beam or "modeling light"...in which case there's ample light for focusing with any of the points).

Unless both you and the subject are extremely still, have you tried using servo mode, and perhaps setting it for a slow response?

Shooting indoors without flash, child sitting on sofa, shooting wide open with the 50mm f/1.4 - no option but to focus and recompose.

I agree that the center point of the 6D is very good, but there are times when you need those outer focus points.
 
Upvote 0
J.R. said:
Shooting indoors without flash, child sitting on sofa, shooting wide open with the 50mm f/1.4 - no option but to focus and recompose.

I agree that the center point of the 6D is very good, but there are times when you need those outer focus points.

Interesting. I've done this, but not with a 50 that autofocuses. My Voigtlander is manual. I will try it in low light on my nephews with the 40 f/2.8 pancake, and try the outer points, and see what happens. Will try to do it Thursday or Friday. The hardest part is making them do what I want to get a nice picture. I'm not good at portraiture! I can make wildlife do what I want via sheer mental telepathy from 50 yards away, easier than I can make a kid smile without smirking or sticking his tongue out! It sounds ridiculous but I have no other explanation! Haha...
 
Upvote 0
I am very pleased with the 6D's available-light performance even on my slow Tamron 70-300 VC USD (and on my almost-as-slow 24-105L). My backup camera is a 50D.

I just photographed an event, no flash. The indoor shots ranged from ISO 1,000 up to ISO 10,000.
In my opinion, the pictures are quite usable.
 
Upvote 0
J.R. said:
CarlTN said:
J.R., I'm not sure what lens and what shooting situation you would be in, where you would need to use the outer focus points in low light. In any case, don't do that, because they aren't meant for low light.

Are you in shutter or aperture priority, or manual? I assume you're at some event or wedding with a wider angle lens or something?

The biggest trouble I face is when I'm shooting at wide open apertures. In low light you need those wide open apertures and I find too many of my shots out of focus with using the center point focus and recompose - kills the fun of it.

As Chuck mentioned, one can always crop later to get the composition right but it lessens the fun a bit so I am predominantly use WA on the 6D and wide aperture lenses on the 5D3.

I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better.

TY J.R. - but, that advice is only for the pinch. Hell, even on the mk3 I encounter situations when I can only use the centerpoint or use on camera flash (i tend to prefer off cam flash). You do what you got to do to get the shot.

As to your other statement -- "I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better." If they had slapped a more robust AF in there, then what makes it different enough from the mk3? Honestly, if you want uncrippled AF, then save the extra $$$ for the 5d3. As a few others have said, the high ISO performance alone makes up for the lackings in AF.

As to the example of the child on a sofa, there are ways, why not slap a flash on there, the AF beam may be enough?

anywho, here is a shot from an engagement shoot I did tonight - 6d, 70-200 2.8 (yup, the discontinued non IS version, ISO 400 --- using the far left AF point! cheers!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5926.jpg
    IMG_5926.jpg
    679 KB · Views: 973
Upvote 0
Chuck Alaimo said:
As to your other statement -- "I guess the main griping about the 6D AF comes from the fact that Canon intentionally crippled the AF and left it only as good as the AF of the 5D2 when it could have been better." If they had slapped a more robust AF in there, then what makes it different enough from the mk3? Honestly, if you want uncrippled AF, then save the extra $$$ for the 5d3. As a few others have said, the high ISO performance alone makes up for the lackings in AF.

Only 1 x type AF point ... c'mon. They could have done it a wee bit better with the than what they have without impacting the sales of the 5D3 - a few more x type AF points couldn't have seriously impacted the sales of the 5D3?

I do have the 5D3 and the 6D is only a backup / second body. I feel shortchanged by Canon with the AF performance of the 6D, which otherwise is a very good camera with excellent IQ.

I guess it all depends on what one's definition of "good" AF is - the center point in low light might be "impressive" but the overall AF performance makes me cringe sometimes (as mentioned in my earlier posts).

Regarding your comment of High ISO performance making up for the lacking AF, it all depends on perspective. For me, high ISO performance is useless if the shot is out of focus. The only reason I bought the 6D over a second 5D3 was because I didn't want to put in too much money on a second body. Did I compromise - Yes, and with full knowledge of what I was getting into.

It's not that you can't get good sharp shots with the 6D, its only that it's damn difficult at wide open apertures.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.