• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Evaluation of Auto focus performance among popular cameras

Discussion in 'Tips and Techniques' started by Interceptor121, Mar 12, 2020.

  1. Interceptor121

    Interceptor121 PADI Pro

    4,300
    622
    113
    Wasn't referring to you James

    The information in the reviews can be used meaningfully but you need to read through it, some data is better than zero data
     
    Nemrod likes this.
  2. stuartv

    stuartv Seeking the Light

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Manassas, VA
    8,450
    4,059
    113
    I don't think the observation that camera AF speed is very dependent on the specific lens used, and suggesting that it should be mentioned in an article that presents a chart of numbers on camera AF performance, is being too picky.

    But, to each his own. I am not the one that will be judged by people who read my article and chose a certain camera because of what I said (or failed to mention). :D

    I don't think there's much to the statement "get some images to proof the point that it is a great camera." As you so rightly noted already, it's 90% the operator. I've seen fantastic images from an RX100. That doesn't prove that it is a great camera... Or maybe it proves that just about every modern camera is great....
     
    HKGuns likes this.
  3. stuartv

    stuartv Seeking the Light

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Manassas, VA
    8,450
    4,059
    113
    Not if it leaves you thinking that you are fully informed, when you actually are not... Better to be ignorant and know it, than to think you know the right answer because you don't realize you only got part of the data.
     
    tursiops likes this.
  4. HKGuns

    HKGuns Barracuda

    # of Dives: 0 - 24
    Location: Merica
    271
    278
    63
    I’ve never done UW but I have done BIF and can attest to the AF challenges.

    Can’t imagine diving being more AF demanding.

    These barn swallows are really fast movers and pushed the AF limit of my Canon 1DIV as well as my skills. Glass matters too, as I couldn’t have attempted these shots on anything less than my 500/F4.

    Lens makes a tremendous difference in AF speed and I agree deserves mention. Pair a fancy camera with crap glass and you typically end up with crap pictures. The person behind the lens matters quite a bit as well. Photo's I can manage with my 500/F4 are nearly impossible with my 100-400. My 400 prime was extremely fast to AF and light which made it very versatile.

    These aren’t as sharp as I would like, but pretty decent of an extremely difficult subject.

    These are pretty extreme crops, but held together fairly well.

    p385972827-5.jpg

    p218411899-5.jpg

    Edited to add a regular bird.

    p751624717-5.jpg
     
    Nemrod likes this.
  5. Nemrod

    Nemrod Solo Diver

    11,950
    2,101
    113
    No worries mate. As you said, some data is better than no data and such articles do make us think and helps us to consider the different variables and qualities beyond manufacturer advertisement hype (like Sony claiming fastest AF) that make one system seem or actually be more responsive than another.

    James
     
  6. Interceptor121

    Interceptor121 PADI Pro

    4,300
    622
    113
    I don't have answer that is just data if you prefer to ignore it and therefore be ignorant that is up to you
     

Share This Page