Dual Pixel AF - Is there anything that comes close?

[dvcrn]

I currently own a Canon 80D. And it's a love-hate story. I absolutely love the 80D for the Dual Pixel AF and colors. Now with the inofficial C-Log profiles out there, it became a good amount better than before. I really would like to go "full canon" but can't get myself to spend the ridiculous prices for cameras that are actually 'good' in video. And because of that I can't get myself to invest more into EF-S lenses until I know whether I will stay with it or not. (I guess I could do FF glass but still). 

I am a huge fan of mirrorless cameras with a EM5II as my primary photo shooter. I nibbled around different cameras back and forth. Tried the a6300 which apparently has besides DPAF the best autofocus system out there but even that can't reach the beauty of the Canon ones. (Plus oh well, that rolling shutter)

So my question: Is there anything that comes close to DPAF? Is it "worth it" to invest into a company that seems to lack so far behind? I never used a pro-grade Canon camera but was waiting for the new 5D just to get disappointed. 

[Cinegain]

The new Olympus E-M1 mark II sounds sweet as fuck. Hope it's any good, but who knows. We all know that Canon's DualPixel AF and Sony's 4D AF is up top. A lot of AF systems still progressively focus to the back and then discover 'ah, that was one step too many' and go back to lock the focus in place just before that. That looks so silly. In the end you can make anything work, these are just tools. But it's either the budget, features, process or results that pushes you in a certain direction. A choice is the result of eliminating the other options, so pick your poison... what's worth to you the most?

If you say you love mirrorless and use an E-M5II right now... I'd say, stick around for the E-M1 mark II. They've got some stuff up at https://www.youtube.com/user/getolympus/videos and sure does look impressive.

Nothing wrong with Canon either. Although, usually it's the people that stick to Canon that have been using it for years and years. Not sure that many people make it their top pick these days. But, it gets the job done... if the job is to tell a story with visual imaging. If you tell your story right, it shouldn't matter what it was shot on, you can just use a potato. But what do you enjoy using the most to get it done? What gives you the best possibilities? For some it's a high frame rate, so they can do better slowmo. For some it's a bigger sensor with low megapixel count for light gathering and bokeh. For some it's color and ease of use. For some it's having something compact yet powerful. It all depends. Don't think you need to be all too worried about the glass. You can buy second hand and it will probably sell for roughly the same if you've got a change of heart...

[teddoman]

1 hour ago, dvcrn said:

Tried the a6300 which apparently has besides DPAF the best autofocus system out there but even that can't reach the beauty of the Canon ones. (Plus oh well, that rolling shutter)

So my question: Is there anything that comes close to DPAF? Is it "worth it" to invest into a company that seems to lack so far behind? I never used a pro-grade Canon camera but was waiting for the new 5D just to get disappointed. 

Are you saying Canon dual pixel AF is performs like a "beauty" compared to Sony A6300 phase detect autofocus?

Or you're just suggesting you prefer the Canon image quality?

[Jimbo]

Nice post, @Cinegain. Very true. It's very tough in this consumer world where we are all gearheads-cum-filmmakers not to get pushed and pulled by marketing at every turn (especially these last 5 crazy years), researching until our eyes are bleeding, when we could be jotting down some ideas for a short film or practising our lighting/camera work/grading etc. instead.

I am constantly having to slap myself out of it, remind myself to stay on target, and ask myself these questions when I've been scrolling and refreshing all day and working out how I can possibly afford something:

- What's my long term goal with this work?

- Will this time/money spent on researching/changing gear help my long term goal?

Now, if you are just here for fun and have no money problems then hell, enjoy the ride! If you are like me, making a small living with my work and trying to carve as much time as possible for speculative, creative work then I have to keep a keen eye on my time/money.

Therefore, getting around to the OP. @dvcrn, I would suggest stick to your Canon for now, especially if DPAF either gives you great enjoyment or helps you achieve the results you want the fastest. There is nothing comparable to this tech yet. However, given you mentioned the EM5II, I think medium term you should keep your eyes on the EM1 Mark II, because you know full well someone will do a comparison (probably against the 80D specifically) regarding autofocus. If you like what you see, then in your position I would be super tempted to hop fully into the Olympus world and have 2 cameras that hopefully play well together in terms of colour/usability/lenses if two camera setup is useful to you.

Top priorities for me when choosing cameras 5 years ago when I started my business were small, reliable cameras with lots of features so it's been GH series all the way. They've never let me down, incredible battery life and I can adapt pretty much any lens on the planet on them meaning I can prioritise investment in lenses. Also, I know Panasonic are really in touch with users so the upgrade path has been fantastic! This has given me more confidence to invest in m43 lenses and suitable rigging for these size cameras and have really enjoyed the progress through GH2-3-4 and undoubtedly 5. I feel sorry for Canon users who really love the DSLR form factor and have invested in loads of Canon glass. DPAF aside, they have not been looked after well from my perspective.

[DBounce]

No!

[independent]

If you need video autofocus and are a hybrid shooter, then the best all rounder seems to be the Canon 1DX II and the Sony a7r II. Best bang for the buck is the a6300. No perfect camera out there. At any price. You're better off seeing what the needs are of the specific project or your own style of shooting and workflow. Do you work as a DP on a traditional film set, or are you a one-man band, are you a wedding shooter, are you a hobbyist, etc.?

If you're looking to invest, just keep in mind the short refresh cycles for cameras. Photographers always say invest in the lenses and that's largely true for videographers too. I say largely true, because with autofocus, many of the amazing manual focus lenses are less important to you. If you don't use autofocus, then you'd still be able to take advantage of all your nice leica-R's and zeiss lenses.

 

 

[Inazuma]

What was your problem with the a6300? Ive not used DPAF on a Canon DSLR but I cant see how it can get much better than it is on that camera

[tugela]

The basic problem and deal breaker with the a6300 is that it has "Sony" on it's name plate.

[Emanuel]

It does seem so...

[dvcrn]

Fantastic responses. Thanks guys!

9 hours ago, Inazuma said:

What was your problem with the a6300? Ive not used DPAF on a Canon DSLR but I cant see how it can get much better than it is on that camera

Then I can highly recommend you to give it a try DPAF is a work of wonders. It's so smooth and accurate, if done right it can replace focus pulling when doing things alone. It's also one of the only AF systems I found that feels completely "natural" and doesn't have this weird sudden focus digital effect.

I had it often that with other cameras I thought the camera got it but as soon as something small in the picture changes, it suddenly focuses on something else. DPAF never missed so far. 

I indeed have high hopes in the EM1II but at the same time I'm trying to be realistic that it probably will be slightly under the a6300 in terms of AF performance. Just a guess based on recent development and Sonys power in the market. 

I don't mind having 2 cameras: One for when I need DPAF, one for when I don't. But then the question is lenses: Do you just buy FF lenses all the time and mount them on the MFT / APS-C bodies with adapters? Do you stick with APS-C glass but then reduce the chance of upgrading to FF anytime soon? MFT lenses would be optimal but you can't really mount them on anything else. Plus if you have a good MFT body with a adapter-ed lens, the autofocus will in return suck again. It's like a endless struggle :p 

Someone give me the perfect camera with glorious AF, great picture, 4k video, great low light and amazing in stills. ?

[lwestfall]

Exactly, it's such a love-hate relationship Canon (and really every other manufacturer) forces us into. Nothing can autofocus in video like Canon DPAF. But unfortunately there is much less 4k detail in the 5D Mark IV vs. the GH4 and especially a6300: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n7Qvu1KMt8 I haven't seen yet how the 1DX Mark II compares, but I'm guessing it's the same, since there is still no oversampling involved. The a6300 is pretty quick at autofocus in video but doesn't make the transitions as smoothly as Canon DPAF (or even the equally high-res NX1, although the NX1 loses focus way too much: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqon9ZRx9r8 There is some hope in the E-M1 II and a99 II, but they still don't have the complete superfine super AF coverage that Canon DPAF has. But since the Samsung Galaxy S7 and Note 7 have nice DPAF too, I don't see why no one else is doing it in ILCs. Such a shame there's no NX1 Mark II on the horizon...

[sanveer]

52 minutes ago, lwestfall said:

But unfortunately there is much less 4k detail in the 5D Mark IV vs. the GH4 and especially a6300: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n7Qvu1KMt8 I haven't seen yet how the 1DX Mark II compares, but I'm guessing it's the same, since there is still no oversampling involved.

All Canon DSLRs have soft video. It may have got to do with their algorithm and how they down sample.

[Emanuel]

1 hour ago, sanveer said:

All Canon DSLRs have soft video. It may have got to do with their algorithm and how they down sample.

Unless Magic Lantern will overcome it...

[Flynn]

The EM1ii probably won't be as good as dpaf but then again, can Canon offer 6.5 stops of stabilization? The af looks to be vastly improved, and given the stabilization with the new 12-100, I'd probably be willing to make do. 

[gt3rs]

4 hours ago, sanveer said:

All Canon DSLRs have soft video. It may have got to do with their algorithm and how they down sample.

Not true 4k in 1DC, 1Dx II and 5D IV is not down sampled but 1:1 pixel readout. 1080p I agree is not great...

[ntblowz]

Well E-M1 MKII uses 8 core CPU this time (dual quadcore with 1 delicated core for AF)

hopefully it is as good as it sounds

[Emanuel]

22 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

Not true 4k in 1DC, 1Dx II and 5D IV is not down sampled but 1:1 pixel readout. 1080p I agree is not great...

I think the poster was referring Canon in general, typical Canon look, not specific models or applied technology as case study.

You both are right though. 1080p has never been great with Canon because of the way they handle it, I say.

[Jimbo]

I feel your pain @dvcrn! There really is no free lunch and it's very difficult to make informed decisions sometimes as there's so much noise you need to cancel out to get a clear picture.

Investing in glass is wise as lenses can basically last you a lifetime and resale is always easier with minimal loss, but it's still tough... Do you buy lenses that can move with you through each system if you need to change, or go native so you get the system benefits? I'm always chasing my tail on this one and have ended up with half my lenses being native m43 and half Nikon AI-S.

Clever move from Canon with DPAF, again strengthening investment in their glass. It's just a shame you have to spend at least £4k on a Canon camera to get solid and sharp 1080p in 2016!

All good fun!

[Emanuel]

52 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

 

Clever move from Canon with DPAF, again strengthening investment in their glass. It's just a shame you have to spend at least £4k on a Canon camera to get solid and sharp 1080p in 2016!

 

Right. For some reason ; ) 1080p from their DSLR line since they introduced the thrill 8 years ago with 5DII, is not the best find out there... ;-)

[DBounce]

8 hours ago, lwestfall said:

Exactly, it's such a love-hate relationship Canon (and really every other manufacturer) forces us into. Nothing can autofocus in video like Canon DPAF. But unfortunately there is much less 4k detail in the 5D Mark IV vs. the GH4 and especially a6300: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n7Qvu1KMt8 I haven't seen yet how the 1DX Mark II compares, but I'm guessing it's the same, since there is still no oversampling involved. The a6300 is pretty quick at autofocus in video but doesn't make the transitions as smoothly as Canon DPAF (or even the equally high-res NX1, although the NX1 loses focus way too much: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqon9ZRx9r8 There is some hope in the E-M1 II and a99 II, but they still don't have the complete superfine super AF coverage that Canon DPAF has. But since the Samsung Galaxy S7 and Note 7 have nice DPAF too, I don't see why no one else is doing it in ILCs. Such a shame there's no NX1 Mark II on the horizon...

That camera looks out of focus and probably needs autofocus microadjustment performed. FYI, I cannot recall ever looking at my 1DXMkii 4k footage and feeling it lacked anything in the image department.  And I have compared it directly to my Sony A7Rii, Sony A7ii and Samsung NX1. To my eyes it handily beats all of those cameras. 

I have seen some nice looking footage from the 5DMkIV. But this footage in the video link you list looks off. I'm guessing it's related to the body he has, not all 5DMkIVs.