Canon vs Sony or...

[Twist]

Hi All,

 

I've been a long time still shooter and starting to get into video more, I own the a5100 which is pretty great in terms of AF and the touch screen but now considering adding a canon 70/77/80d.

 

I was wondering what Canons AF is like compared to the A5100/A6000 in terms of subject tracking and acquisition with moving subjects like people/kids?

 

Many thanks in advance

[Twist]

Nobody used both?

[Kisaha]

Canon's dual pixel AF is considered as the best in industry, and I believe it is so.

Sony 5100/6000 are old cameras, surpassed by many cameras from most manufacturers the last couple of years.

Canon's aren't especially techy, but a lot of people found them sufficient for amateur/v-logging/hobbyist use, and they are said to have the best color science, at least they produce pleasant images.

The Sonys you are mentioning are mirrorless cameras, and the Canon's dSLRs, different things. The Canon mirrorless series is called M, M5 and M6 must be ok for your use, maybe you should do some more homework, and clear some things out.

[Twist]

51 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Canon's dual pixel AF is considered as the best in industry, and I believe it is so.

Sony 5100/6000 are old cameras, surpassed by many cameras from most manufacturers the last couple of years.

Canon's aren't especially techy, but a lot of people found them sufficient for amateur/v-logging/hobbyist use, and they are said to have the best color science, at least they produce pleasant images.

The Sonys you are mentioning are mirrorless cameras, and the Canon's dSLRs, different things. The Canon mirrorless series is called M, M5 and M6 must be ok for your use, maybe you should do some more homework, and clear some things out.

I understand they are surpassed by other cameras with 4k etc but the Af is still better than most in terms of tracking during video mode, m43 certainly can't keep up. I know the difference between a dslr and a csc I've used both types for many years alongside for stills and some video, I asked if the canon DP system can keep up with the Sony during video tracking from those that have used both.

 

I don't really need to do homework with regards other cameras as I've narrowed the choice down already and what should I clear out?

 

[pablogrollan]

1 hour ago, Twist said:

I asked if the canon DP system can keep up with the Sony during video tracking from those that have used both.

Not only keep up, the Canon Dual Pixel Autofocus is way better (for video) than the a6000's AF. The A6000 has a very fast AF for stills, probably faster than Canon's midlevel APS-C cameras as the 80D, but the video AF is so-so.

I have used the A6000 extensively and the video AF is only usable in scenes with good contrast, well lit and and with very clear distinction between foreground and background, but it is a bit unreliable/unpredictable sometimes. Dual Pixel AF -I have used it in the C300 and briefly the 70D- gives you greater control and tracks subjects beatifully.

I believe the Sony A6500 has the best video autofocus of any Sony camera -haven't tried it- but as far as I've heard/read it still is not as good as Canon's Dual Pixel AF.

[webrunner5]

3 hours ago, Twist said:

I understand they are surpassed by other cameras with 4k etc but the Af is still better than most in terms of tracking during video mode, m43 certainly can't keep up.

 

 

DPR doesn't seem to think much of autofocus in video mode on the A6500, and hardly any other place I looked worked well other than eye focus, not something you do that often with Video. But to be fair no camera is super dupper great in AF mode all the time. The Panasonic GH5 is not looking too bad either on AF in video mode, and their touchscrenn is second to none.

"Video AF DPR

The extensive frame coverage of the phase-detect pixels, combined with a touchscreen should make for a formidable video camera, especially if you desire or require autofocus. Tapping on your subject in a Flexible Spot area mode leads to quick and decisive focus, and you can adjust the speed of the rack in 3 increments: Fast, Normal, Slow. Fast tends to overshoot and is best avoided, but Normal and Slow lead to very smooth refocusing.

In completely auto (Wide) area mode, the camera does a decent job retaining focus on faces, or other subjects near to the camera and center of the frame (oddly, it didn't perform as well in complete auto mode as the RX100 V, which was generally less jumpy). However, in if you set [Movie] AF Tracking Sensitivity to 'Responsive', it can get distracted, momentarily shooting off to the background or a foreground element. This behavior continues even in the camera's 'tap-to-track' mode, possibly due to the subject tracking algorithm momentarily losing the subject. View a demo reel of the camera's video AF capabilities from 1:18 onward in our video below:

Our biggest complaints around video AF are around usability. Many of the focus modes you'll use in stills shooting are unavailable, and you'll have to do some work before you can simply 'tap-to-track' as you can in stills mode. The camera's default behavior when you tap the screen while in 'Wide' (auto) area mode is immensely confusing: you get a flashing 'spot focus' message on screen with no indication of where you've just placed your AF point. What is spot focus? It's essentially a Flexible Spot override with the manual focus ring engaged, similar to the way tapping the screen in Wide mode in stills momentarily switches you to Flexible Spot mode if you had 'DMF' mode active. The idea is presumably that you can tap to refocus during video recording and manually fine-tune the focus, but it's not clear to us why there's no AF point indication and why it can't just be more like stills shooting.

Furthermore, it's remarkably difficult to simply engage tap-to-track, a well-desired feature you'd think would be as straightforward and simple as most competitor brands have made it. On the a6500, you'll have to first enable the 'Center Lock-on AF' function in a menu, since the easier to use and more reliable 'Lock-on AF' area modes are unavailable in video. And when you return to stills shooting, you'll have to remember to disengage 'Center Lock-on AF', as it takes over the touchscreen, meaning you lose the ability to tap to specify an AF point in any Flexible Spot mode. That also means that to get back to 'spot focus' mode in video, you'll also have to disengage 'Center Lock-on AF'.

Much like in its stills mode, the video AF modes really need a complete rethink. However, when you get it to do what you want it to do, performance can be impressive.

Tags: review, shooting-experience, sony"

 

So yes, the Canon DPAF is the best out there as of now. But I am sure in certain circumstances they both have a advantage. Still like the DPAF though better.

 

This review is good also for the A6500. Dan knows his stuff.

http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/12/01/sony-a6500-touch-autofocus-reviewed-it-does-a-better-job-of-focusing-than-i-can-but-thankfully-it-isnt-infallible/

Well unless they improved the 80D lately the older 70D was a better video camera focus wise and dependability wise also. Less DR on the 70D though.

[BenEricson]

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Canon's aren't especially techy, but a lot of people found them sufficient for amateur/v-logging/hobbyist use, and they are said to have the best color science, at least they produce pleasant images.

Better color. This is tech. Pros care about this more than hobbyists. You can bake in color that will look better than most footage you see shot s-log and graded. There are good examples but there a lot more bad examples.

[Twist]

Thanks to you all for taking the time to post such detailed responses, will have a ponder.

[Snowfun]

Have a look at Bloom's take on AF...

http://philipbloom.net/blog/autofocus1/

[Andrew Reid]

On 16/03/2017 at 8:18 AM, Twist said:

Hi All,

I've been a long time still shooter and starting to get into video more, I own the a5100 which is pretty great in terms of AF and the touch screen but now considering adding a canon 70/77/80d.

I was wondering what Canons AF is like compared to the A5100/A6000 in terms of subject tracking and acquisition with moving subjects like people/kids?

Many thanks in advance

It compares well. Much more bullet proof.

The video quality isn't much a step up from the A5100 though, considering they are double and triple the price.

[Twist]

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

It compares well. Much more bullet proof.

The video quality isn't much a step up from the A5100 though, considering they are double and triple the price.

Thanks Andrew, looking into the system as a whole a bit more it seems stabilisation could be an issue with the Canon, I don't want to buy a gimbal and the usm lenses seem to chatter so that leaves the non IS stm primes. Are any of the usm IS lenses quiet enough to use onboard mic? At least Sony have the 35 and 50 OSS.

I see finding a video setup to cover what should be pretty basic stuff is as much of a pita as a stills setup.

[Kisaha]

What do you mean "stabilization could be an issue with the Canon", how the a5100 is better for Canon in that (or any) matter?

Onboard mics are easily affected by even the placement of your hands, AF noise, zoom noise, record terrible sound, those Sonys do not even have a mic input (even a few dozen $ mic would be sound better than the onboard) and the a5100 doesn't even have a shoe mount.

Just stay with the A5100, from your posts it seems like it is the best camera for you, and you do not have to spend more money for buys.

[Twist]

36 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

What do you mean "stabilization could be an issue with the Canon", how the a5100 is better for Canon in that (or any) matter?

Onboard mics are easily affected by even the placement of your hands, AF noise, zoom noise, record terrible sound, those Sonys do not even have a mic input (even a few dozen $ mic would be sound better than the onboard) and the a5100 doesn't even have a shoe mount.

Just stay with the A5100, from your posts it seems like it is the best camera for you, and you do not have to spend more money for buys.

I thought that was quite self explanatory in my comment about the lenses.

Have you used the A5100 or Sony system? Native E mount lenses are silent. Why do I need a shoe mount, I dont plan on using a external mic. Im not filming a blockbuster.

Im trying to gain a better understanding of the Canon system and weighing up pros and cons, how do my posts show a bias to the Sony system? You seem to dislike them though.

[Kisaha]

I just said that from your words it seems like the camera you currently have is the most appropriate for you.

The only auto focus system I have ever used professionally is the one in Canon C100 mark II. I have used the A7ii, A7Sii, a6300, a6500, mainly with EF lenses. The a6500+18-105 combo was the most pleasant (and closer to my style for a hybrid camera).

I don't dislike equipment, it just tools, and those kind of Sony cameras are missing a lot of the things that are important for me; I am not on the target group of these cameras as it seem, not even close..

Blockbusters have audio departments of hundreds of people, amateurs use small external mics, usually on the shoe mount, you asked about internal mics, so I guessed that you care about audio a bit, and this is a very specialized forum, so one expects a more advanced approach.

You should check the Canon M series as well, if you are willing to check Canon cameras they are interesting alternatives (especially the M6, similar experience to your 5100 with the full touch screen controls, but with the gravity of Canon), and you can add a Rode video micro for some extra audio quality (the difference is huge in my opinion). Plus it has an interesting 5 axis stabilization - which is software based 100%!, but it is there, and as I said, the best AF system in industry. 

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

It compares well. Much more bullet proof.

The video quality isn't much a step up from the A5100 though, considering they are double and triple the price.

Considering that the a5100 has Sony's very successful 24 megapixel sensor plus XAVCS, I'd say the Canon is almost certainly a step down in video quality from an a5100 (I owned one).

 

I wouldn't move backwards and hitch your cart  the dying Canon. Either stick with Sony, or buy Panasonic. 

[Twist]

31 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

I just said that from your words it seems like the camera you currently have is the most appropriate for you.

The only auto focus system I have ever used professionally is the one in Canon C100 mark II. I have used the A7ii, A7Sii, a6300, a6500, mainly with EF lenses. The a6500+18-105 combo was the most pleasant (and closer to my style for a hybrid camera).

I don't dislike equipment, it just tools, and those kind of Sony cameras are missing a lot of the things that are important for me; I am not on the target group of these cameras as it seem, not even close..

Blockbusters have audio departments of hundreds of people, amateurs use small external mics, usually on the shoe mount, you asked about internal mics, so I guessed that you care about audio a bit, and this is a very specialized forum, so one expects a more advanced approach.

You should check the Canon M series as well, if you are willing to check Canon cameras they are interesting alternatives (especially the M6, similar experience to your 5100 with the full touch screen controls, but with the gravity of Canon), and you can add a Rode video micro for some extra audio quality (the difference is huge in my opinion). Plus it has an interesting 5 axis stabilization - which is software based 100%!, but it is there, and as I said, the best AF system in industry. 

 

Thanks, I think I misinterpreted your response previously. I don't hate internal mic quality but I do hate the unnatural chatter/grind of lens af. I've used pretty much every system and high end lens for stills but like I said... video options are still fairly new to me so why not learn from more advanced users instead.

 

Sony always seem to cripple a model to add another.... and another. It's a shame but that's the way it goes. 

21 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Considering that the a5100 has Sony's very successful 24 megapixel sensor plus XAVCS, I'd say the Canon is almost certainly a step down in video quality from an a5100 (I owned one).

 

I wouldn't move backwards and hitch your cart  the dying Canon. Either stick with Sony, or buy Panasonic. 

I like Panasonic output and the m43 lens choice but m43 seems to struggle with af.

[OxfordDavid]

I've spent probably too long thinking about the same issue, and should probably just get out there and keep filming more with my 5d3. But in case it helps, to summarise where I got to... accepting there are lots of ways to make great videos, if you want 1) reasonable AF in video 2) acceptable sound from the camera or a hot-shoe mounted mic in a quiet environment, and 3) camera/lens stabilisation without a gimbal, etc then the list is fairly small. Even more so if you want 4k, although it doesn't sound like that is an issue for you?

As others have said looking at Philip Bloom's tests and others, only really the Sony A6500 or Canon 70/80d autofocus (from your list) give reasonable performance. If you go with Canon and want IS and no autofocus noise then the options are small - 18-55 or 18-135 STM/nano-USM lenses. With the Sony you have the option of IS on a zoom, e.g. 16-70 or 18-105, as well as IBIS with the quieter sony primes e.g. 24/1.8 E, 55/1.8 FE (if you can live with focus breathing on the latter) which will give you more options, all while keeping on-camera sound reasonable.

As others have said you could go with a G80/G85, or for more money the OMD EM-1 ii, but neither autofocus nearly as well.

Happy to be disagreed with though - always good to learn!

[hmcindie]

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Considering that the a5100 has Sony's very successful 24 megapixel sensor plus XAVCS, I'd say the Canon is almost certainly a step down in video quality from an a5100 (I owned one).

Nope, the a6100 a5100 etc have the some soft 1080p mode as Canons with moire and worse compression artifacts.

[Twist]

2 hours ago, OxfordDavid said:

I've spent probably too long thinking about the same issue, and should probably just get out there and keep filming more with my 5d3. But in case it helps, to summarise where I got to... accepting there are lots of ways to make great videos, if you want 1) reasonable AF in video 2) acceptable sound from the camera or a hot-shoe mounted mic in a quiet environment, and 3) camera/lens stabilisation without a gimbal, etc then the list is fairly small. Even more so if you want 4k, although it doesn't sound like that is an issue for you?

As others have said looking at Philip Bloom's tests and others, only really the Sony A6500 or Canon 70/80d autofocus (from your list) give reasonable performance. If you go with Canon and want IS and no autofocus noise then the options are small - 18-55 or 18-135 STM/nano-USM lenses. With the Sony you have the option of IS on a zoom, e.g. 16-70 or 18-105, as well as IBIS with the quieter sony primes e.g. 24/1.8 E, 55/1.8 FE (if you can live with focus breathing on the latter) which will give you more options, all while keeping on-camera sound reasonable.

As others have said you could go with a G80/G85, or for more money the OMD EM-1 ii, but neither autofocus nearly as well.

Happy to be disagreed with though - always good to learn!

I seem to be getting to the same conclusion tbh, I'm a bit of a shallow dof junkie though and standard zoom's in terms of size and speed don't really provide the look I'd like to achieve. I wanted to keep this project under 1.5k but it seems to be going well over that.

M43 is out of the picture tbh. Apsc is as small as I want to go. It doesn't help the 5div is a 1.7x crop in 4k either. A7rii seems the way to go but it's so damn expensive and after years of using Sony I'm not sure I trust then to dump another mount... plus the depreciation. 

Nikon (my choice for stills) is amazing but they are nowhere in terms of AF for video. Their colour science and sensor performance combined with Sony sensors is brilliant though.

[IronFilm]

9 hours ago, hmcindie said:

Nope, the a6100 a5100 etc have the some soft 1080p mode as Canons with moire and worse compression artifacts.

Nope. And you kinda show you don't know what you're talking about when you refer to a non existent camera....  the "a6100"!