Canon EOS R7 and R10 have released...

[zerocool22]

15 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

This is not exactly back on topic but semi-related I guess. When sorting by new for R7 videos on YouTube I keep seeing a bunch of what I guess are fake comparison videos featuring slightly differently processed stills purportedly from two different cameras. There are a few accounts that do this, using the same template, and views have been racking up over the last few days. Is this a thing now? It looks like AI or bot created content.

Been so for years, super annoying. Not sure why those accounts dont get removed.

[Django]

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

It is a little unusual for me to work on a film without a 1st AC who doesn't have a wireless focus system. 

As they've been so cheap, that even "no budget" indie/student film sets have in recent years started to almost always be using wireless focus now. (at least the ones I'm on)

But even in the days before cheap wireless follow focus systems, and even before gimbals were common, it would still be doable for the steadicam op on low/no budget shoots to work with a manual focus lens without a 1st AC pulling focus. They'd just prefocus and then take care to always keep the same distance between themselves and the focus. 

I'm well aware of all this. Worked with steadicam operators on BMD cams and Nikon AIS glass up until about 2016. Every single shoot these days where we hire a crew, even super low budget: 1st AC is on wireless focus system, sure. This isn't news to me, and I'm not debating any of that either.

However, surely you realise that outside of the film crew bubble you're in, there is an entire world of amateur, hobby, influencers and pro solo operators. I'd even say that is the main target of most of these mid-tier hybrid cameras.

And while one can get around contrast based AF or MF, that doesn't negate the fact that latest-gen AF can be a strong asset for certain applications. Just like IBIS. Nobody waited for IBIS to shoot videos with their DSLRs, but we're all glad to have it standard on-board now on our MILCs.

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

That's kinda the point, the latest Panasonic MFT (or L Mount cameras) have autofocus which puts the Sony FS7 to shame! 

Well you'd hope so, the FS7 came out in 2014 ! The main point here though is that Canon, Nikon or Sony autofocus (FX3/FX6/FX9) puts Panasonic DFD AF to shame.

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Eh, is pretty much the common norm for all discussions about a new Panasonic release to have a "but their autofocus..." and about how much better DPAF is

(not saying you do it! But you'd agree it is a common tangent found on Panasonic discussions)

I don't think it gets compared to Canon's DPAF specifically. The reality is that all mirrorless systems expect Panny have more or less caught up with DPAF. They are by far in last position as far as AF. So sure, AF is a major concern there, I'd even say it's the main hurdle keeping many of us from switching over to that system. That said, it seems like a portion of Panny users have simply accepted their fate and work around it. That's cool, doesn't mean its not a deal breaker to the other majority.

 

[MrSMW]

15 hours ago, Django said:

That said, it seems like a portion of Panny users have simply accepted their fate and work around it.

That is pretty much the sum of it for this user…

I’d also like a little less size & weight which is the second gripe many have with the S line and in an interview I read with one of the head honchos over at Panny a few months back, he basically stated they were working on that.

Whether that meant a further development in the S5 line or that the S1 line might go on a slight diet, remains to be seen, but I can imagine that even just a 10% reduction combined with greatly improved AF would be a bit special.

I also think these days, they wouldn’t have to worry too much about spending money on marketing, - just build the thing, put it out there and if it’s ‘a bit good’, the hype train will market it for them.

[IronFilm]

16 hours ago, Django said:

Well you'd hope so, the FS7 came out in 2014 !

The point was that for many years (until quite recently) the FS7 was the mainstream camera for all low/medium budget shoots. And is still very relevant and used today in 2022. The specs are still 100% relevant and the benchmark to compare against. 

Against that benchmark then Panasonic mirrorless AF does very well indeed.

16 hours ago, Django said:

That said, it seems like a portion of Panny users have simply accepted their fate and work around it

Is that statement also true for all the many FX6/C300mk2/C300mk3/FX9/C500mk2 users who don't own any autofocus lenses, are they also "accepting their fate"? Oh wait, no they're not, they're choosing to not use autofocus. Maybe it is less of a big deal than you think it is. 

[Django]

6 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I’d also like a little less size & weight which is the second gripe many have with the S line and in an interview I read with one of the head honchos over at Panny a few months back, he basically stated they were working on that.

For sure, when I tested out the S line when it first came out, the size/weight was a huge turn off. Something about the ergonomics I didn't gel with. The L lenses are also pretty big/hefty, not sure lighting up the bodies won't create other balance issues. 

On the flip side, those that miss DSLRs and their rugged construction probably embrace that.

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

The point was that for many years (until quite recently) the FS7 was the mainstream camera for all low/medium budget shoots. And is still very relevant and used today in 2022. The specs are still 100% relevant and the benchmark to compare against. 

Again, I am that FS7 user that still uses one today in 2022. This is obvious to me.

Doesn't mean I don't wanna upgrade to a FX6/FX9, their advanced AI assisted AF (V2 firmware) being a major selling point. 

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Is that statement also true for all the many FX6/C300mk2/C300mk3/FX9/C500mk2 users who don't own any autofocus lenses, are they also "accepting their fate"? Oh wait, no they're not, they're choosing to not use autofocus. Maybe it is less of a big deal than you think it is. 

I'd say its a very strong minority of FX & C-line users that don't own any AF lenses. Again its one of the main appeal of both systems. And by the way, I am speaking from my perspective as an actual FX & C-line user, not hearsay. 

Maybe let's just agree to disagree on such broad off-topics.

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, Django said:

Maybe let's just agree to disagree on such broad off-topics.

Fair enough, and besides we're probably just now talking in circles and splitting hairs. 

I don't disagree that the AF in the FX6 and FX9 is nice, and useful at times for certain cases. Just I am saying that people attack Panasonic for their AF performance too eagerly, and overstate the overall importance of AF. 

So yeah, we possibly don't broadly differ in opinion radically so, just in degrees. Or maybe I'm turning into a grumpy old man, "it was good enough in the past, it is good enough for you now!"

[Django]

28 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Fair enough, and besides we're probably just now talking in circles and splitting hairs. 

I don't disagree that the AF in the FX6 and FX9 is nice, and useful at times for certain cases. Just I am saying that people attack Panasonic for their AF performance too eagerly, and overstate the overall importance of AF. 

So yeah, we possibly don't broadly differ in opinion radically so, just in degrees. Or maybe I'm turning into a grumpy old man, "it was good enough in the past, it is good enough for you now!"

It's all good, we're all entitled our perspectives & opinions. And perhaps indeed splitting hairs.

Panasonic is not for me for various key reasons but I respect the company & its users. I'm not attacking them, its pretty much factual that their AF system is lagging behind competition. They excel in other domains though like DGO sensor & ProRes in GH6 which is fantastic.

Now wether or not AF is important is definitely subjective. I try and not use it as a crutch, it's not magic neither. It's actually always off by default and I dedicate an on/off toggle button. I have a whole DPAF technique I've developed. Its really more of a safety net for challenging situations. 

I'm actually not much in favour of the "dumbing-down" of skill brought by tech. fortunately I learned a few things the "hard way" i.e. pre-digital. And I still keep myself in check by doing full manual shoots and 35mm film photography whenever possible. I love shooting shoulder mount on the FS7, I love that real ENG look over super steady floating gimbal look for example. But I'm not fighting tech either. Its all about finding that right balance that works for you.

 

[webrunner5]

Well, they have Face and EYE detect down pretty damn well anymore. I think you can trust them to work. Total AF in scenes, sure that is still risky no doubt. But if you locked off there are some pretty good focus pull aids in both mirrorless and smartphones now. 

Itis getting easier to think about AF now than it has ever been. The days of needing 4 people to operate a camera are nearing an end. And it is only going to get better.

But if you are doing a lot solo I think there are some camera brands that I would not consider because of a lack of decent AF now matter what they have in them elsewise. The days of being on sticks all the time are gone also.

[kye]

4 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Well, they have Face and EYE detect down pretty damn well anymore. I think you can trust them to work. Total AF in scenes, sure that is still risky no doubt. But if you locked off there are some pretty good focus pull aids in both mirrorless and smartphones now. 

Itis getting easier to think about AF now than it has ever been. The days of needing 4 people to operate a camera are nearing an end. And it is only going to get better.

But if you are doing a lot solo I think there are some camera brands that I would not consider because of a lack of decent AF now matter what they have in them elsewise. The days of being on sticks all the time are gone also.

The thing never discussed in these debates is "who".  Who should it focus on?

Very early on in the AF game you could program your camera with photos of your family and then it would look for those faces specifically and focus on them, not whatever face happened to be most convenient at the time.

I've never heard features like this mentioned in these debates.

Sure, AF from Canon / Sony are phase detect, which means that it can focus on the object it chooses for you.
Sure, AF from Canon / Sony are face / eye detect, which means that it can focus on the face or eye it chooses for you.

I've used some of the worst AF systems ever made and had many many shots ruined by them.  As often as not, they were ruined because it focussed on the wrong thing or wrong person.

AF is great if you're trying to keep a talking head in-focus on 100mm at F1.2, so I guess it's good enough for professional videographers, but as someone who shoots home and travel content, it's no-where near sophisticated enough for my needs.

[webrunner5]

Oh get real ,if you have a later Sony or Canon camera and use Face or Eye detect it will lock on them even if they jump out of the frame and come back. Hell even my Xperia Pro-I does the same. Works with animals also. 

Maybe you just need to buy an iPhone 13 Pro, sell the GH5 and all your troubles will be gone. Sounds like this is all way too complicated at your advanced age. 😁 If I can do it you must Really be old.

 

[Django]

3 hours ago, kye said:

The thing never discussed in these debates is "who".  Who should it focus on?

Very early on in the AF game you could program your camera with photos of your family and then it would look for those faces specifically and focus on them, not whatever face happened to be most convenient at the time.

I've never heard features like this mentioned in these debates.

Sure, AF from Canon / Sony are phase detect, which means that it can focus on the object it chooses for you.
Sure, AF from Canon / Sony are face / eye detect, which means that it can focus on the face or eye it chooses for you.

I've used some of the worst AF systems ever made and had many many shots ruined by them.  As often as not, they were ruined because it focussed on the wrong thing or wrong person.

AF is great if you're trying to keep a talking head in-focus on 100mm at F1.2, so I guess it's good enough for professional videographers, but as someone who shoots home and travel content, it's no-where near sophisticated enough for my needs.

OK lets talk about this. First of all like I've said: AF isn't magic. There is skill involved in using an AF system, no matter what kind. Especially with challenging scenes, subjects and fast glass. AF is there to help but you should always be in control of it.  DPAF absolutely allows you to choose who's in focus, that's absolutely crucial and the whole beauty of it. The most common method is simply to move your AF box with either joystick or touch & drag gestures or just tap to focus on your subject and it will not only lock but track. R3 can even do Eye-AF selection right inside the EVF (a tech developed on EOS 7 DSLR). Point being that you have total control on who it focuses on. That's absolutely essential and always the job of a solo operator. You can also do rack pulls or even allow DPAF to guide you using rack focus tools to manually pull in between subjects. Here is a break down on the old DPAF:

There are a bunch of settings and tricks to make it even more effective. And DPAF2 brings faster, better settings.

It isn't at all limited to talking head content either, its actually most practical when R&G handheld or on gimbals doing dolly shots. Not limited to pro usage neither, use it for travel, family, hobbies, whatever.

Most challenging things to track is action/sports, animals & kids. There are AF tracking modes for each.

Now it isn't fail proof but if you know what you're doing, your hit rate and motion shot creativeness will improve tenfold over unreliable contrast AF. 

That said never go full retard and let the camera on Af autopilot. I always have one finger on disable Af and the other hand on the focus ring when using AF on a paid job. It rarely disappoints though and is so much less stressful than punching in to check focus every time your subject moves or coming home with those unexpected OOF shots.

Like anything, your mileage may vary and I have tremendous respect for manual focus which will always be what I prefer when conditions allow it. DPAF can be almost too perfect, the MF Guide mode is brilliant for that though, especially as it works on manual-only cine glass.

[FHDcrew]

Yeah letting the camera go fully auto is a bad idea. I like the aforementioned hybrid, guided AF approach. For example on my Z6 the auto area AF doesn’t always focus on or do what I want. Sometimes I just have to intervene….

[FHDcrew]

Crazy idea. Since the Canon R10 has HLG 10 bit support, could we in theory bring the footage into Davinci resolve and do a very accurate color space transform into C-log 3?  That would mean the camera is log capable!  
This guy did this with Panasonic S1 HLG before V-log was freely available:

 

[kye]

1 hour ago, Django said:

OK lets talk about this. First of all like I've said: AF isn't magic. There is skill involved in using an AF system, no matter what kind. Especially with challenging scenes, subjects and fast glass. AF is there to help but you should always be in control of it.  DPAF absolutely allows you to choose who's in focus, that's absolutely crucial and the whole beauty of it. The most common method is simply to move your AF box with either joystick or touch & drag gestures or just tap to focus on your subject and it will not only lock but track. R3 can even do Eye-AF selection right inside the EVF (a tech developed on EOS 7 DSLR). Point being that you have total control on who it focuses on. That's absolutely essential and always the job of a solo operator. You can also do rack pulls or even allow DPAF to guide you using rack focus tools to manually pull in between subjects. Here is a break down on the old DPAF:

There are a bunch of settings and tricks to make it even more effective. And DPAF2 brings faster, better settings.

It isn't at all limited to talking head content either, its actually most practical when R&G handheld or on gimbals doing dolly shots. Not limited to pro usage neither, use it for travel, family, hobbies, whatever.

Most challenging things to track is action/sports, animals & kids. There are AF tracking modes for each.

Now it isn't fail proof but if you know what you're doing, your hit rate and motion shot creativeness will improve tenfold over unreliable contrast AF. 

That said never go full retard and let the camera on Af autopilot. I always have one finger on disable Af and the other hand on the focus ring when using AF on a paid job. It rarely disappoints though and is so much less stressful than punching in to check focus every time your subject moves or coming home with those unexpected OOF shots.

Like anything, your mileage may vary and I have tremendous respect for manual focus which will always be what I prefer when conditions allow it. DPAF can be almost too perfect, the MF Guide mode is brilliant for that though, especially as it works on manual-only cine glass.

Good post and good points made, and nice to see appetite for a more nuanced discussion around it.

I see a number of elements in the overall set of functionality:

1. being able to reliably focus on a thing (this is where PDAF has the clear advantage)
2. being able to recognise objects that might be good to focus on (face detect, eye detect, animals, etc) and also being able to recognise that there might be candidates that are quite out-of-focus
3. being able to choose the right subject from the faces / animals detected
4. being able to know what to do when an object tracking is lost (focus on someone else, the background, or hold focus?)
5. being able to adjust the focus racking speed to be context-sensitive
6. being able to anticipate focus on an object before that object is in frame

The PDAF vs CDAF debate only applies to #1 - literally none of the other elements are related to it at all.

Obviously PDAF is much better at number 1 than a non-dedicated focus puller, and this is what CDAF systems get criticised for (either not doing it at all, going the wrong way, or pulsing while tracking).

Modern cameras are all getting much better at #2 with face-detect being pretty reliable and ubiquitous at this point.

MILC/cinema cameras seem to have zero capability to do #3, which is why you have outlined the use of the joystick and touchscreen and other techniques, and I agree with you that if someone practices a bit and gets familiar with their camera then this is probably a good enough way to control the AF.

#4 is only just being added to new cameras so I think is probably "cutting edge".  Apart from the "face AF only" mode not being on all cameras, the ability to change the focus mode on the fly is probably absent or tedious (maybe I'm wrong here but I doubt that it's as easy as the controls for #3.

#5 is adjustable deep in the menus of most cameras, but changing it on the fly is likely to be cumbersome / prohibitive, and the camera automatically doing it is completely absent from all cameras and will be a long wait.
This is particularly relevant because there's always a balance to the camera not getting jumpy when something moves through the shot but also not having a huge lag when the thing to focus on actually does need to change.

#6 isn't available in any real capacity from cameras

Anyone who focuses manually will be worse at #1 than PDAF systems, and have full and complete capability on 2-6.  Mostly the conversation only talks about #1 with sideways references to 2-3 and no acknowledgement the others exist.

In terms of aesthetics, I greatly prefer to have imperfect #1 if the rest are on-point.  In fact, as someone who spends most of the time behind the camera on my own family videos, the way I use the camera (and edit) has proven to be a significant presence in these videos, and focus pulling is a significant contributor to that aesthetic.

[kye]

25 minutes ago, FHDcrew said:

Crazy idea. Since the Canon R10 has HLG 10 bit support, could we in theory bring the footage into Davinci resolve and do a very accurate color space transform into C-log 3?  That would mean the camera is log capable!  
This guy did this with Panasonic S1 HLG before V-log was freely available:

 

"HLG" isn't a standard as-such, more like a concept.  There are multiple standards within HLG (rec2020 and rec2100, maybe more) but the HLG from the camera may not be an implementation of one of those.

I've tried this on the GH5 and found it wasn't exact, but was a "good enough" match to the rec2100, but I'm not doing this at any professional level.

It's easily testable though - just do a set of over/under exposures on a reference scene and see if matching the levels in post results in a match or not.  You can try converting from various standards and see if any of them get the shots to match.  
Its very easy in Resolve to put a reference exposure over the top and set the blending mode to "Difference" and you can clearly see the errors.  IIRC on the GH5 the errors were strange colour shifts in the shadows and highlights and some of the more saturated colours, but was a pretty good match in the mids and lower saturation.  I tried compensating with curves etc but it was messy.

[webrunner5]

A Nikon D3 and a Canon 1d mk III had predative focus years and years ago. How do you think sports photographers got a lot of those shots, sure they knew what was probably going to happen, but the cameras began getting faster and smarter also. DSLR cameras back in the day were not as backward as people think, not the top end ones. That is why they cost 6K even years ago when you could buy a Rebel for 250 bucks.

All these new top end cameras other than Panasonic for some dumb ass reason seem to think AF might be a good idea. Trouble is Panasonic is so far behind even if they do get religion it will be Pagan like compared to the rest that have a huge head start. And waiting 4 to 5 years before you come out with a new body is pretty damn stupid as fast as tech is changing. Death Wish I guess.

Sony did the same stupid shit with the A7s mk III.

[webrunner5]

19 minutes ago, kye said:

"HLG" isn't a standard as-such, more like a concept.  There are multiple standards within HLG (rec2020 and rec2100, maybe more) but the HLG from the camera may not be an implementation of one of those.

I've tried this on the GH5 and found it wasn't exact, but was a "good enough" match to the rec2100, but I'm not doing this at any professional level.

It's easily testable though - just do a set of over/under exposures on a reference scene and see if matching the levels in post results in a match or not.  You can try converting from various standards and see if any of them get the shots to match.  
Its very easy in Resolve to put a reference exposure over the top and set the blending mode to "Difference" and you can clearly see the errors.  IIRC on the GH5 the errors were strange colour shifts in the shadows and highlights and some of the more saturated colours, but was a pretty good match in the mids and lower saturation.  I tried compensating with curves etc but it was messy.

It's a big war and the winner gets the spoils, ergo being able to have the patents and then licensing it. Sony has probably been the biggest, try to set the standard, Whore over the years.

[Chrille]

Has anyone here actually used the R7? Specs work for me but my main question is wether it's fun to use!

 

[IronFilm]

43 minutes ago, Chrille said:

Has anyone here actually used the R7? Specs work for me but my main question is wether it's fun to use!

 

B&H says it is still in the pre-order stage:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1707911-REG/canon_eos_r7_mirrorless_camera.html

Don't anybody here has shot with it if it hasn't shipped yet. 

[BTM_Pix]

On 5/31/2022 at 5:35 AM, kye said:

6. being able to anticipate focus on an object before that object is in frame

#6 isn't available in any real capacity from cameras

I had it on my P4K over two years ago.

The first two examples are regular in frame face detect AF but the third is what I call "Wide AF" where the detection happens outside of the host camera's field of view.

It also does all of the other things on your list and may well come to other people's cameras soon....