AF can be dependant on the lens in question as well.
Without taking into consideration the 5D3, 1DX and D4. I can say that Canon was always faster at locking on the target. Thought it wasn't as accurate as the Nikon. Tracking was in general better on the Nikon bodies.
This after using the following (1d3, 7d, 1d4, 5d2, d300(s),d3, d3s, d700, d800).
The D800 is slightly faster than the D3/D3s from AF perspective.
The only first-hand comparison I have to offer is between 5D II and 5D III. Of course everyone already knows the improvement is huge. I'll just add an illustration.
I have two lenses, 85 1.8 and 35L, that I use constantly, but for both I had concluded wide open use was for emergencies only. I actually decided that I must have substandard copies, because both seemed to need a stop-and-a-half or so to sharpen up acceptably, and more than that to show their potential. As it turns out, it was the camera, the 5D II—which I had been using with only the center autofocus point (and pretty happily, too). But with the 5D III both lenses turn out to be great performers wide open. Now I'm getting tack sharp wide-open results shot after shot, even in low light, with both lenses.
In extreme low light, as 6400 ISO at f/2.8 and 1/4 secs, my D800E beated my 1DX in AIServo mode hands down! It just barely edged it in One Shot mode thought. But in low and normal lightning, my 1DX is the clear winner!
imo, the system that can shoot 50L in all aperture setting at all subject distance and its focal plan always snapped at 1/3 dof which is my 1Ds2 currently handle right now
imo, the system that can shoot 50L in all aperture setting at all subject distance and its focal plan always snapped at 1/3 dof which is my 1Ds2 currently handle right now
hehe, I just picked up a 5Dc that I mounted my 50L on just to test the body and not expecting much precision, but unbelievably it's the most accurately focusing combination I've ever used. Every shot at f/1.2 nails focus, near distance, mid-distance, far distance. I've never seen anything like it. I don't think I'll ever take the lens off the body for fear of changing anything
snapsy wrote:
hehe, I just picked up a 5Dc that I mounted my 50L on just to test the body and not expecting much precision, but unbelievably it's the most accurately focusing combination I've ever used. Every shot at f/1.2 nails focus, near distance, mid-distance, far distance. I've never seen anything like it. I don't think I'll ever take the lens off the body for fear of changing anything
Adam, you just hit a home run like i did with one of my 5d2
The 85L MkII has been a notoriously slow and inaccurate focussing lens. Last night at dusk I shot seagulls in flight with an 85LII and a 1Dx in Ai-Servo. Who knew!
timbop wrote:
Canon and nikon are on par in the same camera category (pro, semipro, enthusiast, etc) with sony and the rest a notch lower in each product segment/tier. A nikon pro body will out-AF an enthusiast canon camera and vice-versa. So the question isn't nikon or canon, it's what your budget is to buy into the best tier and get the lenses you need. The Canon 1dx or nikon d4 would be the "best" assuming you can afford the right lenses for the kind of action you are looking to capture.
that is actually no longer entirely true. when it comes to pure autofocus speed and accuracy and tracking, canon 5d3 will probably match if not beat Nikon d4. for all the complaining that I and others do about canon's dated sensor technology and limited DR, they are better at autofocus in 1dx and 5d3. disclaimer that I have only shot with 5d3 and d600, and can tell you there is not comparison. However, based on all the independent reviews I have seen, canon holds and edge in its new autofocus system.
of course that does not make Nikon's inadequate in any way. its quite good also.
There is a 44 page paper online that helps 1DX owners (and 5D3 too) work through all of the options for autofocus.
Well worth a read! This is incredibly powerful technology, with some related complexities. You can set it to quickly acquire new subjects that enter the frame, or ignore foreground subjects that come in front of something what you are tracking. You can better track straight line subjects, subjects that turn quickly, reverse course, start & stop, etc.
You can tune the priority for the first shot to "focus" or "exposure" (perfect focus, or any image ASAP.) With a different priority for second & subsequent images.
Then I read a pro sports shooters tips on setting up the camera. After 6 months of heavy use, he was getting enough experience to know how best to shoot some sports, but still was just learning.
Incredible stuff! I'm afraid, though, that in 2-3 generations I will have to go back and get a Phd just to set up the camera! You might need 5-6 people to make an image - each a specialist in one subsystem!
One person one focus, one on exposure. One on in camera color balance tuning & bracketing. One to help design the Picture Profile for each shot. One to help determine the best pixels to use on the sensor - full sensor pure color, Bayer Matrix, subsampling angorythms, noise reductions....
mmurph wrote:
There is a 44 page paper online that helps 1DX owners (and 5D3 too) work through all of the options for autofocus.
Well worth a read! This is incredibly powerful technology, with some related complexities. You can set it to quickly acquire new subjects that enter the frame, or ignore foreground subjects that come in front of something what you are tracking. You can better track straight line subjects, subjects that turn quickly, reverse course, start & stop, etc.
You can tune the priority for the first shot to "focus" or "exposure" (perfect focus, or any image ASAP.) With a different priority for second & subsequent images.
Then I read a pro sports shooters tips on setting up the camera. After 6 months of heavy use, he was getting enough experience to know how best to shoot some sports, but still was just learning.
Incredible stuff! I'm afraid, though, that in 2-3 generations I will have to go back and get a Phd just to set up the camera! You might need 5-6 people to make an image - each a specialist in one subsystem!
One person one focus, one on exposure. One on in camera color balance tuning & bracketing. One to help design the Picture Profile for each shot. One to help determine the best pixels to use on the sensor - full sensor pure color, Bayer Matrix, subsampling angorythms, noise reductions....
mttran wrote:
Hard to beat latest canon AF for sure. i don't mind to have one
It is an amazing system. They solve problems I never knew I had!
I was in college for "Fine Art" photography when auto ficus first started to appear on mainstream SLR's. The Canon AT1 for example. I remember ** strongly** feeling like auto focus was cheating, and that no ** real** photographer would use auto focus.
Much less auto exposure, which was just coming out in the AE-1!
I guess it challenged our egos to think that "we" really weren't that accomplished just because we knew the technical.
As always, content is everything. But really amazing tools we have today to help us. I can create more high-quality images -and prints - from a single day shoot today than I probably did in 4 years of college. Getting 2-3 OK prints from 3 rolls of B&W film was an expensive, laborious process.
mmurph wrote:
It is an amazing system. They solve problems I never knew I had!
I was in college for "Fine Art" photography when auto ficus first started to appear on mainstream SLR's. The Canon AT1 for example. I remember ** strongly** feeling like auto focus was cheating, and that no ** real** photographer would use auto focus.
Much less auto exposure, which was just coming out in the AE-1!
I guess it challenged our egos to think that "we" really weren't that accomplished just because we knew the technical.
As always, content is everything. But really amazing tools we have today to help us. I can create more high-quality images -and prints - from a single day shoot today than I probably did in 4 years of college. Getting 2-3 OK prints from 3 rolls of B&W film was an expensive, laborious process.
- we are still "important". The better gear today is a great help in getting faszinating pictures. But it is not doing them. Images without or bad composed content keep to be boring images, how crisp they look or how perfect they are exposed by the used camera.
Ralph Conway wrote: - we are still "important". The better gear today is a great help in getting faszinating pictures. But it is not doing them. Images without or bad composed content keep to be boring images, how crisp they look or how perfect they are exposed by the used camera.
True, true, true!
I posted this on another forum, in response to a newer photog who wanted to use only Zeiss manual focus primes on his 5D3 for stills & video (that is why the El Mariachi reference):
"I started with all manual, B&W only, a purist. I even mixed my own developers from scratch!
But as a 20+ year pro, my 24-70 stayed on my camera about 85% of the time, even though I had at least 14 mostly "L" lenses in my cabinet.
There is "theoretical" perfect, and there is day to day utility. Don't become too obsessed about the technical.
In the end, content is much more important!
High quality is a given. But quality without content is dead boring. Great content will get you a contract like Robert Rodriguez for El Mariachi. Because the needed technical skills can be taught, or easily bought - it is trivial in the end.
Have fun, relax, experiment and learn! Make images, look at them. Find what excites you in your images, make more of those. Repeat = a career."
Nikon D4/D800 wins for some of these while The Canon D1 X /5D III wins for some.
Depending on what you value most, one camera might have a very small advantage, but they are pretty close. Its noth something I would base a buying decision on, since they are both supurb.
