bobby350z wrote:
Would be nice if people shared more some shots and at higher res too.
When it comes to assessing resolution (and noise, and a few other things) sharing crops from full resolution images is useful. Even better to share crops from a few places in the image — perhaps a crop from the center and one from a corner. Moving up the scale, even more useful than that is to share a link (not posting the actual image here) to a copy of the full image on a different host, so that those who want to investigate a full file can download it separately.
(Displaying super huge images in forums isn't necessary...)
Interesting timing, the DPTV guys mention the false positives of the latest Fuji bodies regarding AF.
Overall consensus seems to be better than old Fuji but still not as dependable as the big 3’s flagships. If you made older Fujis work commercially these would still be an improvement but definitely not as reliable as they should be at this point.
I think they said it nicely. It is not that Fuji is bad but the other major players, Canon, Sony and Nikon are just well ahead and it doesn't change with the latest Fuji release. I am not sure why this is the case. My suspicion is that internal hardware is not the top notch affecting software performance improvements. I have nothing to back this and could be totally wrong.
bobby350z wrote:
I think they said it nicely. It is not that Fuji is bad but the other major players, Canon, Sony and Nikon are just well ahead and it doesn't change with the latest Fuji release. I am not sure why this is the case. My suspicion is that internal hardware is not the top notch affecting software performance improvements. I have nothing to back this and could be totally wrong.
There's certainly nothing hardware wise that should hold back the XHS2, so my gut feeling is that Fuji is just not great on the software/algorithm side. It's certainly not their bread and butter like it is Sony's. That the XHS2 (stacked low res) and XH2 (non stacked higher res) are seemingly close in AF performance should tell you that the S2 is the body that isn't fully optimized, and the only explanation to me is the software layer.
If you approach the XH2 like the high res body it is and don't try to shoehorn it into an action camera, the AF seems perfectly fine for what it is.
My experience with Fuji X-H2S was basically the same as you have here. The AF always wants to drive toward the background and can’t ever just stay put in continuous AF regardless of whether it’s in eye AF or single point. It essentially is like shooting a DSLR for stationary or slow moving subjects. Interestingly, it could capture 40 sharp frames of my dog sprinting at me but my wife holding my baby walking slowly toward me was essentially impossible. Even standing still. You basically see the AF shoot back behind the subject constantly before correcting.
Fuji has a problem with their AF-C algorithms. Usable for action but not for slow subjects imho.
Jesse Evans wrote:
My experience with Fuji X-H2S was basically the same as you have here. The AF always wants to drive toward the background and can’t ever just stay put in continuous AF regardless of whether it’s in eye AF or single point. It essentially is like shooting a DSLR for stationary or slow moving subjects. Interestingly, it could capture 40 sharp frames of my dog sprinting at me but my wife holding my baby walking slowly toward me was essentially impossible. Even standing still. You basically see the AF shoot back behind the subject constantly before correcting.
Fuji has a problem with their AF-C algorithms. Usable for action but not for slow subjects imho. ...Show more →
I've seen these impressions echoed quite a bit. People love to point to the dog type scenario to "prove" that Fuji has finally matured, but that's the edge case. Most of the time you're taking the other type of photo. This is what frustrates me to no end about Nikon as well. You can have one of the easiest scenes ever devised and a Fuji and Nikon will suddenly become braindead and eat glue while a Canon or Sony are having no issues.
RoamingScott wrote:
There's certainly nothing hardware wise that should hold back the XHS2, so my gut feeling is that Fuji is just not great on the software/algorithm side. It's certainly not their bread and butter like it is Sony's. That the XHS2 (stacked low res) and XH2 (non stacked higher res) are seemingly close in AF performance should tell you that the S2 is the body that isn't fully optimized, and the only explanation to me is the software layer.
If you approach the XH2 like the high res body it is and don't try to shoehorn it into an action camera, the AF seems perfectly fine for what it is....Show more →
It maybe but I think if it was software only, they would have hired some right folks and had it on par with Canon/Sony a while back. I think that Fuji pays quite a bit for sensors which aren't developed by them. Canon/Sony have in house advantage. That means rest of the hardware, ram, processors etc inside Fuji may not be the latest high end stuff but a gen or two behind say Sony. That could easily explain issues with the AF. Again I am not sure if someone has done teardown to see what's inside.
in the television/monitor world only very few players make the OLED/LCD panels, the rest either buy from them either the generic version or order custom versions. this is true when Nikon and or fuji order from sony or other manufacturers. this by no means comprises the rest of the system. in case u have not noticed, fuji has been very successful with both the aps and medium format systems
bobby350z wrote:
It maybe but I think if it was software only, they would have hired some right folks and had it on par with Canon/Sony a while back. I think that Fuji pays quite a bit for sensors which aren't developed by them. Canon/Sony have in house advantage. That means rest of the hardware, ram, processors etc inside Fuji may not be the latest high end stuff but a gen or two behind say Sony. That could easily explain issues with the AF. Again I am not sure if someone has done teardown to see what's inside.
These forum discussions are always a little bit interesting…and confusing to know what to make of it. Has Fuji improved it’s AF or not? And of course, everyone’s opinion is different based on their POV, experience level, needs, etc. Are they better than other camera manufacturers? Probably not…don’t care since I don’t own them and don’t plan to.
I’m just going to report that I picked up the X-T5 a couple of days ago, have shot a couple HS soccer games (that’s my bag…I’m a photography teacher and a dad, not a pro, but I’ve shot hundreds of games for years with Fuji). And compared to the XH1 and XT3 (not compared to SONY/NIKON/CANON etc) it’s much improved. Now, I don’t use the Face/Eye focus for sports…I’ve never found that to be as reliable for action. I use Zone focusing and the AF-C Custom Set 2 (the one with the Cheetah) for soccer. (I’d be curious actually what other people use…?) Anyway, the two things that stick out for me in terms of improvement are MUCH faster and surer acquisition of focus on target (yay). And more positive results when I look them over in editing later. Not perfect, still some misses, but fewer misses than before…far fewer, and I’d say usually the misses are (as usual) my fault.
Anyway, just thought I’d chime in with a user report. Make of it what you will. Carry on…
cdgerston wrote:
These forum discussions are always a little bit interesting…and confusing to know what to make of it. Has Fuji improved it’s AF or not? And of course, everyone’s opinion is different based on their POV, experience level, needs, etc. Are they better than other camera manufacturers? Probably not…don’t care since I don’t own them and don’t plan to.
I’m just going to report that I picked up the X-T5 a couple of days ago, have shot a couple HS soccer games (that’s my bag…I’m a photography teacher and a dad, not a pro, but I’ve shot hundreds of games for years with Fuji). And compared to the XH1 and XT3 (not compared to SONY/NIKON/CANON etc) it’s much improved. Now, I don’t use the Face/Eye focus for sports…I’ve never found that to be as reliable for action. I use Zone focusing and the AF-C Custom Set 2 (the one with the Cheetah) for soccer. (I’d be curious actually what other people use…?) Anyway, the two things that stick out for me in terms of improvement are MUCH faster and surer acquisition of focus on target (yay). And more positive results when I look them over in editing later. Not perfect, still some misses, but fewer misses than before…far fewer, and I’d say usually the misses are (as usual) my fault.
Anyway, just thought I’d chime in with a user report. Make of it what you will. Carry on…...Show more →
It is better , that's for sure. Is it Sony good , probably not , maybe the previous generation. Forums are good for extreme opinions , reality is the loudest mouths here have never shot with any of the cameras they are arguing about. Their decision is based on the opinions of others. Things have improved as you have noticed , I have noticed also. Still don't think eye AF is as good as Sony , but zone focusing with eye AF works well, guess it depends what you are shooting / conditions / lighting / lenses . Edit: and AF settings
cdgerston wrote:
These forum discussions are always a little bit interesting…and confusing to know what to make of it. Has Fuji improved it’s AF or not? And of course, everyone’s opinion is different based on their POV, experience level, needs, etc. Are they better than other camera manufacturers? Probably not…don’t care since I don’t own them and don’t plan to.
I’m just going to report that I picked up the X-T5 a couple of days ago, have shot a couple HS soccer games (that’s my bag…I’m a photography teacher and a dad, not a pro, but I’ve shot hundreds of games for years with Fuji). And compared to the XH1 and XT3 (not compared to SONY/NIKON/CANON etc) it’s much improved. Now, I don’t use the Face/Eye focus for sports…I’ve never found that to be as reliable for action. I use Zone focusing and the AF-C Custom Set 2 (the one with the Cheetah) for soccer. (I’d be curious actually what other people use…?) Anyway, the two things that stick out for me in terms of improvement are MUCH faster and surer acquisition of focus on target (yay). And more positive results when I look them over in editing later. Not perfect, still some misses, but fewer misses than before…far fewer, and I’d say usually the misses are (as usual) my fault.
Anyway, just thought I’d chime in with a user report. Make of it what you will. Carry on…...Show more →
Good to know that. I used to shoot my kids baseball with XT-1. It took me a while but for person coming at me, I was surprised that the AF was pretty good. When I say that I mean as good if not better than Canon 5dmk3/300mm f2.8 IS I (my main system at the time). Over the years, AF systems have gotten much better but so do people's expectations. Now a days one should be able to nail a fast walking person at f1.2 f1.4 with 90-95% success rate.
bobby350z wrote:
Good to know that. I used to shoot my kids baseball with XT-1. It took me a while but for person coming at me, I was surprised that the AF was pretty good. When I say that I mean as good if not better than Canon 5dmk3/300mm f2.8 IS I (my main system at the time). Over the years, AF systems have gotten much better but so do people's expectations. Now a days one should be able to nail a fast walking person at f1.2 f1.4 with 90-95% success rate.
Worse feeling to have is shooting something important and having to second guess the AF. Many situations have no do over…miss the shot and just keep on walking.
Is there a consensus that the eye/face detect really doesn’t work on these new Fuji bodies? I’m using the X-T5 with the new prime lenses and am getting nothing in focus, even with my subject standing still and looking straight at the camera, with continuous and single. It registers and follows the eye perfectly with the little green box, but if I want it in-focus I have to use manual.
For non-people it works well for an obvious subject on a dull background, but if there’s texture to the background it will often choose that instead. So I’m using manual focus a lot.
My guess is reported problems with the eye autofocus are due to problems with the settings. I am real happy with mine. Low light, fast kids and dogs…no problems. It's the first camera I have owned where I find I can use the eye autofocus for family gatherings. I usually start out with a custom zone setting (2or 6 ), watch my shutter speed, and stay below 10 frames per second or use single shot. I have not used the recent Sony cameras but I can say it's more useful than my Z6.
…
joyc wrote:
My guess is reported problems with the eye autofocus are due to problems with the settings. I am real happy with mine. Low light, fast kids and dogs…no problems. It's the first camera I have owned where I find I can use the eye autofocus for family gatherings. I usually start out with a custom zone setting (2or 6 ), watch my shutter speed, and stay below 10 frames per second or use single shot. I have not used the recent Sony cameras but I can say it's more useful than my Z6.
…
OK this is helpful, I’ll look at these zone things.
Well I'm still having no luck with eye and face focusing. I've tried every setting I can think of, but to get it right I have to stop down to 4.5 and/or manual override. And for that kind of work it makes more sense to just use my little Ricoh with it's max aperture of 2.8.
Started with Fuji when Fuji XT-1 came out.