p.2 #1 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
SGinNorcal wrote:
How you describe this reminds me of some recent experiences with the 70-300. Often/most of the time, no complaints. But I've noticed on two occasions where my photos of an elk herd were slightly out of focus. The first time, I thought I had let shutter speed drop a little too low. But again last week I experienced it again on the same subject. Good light and good shutter speed, but same result. My theory is that its a low contrast situation, the elk are brown and close to the same color as the grassy brush they are moving in. In the same set of photo's I have birds in flight in excellent focus at 420mm (w/ 1.4) while the elk are blurry. Even those at lower focal lengths don't look as sharp as they should. ...Show more →
Yeah I used to remember back in the old CDAF only days things like a high contrast background stealing focus over a low contrast subject was fairly common. The hybrid PDAF/CDAF cleaned that up but I think it can still happen sometimes, haven't noticed it myself recently though. Gotta be careful if you have the MF override on as well, some of them are really easy to move unintentionally. I haven't noticed any issues with my 16-55 mk1 aside from the issue mentioned above when I used it with CDAF only body, saw it often then.
p.2 #2 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
SGinNorcal wrote:
How you describe this reminds me of some recent experiences with the 70-300. Often/most of the time, no complaints. But I've noticed on two occasions where my photos of an elk herd were slightly out of focus. The first time, I thought I had let shutter speed drop a little too low. But again last week I experienced it again on the same subject. Good light and good shutter speed, but same result. My theory is that its a low contrast situation, the elk are brown and close to the same color as the grassy brush they are moving in. In the same set of photo's I have birds in flight in excellent focus at 420mm (w/ 1.4) while the elk are blurry. Even those at lower focal lengths don't look as sharp as they should. ...Show more →
I have sometimes wondered if low contrast is an issue. I know it was years ago when I used the 55-200 for a travel lens on a XE1. That combo would sometimes simply refuse to focus in low contrast situations at 200mm.
I first started noticing this when I was photography birds wit a Canon FF system side by side with my XT5 and the Fujifilm 100-400. I’m aware of some potential challenges there, especially in those low contrast (often with fog or at twilight) conditions and with moving birds. But I had the problem even in good light and with stationary birds at times. I’d get some sharp images, for sure, but the percentage was much lower than I expected based on my work with the FF system. (And that system, BTW, is not exactly optimized for BIF, to say the least!)
Lower contrast may have been an issue in the last few months — I was in Scotland (and a few other places) where it was often cloudy and rainy. However, when I look at shots I did with the 50-140 the outcome is much more reliable than with the 16-55.)
I’ve also used the two systems side by side in Death Valley several times. Again, I’ve gotten some good stuff with the Fujifilm system there, where I mostly used the 16-55 and the 100-400, including a few that I checked very carefully that have excellent sharpness. Then there are others from the same location (usually in excellent light) where things just didn’t end up fully dialed in. (And for these I was usually using a tripod.)
When everything works, the results are excellent. But…
(And I still only see this with the two zooms. I don’t see it with my Fujifilm primes.)
p.2 #3 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
gdanmitchell wrote:
I have sometimes wondered if low contrast is an issue. I know it was years ago when I used the 55-200 for a travel lens on a XE1. That combo would sometimes simply refuse to focus in low contrast situations at 200mm.
I first started noticing this when I was photography birds wit a Canon FF system side by side with my XT5 and the Fujifilm 100-400. I’m aware of some potential challenges there, especially in those low contrast (often with fog or at twilight) conditions and with moving birds. But I had the problem even in good light and with stationary birds at times. I’d get some sharp images, for sure, but the percentage was much lower than I expected based on my work with the FF system. (And that system, BTW, is not exactly optimized for BIF, to say the least!)
Lower contrast may have been an issue in the last few months — I was in Scotland (and a few other places) where it was often cloudy and rainy. However, when I look at shots I did with the 50-140 the outcome is much more reliable than with the 16-55.)
I’ve also used the two systems side by side in Death Valley several times. Again, I’ve gotten some good stuff with the Fujifilm system there, where I mostly used the 16-55 and the 100-400, including a few that I checked very carefully that have excellent sharpness. Then there are others from the same location (usually in excellent light) where things just didn’t end up fully dialed in. (And for these I was usually using a tripod.)
When everything works, the results are excellent. But…
(And I still only see this with the two zooms. I don’t see it with my Fujifilm primes.)...Show more →
What type of shots are you taking? With a 16-55 and, I'm assuming landscape apertures it would be odd to have a shot totally blurry due to focusing issues? Can you be more specific as to the issues and types of shots you are experiencing it under?
p.2 #4 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
rbf_ wrote:
What type of shots are you taking? With a 16-55 and, I'm assuming landscape apertures it would be odd to have a shot totally blurry due to focusing issues? Can you be more specific as to the issues and types of shots you are experiencing it under?
Most likely focus beyond infinity. A Fuji AF-S problem. Image is not out of focus, but overall soft with no critical sharpness anywhere. Can happen with every lens, though I haven't seen it with my 50f2 or 90f2.
p.2 #5 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
rbf_ wrote:
What type of shots are you taking? With a 16-55 and, I'm assuming landscape apertures it would be odd to have a shot totally blurry due to focusing issues? Can you be more specific as to the issues and types of shots you are experiencing it under?
I”m not especially looking for an analysis of what might be causing the problem, but these are mostly landscape shots where the issue shows up… though also in some handheld urban shots.
I would typically use f/5.6 as a default aperture on my APS-C system.
As mentioned, the issue seems specific to two lenses, the 16-55 and the 100-400. I don’t see it on the 50-140. And it is inconsistent — I will sometimes get quite sharp shots and sometimes get inexplicable fuzziness.*
- - -
* To anyone who is interested, feel free to steal “Inexplicable Fuzziness” as the name of your new band.
p.2 #6 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
Nielk Mike wrote:
Most likely focus beyond infinity. A Fuji AF-S problem. Image is not out of focus, but overall soft with no critical sharpness anywhere. Can happen with every lens, though I haven't seen it with my 50f2 or 90f2.
If nothing in the image is in focus, the image is out of focus. I saw this crop up more than I was comfortable with on the 10-24.
Wouldn't you know switching brands fixed the issue completely, like so many other parts of the Fuji experience
p.2 #8 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
RoamingScott wrote:
Wouldn't you know switching brands fixed the issue completely, like so many other parts of the Fuji experience
I'm not the type to jump brands often especially over what I see as a minor issue. For me it means that I'll keep using the 70-300 as I do, a lightweight telephoto that usually does the job and doesn't bother me to be in my pack for miles of not being used. If I'm intentionally going out to take telephoto shots, I have two choices that are better, just a massively larger form factor. That said, I wouldn't mind understanding the issue enough to minimize it.
p.2 #9 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
Low contrast causes problems with AF, in early systems it was only Contrast Detect, my Nikon F801 got on OK with zebras but plain coloured surfaces were hopeless,. Even Phase Detect likes to have something to lock on to. Cho9se something with detail at least to focus on.
If nothing was sharp in the picture, for any of several reasons, you wouldn't press the button would you?
p.2 #10 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
SGinNorcal wrote:
I'm not the type to jump brands often especially over what I see as a minor issue. For me it means that I'll keep using the 70-300 as I do, a lightweight telephoto that usually does the job and doesn't bother me to be in my pack for miles of not being used. If I'm intentionally going out to take telephoto shots, I have two choices that are better, just a massively larger form factor. That said, I wouldn't mind understanding the issue enough to minimize it.
I'm not specifically advocating for anyone to switch, but for me, it was an annoyance that cropped up more than I liked, was kind of hard to catch in the field, had me overshooting in case it happened, and simply doesn't happen on my main system now.
p.2 #12 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
RoamingScott wrote:
If nothing in the image is in focus, the image is out of focus. I saw this crop up more than I was comfortable with on the 10-24.
Wouldn't you know switching brands fixed the issue completely, like so many other parts of the Fuji experience
Unlike with focus beyond infinity, normal OOF images have some area that is in focus - only not he one that was intended to be in focus. But focus beyond infinity just renders an overall slightly soft image that only reveals that softness upon closer inspection. Nothing is in critical focus, neither near, nor far, nor anywhere in between. The Focus Distance Limiter function can mitigate that - but only if one uses lenses that are at infinity focus when the distance indicator is at infinity. Fuji zooms are not par-focal. So at the wider angle, those lenses have infinity focus before the distance indicator is at infinity (often at 5m or 10m) The 10-24 is a prime example of that problem and I sold it because of that.
p.2 #13 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
SGinNorcal wrote:
I'm not the type to jump brands often especially over what I see as a minor issue. For me it means that I'll keep using the 70-300 as I do, a lightweight telephoto that usually does the job and doesn't bother me to be in my pack for miles of not being used. If I'm intentionally going out to take telephoto shots, I have two choices that are better, just a massively larger form factor. That said, I wouldn't mind understanding the issue enough to minimize it.
To minimize the issue: 1) Use manual focus; 2) Point the camera at something not too far away (say 100m); 3) Confirm focus with focus peaking; 4) Use the Distance Limiter Function (but that doesn't work with zoom lenses)
p.2 #14 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
gyoung143 wrote:
Low contrast causes problems with AF, in early systems it was only Contrast Detect, my Nikon F801 got on OK with zebras but plain coloured surfaces were hopeless,. Even Phase Detect likes to have something to lock on to. Cho9se something with detail at least to focus on.
If nothing was sharp in the picture, for any of several reasons, you wouldn't press the button would you?
Gerry
Problem is: Focus Beyond Infintiy - You don't see the overall softness in the EVF. Only if you zoom in. So when you take the image, all seems fine. Only upon closer inspection at the PC do you notice the lack of critical focus.
p.2 #15 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
Nielk Mike wrote:
Unlike with focus beyond infinity, normal OOF images have some area that is in focus - only not he one that was intended to be in focus. But focus beyond infinity just renders an overall slightly soft image that only reveals that softness upon closer inspection. Nothing is in critical focus, neither near, nor far, nor anywhere in between. The Focus Distance Limiter function can mitigate that - but only if one uses lenses that are at infinity focus when the distance indicator is at infinity. Fuji zooms are not par-focal. So at the wider angle, those lenses have infinity focus before the distance indicator is at infinity (often at 5m or 10m) The 10-24 is a prime example of that problem and I sold it because of that....Show more →
I spent more time behind a technical camera focussing on a screen than you'vehad hot dinners, with no infinity hard stops, no focus scales etc etc. I know what focus beyond infinity looks like. It's not the big deal you keep harping on about. The image rapidly loses all sharpness, it's very obvious
You should stop trying to teach your grandmother to suck eggs and look to your own technique.
p.2 #16 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
Normally, if I have any difficulty with AF, I reach for the focus ring. But in this specific case, I was following a large bull elk walking through brush with the 70-300 and a 1.4x handheld at or near max zoom. I needed AF in this case as I had my hands full tracking the subject. I thought he was in focus and they are close enough that I didn't notice on the fly. He was generally walking towards me so I kept shooting as the distance got shorter (still at least 150 yards). The crazy part is that periodically, I would switch over to birds nearby and take a quick snap before moving back to the bull. All of the birds are sharply focused despite being much smaller and some moving. The big difference is contrast of the birds against sky vs. brown fur against brown/earth tone brush. I'm not too proud to own my mistakes, I just can't figure out what I did in this case.
p.2 #17 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
SGinNorcal wrote:
Normally, if I have any difficulty with AF, I reach for the focus ring. But in this specific case, I was following a large bull elk walking through brush with the 70-300 and a 1.4x handheld at or near max zoom. I needed AF in this case as I had my hands full tracking the subject. I thought he was in focus and they are close enough that I didn't notice on the fly. He was generally walking towards me so I kept shooting as the distance got shorter (still at least 150 yards). The crazy part is that periodically, I would switch over to birds nearby and take a quick snap before moving back to the bull. All of the birds are sharply focused despite being much smaller and some moving. The big difference is contrast of the birds against sky vs. brown fur against brown/earth tone brush. I'm not too proud to own my mistakes, I just can't figure out what I did in this case....Show more →
I'm with you on owning my mistakes. I'll admit to them here in the forums when I make them. I also have enough experience to know avoid things like too slow shutter speed (and to recognize the specific characteristics of the blur that causes) and to go slow and be careful about getting AF confirmation.
I've just spent some time look closely at other photographs from this same trip made with the prime I use for urban/street shooting and they are in good focus. Different lens and different subjects, so the next step is likely to, again, put the camera and two suspect lenses on the tripod, find a straightforward AF target, and test them in varied situations.
I did this once before with the 100-400 and had some surprisingly soft images. Again, the strange thing is that sometimes — also on the tripod — images with that lens can be very sharp.
In most cases the OOF is small enough that people would not notice it in a 13x19 print and likely larger, and if I shared screen-size jpgs it would not be visible at all.
p.2 #18 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
gyoung143 wrote:
I spent more time behind a technical camera focussing on a screen than you'vehad hot dinners, with no infinity hard stops, no focus scales etc etc. I know what focus beyond infinity looks like. It's not the big deal you keep harping on about. The image rapidly loses all sharpness, it's very obvious
You should stop trying to teach your grandmother to suck eggs and look to your own technique.
My friend, calm down! Focus beyond infinity with Fuji just sets the focus slightly beyond, resulting in a soft, but not blurry image. That makes it so difficult to detect while shooting. It happens quite often in landscape photography, the more since Fuji AF seems to have a more difficult time than, say, Sony to focus on vegetation in the distance.
p.2 #19 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
Nielk Mike wrote:
My friend, calm down! Focus beyond infinity with Fuji just sets the focus slightly beyond, resulting in a soft, but not blurry image. That makes it so difficult to detect while shooting. It happens quite often in landscape photography, the more since Fuji AF seems to have a more difficult time than, say, Sony to focus on vegetation in the distance.
You speak as of it's a general problem, which I doubt, but a personal obsession of yours.
p.2 #20 · BACK TO FUJI with my 2nd X-H2-based system
gyoung143 wrote:
You speak as of it's a general problem, which I doubt, but a personal obsession of yours.
It is a general problem. I have tested it with all my lenses and cameras. The 50f2 and 90f2 mostly fine. But the rest shows focus beyond infinity on all bodies from the X-E3 to the X-T5 and X-E5. X-Pro2 and 3, X-T3 - all of them. If I expect a camera like the X-E5 not to focus beyond infinity - is that an obsession? Or just a justified expectation based on how my Sony cameras perform?
If some one looks at an image that was focused beyond infinity on the phone or PC screen w/o magnification, that slight softness most likely will go unnoticed. But if you work on an image and crop, you will notice. Could it be that you just don't crop much?
Also, what is the point of spending big time on the sharpest and most resolving lenses if the camera ruins it by not achieving critical focus? When I use a camera, I don't want to think about AF. I just expect the camera to do it right. Like my Sony RX1R M3. Is that an obsession or justified expectation?
What makes it so hard for you to just acknowledge the focus beyond infinity issue and expect Fuji to fix it? Instead you always try to downplay the issue to the point where you even doubt my findings.
