Juha Kannisto wrote:
Cosina's Voigtländer lenses for E-mount and X-mount have "built-in distance encoders to support camera models equipped with 5-axis in-body image stabilization utilizing distance information to the subject to compensate for camera shake", but their Nikon Z and Canon RF lenses don't have those distance encoders and they only support 3-axis IBIS. Not sure how the focus mechanism will know the exact exit pupil distance in that case.
This is a very interesting and suprising thing! I myself am interested in Voigtländer lenses. These are my most used manual focus lenses and thus I compared their usage on different systems.
I was not aware of the fact reported above, that Juha has pointed out (no distance encoding for Z and RF Voigtländers).
But comparing the manual focus experience of the same Voigtländer lenses on a Sony A7r5 and the corresponding Nikon body sometime early this year I personally prefered the experience on the Sony (before someone screams: I want to point out that this was a personal experience).
But so much that I posted a differing view to the title of this thread. I want to be very clear that this is my personal observation and that others may have different valid approaches to mf and whose requirements may not yet be met by Sony. My oposition is not been against these requirements but against the broad statement that Sony has the worst manual focus experience per se.
Steve Spencer has been very helpful in listing the very varying aproaches to manual focus that exist. They are all valid. Depending on the approach one uses the Sony aids are very good (possibly better than) or lacking compared to other companies.
Oct 22, 2024 at 12:15 PM
Previous versions of Knut.'s message #16668309 « Does Sony have the worst manual focus assist »
