Jump to content

Leica please give the SL2 the S5 AF & AFC updates


SJH

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 9/6/2020 at 5:04 AM, tom0511 said:

 if one wants good af-c, than rather buy a Nikon D500 or d6 or Canon d1x, instead of a mirrorless camera. Maybe the Sony A9 is also in this league.

Howeber I find for anything except hard core action/sports the sl2 does a pretty good job in regards of AF.

I have an A9 and a friend the EOS 1DX3. In most situations the A9 leads due to its stunning eye AF. It locks on like an angry chihuahua. Initial lock seems to be faster on the Canon by a hair. And the silent shutter in the A9 is so very very good.

I don't shoot enough sports to justify it so it's going. Maybe the SL2 will be upgraded to be good enough for my uses. If not I have an S1R that will be.

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

The processor’s processing power and the source code architecture plays a big part in the Contrast AF calculation time which in turn affects the AFC tracking reliability.

In many of the S5 review, much is talked about the annoying background pulsing during video application in AFC mode of the S1/R/H and SL2. The feedback is mainly about this improvement from S5.

There is also mention about crop mode of video, higher frame rate and shutter speed improving the Autofocus tracking capability which all matters with processing power and other functions that require processing from the processor at the same time that seems to compromise the AF sustainability over tracking capability.

There are also reviews giving feedback on picture taking AFC tracking improvements based on the S5’s new algorithm comparing to S1. Now does the SL2’s Maestro lll processor has a higher processing power than Panasonic’s Venus processor is everyone’s guess. So assuming their processing power is identical, than the SL2 should benefit from the new algorithm that will be introduced to the S series later.

My own feedback on using the APSC mode with 90-280mm to enlarge the view in the EVF gives me much better AFC tracking results. Now it could be due to an enlarged subject that makes AF tracking more stable or that also means providing more processing power to AF which I’m uncertain.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to confirm: You say you switch to aps-c and then AFc gets better. You mean faster or simply more hits ? (Whatever the reason is for this behavior ...).  Or you can better hold the camera steady because the subject in the EVF is bigger ?

Edited by caissa
Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, caissa said:

Just to confirm: You say you switch to aps-c and then AFc gets better. You mean faster or simply more hits ? (Whatever the reason is for this behavior ...).  Or you can better hold the camera steady because the subject in the EVF is bigger ?

Firstly, bigger subject wrt the AF box frame  turns ‘green’ easier & faster. 
Tracking subject frame by frame, I used to get one frame sharp followed by the next frame soft in focus and the following frame sharp and the pattern repeats in the Original SL. With the SL2, soft focused frame rates reduced ( and subject size matters as small subjects tend to get soft focus frames more). 
With APSC mode selected. Tracking results improved to 90% sharp with approximately set AF profile.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sillbeers15 said:

Firstly, bigger subject wrt the AF box frame  turns ‘green’ easier & faster. 
Tracking subject frame by frame, I used to get one frame sharp followed by the next frame soft in focus and the following frame sharp and the pattern repeats in the Original SL. With the SL2, soft focused frame rates reduced ( and subject size matters as small subjects tend to get soft focus frames more). 
With APSC mode selected. Tracking results improved to 90% sharp with approximately set AF profile.

Thanks! This is something that I have never been thinking about - but that I will, for sure, try...

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 4 Stunden schrieb sillbeers15:

Firstly, bigger subject wrt the AF box frame  turns ‘green’ easier & faster. 
Tracking subject frame by frame, I used to get one frame sharp followed by the next frame soft in focus and the following frame sharp and the pattern repeats in the Original SL. With the SL2, soft focused frame rates reduced ( and subject size matters as small subjects tend to get soft focus frames more). 
With APSC mode selected. Tracking results improved to 90% sharp with approximately set AF profile.

I had a similar experience: I got the S5 with 20-60 for a little "test", 30 minutes. AFC setting was done from the Panasonic man. I took it to a crowded crossroad; cars and cyclist in different speed from different directions. For me, the Pana perfomance was ok but not great, with some faults. For a comparison I had my SL2 with TL 18-56 with me. It fits in size and output (20mp). It has the latest firmware. I seldom use AFC and was absolutely surprised how flawless tracking worked in this situation. Maybe not in the first league for, maybe swallows in flight, but really better than S5. I didn't think that it was because APS-C, but it seems so...

Edited by justru49
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In all the mirrorless cameras that are equipped with Phase detection AF as commonly said actually has a phase detect + contrast detect hybrid AF and not just phase detect along. 
The reason being phase detection is good to directing the focusing direction way faster than contrast detection which lacks the ability to know the correct focusing direction until it checks & compare image contrast therefore creating a back & forth hunting situation that slows down focusing compared to phase detect AF. However phase detect lacks focusing accuracy, therefore a combination of phase detection for bringing the focus point close to destination quickly & let contrast detection take over to complete the focusing task became the main stream focusing mechanism for most mirrorless cameras. However it means that selected sensor cells will give up image creation function and turn into providing focusing function for phase detection AF. This commonly causes banding problem sometimes encountered in images produced. So Panasonic choose to apply their proprietary methodology of DFD using stored data images of specific lens character to make up the direction & speed to bring focusing close to designation. Judging from real world application, it is not any slower than phase detection. 
I am writing this to share and learn on various AF methodology’s pros & cons as till date I constantly come across many individuals including camera reviewers making statements on Phase detection AF more superior than Contrast detection AF.

I see the issue of current contrast detection AF system lacking in specifically the AF continuous tracking reliability as the main cause of weakness comparing to the best class phase detection & contrast detection hybrid AF in the following:

1. Locking on focus for smaller subjects;

2. In focus tracking reliability;

3. Continues AFC Drive speed (6fps limit).

With the introduction of a completely revamped AF algorithm source code found in Lumix S5 that addressed above points 1 & 2 ( according to several camera reviews) but yet to determine how good it gets comparing against the best in class, I can confidently say that the AF software and camera processing power are the factors that determine how good a contrast detection AF can be produced. Can it break the 6fps limit on AFC with future firmware upgrades to the 10fps normal will yet to see ( Panasonic GH5 did not have such a problem of slower than normal drive speed of AFC).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the really good discussion on this and many key points have come up, firstly let me explain that I started this because I really do like my Leica's and I want them to be successful with the SL2 and future releases. I continue to use my M4 and M10R, my SL2 is for the heavy lifting. Also I appreciate that many people just use manual focus with M lenses or AFS and single point, however, the market is now really offering very good AFC and once the S models in the Panasonic range get the update next quarter I see the rankings as follows regarding AFC ability:

First tier - Current Sony A7 & A9 series along with the Canon R5 and R6

Middle tier - Nikon, Fuji XT4/X-Pro3, Canon RP & R series 

Lower middle tier - Panasonic S series but rising and close  to the middle tier come December

Bottom of the class - Leica SL2 

I don't think this is a good place to be on the AFC front in a crowded full frame space (unlike the M's) with a camera costing £5k and SL lenses at £4k a pop , the opportunity for Leica and Panasonic is to move into that Middle Tier realistically and thus the Lower middle and bottom become redundant with Sony & Canon's R5 & R6 occupying the premier league. With the M series Leica has the field to themselves and Sony's are an acquired taste ergonomically, so the SL series could rely on Leica stalwarts feeling it was 'special'. It still is but Canon have shown the world what they can do again and the R5 is built well, with good menu's and ergonomics; this spells trouble for Leica with the SL2 because equally the Canon RF lenses are very high quality. You can see people saying well I have my M's, I don't like Sony but hey Canon are now here with the R5 for slightly less. It can shoot high resolution shots, 20 fps, has market leading tracking, a decent flip screen for video (if and when I want to do this), plus it's built pretty well and the menu's are far better than Sony's mess.

Many people reluctantly migrated to Sony from their Canon's when they appeared to give up on a decent 5D Mk3 replacement but they still missed the quality and feel of the Canon and L glass, myself included. Don't get me wrong every time I shoot with my SL2 it gives me a buzz but really do I have to put up with the 'wobble' in AFC, my £4k Summicron APO grinding away, pointless Pre-focus option in AFS and having to adjust my tracking profiles for every subject or situation e.g. depth etc. This takes time away from composition and capturing the moment and isn't very 'Leica like'. If you're going to play with Panasonic and use the 'parts bin' I really get that but make sure you at least keep with the innovation within each firmware or camera release in the S series and if you can get on a parr with Nikon and Fuji very soon that's good news for your existing and potential customers, otherwise sadly the SL2 will become even more niche which would be such a shame.

The other helpful pointer that has also come from some of the S5 reviews is that in AFC and tracking it seems better to keep Pre-Focus set to on, in AFS I don't think it matters and it eats battery life as per Jono's excellent review (he switches it off) but by his own admission he doesn't use AFC that much. Jono please correct me if I'm talking nonsense here and you read this!! Thank you all also for the above advice on using APSC mode for better tracking and AFC, I'll give that a go this week.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been a great discussion, and I like your summary, SJH, but having had an S1R briefly before my SL2 I found absolutely no difference in AF performance between the two.  In fact, I feel like the SL2 focuses faster with Leica lenses although admittedly I no longer have the S1R to compare head to head.  Finally, while I like my little X-Pro3, Fuji AF is absolutely at the bottom of this heap. There is a lot to like about Fuji cameras but autofocus is not one of those things.

As it stands now, I rarely use AFC on fast moving subjects and thus have no issues with the AF of the SL2, but I totally understand those that would like to see this improve.

I am pretty optimistic that Leica will release a firmware update with AF improvements, although it will probably come well after the Panasonic update.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally feel that the general sentiment has way underrated the SL2’s AFC capability. The wobble phenomena has no bearing on AFC accuracy and success rate. 
Brush up your familiarity with SL2’s AFC and improve your user skills rather than making comments from your desk alone. I say this as the more I use the AFC functions on the SL2, all the more I find it acceptable to my needs. 
If you’re looking for the the fastest and best AF camera. Go get one and make peace with it instead of looking back at the SL2 with continued dissatisfaction. Certainly there is room for the AFC on the SL2 to improve and I look forward to later firmware updates and future SL3 release. But for the time being, I’m enjoying shooting AF on my SL2.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chaemono said:

On #30, and the S1 focuses faster than the S1R. I had both. It’s the 24 vs. 47 MPx thing. 12 MPx FF cameras focus even faster. 

In theory it makes sense as there is less image processing power drawn by 24MPX vs 47MPX therefore more processing power awarded to AF calculation if both using same processor.

In your experience, you’re referring to faster focusing on stationary objects using AFS or Continuous focusing shots on AFC with better success rates?

Edited by sillbeers15
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 35 Minuten schrieb sillbeers15:

In theory it makes sense as there is less image processing power drawn by 24MPX vs 47MPX therefore more processing power awarded to AF calculation if both using same processor.

In your experience, you’re referring to faster focusing on stationary objects using AFS or Continuous focusing shots on AFC with better success rates?

Faster focusing on stationary objects using AFS. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the various pointers and helpful comments.

As I mentioned at the beginning I don’t think Leica have too much to do so I’m not jumping up and down about a big gap, rather I just want Leica to keep on their toes compared to the competition. Liked the comment about buying the S5 and I might just do that as a ‘hybrid backup body’. Great deal in the UK right now in that you get the grip, spare battery, 20-60 zoom and Sigma 45mm lens all for £2k. Essentially that makes the body about £1k.

Anyhow going back to the central point I’m shooting the hell out of my SL2 and I really do like it, so many pluses that can’t be beaten. I think though we should encourage them to get an AF update out by the new year and that would really be the icing on the cake. Otherwise we might have to wait another 9 months or so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2020 at 1:52 PM, Chaemono said:

Faster focusing on stationary objects using AFS. 

I am more concern about AFC accuracy rates as this is where the performance deviation is greater compared to others.

Leica SL2 & Panasonic S series cameras can only provide half the continuous AFC shooting speed of the normal mirrorless FF cameras. Not that I need my SL2 to shoot faster but it would be good for it to match the average performer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People use cameras in different ways. So I still have a Canon 5DsR that I bought even before the SL. Everybody says how good the Canon R5 is, but I feel no inclination to spend money on it and replace the 5DsR. In my eyes the Canon R5 is just mediocre, with "excellent" on paper performance and a lot of marketing work regarding video. But in the end not worth the money. (for an upgrade)

Whenever the SL2 is not fast enough on AFc I go back to the old 5DsR. It is probably a little slower than the newest Canon gear, but its AF was always more than fast enough for me. And you find in the wildlife fora many examples with it, even of famous "birders". If anything then the rumored Nikon Z8 could be interesting. Nikon AF is usually also very good (better than on this "list", always very precise). Or the Nikon D6 if low light performance is important (much better than anything else here).

So I wait until more people have tested the S5. Until I see people using it for BIF or similar topics. (This list from SJH is just based on marketing nonsense, no real value in it, no substance, only speculation.) I also do not really like to go back to 24 MP (and this is probably the reason for the faster AF). In my eyes it's simply a cheap entry camera. (And the SL2 in APS-C mode is no slouch either).

If the AFc speed had been a problem for me in the last 4 years, then I would never have started using the SL or SL2 and not continued using the 5DsR after more than 4 years now. That Leica has AF now is nice, but not really a reason to use Leica. I think many Leica users decided for it because of other reasons. (A different style.)

 

And regarding statistics and percentage of "hits". In the last 30 years the hit rates were always very low. In the marketing brochures the hit rates are sometimes now even at 100% . That's not the reality (simply ridiculous). When I threw away maybe 90 % of all pictures taken a decade ago, then I usually throw away more than 99% of all fotos (because they are simply not worth keeping) in the last few years. The garbage gets more and more. I am sure you all have similar experiences. The main difference is that now even if you are completely desinterested in a photo subject you sometimes "automatically" get a photo that you would like to keep (just for fun).

Edited by caissa
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, caissa said:

People use cameras in different ways. So I still have a Canon 5DsR that I bought even before the SL. Everybody says how good the Canon R5 is, but I feel no inclination to spend money on it and replace the 5DsR. In my eyes the Canon R5 is just mediocre, with "excellent" on paper performance and a lot of marketing work regarding video. But in the end not worth the money. (for an upgrade)

Whenever the SL2 is not fast enough on AFc I go back to the old 5DsR. It is probably a little slower than the newest Canon gear, but its AF was always more than fast enough for me. And you find in the wildlife fora many examples with it, even of famous "birders". If anything then the rumored Nikon Z8 could be interesting. Nikon AF is usually also very good (better than on this "list", always very precise). Or the Nikon D6 if low light performance is important (much better than anything else here).

So I wait until more people have tested the S5. Until I see people using it for BIF or similar topics. (This list from SJH is just based on marketing nonsense, no real value in it, no substance, only speculation.) I also do not really like to go back to 24 MP (and this is probably the reason for the faster AF). In my eyes it's simply a cheap entry camera. (And the SL2 in APS-C mode is no slouch either).

If the AFc speed had been a problem for me in the last 4 years, then I would never have started using the SL or SL2 and not continued using the 5DsR after more than 4 years now. That Leica has AF now is nice, but not really a reason to use Leica. I think many Leica users decided for it because of other reasons. (A different style.)

 

And regarding statistics and percentage of "hits". In the last 30 years the hit rates were always very low. In the marketing brochures the hit rates are sometimes now even at 100% . That's not the reality (simply ridiculous). When I threw away maybe 90 % of all pictures taken a decade ago, then I usually throw away more than 99% of all fotos (because they are simply not worth keeping) in the last few years. The garbage gets more and more. I am sure you all have similar experiences. The main difference is that now even if you are completely desinterested in a photo subject you sometimes "automatically" get a photo that you would like to keep (just for fun).

Thanks Caissa and you make some very interesting and reasoned points, I think the thing for me is that actually the list is generally validated by the more serious reviews plus for example Nikon users generally feeling that the AFC has been improved significantly in the Z6 & Z7 over the 18 months. Where I was going with this is I could do another list around ergonomics, IQ etc and the SL2 would come out top. However, if you take a look at the DPReview video (I like their stuff) it’s as much about the user experience and the improvement in AFC etc.

So in summary I was really suggesting that if Leica can bring the S5 improvements to the SL2 then that will great for us all but equally it will actually improve the experience of using the viewfinder and hopefully remove the ‘grinding’ from Leica lenses and pulsing in the normally wonderful EVF, on this aspect the SL2 doesn’t confirm to the ‘Leica’ way which was rather central to the original posts if you see what I mean. Now of course if you want the best AFC currently then you’re better off using a D6 or an A9II for example but I’m not really expecting that from the SL2 as like you and many others I didn’t buy it with that expectation. However, the viewfinder experience and ‘noise’ in using a wonderful camera like the SL2 is, I believe, very important to photographers as well as getting a good (not market leading I would stress) AFC hit rate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

May be of interest to some of you:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/0171197083/coming-into-focus-how-panasonic-s-dfd-gamble-may-yet-pay-off

TL;DR: Improvements are there but it's not enough. Panasonic needs more horsepower to make their stubborn choice of DFD-only AF work. In a few years they may be where the competition is right now, if customers haven't left.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, SJH said:

Thanks Caissa and you make some very interesting and reasoned points, I think the thing for me is that actually the list is generally validated by the more serious reviews plus for example Nikon users generally feeling that the AFC has been improved significantly in the Z6 & Z7 over the 18 months. Where I was going with this is I could do another list around ergonomics, IQ etc and the SL2 would come out top. However, if you take a look at the DPReview video (I like their stuff) it’s as much about the user experience and the improvement in AFC etc.

So in summary I was really suggesting that if Leica can bring the S5 improvements to the SL2 then that will great for us all but equally it will actually improve the experience of using the viewfinder and hopefully remove the ‘grinding’ from Leica lenses and pulsing in the normally wonderful EVF, on this aspect the SL2 doesn’t confirm to the ‘Leica’ way which was rather central to the original posts if you see what I mean. Now of course if you want the best AFC currently then you’re better off using a D6 or an A9II for example but I’m not really expecting that from the SL2 as like you and many others I didn’t buy it with that expectation. However, the viewfinder experience and ‘noise’ in using a wonderful camera like the SL2 is, I believe, very important to photographers as well as getting a good (not market leading I would stress) AFC hit rate.

DP review on SL2’s AFC is rubbish! Complaint was only EVF wobbling which does not affect AF success rate at all.

Don’t just read reviews & watch YouTube, go use the camera, play around with AF settings and decide for yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...