Panasonic AF moves ahead of SL2 with firmware update

[SJH]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As we were all expecting Panasonic is issuing a firmware update across all of it’s full frame camera’s with improved AF, I hope Leica follow for the SL2 which still remains a wonderful camera but now is placed bottom in terms of AF performance in certain scenario’s https://www.dpreview.com/news/0915264785/panasonic-firmware-shares-more-features-across-s1-s1r-s1h-and-s5 

[SJH]

I’ve recently being doing a lot of shooting with my M10R and M10M and it’s made me think that Leica really need to address the relatively poor AFC in the SL2. The M’s are perfect tools for the purpose they were designed for but the SL2 competes in a crowded market and having used it since it came out all over the world, from the Caribbean to the Alps, the AF is now lagging the market by some margin only 1 year in. Now to be clear if you need A9ii performance then get an A9ii that will ensure you get the shot so I’m not asking Leica to somehow magic this out of thin air, my expectations are that they should though ensure v3 firmware gets the SL2 in the middle for high end mirrorless camera’s without continuously having to adjust the AF profiles etc.

In the end this would mean more SL2 sales for Leica and most likely Q2 sales - in the Q2 forum there is a similar thread around how weak face detect/AFC etc is and how frustrating this is becoming for more and more photographers. Whether we like it or not Sony hit upon two things that define what the space wants today and that is top quality sensors (the SL2/Q2 has this) and market leading AF, everything else about Sony’s lineup is actually relatively poor e.g. menu’s, handling, EVF’s (excluding the A7IIIs and A7RIV) etc. For that reason I really don’t like using the Sony’s compared to the SL2 as it has so many market leading assets but having seen what Panasonic are doing, even for the S1 and S5, it’s highlighted the SL2’s relative weakness in this area.

So please Leica address this soon in v3 as we don’t want to see the SL2 to be condemned as having terrible AF for all time on forums, reviews and YouTube for hyperbole purposes when it’s not actually far off from being pretty good.

[Dr. G]

I have both the a9ii and the SL2.  Yes, the AFC performance of the a9ii is way ahead of the SL2, but with phase detect AF and the sampling rate it is to be expected.  Eye AF is flawless with the a9ii.

That being said, the colors from the a9ii are nowhere near what I’m seeing in my SL2 files (RAW for both) and I pretty much only take the a9ii out for wildlife and nature photography...right now.  There are no events to shoot under the current COVID situation where I need both good AFC and good low light performance.    I have always wanted to use the SL2 in that situation, but the a9ii still is much better for grabbing those shots.  The trade off is that I have to do far more work with the files in post.  Plus, so have to carry a separate set of lenses - so not ideal.  
 

I’m hoping a Leica will update the firmware for the SL2 to provide a better shooting experience with moving subjects and also provide a way to see if eye-AF is locking through the EVF.  I may be in the minority, but I’m hoping the SL2-S has both better AFC and cleaner high ISO files (which would most likely come from a lower resolution sensor) for night and lower light events.  

Edited November 7, 2020 by Dr. G

[helged]

I am optimistic regarding improved AFc in SL2. Firstly due to the collaboration with Panasonic, but also because of the powerfull Maestro III processor (SL and S3 use Maestro II). And finally, Leica is aware of the problem.

That being said, those dependent on fast, reliable AFc shooting should probably look at other brands. I have used Nikon D5, D500, D850 for some years for wildlife photography. The AFc is brilliant (D5 in particular), but I never fell in love with the files. So most of the Nikon gear is now sold... 

Edited November 7, 2020 by helged

[nicci78]

7 hours ago, SJH said:

in the Q2 forum there is a similar thread around how weak face detect/AFC etc is and how frustrating this is becoming for more and more photographers. Whether we like it or not Sony hit upon two things that define what the space wants today and that is top quality sensors (the SL2/Q2 has this) and market leading AF,

Sadly Q2 has old Maestro II. Panasonic newest firmware for better DFD AF required brute force. Something that Maestro III certainly can. But Maestro II could not. 
 

If you want master AF performance. Just avoid Q2. Its AF is slower than 5 years old Q. 
 

Q and SL were sharing the same Maestro II processor. Which is fine for 24MP, five years ago. 
But for a weird reason. Q2 kept the old Maestro II and SL2 get the newest Maestro III.  
Q2 is clearly underpowered with 47MP burden. 

Edited November 7, 2020 by nicci78

[SJH]

Thanks for your replies and I agree with all of your comments, funny enough I sold my Q2 alongside my M10 to fund the M10R and M10M. Whilst the Q2 can produce stunning files why o why only use the old Maestro II, as people are discovering even after the v2 update there's not much headroom for improvement. So my Q2 got squeezed out by the SL2 and M10R as it really just sat in the middle ground and the SL2 felt so much more responsive. The Q2 isn't really pocketable anyway so I just found myself taking the SL2 and 35mm APO.

Coming back to the SL2 it seems many people do take the view (as I do) that if you want to nail BIF and extreme sports action then really you need a Sony, Canon or Nikon. However, given the MIII processor there is plenty of headroom so that v3 firmware can make it a really good all round camera rather than the one with the worst AFC, eye/tracking in the full frame market from £2 to £5k. It seems we'll all be delighted if this happens soon

[cabe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I believe that the SL2, like Panasonic cameras, will also receive the firmware update that will make autofocus more performing.

The SL2 is an amazing camera, if they improve the AFc, it could become perfect!😉

🤞 

[nicci78]

Just release SL3 with on sensor phase detect AF combined with contrast detect. 
 

No need for Panasonic to drag Leica to hell, just to prove that they can make DFD AF great. Eventually, just by shear brute force. S5 is getting better. But it will never reach A9 territory.
That’s why it is game over for Panasonic. Please admit defeat and adopt phase detect ASAP. 
 

You cannot wait for S1/S1R Mark III or SL4 to do so. It must happened with the next round of cameras. 
Even future SL2-S should adopt phase detect, if not too late. 

Edited November 7, 2020 by nicci78

[LocalHero1953]

Sports and BIF are specialist areas where Leica has never tried to compete. Everyone knows that you're better off with a Nikon or Sony for this. I'm sure it would be nice to have better AF in the SL2 - but it's hardly going to drag Leica to hell😁! Is your middle name Hyperbole, @nicci78? 

[XRayGuy]

I agree with so much of what has been written on this thread, but object only to the oft-repeated notion that Nikon is still competitive in AF.  I have not tried a Z6/7 mark II but the first gen does not have competitive autofocus.  In fact, my SL2 is superior.  My A7rIV absolutely is top-notch for AF-C and eye AF, and by reports it sounds like the Canon R5/R6 are near Sony-level performance, but unless Nikon has improved significantly with the second gen Z6/Z7 they are not in the same conversation.  One thing I could not stand is that it was reasonably fast but just frequently inaccurate.  I always feel like when the SL2 tells me it is in focus, it actually is - that is huge.

At the end of the day, I think nicci78 is right that ToF is not coming soon enough and it is time to add phase-detect AF.

[SrMi]

3 hours ago, XRayGuy said:

I agree with so much of what has been written on this thread, but object only to the oft-repeated notion that Nikon is still competitive in AF.  I have not tried a Z6/7 mark II but the first gen does not have competitive autofocus.  In fact, my SL2 is superior.  My A7rIV absolutely is top-notch for AF-C and eye AF, and by reports it sounds like the Canon R5/R6 are near Sony-level performance, but unless Nikon has improved significantly with the second gen Z6/Z7 they are not in the same conversation.  One thing I could not stand is that it was reasonably fast but just frequently inaccurate.  I always feel like when the SL2 tells me it is in focus, it actually is - that is huge.

At the end of the day, I think nicci78 is right that ToF is not coming soon enough and it is time to add phase-detect AF.

Hmmm, my SL2 has worse AF-C than my Z 7. My a7rIII has equal or slightly worse AF-C than my Z 7. My Sony A9, Nikon D850, and D5 are a different league (AF-C).

Interestingly, Olympus M1.3 uses CDAF for AF-S, and it is really fast.

The issue with OSPDAF is that occasionally it can cause image degradation (seen on a7x, a9x, Z 6, Z7, GFX100). In the case of GFX100, the degradation caused by OSPDAF prevents owners from using 16-bit mode. For Leica, image quality is paramount. I am not surprised that they are reluctant to consider OSPDAF.

 

[caissa]

It is quite obvious that we users expect that the AF sw will be improved. I see no need for this constant repetition of the same topic. If some one is clever enough to design this camera then he is surely clever enough to know that. Probably long before anybody else.

Of course I’d love to see an improvement, but I hate to read the same old story all over again. Boring. Fed up.

Buy another camera if this is so hellish for you. (As someone said lately, it’s time to wear the big boy pants.)

[Slender]

I really, really do appreciate Nicci78 deep insights into the industry trends, enjoy learning about behind the scene politics and all that gravitates around precise definitions, market shares...etc...

But my oh my, I do wonder how it must feel to spend all that time complaining on multiple forums about cameras he doesnt own... - Except Q2 and CL - already looking out for "the graals of perfections" like M12 and SL4 packed with Sony tech, Apple UX and democratic prices.... that he wont bother buy anyway . Time to get yourself an M3, a nifty fifty, some rolls of 400TX and a walking stick 🤠🍁 🍂 🏕️ and get some air, shot some shots, you know.

I don't mean to offend, take it with a pinch of salt. It's time I go out, too, and use this flawed, retarted SL2 of mine for some assigment...

[Siran]

17 hours ago, SJH said:

Thanks for your replies and I agree with all of your comments, funny enough I sold my Q2 alongside my M10 to fund the M10R and M10M. Whilst the Q2 can produce stunning files why o why only use the old Maestro II, as people are discovering even after the v2 update there's not much headroom for improvement. So my Q2 got squeezed out by the SL2 and M10R as it really just sat in the middle ground and the SL2 felt so much more responsive. The Q2 isn't really pocketable anyway so I just found myself taking the SL2 and 35mm APO.

Coming back to the SL2 it seems many people do take the view (as I do) that if you want to nail BIF and extreme sports action then really you need a Sony, Canon or Nikon. However, given the MIII processor there is plenty of headroom so that v3 firmware can make it a really good all round camera rather than the one with the worst AFC, eye/tracking in the full frame market from £2 to £5k. It seems we'll all be delighted if this happens soon

Hi SJH. I’m not very technical I’m afraid but found your comment about the MIII processor having headroom interesting. What does that actually mean - could AF be significantly improved on the existing hardware?

 

 Thanks

[BernardC]

17 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Eventually, just by shear brute force. S5 is getting better. But it will never reach A9 territory.
That’s why it is game over for Panasonic. Please admit defeat and adopt phase detect ASAP.

Whatever Sony's secret sauce is, it carries the unwanted baggage of sub-par image quality. Sure, their AF is almost as fast as a traditional SLR (and the cameras that have this feature are as expensive as top-end SLRs), but clearly that's not enough: they are loosing market share at an alarming rate. This is not what their competitors aspire to. You will tell me that Panasonic's share is much lower, but keep in mind that they just released their first mass-market product. They deliberately entered the market at the high end.

I appreciate the strength of your convictions, and you've certainly made your position clear over dozens of similar posts, but consider this: AF speed is no longer the market differentiator that it was five or ten years ago. We have reached the point of sufficiency, just like the "megapixel wars" became irrelevant when every brand had 20-24 MP on offer.

Each brand has a "thing" that they are slightly better at. For Sony it's speed (if you disregard the SLRs that actual professionals use). For Panasonic it's feature-depth and video quality. For Canon, it's all-around competence, versatility, and sturdiness. For Leica it's ultimate image quality (especially for colour). I don't follow Nikon much, but they seem to have released quite a few showcase lenses lately.

Unlike you, I am not convinced that any of these brands would benefit from suddenly adopting a competitor's strategy. If anything, they would lose their own customers, and not gain any of their competitor's customers. That's not to say that Panasonic's AF won't get any faster; it surely will, and that's why "speed" is not a winning long-term strategy (as with mass-market cars, no one cares if yours is faster than theirs).

[XRayGuy]

As much as I would like to see the SL2 AF improved, I am of the camp that believes the current AF is good enough for my needs and that any issues related to it are far overstated.  As I said above, it is middle-of-the-pack in my mind which is fine given that at the end of the day I have the SL2 for ultimate image quality.

That said, phase detect striping in the newest Sony cameras is to me essentially not visible and not a real world issue.  The banding in the Z cameras was more of a problem but perhaps improved in the mark II versions.

[ynp]

18 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Sports and BIF are specialist areas where Leica has never tried to compete. Everyone knows that you're better off with a Nikon or Sony for this. I'm sure it would be nice to have better AF in the SL2 - but it's hardly going to drag Leica to hell😁! Is your middle name Hyperbole, @nicci78? 

The reliable Eye AF is very beneficial for “people photography”. 

[LocalHero1953]

22 minutes ago, ynp said:

The reliable Eye AF is very beneficial for “people photography”. 

I agree. But I find it satisfactory in the SL2 already!

[SJH]

20 hours ago, Siran said:

Hi SJH. I’m not very technical I’m afraid but found your comment about the MIII processor having headroom interesting. What does that actually mean - could AF be significantly improved on the existing hardware?

 

 Thanks

Hi Siran - as a summary yes the SL2 has the latest tech with the MIII processor but the Q2 utilized the MII from the previous generation. So in simple terms whilst they share the same sensor and menu’s Leica has more headroom to extract better AF performance (and other functions) from the SL2 as the processor is significantly more powerful. The Q2 may well be at it’s limits in terms of AFC, face detect etc whilst the SL2 has some way to go with firmware updates.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[cabe]

 

3 hours ago, SJH said:

...the SL2 has some way to go with firmware updates.

that's what I believe / hope too

Edited November 9, 2020 by cabe