PDAF likely to replace DFD-CDAF on SL3

[sillbeers15]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, John Smith said:

This doesn't prove your statement, "Leica did non decide anything. They just picked what Panasonic had to offer on the AF front, which was DFD and no PDAF."  Leica's decision to implement Panasonic's AF doesn't mean it didn't decide anything. 

I’m not sure how well you know Leica’s AF. Very simple check you can do to find out Leica & Panasonic’s AF are identical in specs. On AFC, continuous AF only works on medium drive speed. Also compare the number of AF points. Both SL2 & S1R are the same. So both are slower in continuous AF & number of AF points comparing to Sony, Canon & Nikon by a yard. 
Btw, news of Leica inventing Autofocus is years ago and only at prototype invention and no where near mass production scale. Let’s not confuse prototype invention and producing a product like SL2.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[sillbeers15]

4 hours ago, beewee said:

This has nothing to do with being anything being SL specific.

You seem to think that Leica needs to be on the latest and greatest technology in order to survive. Leica has never had their own ASIC. They probably never will. No current camera manufacture are on the latest TSMC N5P node but cameras still keep coming out. You don’t need the latest nodes to be in the game.

The M cameras are just as dependent on silicon advances as the SL series, if not more so because of thermal limitations for the small body. Yes, SL cameras need to support video and AF but you don’t need a beefy processor for that. There are plenty of commercial off the shelf parts and licensable IP that can do it on dedicated silicon logic within a bigger chip that performs other functions. Video encoding/decoding is such a fundamental element of parts these days, you don’t need anything particularly special to support core video.

As for AF functionality, it largely depends on how many fancy modes you want. Yeah, if you want to have AI everything, you’ll need a dedicated processor but if you just want solid tracking PDAF continuous AF plus contrast detect AF for accurate fine corrections, it doesn’t take that much processing power to do this. Frankly, the fact that Sony has a giant list of AI-based subject detection that requires you to select the subject type and buries this selection in sub-menus makes the feature almost unusable. They may as well not include the feature because no one will go in to switch between shooting a bird, insect, dog, human, … ad nauseum. So at the end, was it really worth it to implement all this fancy silicon for fancy AF on a Sony body? Maybe nice to have on a marketing sheet and get it featured on dpreviewTV but will anyone use it? Probably not.

 

If you have been in this forum long enough to read my other threads, you will know that I have been defending the performance of Leica’s AFC. I have always been saying that it is usable although not an industry leader in Mirrorless. But after 2 generations of SL user and now a crowded Mirrorless market, I will no longer accept the next SL3 AFC to be sub par anymore. No need to offer the best in class AFC but it has to be comparable in performance. I stick to Leica SL series for the Leica lens optical superiority and a simple likeable menu in SL2. But I am attracted to Z9’s performance now. If SL3’s AF disappoints again, then I will have to move on. Whatever said, I’m still keeping my M system.

[Chaemono]

vor 8 Minuten schrieb sillbeers15:

If you have been in this forum long enough to read my other threads, you will know that I have been defending the performance of Leica’s AFC. I have always been saying that it is usable although not an industry leader in Mirrorless. But after 2 generations of SL user and now a crowded Mirrorless market, I will no longer accept the next SL3 AFC to be sub par anymore. No need to offer the best in class AFC but it has to be comparable in performance. I stick to Leica SL series for the Leica lens optical superiority and a simple likeable menu in SL2. But I am attracted to Z9’s performance now. If SL3’s AF disappoints again, then I will have to move on. Whatever said, I’m still keeping my M system.

SL3 will likely have a sensor with 60 MP vs. Z9 with 45.7 MP. AFC will probably be slower on the SL3 just because of that.

[sillbeers15]

26 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

SL3 will likely have a sensor with 60 MP vs. Z9 with 45.7 MP. AFC will probably be slower on the SL3 just because of that.

I can accept that as Leica has its attributes. But I just hope to get a reliable AFC tracking. I really like the SL2 eye/face AF update through firmware update. I hope to also get a animal/bird eye AF tracking on AF3.

[Simone_DF]

55 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

SL3 will likely have a sensor with 60 MP vs. Z9 with 45.7 MP. AFC will probably be slower on the SL3 just because of that.

That is fine. No one is expecting Canon or Sony level, but something more reliable than the current AFC performances. I'd be very satisfied with performances similar to the old A7III, for example.

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, sillbeers15 said:

I’m not sure how well you know Leica’s AF. Very simple check you can do to find out Leica & Panasonic’s AF are identical in specs.

It's not a secret that you've uncovered. Go look for the original SL press releases, they mention Panasonic's DFD. Implementation has always been slightly different on Leica and on Panasonic, because they use different processors. Let's hope that issue gets resolved, it's needless duplication of effort.

 

1 hour ago, sillbeers15 said:

Btw, news of Leica inventing Autofocus is years ago and only at prototype invention and no where near mass production scale. Let’s not confuse prototype invention and producing a product like SL2.

Do you remember the Minolta Maxxum? It may have been called Dynax in your market.

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, beewee said:

ou seem to think that Leica needs to be on the latest and greatest technology in order to survive. Leica has never had their own ASIC. They probably never will. No current camera manufacture are on the latest TSMC N5P node but cameras still keep coming out. You don’t need the latest nodes to be in the game.

Pixii's latest iteration uses a smartphone SOC, but they are the only ones to do so. I doubt it's a cutting-edge SOC. All of the bigger companies, including Leica, use their own ASICs. Some of these have become marketing talking points over the years, like Canon's DIGIC processors. Canon's fan-boys discuss different generations of DIGIC in the same way that others might discuss vintages from a great vineyard.

I agree that it doesn't matter in the end. You don't need the latest ASIC but, like any other chip, it's likely that a newer design will be fabbed on a newer node.

[Simone_DF]

Now a good question is if we’ll see PDAF on the Q3 first, or if we have to wait for the SL3

[LBJ2]

29 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

Now a good question is if we’ll see PDAF on the Q3 first, or if we have to wait for the SL3

New sensor, new AF system, I'm guessing will roll-out first to the system the has sold the most and that seems like could be the Q system. No matter, I am in no hurry to spend again for the SL3 when I am already able to use SL2 AF system effectively. However an M11 like sensor 60MP  in the SL3 is what will calls to me...hard. My few SL APO primes are just at the tip of what they can do with the current SL2 sensor. 

Edited December 30, 2022 by LBJ2

[LBJ2]

7 hours ago, beewee said:

This has nothing to do with being anything being SL specific.

You seem to think that Leica needs to be on the latest and greatest technology in order to survive. Leica has never had their own ASIC. They probably never will. No current camera manufacture are on the latest TSMC N5P node but cameras still keep coming out. You don’t need the latest nodes to be in the game.

The M cameras are just as dependent on silicon advances as the SL series, if not more so because of thermal limitations for the small body. Yes, SL cameras need to support video and AF but you don’t need a beefy processor for that. There are plenty of commercial off the shelf parts and licensable IP that can do it on dedicated silicon logic within a bigger chip that performs other functions. Video encoding/decoding is such a fundamental element of parts these days, you don’t need anything particularly special to support core video.

As for AF functionality, it largely depends on how many fancy modes you want. Yeah, if you want to have AI everything, you’ll need a dedicated processor but if you just want solid tracking PDAF continuous AF plus contrast detect AF for accurate fine corrections, it doesn’t take that much processing power to do this. Frankly, the fact that Sony has a giant list of AI-based subject detection that requires you to select the subject type and buries this selection in sub-menus makes the feature almost unusable. They may as well not include the feature because no one will go in to switch between shooting a bird, insect, dog, human, … ad nauseum. So at the end, was it really worth it to implement all this fancy silicon for fancy AF on a Sony body? Maybe nice to have on a marketing sheet and get it featured on dpreviewTV but will anyone use it? Probably not.

 

Bells and Whistles sell.

I switch between human, bird, animal Eye AF on the Sony A1 literally all-the-time, as do many, perhaps even a majority of photographers with these features. Do I need equally specialized AF for other massive targets like trains, planes, cars LOL maybe in 20+ years I'll need such assistance if I can still see and lift a few pounds of camera gear to my eye. 

But yes, I would appreciate the Sony A1 system ( like the Z9) could recognize the subject eye type automatically rather than me having to press a button each time I switch from human to animal--which has tripped me up more than a few times frankly. 

Do we need any of this specialized AF AI? No. But look at what happens when the industry gets a taste of it and one camera system's AF lags behind the others, e.g., Panasonic/Leica. #1 Brings out the complainers in force when we all know perfectly well, we can all get the shot with DFD/CDAF.

[LBJ2]

9 hours ago, beewee said:

The z9 is a big heat dissipating brick with a giant battery attached as far as thermals and power goes. I don’t see how it furthers your point here about use of high efficiency silicon here. You can make an older node faster by upping voltage or die area at the cost of power consumption and increased thermal dissipation.

Even if the Z9 was a good example, foundries don’t care about how many chips you buy for a specific model. They care about how many wafers. You can put many different chips for different models on the same wafer, as long as you can use them. Nikon’s overall volumes are more than an order of magnitude higher than Leica.

Despite the Maestro processor branding, Leica has been buying chips from the likes of Fujitsu for years and Fujitsu isn’t big player in this area either but at least Fujitsu is willing to do business with Leica. There’s no way TSMC will do business with Leica and Leica doesn’t have enough IP or cash on hand to be a fabless semiconductor company either.

Bottom line, Leica is such a small fish in this industry, they have very few options available in terms of semi-custom or even pure of the shelf processors go. If they want to build an ASIC, they’re going to need to find a couple hundred million dollars to do this and sell a heck of a lot more cameras to fund it. The only way around this is to share the same processor with Panasonic through the L2 alliance. Only time will tell on this.

You wrote: "The z9 is a big heat dissipating brick with a giant battery attached as far as thermals and power goes."

Something to think about as I wondered from day-one why Nikon's came back from near--death with the large DSLR sized Z9...very large camera body size and large on-board powerful battery is one way to delivery all the bells and whistles quickly. Nikon sure called that one right as the Z9 has been a star even with the elderly Nikon population who can't buy the Z9 fast enough ( we sure don't hear Nikon photographers complaining about size and weight). Thinking about this makes me appreciate the relative tiny Sony A1 technology/engineering even more. 

[LBJ2]

3 hours ago, sillbeers15 said:

If you have been in this forum long enough to read my other threads, you will know that I have been defending the performance of Leica’s AFC. I have always been saying that it is usable although not an industry leader in Mirrorless. But after 2 generations of SL user and now a crowded Mirrorless market, I will no longer accept the next SL3 AFC to be sub par anymore. No need to offer the best in class AFC but it has to be comparable in performance. I stick to Leica SL series for the Leica lens optical superiority and a simple likeable menu in SL2. But I am attracted to Z9’s performance now. If SL3’s AF disappoints again, then I will have to move on. Whatever said, I’m still keeping my M system.

For me the SL system is all about the class-leading SL APO primes. I was more than happy to learn how to make DFD/CDAF work to gain access to these lenses. And to one of your other comments. Absolutely the SL2 Eye-AF capabilities has improved greatly in recent SL2 firmware updates. Just like my Sony A1, the SL2 Eye AF already starts tracking the eyes in the scene the minute I lift and point the camera...pretty cool and capable IMO. 

Yes. The cat is now out of the bag..."New Year, New Phase" there will be no going back. SL3 + more power opens up all kinds of possibilities ! 

[LocalHero1953]

3 hours ago, sillbeers15 said:

I can accept that as Leica has its attributes. But I just hope to get a reliable AFC tracking. I really like the SL2 eye/face AF update through firmware update. I hope to also get a animal/bird eye AF tracking on AF3.

We all have personal preferences. And then there's what Leica's market as a whole wants. Personally, I have zilch interest in bird/animal photography or sports with the SL2-S. Leica has always been tagged as the brand to avoid when it comes to sports and BIF, and the one to head for for IQ and colour. If Leica's target market wants such high-performance AF then it would have to deliver. But is it sensible for Leica to go for the sports and BIF crowd when others are well-entrenched there?

Mind you, I hope that the Q3 is a generation or two ahead of the Q2 for AF/face recognition - it would be good if it could get at least as far as the current SL2-S. The AF of the Q2 is fast, but totally lacking in practical face recognition and tracking.

Question for those who know: exactly which areas of AF does PD improve compared to CD? Absolute speed towards as specified focus point? Identification of features (faces/eyes etc)? Tracking of movement? From my limited understanding PD just saves time in deciding which direction to focus and how far, but it does nothing for face recognition, and tracking requires additional processing. So what improvements should we expect, and what would be unaffected?

Edited December 30, 2022 by LocalHero1953

[sillbeers15]

18 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

We all have personal preferences. And then there's what Leica's market as a whole wants. Personally, I have zilch interest in bird/animal photography or sports with the SL2-S. Leica has always been tagged as the brand to avoid when it comes to sports and BIF, and the one to head for for IQ and colour. If Leica's target market wants such high-performance AF then it would have to deliver. But is it sensible for Leica to go for the sports and BIF crowd when others are well-entrenched there?

Mind you, I hope that the Q3 is a generation or two ahead of the Q2 for AF/face recognition - it would be good if it could get at least as far as the current SL2-S. The AF of the Q2 is fast, but totally lacking in practical face recognition and tracking.

Question for those who know: exactly which areas of AF does PD improve compared to CD? Absolute speed towards as specified focus point? Identification of features (faces/eyes etc)? Tracking of movement? From my limited understanding PD just saves time in deciding which direction to focus and how far, but it does nothing for face recognition, and tracking requires additional processing. So what improvements should we expect, and what would be unaffected?

From the questions you ask about the purpose of PDAF over DFD perhaps tells that you do not do much AFC tracking. From my experience of shooting BIF using the SL2, all things well until the autofocus just stop working when the shutter release button or back button is pressed at a back lighted background. Replacing DFD with PDAF on AFC tracking will certainly resolve the problem. The other common criticism is the AFC pulsing effect seen in the AF tracking box and background focus pulsing when shooting video. Again PDAF will resolve those pulsing effect. The other solution to continue employing DFD may be more challenging is to bump up the AF calculation rate to double or more such that the pulsing goes away as it is too fast for the eyes to see. PDAF should be the easier solution. 
I see the mirrorless camera competition will surely drive more AI enhanced AF capability offered as standard feature. Therefore my wish for animal / bird face recognition that is already standard feature in other mirrorless should not be seen as minority request for the SL3 not to remain a sub performer.

[Chaemono]

If SL3 comes with good enough AFC and 60 MP it will end the GAS among Leica FF mirrorless aficionados. Newer iterations will just offer incremental utility (faster processing power, AI). Same goes with M12 if it comes with IBIS and M11 sensor. M13 will be a poor seller. SL4 only some who stuck with original SL might consider. 

[Simone_DF]

4 hours ago, LBJ2 said:

New sensor, new AF system, I'm guessing will roll-out first to the system the has sold the most and that seems like could be the Q system.

Maybe, but maybe not. Don't forget that the Q2 has a Maestro II, while the SL2 has a Maestro III. Following the same pattern, the Q3 should use cheaper components compared to the SL3, which is also reflected in the price.

[Simone_DF]

3 hours ago, LBJ2 said:

Something to think about as I wondered from day-one why Nikon's came back from near--death with the large DSLR sized Z9...very large camera body size and large on-board powerful battery is one way to delivery all the bells and whistles quickly. Nikon sure called that one right as the Z9 has been a star even with the elderly Nikon population who can't buy the Z9 fast enough ( we sure don't hear Nikon photographers complaining about size and weight). Thinking about this makes me appreciate the relative tiny Sony A1 technology/engineering even more. 

The reason for the success of the Z9 is that it's the first pro mirrorless from Nikon specifically designed for sport / wildlife, and photographers who were sitting on the fence, dropped their D5s and D6s and migrated en masse, while the rest of the Nikon folks migrated over time to the various Z6 / Z7 models. 

No one is complaining about the weight because Nikon is also offering lighter models, like the Z6 / Z7, which are in the 600g ballpark vs the 900g of the SL2. Do you want even lighter? They got you covered with the Z50 and ZFC.

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, sillbeers15 said:

From the questions you ask about the purpose of PDAF over DFD perhaps tells that you do not do much AFC tracking. From my experience of shooting BIF using the SL2, all things well until the autofocus just stop working when the shutter release button or back button is pressed at a back lighted background. Replacing DFD with PDAF on AFC tracking will certainly resolve the problem. The other common criticism is the AFC pulsing effect seen in the AF tracking box and background focus pulsing when shooting video. Again PDAF will resolve those pulsing effect. The other solution to continue employing DFD may be more challenging is to bump up the AF calculation rate to double or more such that the pulsing goes away as it is too fast for the eyes to see. PDAF should be the easier solution. 
I see the mirrorless camera competition will surely drive more AI enhanced AF capability offered as standard feature. Therefore my wish for animal / bird face recognition that is already standard feature in other mirrorless should not be seen as minority request for the SL3 not to remain a sub performer.

Thank you for the explanation.

You are correct that I do not deliberately select AFc. I usually select the SL2-S iAF mode, which switches between AFc and AFs according to its own algorithm - it is on AFc when people are in the frame, but usually AFs otherwise. My needs for AF are mainly around performance/music/theatre/dance. Compared to sports and BIF, the range of focus required (in metres) is less, OTOH, I am usually closer to the action (sometimes on stage). The action is occasionally fast, but near to me, and actors are often crossing. I don't use burst mode. In general I find the AF performance (SL2-S) adequate - which is to say that most of the time I get the shots I want. (I can well understand that better tracking would help with actors crossing.) However, the action, being close and fast, requires a faster shutter speed to stop motion - motion blur is more of a problem for me than missed focus. Similarly, I often want to shoot stopped down, so that an actor behind the one I'm shooting at is partly in focus (enough to see their expression). Fast shutter speeds and small apertures indoors: that's why higher ISO performance is what I want to see in the SL3. I can live with the AF performance as it is now (no disrespect intended to those who want something different).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LBJ2]

45 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

Maybe, but maybe not. Don't forget that the Q2 has a Maestro II, while the SL2 has a Maestro III. Following the same pattern, the Q3 should use cheaper components compared to the SL3, which is also reflected in the price.

I didn’t know the difference in processors between Q2 and SL2, this might explain why the complaining about the Q2 Eye AF performance ( by some) compared to what I experience on the SL2. 

[Simone_DF]

27 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

I didn’t know the difference in processors between Q2 and SL2, this might explain why the complaining about the Q2 Eye AF performance ( by some) compared to what I experience on the SL2. 

Yes, unfortunately the Q2 AF is waaaaaay worse than the SL2. The Maestro II is not enough to drive it.