05-16-2013, 06:24 AM
One of us already made the essential statement: each one us have our own style of shooting, and having a suitable camera in hand is the key word here. Nevertheless, it's quite a nice discussion and I can' t keep myself off topic 
...
I agree that PDAF has it's issues regarding focus accuracy, mostly coming from design/production errors. And with the new high MP sensors and 100% views that's becoming more obvious. But if we think of the complete system (tracking with PDAF, large sensor giving more DoF controll, large sensor with better SNR ratio, OVF etc...), focusing only on "focusing" does not sound reasonable to me. One should ask "what do I need" before making decisions of a possible camera buy. I had concerns before buying the D800 because of the previews showing that the 100% views does not forgive focus errors. But I also new that my fast lenses are primes (which I rarely use with the max aperture), and my zooms are wide angles (except for the new 70-200mm which is a f/4 lens). This makes the micro AF adjustment functionality sound more reasonable.
I did apply micro AF adjustment on my 135mm f/2 lens. Test shots were done from more or less the same distance I use the lens most of the time and with the aperture set to my favorite (f/3.2). Below are the before and after images 100% enlarged:
![[Image: _SKT0385_135mm_noAF_zps81713f0e.jpg]](http://i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r571/SerkanKet/Test%20Shots/_SKT0385_135mm_noAF_zps81713f0e.jpg)
![[Image: _SKT0391_135mm_AF3_zps05aedc3a.jpg]](http://i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r571/SerkanKet/Test%20Shots/_SKT0391_135mm_AF3_zps05aedc3a.jpg)
It worked also well in the field. Surely I missed focus sometimes but this was mostly my fault. We have to consider one important thing with the modern DSLRs: you might have 51 AF points or even 90... Setting the correct AF point AND achiving a desired composition AND shooting quickly is not easy (at least for me ). It requires discipline. Most of my missed shots are my faults. One should utilize what the camera can give... With the AF-S lenses one can do the AF with dedicated AF button and then a slight manual adjustment with the focus ring can cure in a lot of cases (especially for static subjects). But of course, in the end, these all do not change the fact that PDAF technical AF issues are eliminated in CDAF cameras. One could understand that by thinking of how DSLR macro users achieve correct focus: either with (magnified) live-view or regular MF.
I too wait for the FF mirrorless... Most probably I will migrate from the DSLR in case what I look for will be included in this new package. Because I rarely use focus tracking and DSLR systems are doomed to be bulky / heavy. BUT, how will the future mirrorless FF look like is contraversial. For instance, how will the balance be on that camera? I saw very very beautiful images from OMD & 75mm f/1.8 combo and that system looks very well balanced. But can we imagine a FF OMD + 135mm f/2 lens please (150mm f/3.6 will be something else, but I don't believe that a FF user would choose it over a 135mm f/2)... Will they look the same? Or a Fujifilm FF camera with the same 135mm lens?... We all know that Leica / RX1 are the ones similar to what we're waiting for. And we also know that Leica is a MF system with a specially designed FF sensor for the corner image performance (limited to 135mm FL) and RX1 is fixed with a 35mm lens.
Also we know wide angles are demanding... FF sensor with high pixel density combined with shorter register distances is something that the manufacturers need to tackle. And not only this but also the size of a UWA lens attached on a compact mirrorless could harm the balance feel.
Last but not least, I'm not sure whether a new FF MFT system would be able to keep up with the video performance of the older brothers or not.
Serkan
...I agree that PDAF has it's issues regarding focus accuracy, mostly coming from design/production errors. And with the new high MP sensors and 100% views that's becoming more obvious. But if we think of the complete system (tracking with PDAF, large sensor giving more DoF controll, large sensor with better SNR ratio, OVF etc...), focusing only on "focusing" does not sound reasonable to me. One should ask "what do I need" before making decisions of a possible camera buy. I had concerns before buying the D800 because of the previews showing that the 100% views does not forgive focus errors. But I also new that my fast lenses are primes (which I rarely use with the max aperture), and my zooms are wide angles (except for the new 70-200mm which is a f/4 lens). This makes the micro AF adjustment functionality sound more reasonable.
I did apply micro AF adjustment on my 135mm f/2 lens. Test shots were done from more or less the same distance I use the lens most of the time and with the aperture set to my favorite (f/3.2). Below are the before and after images 100% enlarged:
It worked also well in the field. Surely I missed focus sometimes but this was mostly my fault. We have to consider one important thing with the modern DSLRs: you might have 51 AF points or even 90... Setting the correct AF point AND achiving a desired composition AND shooting quickly is not easy (at least for me
). It requires discipline. Most of my missed shots are my faults. One should utilize what the camera can give... With the AF-S lenses one can do the AF with dedicated AF button and then a slight manual adjustment with the focus ring can cure in a lot of cases (especially for static subjects). But of course, in the end, these all do not change the fact that PDAF technical AF issues are eliminated in CDAF cameras. One could understand that by thinking of how DSLR macro users achieve correct focus: either with (magnified) live-view or regular MF.I too wait for the FF mirrorless... Most probably I will migrate from the DSLR in case what I look for will be included in this new package. Because I rarely use focus tracking and DSLR systems are doomed to be bulky / heavy. BUT, how will the future mirrorless FF look like is contraversial. For instance, how will the balance be on that camera? I saw very very beautiful images from OMD & 75mm f/1.8 combo and that system looks very well balanced. But can we imagine a FF OMD + 135mm f/2 lens please (150mm f/3.6 will be something else, but I don't believe that a FF user would choose it over a 135mm f/2)... Will they look the same? Or a Fujifilm FF camera with the same 135mm lens?... We all know that Leica / RX1 are the ones similar to what we're waiting for. And we also know that Leica is a MF system with a specially designed FF sensor for the corner image performance (limited to 135mm FL) and RX1 is fixed with a 35mm lens.
Also we know wide angles are demanding... FF sensor with high pixel density combined with shorter register distances is something that the manufacturers need to tackle. And not only this but also the size of a UWA lens attached on a compact mirrorless could harm the balance feel.
Last but not least, I'm not sure whether a new FF MFT system would be able to keep up with the video performance of the older brothers or not.
Serkan