Folks, when did I start to propagate mirrorless cameras instead of DSLRs ? 3-4 years ago ? Something like that and this isn't really news for the readers in this forum. Ever since the Panasonic GH2 I am only using mirrorless cameras for my private sessions. I've never had issues with the AF performance from there on - I also mentioned this several times. A fast AF from a mirrorless cameras is also hardly a new concept. Most MFT and 1 Nikon users never had issues (except for 1st gen models ) - it's just fairly new for Sony. On the NEX-6 things improved but they weren't really impressive. Things changed at last with the A7 and A6000 albeit not with the A7R & A7s. So it's mostly better now - cool! No worries!
However, Mr. Wild came up with some aggressive statements and I'd like to hear a technical explanation from him why multiple 48-bit line sensors with dedicated amplifier circuitry (citing e.g. Canon regarding DSLR PD-AF) are inferior to much smaller, embedded photodiodes in a 42-bit sensor. The the CPU processing power of an EOS 1D X or D4s should also be quite bit higher than on an A6000.
This discussion is, of course, a joke, I know that.
Depending on the camera model, modern DSLRs have have a small advantage but the advantage is there and I don't think that this gap can be completely closed in the next few years. Just take the EOS 70D as an example. It has both on-chip as well as conventional PD AF. If the on-chip version was just as good then why would they have bothered with the conventional one at all ? Technically the AF photodiodes in a conventional PD-AF are just bigger thus more sensitive (better signal/noise quality).
Does it matter for most mortals - no. Does it matter for a few - maybe.
However, Mr. Wild came up with some aggressive statements and I'd like to hear a technical explanation from him why multiple 48-bit line sensors with dedicated amplifier circuitry (citing e.g. Canon regarding DSLR PD-AF) are inferior to much smaller, embedded photodiodes in a 42-bit sensor. The the CPU processing power of an EOS 1D X or D4s should also be quite bit higher than on an A6000.
This discussion is, of course, a joke, I know that.
Depending on the camera model, modern DSLRs have have a small advantage but the advantage is there and I don't think that this gap can be completely closed in the next few years. Just take the EOS 70D as an example. It has both on-chip as well as conventional PD AF. If the on-chip version was just as good then why would they have bothered with the conventional one at all ? Technically the AF photodiodes in a conventional PD-AF are just bigger thus more sensitive (better signal/noise quality).
Does it matter for most mortals - no. Does it matter for a few - maybe.