Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 67
  1. Collapse Details
    #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Ottawa , Canada
    Posts
    696


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #22
    Senior Member Batutta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Planet 10
    Posts
    7,498
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Evans View Post
    The setting he showed at about 9:19 I think is the exact opposite for what he wanted to have happen. He wanted the GH5 to respond rapidly to his changing views and the two settings are to refocus slowly and the second to stay on the initial focus position. Looks like that is exactly what it did. Maybe the problem is giving too much control rather than having the engineers just giving a couple of settings.
    I think the terminology used in the menu settings is confusing people.
    "Money doesn't make films...You just do it and take the initiative." - Werner Herzog


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Ottawa , Canada
    Posts
    696
    Default
    I totally agree. It may have also been useful to have some presets like in the still menu.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    4,676
    Default
    I'd like to see the Barry Green GH5 AF test to set this to rest.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #25
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by filmguy123 View Post
    I'd like to see the Barry Green GH5 AF test to set this to rest.
    Not gonna happen. Don't have a GH5, don't intend on getting one any time soon, and I believe it is completely dependent on the lens itself. All I was reporting was that lenses operate at different speed and different efficiency, and I can say that the two menu items have an ENORMOUS impact on the focus efficiency of a DVX200/UX180/UX90, so I suspect that they will have substantial impact on the GH5 also.

    I don't have a GH5, so the subject doesn't affect me so I'm stepping out of the discussion, y'all test or vilify or celebrate it however you want.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    1,366
    Default
    You can use the C series and certain Sony cams in a limited number of professional scenarios with basically no futzing. Period. It works.

    If you fiddle and tweak and pray and have just right scenarios you might get barely acceptable results for your kid's soccer match or your vlog that nobody watches from the GH5. Maybe. Sort of.

    I mean, sorry, but that's the actual state of affairs. I had hoped that maybe Panny pulled a rabbit out of their hat, but I didn't really expect it, nor do I really have many actual shooting scenarios in which I even WANT the camera to take over focus.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    4,676
    Default
    If it turns out that this is indeed the case, tests are accurate, and a FW update doesn't correct sometime on the software side this is disappointing mostly in the advertising sense. For me personally it's a minor disappointment as I focus all manual and had some limited use cases where this would have come in handy or allowed for some cool creative tricks. But it's really disappointing to see a manufacturer tout something if it doesn't live up to their own hype by a long shot.

    So, here's hoping, I'll give the benefit of the doubt until I have run my own tests and seen what the April FW update holds.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    6,357
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by filmguy123 View Post
    If it turns out that this is indeed the case, tests are accurate, and a FW update doesn't correct sometime on the software side this is disappointing mostly in the advertising sense...
    You should watch the video that Ron linked to on top of this page.

    This one -

    Last edited by DLD; 04-06-2017 at 04:28 PM. Reason: You not I.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,533
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by jjneff View Post
    "As Max pointed out, if you do not record in camera, the AF is fast. Otherwise, horribly slow, and depends if you are recording or not. And... You aren't recording in camera like 95% people will do. So unfair test. Sorry...! And when you pretend it works well.. Eww.. Sorry, it hunts back and forth and it looks ugly. Even a 80D has a better AF lmao." I agree
    The 80D has superior AF technology so there's no question.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Ottawa , Canada
    Posts
    696
    Default
    I have not seen any tests of the normal continuous auto focus. All the tests have been of the AF custom settings. These I feel are intended to be set for custom use so would be different for different scenarios. For the Photo menu there are several presets for example. Has anyone seen the GH5 performance with just the normal auto focus ?


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •