Do you guys use Auto focus during video?

orchidsofwrath

orchidsofwrath

Active member
I was just wondering if you guys end up using any auto focus or afc or face detection or the like during video recording for narrative stuff. I'm wondering because if everyone just ends up using manual focus anyway I don't really see a point to getting the 14-140mm as its so slow selective dof will probably be limited. I'm deciding on which gh2 kit to get and I'm considering just getting the body with some faster lense(s).

What do you guys think?
 
I very much prefer to use either AFS (single touch autofocus) or manual focus, although I do like the ability to do "touch screen" focus. I can do a kind of "rack focus" with that (touch the second subject you need the camera to refocus to). You do get a bit of a "lag" but when used to it you can "time" your touch on the screen and it works out.

But the Continuous Autofocus can be handy for me when I have to work by myself and step out in front of the camera. For that I use the Leica DG Summilux 25mm f1.4 a lot, and that is one of the reasons I ordered my second GH2 with the 14-42mm "kit" lens (the second reason being at the time I ordered the "kit" price was about $30 less than body only).

The Lumix 20mm f1.7 is NOT a Continuous Autofocus lens although it will do a "face detect" kind of follow focus if the focus mode is set to AFS (single autofocus) and the knob above it set to "face detect". Not perfect but again it helps if I have to work by myself and get out in front of the camera.

I'd get the GH2 with 14-42mm "kit" lens. That "kit" is often priced at or close to the body only price and the lens is a lot better than the "lens snobs" give it credit for. The Lumix 14mm f2.5 is pretty sharp and not a bad low light performer, the Lumix 20mm f1.7 is a great lens for it's price (I'm gonna keep mine even though I just got the 25mm f1.4), and the Olympus Zuiko 45mm f1.8 is everything they "rave" about.

I don't do much "long range sniping" but for that I have the Lumix 45-200, pretty pleased with that one too.
 
Thanks a ton for the response Bruce. Are you doing narrative or documentary stuff?

The 14-42mm kit is actually 150 bucks more which is funny cause that particular lens is only 130 bucks on amazon.
 
orchidsofwrath said:
Thanks a ton for the response Bruce. Are you doing narrative or documentary stuff?

The 14-42mm kit is actually 150 bucks more which is funny cause that particular lens is only 130 bucks on amazon.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and you can pick it up used for under $100.
 
ErikTande said:
I love the autofocus, especially the face track. If you're doing everything yourself it can be a production saver.

Also, the kit lens is great as well. Check out these screengrabs:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?284480-The-Jump-(short-movie-for-Tropfest)

Here's a video I shot with almost all autofocus:

https://vimeo.com/46156612
pass: world

Mostly the Olympus 45mm, some 20mm pancake and some 7-14.
Click to expand...
nice! Are the screengrabs the 14-42 or 14-140? I dug the music video too.
 
Depends on what you shoot and perhaps whether you need to zoom in/out during the shot.

Here's the 14-140 on autofocus I did for the Baja 500. All the bike/quad shots were done with the 14-140:

 
orchidsofwrath said:
Thanks a ton for the response Bruce. Are you doing narrative or documentary stuff?
Click to expand...

Narrative shorts when I can get some crew to work with me, and Defensive Handgun training videos when I was instructing a couple years ago.


orchidsofwrath said:
The 14-42mm kit is actually 150 bucks more which is funny cause that particular lens is only 130 bucks on amazon.
Click to expand...

Things vary quite a bit. First GH2 was body only, used. Second was brand new from B&H and at the time I ordered mine GH2 with 14-42 was about $30 less than body only price from same place...B&H. That was a "no brainer", it was like they were paying me about $30 to take that "kit" lens off their hands. And unless you're in pretty low light it's not a bad lens.
 
I work a lot with native Panasonic (pancake) lenses and use single push auto focus a lot but don't find it very reliable and the LCD screen isn't large enough to judge. In combination with larger LCD monitor or z-finder it can be workable.

What I also do a lot is using a mechanical follow focus in combination with Zeiss lenses (which have a fixed focus ring) and distances marked on the follow focus ring, in 1 meter parts, and then estimate distance between camera and subject, and use the camera LCD screen to judge/double check. Still I come home with out of focus material sometimes.

So to me it remains a problematic thing, apart from that I love the GH2 footage so I choose to continue struggling till I'm skilled enough or find the ultimate technical solution to solve the focussing problem.
 
I was going to ask a similar question! When you guys aren't in manual mode and want to do run and gun, would this be your optimal settings:

In the GH2 Menu - Choose "continuous AutoFocus"
On the Camera Body, Choose: "AFS" with the First Mode on the dial. (I'm guessing it's called face priority mode, or something to that effect) It's the only one with a person on it.

From there, you can't really dictate where the camera focuses, yeah? I was playing around with the 14-42mm X pancake lens and trying to figure out what the best mode was for run and gun stuff.
 
I really cannot see the point of using a great camera and then having an auto focus suddenly decide to wreck the shot for you. You don't need to always have micro thin DoF, so in bright outside conditions, on fast moving objects, is there really any need? Any lens system that insists the object for critical focus has to be in a certain point in the frame is doomed. The shots with foreground/subject/background are exactly why auto focus has always been considered problematic for video - even when using proper video cameras that don't have micro DoF. For these kinds of subjects manual focus is always better because it has a brain behind it. Even stills people get caught out - but they can get away with the odd out of focus frame, video is not that forgiving.

I'm just reviewing some material from a camera given to a novice for C, not even B roll material where moving lights on stage have really messed up the auto focus he had to use because manual focus was beyond his skill level. He was always the same distance from the key subject, but the damn camera kept trying to focus on the moving lights just behind him.
 
paulears said:
I really cannot see the point of using a great camera and then having an auto focus suddenly decide to wreck the shot for you. You don't need to always have micro thin DoF, so in bright outside conditions, on fast moving objects, is there really any need? Any lens system that insists the object for critical focus has to be in a certain point in the frame is doomed. The shots with foreground/subject/background are exactly why auto focus has always been considered problematic for video - even when using proper video cameras that don't have micro DoF. For these kinds of subjects manual focus is always better because it has a brain behind it. Even stills people get caught out - but they can get away with the odd out of focus frame, video is not that forgiving.

I'm just reviewing some material from a camera given to a novice for C, not even B roll material where moving lights on stage have really messed up the auto focus he had to use because manual focus was beyond his skill level. He was always the same distance from the key subject, but the damn camera kept trying to focus on the moving lights just behind him.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think manual focus will always (a long time...) be the better option of the two. Some large sensor auto-focus systems also seem to a be a bit slow, however, in situations where the right equipment is lacking the facial-detection function can be relativity helpful in jibbing situations.
 
stoneinapond said:
is that lens comparable in quality to the 14-42? The current price is certainly attractive.
Click to expand...

The 45-200 is probably a better "quality lens" expecially from the standpoint of physical "build quality". As far as optical performance the two are pretty dissimilar lenses due to the big difference in zoom range. With careful photographic technique and insuring proper stability IQ is going to be quite good, but for someone trying to handhold at the 200mm end results could be disappointing (comparable to trying to handhold a 400mm lens on 35mm film camera).

I'm very happy with mine and the current attractive price makes it a very good bargain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top