I gave AF a try

JPNola

JPNola

Veteran
What a frustrating, maddening experience it was.

Abandoned AF altogether after 2 days of giving it a go. It boned the shot at least 50% of the time.

I found it about as useful as auto-exposure, working satisfactorily in only about 5% of situations. Not dependable enough for professional work, except for maybe when shooting interviews where there is no movement in frame other than that of your subject.

Not a fan. For me, auto-focus is a solution in search of a problem. And not a very good solution. You can’t trust it in 95% of situations.
 
what lenses were you using? there are certainly situations where manual focus will do better than autofocus. but i find my results with autofocus to be improving and conquering some scenarios i was certain it would always flunk, like a twirling dance couple with plenty of faces in the crowd behind them. finding the correct settings for subject switch sensitivity and subject-tracking sensitivity made the difference, although some lenses handle it better than others. but that being said, if you don't like it, then more power to you
 
Since binning the FS7 and going with the C200 Im 80% thinking AF is wonderful.

Ive got it set on focus on whatever is in the box. Thats enough for me.

Sure some stuff it wont work (arriving leaving frame, passing dirty foregrounds) but mainly its just a massive releif in stress and a huge upgrade.
 
I think a huge thing is your monitor setup.

If you have a 27in monitor under a black tent MF is probably OK.

If you have a 3in camera monitor wrapped in gaffa and a breakfast box hood then you are going to struggle with MF on a sunny day.

If your lost the tent , the 27 in rental fee, and the crew memeber (who needed feeding transporting and hotelling) who set that monitor up and bagged more profit you could get a new car pretty fast.

If you let that saving go to the production.. well that would be bad.
 
The lens was the Sony 24-105mm G, camera was Sony FX9.

One situation where it did not do as desired was shooting football. I started tight on the QB under center, as soon as I widened out the AF left the QB for other movements. Also while shooting a group of 7 people in the bleachers. My subject was a couple seated center-frame with “social distancing” distance between the couple and others. The AF would periodically jump to individuals seated to side of frame at in rows behind of, or in front of, my couple. Another instance was an individual standing in center of a group of 4. The AF jumped to someone crossing frame a few feet in front of the lens. A huge jump from my subject who was 30 ft away. There was also an instance where my subject, a person, was the only thing moving in frame until a piece of heavy machinery rolled into frame, the AF momentarily shifting back to the machinery before ping-ponging rapidly back to person.

Shooting a person center-frame, full body, I attempted to manually override to perform rack focus to a helmet of a player 1/3rd the distance, in lower left of frame. Each time I manually hit focus on the helmet and stopped the focus action, the AF took over sending focus back to the figure center-frame. There was no way for me to manually hold the focus where I desired it to be, short of disabling AF at the precise moment when focus is manually placed where desired.

Also, when I attempted to override manually for an artsy rack out of focus / tilt to blue sky, the AF took over again when the manual override hit the electronic nether-zone, snapping the image back into full-focus. An editor would have to truncate the shot prematurely, prior to where AF “corrected”.

It could be inefficiency of the lens. Or camera. Or both. But I think it more AF’s lack of intelligence. Inability to “know” where focus is wanted.
 
I was using the camera eyepiece. I almost always do, save for some camera moves that require the camera to be held in extended arms.

I miss focus, of that I am certain. But not enough for it to be an issue, in my experience and opinion. I cannot recall a single instance where I received feedback from a client regarding focus. And I doubt that my local peers have either. It just isn’t a thing. Exposure, yes. But not focus. Maybe that just reflects that we are more tolerant of focus error and correction than we are of exposure error. The former is typically temporary within the shot, the latter throughout.
 
I have used AF on my FX6 extensively. To expect it to be bullet proof is asking to much. With that being said once you learn how the AF system works and how to best utilise the settings it makes my work so much easier.

All the three main areas of AF setup have to be adjusted to what you shoot. First is the zone/spot selection. I find the flexible spot to work the best in most cases. Just keep what you want in focus in the box and your good. But you also have to in consideration the AF speed and AF sensitivity. With both at 3 it's nicely balanced for most things.

Then is the face detection settings. For interviews I use the face only option and it always works and much better than on the C200. For run n gun the face priority works better when going between faces and objects and again just keep the thing you want in focus in the box.

It takes some time to get to know it and sometimes it fails but in fairness it keeps things in focus much better than I can.
 
So you are talking fancy shots. AF is going to keep that rocking interviewee sharp or mr important sharp as he does his factory tour and you nail him with an 70-200. Or the sport player doing down the wing towards the camera at a sprint. Not 'cinematography'.

On interviews maybe you are asking the questions and consulting your notes - your footy will stay sharp

It is important to get a deep understanding of the af firmware business and camera setup business.

For example it may be possible for AF only to work when you press something. Or the AF to stop when you press something else and keep a finger on it.

This will enable you to move to fancy manual racks or to stop the thing racing to the background when the subject leaves frame.

Im such an AF newb as not to be able to offer you much direction on this.

Ive kept it simple with the mode 'focus on this area' for now.
 
Last edited:
With the FSx 6/9 and loupe there is a clear problem of not being able to tap the screen?

this is not going to help

With the C200 I find actually the jog lever is less useless than I thought, Im relying on screen taps less than I imagined.

(I carved a hole in the bottom of my diy screen shade to allow finger acess) DJI/Hoodman have nice a nice slit to allow ipad slapping while screen shading.
 
Its really odd helper for compromised situations. I did and interview in a field last week and had bad wind noise.

I was able to set the camera and the walk forward to place my body between the mic and the wind.

If you have a soundie, maybe a grip with a frame and net to nail that wind you would not need AF

For the small crew I feel it is very useful.
 
Im going to post this PRIVATE link.

My first bigger shoot with the C200. Its just me an a stills guy - not a big crew shoot.

The first shots are all walk towards, the second are Movi and 50-80mm.

In both situations the AF just basically lets you sit back and compose. 90% of these those are AF.

There is one standout shot (that might go in my reel) of a woman throwing leaves at the camera.. its MF on the FS7 ! !

https://vimeo.com/547381473/9b9269582a
 
Fx9 auto focus is sort of bad. at least by todays standards. it’s what i used to think video autofocus was always going to be.

C300mk3 AF is good, and i might say surprisingly good. not perfect, but very usable.

R5 and A7s3 auto focus are unreal good.
 
Shooting an (American) football game with AF is possible if you can isolate a player or two - let's say a WR and a CB jostling each other as they run down a sideline.

If you're shooting field level, with a dozen players potentially moving in between your subject (QB) and the camera, then the AF won't work, as it will simply pick the nearest player or group of players. Even those NFL/soccer shots constantly go out of focus, when different players jump into the frame.

But AF should work if your vantage point gets high enough and your lens is long enough.
 
“ Just keep what you want in focus in the box and your good. ”

Here AF dictates framing ( not good )

“ With the FSx 6/9 and loupe there is a clear problem of not being able to tap the screen? this is not going to help. ”

There AF dictates the manner in which I shoot, making it more difficult for me as Operator to see the image: sun on lcd, glare on lcd, presbyopia. ( not good ).

If I am regularly having to direct the AF by tapping the screen or by other method, why not just direct the focus by focusing manually, via the focus ring? Is it automatic focus if it is regularly having to be directed, corrected, and overridden as result of misplacement?
 
Last edited:
imo the only useful aspect of AF is in recalculating the distance to a moving subject (and/or from a moving camera). but that's also one of the most challenging aspects of focus-pulling in the 1st place. i wouldn't have gotten into af if i couldn't select a subject and have the computer track it anywhere across the frame. af doesn't just pick the nearest player as someone suggested. and the subject identification and tracking abilities are only going to get better and better
 
There is potential for AF use “dumbing down” the product. That is, the image-making becomes less stylistic / less artful. Subject always is focus. AF potentially results in image-making being less “cinematic”. More vanilla. More sterile. DP further removed from the process.

I’d rather greater human involvement, with accompanying human error, than less human involvement but less focus error. I want the humanness in image-making. Even if that means human error.

Is a painting “Art” if executed by an emotionless machine following code?
 
With AF at hand you need to learn how to best utilise it and when to use it. It's just another tool in the camera and you have to learn.

In my experience the way any camera operates influence how footage will be. If ever so small.
 
I think you need 'a problem' before you will find a solution.

WHat is your problem.?

For example I have a 'problem' that MF on my MOvi eats resources in terms of calibrating lenses, needing a puller, functional wirless transmission many types of charged batteries.

I also struggle (another problem) with actually aquiring focus (for 4k delivery) in my small viewfinder. Glasses on subject no problem, smooth skin, not so easy.

AF helps with some of my problems. Unless you have Identified a problem how can you know if AF helps you solve it.
 
"I want the humanness in image-making. Even if that means human error."

This reads very much like 19th century objections to photography.
 
Andy9 said:
"I want the humanness in image-making. Even if that means human error."

This reads very much like 19th century objections to photography.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your input, Andy, but we now have a machine that can speak for you, error-free. We kindly ask that you refrain from further activity on the forum. :smile:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top