AC130: Video footage of the Auto Focus in action

Mike Warren said:
However, these tests are not repeating the same actions. Similar, but not identical, so the test, although demonstrating something is amiss, is not supplying enough data to say exactly what the problem is.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to help you all get to the bottom of this, which is not easy without access to a sample camera. Yet again I feel I should have just remained quiet. I hate trying to get answers without enough data.

.
Click to expand...

Hey Mike, we are all trying to be as objective as we can here and knowledgable input is always welcome. You clearly understand the machinations of auto focus, certainly more than I do, and it is all of interest. But we users are faced with the reality of unpredictability.

Regarding the tests: While the tests are not exact in scientific terms, this is a tool for shooting random events by definition. I could not accept that as an argument on why the auto focus sometimes fails. ELN614 fabulous horse shots certainly had verticals, horizontals and movement- Karl's Church in broad daylight at infinity- my tests- Chris's failed wedding shots- etc. One has to ask ,under what conditions can this auto focus be relied upon to get right?. And if it involves rolling up trousers, only facing North and standing on one leg, count me out- far too old for such nonsense!
 
Rod Pike said:
And if it involves rolling up trousers, only facing North and standing on one leg, count me out- far too old for such nonsense!
Click to expand...

For you, I guess if Panasonic don't come up with an acceptable answer (and I suspect they won't), you will probably have to return the camera as unfit for purpose, assuming NZ has a similar law to Australia. I'm out of touch with NZ consumer rights.

With any auto focus system I've used I know pretty quickly if I have a situation it's going to find difficult, and often can help it out by reframing to give it more usable data to work with. Having a reasonable idea what it's doing under the hood does help that sort of thing come more intuitively, and I also have a methodical mind for working out why something is behaving a certain way.

As for these cameras, apart from a couple of instances I've seen here, I'm confident I could have made the auto focus work just by changing the framing temporarily. It's even possible I may have been able to work out what's happening on the odd cases too. I don't know.
 
Hi Mike

Just to break away from the to and from banter...that's the camera all right!! Nice pic too!!! You had to wait till the tube warmed up and if you panned too quickly you got trails on the video. Black and White EVF on all those early camera as it was a tiny CRT tube..no LCD stuff.
After that I had a Panasonic M3 then an M5 and an M305 (grey import of the M10) ..All standard VHS full size tape and a stunning 200 line horizontal resolution...you couldn't dub more than once with terrible losses. I went forward after that with an MS1 and then an MS4 (SVHS) and 400 line resolution. After that SVHS become very hard to find!!
My only diversion from shoulder mount were two Panny GS500's (I used them on a kinda 'fig rig' ) After going digital it was our local equivalent of the DVC20 ..3 x 1/6" chips and 4:3 only...they actually worked very well and produced a very clean image even on flat screen TV's!!! I got 2 x HMC72's when they came out and replaced those in 2009 with the HMC82 which I have been replacing anually since 2010.

OK, you can now get back to the 160 and it's focus problems again

Chris
 
According to Craig at JVC, the 600 series is 'very responsive' (his words not mine) at full zoom but he hasn't actually tested a situation like a horse in a paddock. The camera is shipping soon, he says, and it will be interesting to see if the JVC can handle focus a lot better than the 160 then surely Panasonic would be at least obliged to attempt to rectify the very slow focus, Whether someone will be prepared to do tests similar to the horse video is another story of course!!!

Then again it might indeed be a physics issue on all cameras and not much anyone can do about it.

Chris
 
600 flesh tones were very impressive. Low light was decent. He did mention he only shoots on manual focus, but I suspect he does very different work than I and others. I like the expand-ability of recording formats. Easy to compare side by side. Still disappointing none of them go beyond 35Mbps Still forces me to keep my nanoflash.

But back on topic. Rod very nice work proving contrast is not the issue with the focus. That paper had the perfect contrast (black & white) to show it still can't perform.
 
Ok I just got off the phone with my father (he just got back from China yesterday)
His long conclusion/ hypothesis: It's either "A" or "B" or the combination of both.
"A" being a false signal is being given from the electronics processing the signal (this can include no signal being given to the lens' motor to focus)
or
"B" there is electrical noise causing the electronics to fail to properly do it's job.
Essentially the electronics is faulty. Could be design, or programming. (ie hardware or software)

He also states that the ability to focus "quickly" is up to the mechanical elements of the lens. He sees this lens as very sophisticated in design (18 elements in 12 groups) and well constructed (from what he saw) but felt it could of been easily be under designed mechanically where the short comings would be the "gap" specs* in the worm /screw gear (if it uses one) or a flaw in the Cam if it uses one. He also states the motor could have a "bad spot" that can show up intermittently.

*To follow up in the "gap" specs. If the specs of the worm screw is too "tight" it can fail or wear-out prematurely and if it is too "loose" or "wide" it will respond more slowly and have a long delay when the zooming changes direction.

He felt the expectation of this camera/ lens, to get it's focus, should be no more than 2 seconds when no there is no focal length changes (ie zooming). If it fails to find focus in that time he would conclude it was poorly built or designed. Another word he used is "junk" (sorry Panasonic it is a term of art - he is not saying it is trash, rather low spec tolerances were allowed in the design. Essentially if the US gov't spec the camera, for purchase, to obtain focus withing 2 seconds and if it ever would not meet the design specification limits it would be classified as junk. I would need to be thrown out, fixed or returned.)

He did ask me who made the lens. I said; "I did not know, Panasonic does not say". His reaction was more of intrigue as if it must be a generic lens not made from a well regarded manufacturer. (like Leica, Nikon, or similar)
-----------------
The short he said; if it works some of the time and not other times-- it is not operating properly.... and not do to any limitations of physics or specs of the lens (ie size and weight). ie it needs to be fixed or returned. I told him Panasonic (based on Jan's post) felt it is operating with it's design -- so there is nothing to be fixed.

He said to get Panasonic to disclose the specification to which they designed the lens.
So the question is: Jan, How long is suppose to take the lens to obtain focus on a subject/object @ f/5.6, with full range of contrast, and with no change in focal length? (since it's a zoom lens)
To user/ post readers: there may be different times, like at 28mm .5 seconds and at 500mm 1.8 seconds. Plus a different f-stop may be given vs the one above. Once those details are disclosed then Rod and Karl can test their cameras against Panny's specs.
My father said if they come back with a high number (ie 5 seconds) -- he said it might be a "you get what you paid for"
An example would be a film still camera -- one body may cost $300 and shoot 3 frames per second and the $800 body will shoot 10 frames per second... "you get what you paid for". So if Panasonic says 5 seconds "you get what you paid for".
 
I don't think any of us who are doing the testing are unreasonable folks. Testing is difficult for me because I am an EE with a very limited understanding of optics but I try to go about my testing using engineering principles.

It took me a long time to figure out that if you can pre-identify an approach to an object that takes you through a certain type of high contrast area, you can achieve consistency.

The problem is none of us bought this camera with a view to only doing bench testing - and, no one would have the time or patience in real videography to research "the" approach where you get focus lock-in and refrain from arriving at an object from all other directions.

I don't think Rod has the time or patience either to train his horses to approach the camera in some specific manner.

My concern is the intermittent behavior, which we DO seem to be observing and able to replicate at distant points on the globe.

Here's the deal . . .


  • If AF does not work at or close to full zoom, fine, if, as and when I hear that I simply won't use AF at full zoom.


  • If focus lock-in time ends up being 5 seconds, no problem, I am prepared to compensate for this to the point of using a different camera for certain types of events.

However, if it turns out that the camera in general is not consistent under AF, to me this means I cannot use it in AF mode for ANY event.

And since the camera is advertised as having AF (plus I paid another $450 for "focus upgrades"), if the camera is declared to be inconsistent across a range of situations other than those at boundary conditions, I will want the problem(s) fixed.
 
Last edited:
Well said Karl. ( The beautiful horses are ELN614's work actually) But the point is made. We are spending our time here testing and retesting, and trying to meet all the requirementsa of a fair test. This is a cost to us, as business time is money .

It has a full auto switch. My last test was not challenging and pretty much met ideal shooting conditions as a test example. This camera should have breezed that full auto test and again failed in a random way.

It is time Panasonic addressed this and stopped telling us it is in some way user error because we are using it in an unusual or non-professional way, or implying our expectations are too high.
 
Sorry, ELN614. My error.

Your horse videos are extremely important recordings in all of these discussions.

It is not acceptable that during a run, the camera would, all of a sudden, lose focus.

I cannot figure out how/why it would do this.

My daughter lives about 10 minutes away, in horse country.

I will try to find a farmette that will allow me to record horses in action.

Where I live we have cows (too slow) and geese (too fast), so I have nothing I can test.
 
kwkeirstead said:
I
It is not acceptable that during a run, the camera would, all of a sudden, lose focus.

I cannot figure out how/why it would do this.

.
Click to expand...
I think we have shown that it just does, randomly and across a wide range of subject matter, movement and lighting and it is for Panasonic to address the "why". I look forward to the feedback from Japan.
 
From a business point of view Panasonic and/or their agents/representatives should be at least keeping up with this thread and at the very least, doing a little reassuring but it doesn't seem to be happening. That seems to me to say that we have shown you how to use the camera, we even put up a video for you showing you how the focus works and that's that.

You guys are spending hours on doing tests for a defect that has been well documented and certainly exists. Is it really necessary to do even more tests for an issue that will more than likely have nothing done about it. I think the bottom line here is going to be either use the camera in manual and be content with that or use something else. That's was the only advice I got back in April and I took it. Sheesh, now Karl has to go travel to horsey country to see if his camera will freeze up when the horse comes towards you. Just a thought here if you sat on the street and filmed the cars coming up the road, would that not maybe accomplish the same sort of thing???

Well, I have a wedding to do in 3 hours and yes, I will be using manual during the ceremony but full auto on all the rest AND I won't have any focus issues!!

Chris
 
Rod Pike said:
I think we have shown that it just does, randomly and across a wide range of subject matter, movement and lighting and it is for Panasonic to address the "why". I look forward to the feedback from Japan.
Click to expand...


Rod: These camcorders have been on the market for nearly a full year now. I bought my AC130 in early November last year. If I remember correctly, the AC160 was available even earlier than that here in the USA.

Panasonic's engineers have long since moved on to work on their next generation products by now.
 
LanceOregon said:
Rod: These camcorders have been on the market for nearly a full year now. I bought my AC130 in early November last year. If I remember correctly, the AC160 was available even earlier than that here in the USA.

Panasonic's engineers have long since moved on to work on their next generation products by now.
Click to expand...

Lance:
Thankyou for your insight. Is this opinion or fact, and how is that relevant?
This is a current model, 2 months old or so, with a 3 year warranty and Panasonic will address this warranty issue ( one way or another.)

Panasonic NZ are already processing this on my behalf and have advised me that they are currently awaiting direct feedback from Japan.

Panasonic's engineers may well have moved on of course, however, until I hear otherwise I will assume that this multinational company still values their customers and of course honours warranties.

As an aside, Toyota are recalling 4.7milion vehicles worldwide manufactured since 2005 because of a potentially faulty window switch. This may well be a safety issue, but it does demonstrate that corporations do take their world market reputations seriously. I have every confidence that Panasonic are listening (although not saying much!) and will deal with this in a responsible way.
 
Well, here in the United States we have been aware of these issues for quite some time. The issues being discussed here are nothing new. Certainly by the end of last year, autofocus issues were being widely discussed here. Those are most definitely facts that cannot be disputed.

From my own experience of working in the computer hardware and software manufacturing industries, it would be quite unprecedented to go back and offer any kind of update at this late date. Even in the software industry, where it is super simple to upgrade a product. For a hardware company, it would truly be unheard of. A company's top management would literally have to believe that its reputation and goodwill with its customers was totally on the line, in order to do what you are suggesting. And if that had indeed been the case in this matter, then I would have expected something to have been done long ago.

In my opinion, this is all water that is well under the bridge, at this point in time.
 
LanceOregon said:
Well, here in the United States we have been aware of these issues for quite some time. The issues being discussed here are nothing new. Certainly by the end of last year, autofocus issues were being widely discussed here. Those are most definitely facts that cannot be disputed.

From my own experience of working in the computer hardware and software manufacturing industries, it would be quite unprecedented to go back and offer any kind of update at this late date. Even in the software industry, where it is super simple to upgrade a product. For a hardware company, it would truly be unheard of. A company's top management would literally have to believe that its reputation and goodwill with its customers was totally on the line, in order to do what you are suggesting. And if that had indeed been the case in this matter, then I would have expected something to have been done long ago.

In my opinion, this is all water that is well under the bridge, at this point in time.
Click to expand...

Oh well Lance, thankyou for your opinion. However I will wait for Panasonic to give their view anyway.
 
What I'm about to show does not explain the couple of odd cases posted here, but for the sake of others reading this thread I thought I'd show similar things happening with another camera, and how to prompt an auto focus to work when it's misbehaving.

This video was shot with a 1/4" consumer camera at around 22x zoom. All I wanted to get was a record of what he was saying for my notes so both sound and vision were not important. Notice that as I zoom in to his face the camera decides to focus on the background and stay there. After deliberately staying on his face for a long while to see if the auto focus would finally do something, I moved down to his chest where I felt his hand and red glasses would be good data for the auto focus to work with. One it focused, I moved back to his face and the focus remained fine. If it have been made more responsive than that it would have been continuously hunting, and as far as I'm concerned even a little hunting destroys the shot. This is simply how I expect an auto focus system to work and is why I avoid it as much as possible.

But, as I said, there are a couple of samples posted in this thread where the AC160 really should have been able to cope better. With this post, I'll go back to keeping quiet unless I get a direct question.

 
I'm sure we can all find the odd shot here and there which has hung up occasionally. But two wrongs don't make a right and we are talking about this particular camera-an expensive prosumer camera range- the 130/160/ and the latest 160A, that have had a massive amount of complaints and discussion about this focus issue.

As Lance mentioned, it has been going on in USA for some while apparently, and in my long years with video (started off with reel to reel B/W Sony around 1969 I think), I have never heard a camera get such bad press on a single issue. (Now I wait for someone to remind me of a worse one, but I am really only interested in this one!).

I would like to know--what actions that people have taken, other than endlessly discuss the problem. How many owners engaged with Panasonic directly? Did you send yours back? what was the Panasonic reaction?

Jan is the only Panasonic voice on this forum and in all fairness, she is a product Manager and cannot possibly be expected to do anything else other than repeat the Company standpoint as presented to her.

So a direct contact with Panasonic is the correct way to go, and I await my feedback from them.
 
Hi Rod

I can see Lance's point sadly so I truely hope that they actually come back to you. I doubt whether they will agree to do anything as they, as already said, have moved on with R&D. I myself was wondering whether due to the Tsunami disaster, some of their suppliers of components, boards and such might have had to sourced elsewhere in a hurry. For me, (and his is only my opinion) the build quality compared with my current HMC82's was severely lacking ..My current cams are solid and everything works so I expected at least double the quality (both image, workings and build) when I paid over $8000 for two 130's...My opinion again were they barely scraped the 50% mark for build quality, workability and image quality. I have just come back from a wedding using the HMC's and seriously the images alone knock the stuffing out of my previous 130's ... absolutely stunning in comparison!! (if you want some screen grabs let me know?) Something is seriously amiss here but I doubt whether you will do very much better than getting a refund ..if they agree to redesign your camera/change the lens and sensors etc etc then they will have to do the same for everyone which would make an awful lot of business sense.

I certainly hope they do at least something for you.

Chris
 
ChrisHarding said:
Hi Rod

I can see Lance's point sadly so I truely hope that they actually come back to you. I doubt whether they will agree to do anything as they, as already said, have moved on with R&D.
Click to expand...

Hi Chris, as I said this camera is current and only a few months old. Warranty or failure to perform is nothing to do with R&D.
Below is Panasonics statement from their website of their commitment to us , the customer. Reading this should convince anyone that Panasonic will not ignore this issue.

[h=1]Why Panasonic[/h]Count on your Panasonic Pro Video Equipment: At Panasonic, we understand the vital importance of your professional video equipment investment. When exceptional quality is called for, when the turnaround time is short, when you have only one chance to capture the action, and when everything is on the line (including your reputation), you need your professional video tools to perform, hour after hour, day after day. Panasonic is delighted to offer you the finest professional video products in the industry, backed by the industry's best support programs.

This is their statement of commitment

Glad the wedding went well with your 82's. The galling thing for me , was I nearly bought two of them instead of the 160A, but was enchanted by the 1/3 chip thing!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top