5D MK II - Auto-Focus Opinion Needed

[tom_lauren]

<p>All:<br>

I've been a long time serious amateur and finally want to make the jump to a higher end camera like the 5D MKII. I mainly shoot portraits, parties, nightlife and architecture and like to print big. So I'm very close to buying a 5D MKII however I keep hearing and reading about the concern others have seen around its auto focus capability. Mainly it’s difficultly in locking focus or its sensitivity under certain conditions. Should I not be concerned? I know technique is very important but if you do have good technique is the auto focus giving anyone else issues? Thanks in advance...</p>

[JDMvW]

<p><em>I</em> don't know anything about <em>specific</em> 5D mkII focus issues, but I have seen a few reviews of the new camera which have suggested that Canon's AF needs speeding up <em>in general</em> , but not as an issue particularly for the 5D alone. I'm not saying there isn't a problem, but that sort of comment is all that I have seen and I have been looking at the reviews.<br>

If that generic criticism is the issue, I think it is misplaced concern since plenty of people have been photographing action with Canon AF systems for quite a while now. Somebody else's AF may be somewhat faster, I don't know, but even the older EOS cameras work plenty fast for the photography most of us do.</p>

<p>Just as an historical note, back in the first reviews of the EOS (the 650 & the 620) cameras in Popular Photography in late 1987, it was observed that the EOS autofocus then was faster than manual focus by expert photographers with greater accuracy.</p>

[ken schwarz]

<p>I have a 5D MkII and can tell you that the AF system works just fine under reasonable lighting conditions. Most important, it is accurate, which is more than I can say for my 30D. I don't know whether this is entirely made possible by the focus microadjustment calibration procedure, but I do know that every shot is spot-on. I couldn't get this kind of accuracy with the 30D despite the fact that I sent it in to Canon along with lenses for calibration. The 5D MkII AF seems fast enough to me, but I must admit that I don't frequently photograph fast-moving scenes in dim light. I shoot with f/4 zoom lenses (17-40, 24-105, 70-200) all the time and the AF system performs like a champ with them as well as with faster primes such as the 50/1.4 and the 85/1.2. The center AF is indeed more capable than the other AF sensors in difficult conditions where there is little contrast in the object you are aiming at, but I've not found this to be an issue in practice--I just use the center AF almost all the time and get the spot-on results I mentioned above. (Yes, I know that focus-and-recompose has its hazards, but even at f/4 it's not at all an issue at most shooting distances.) If you must shoot in (near) darkness, the red light emitted by a Canon flash or the ST-2E will give the AF system what it needs to lock on instantly.</p>

[hawkman]

<p>Tom,<br>

5DMKII AF is more than adequate for the conditions you describe.</p>

[douglas lee]

<p>I also own the 5D II. I think most of the comments you are seeing which mention AF are from those who were hoping for a bigger improvement in AF speed over the 5D. And, more cross-type AF sensors. Based on what I have read on hear and other forums, the Canon 1D series bodies have much better AF. I think people were hoping Canon would put their pro level AF in the 5dII.</p>

<p>Overall, I find it adequate as a center AF sensor camera. </p>

[elliot1]

<p>"shoot portraits, parties, nightlife and architecture ... Should I not be concerned?"</p>

<p>I have had the MKII only a few weeks but based on my first few thousand shots, my anwser is "absolutely not!". The autofocus system on the MKII is excellent, certainly as good as the original 5D, and maybe better. I shot all kinds of sports with my 5D and never had any issues. The lens you use can perhaps make a difference so choose wisely.</p>

 

[eric merrill]

<p><a href="http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0902/tech-tips.html">http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0902/tech-tips.html</a></p>

<p>Scroll down 'til you find the question about the 5D II autofocus.</p>

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

<p>Yes for subjects in good lighting, the AF of the 5D II is fine. I can shoot birds in flight, no problem. It (AF of 5D II) seems to be a bit better than my significant other's 40D...</p>

<p>What you might want to read about is how does the AF of the 5D II fare in low(er) light conditions? Again, in bright light it is fine - but I don't use this camera to AF in low(er) light conditions. Others have and it is worth reading their comments.</p>

<p>rdc/nyc</p>

[dave_trayers]

<p>I shoot almost exclusively in low light conditions of the theater. I've shot just about every Canon DSLR and until recently I used a 1DmkIII. I now shoot with a 5D2 and it autofocuses just as fast and tracks just as well as the 1DmkIII. I use a 70-200 f/2.8 L IS and some primes. I typically use the center AF point and the AF button to start the AF.<br>

<br />I have absolutely no problems with the 5D2 auto focus in low light.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I was concerned about the 5DII AF but it works very well indeed (at least with fast F2.8 or better lenses). I have shot lots of ski racing (a difficult subject for AF) and lost about 5-6 shots out of 1500+ for focus issues. In ski racing if you are shooting from on the course a skier passing you will cover about 100 degrees of arc in a second. I have also had no problem shooting amateur ice hockey in some fairly dark arenas. What I have discovered is that in difficult conditions you need to just select the center AF point - if you use the auto selection feature the AF does not perform too well. I have really only discovered one type of sjhot where a 1 series performs noticably better (I have been shooting film 1 series cameras for many years and still shoot with the 1V and 1NRS). If you have a fast moving subject suddenly appear the camera may not focus quickly enough. I discovered this by shooting a sucession of skiers going over a jump I was lying beneath. Since I could not see the skier until they were in the air above me the camera needed to snap into focus very quickly. Out of about 20 skiers only two were in focus - the 1V would have had about an 80% sucess rate. Of course in this situation the solution is simple - use manual focus! I beleive that most tests have the 5DII AF about the same as the 40D / 50D and slower than the Canon 1D series and Nikon D3. For what you are shooting you will have no problems - in an indoor setting my camera will usually manage to focus on a blank white wall (after a bit of hunting) which is a pretty good test of any AF system. You will be impressed by the image quality of the 5DII</p>

[photo_dark]

<p>I own both a 40D and a 5Dmk2. I've found the 5D focus perfectly capable for just about any situation. The 40D has a slight edge, but it's really not noticeable for most things outside of faster moving subjects in AI Servo / high speed shooting. The 40D is certainly the better pick in those cirumstances.<br>

<br /> However, I do have a technical issue with the 5Dmk2 that is causing it to fail to ATTEMPT to focus, which is a different issue altogether (It's going in for servicing next week). I don't know if it's common or rare, but, when the AF works properly, it's great. F2.8 or wider, no problems under any light.</p>

[des adams]

<p>Tom,<br>

I bought a 5d2 and returned it to Amazon. The files from it were brilliant. I returned it because the of the AF. Previously I'd had a 350D and now I have a 40D and both of these focused fast and accurately, and unless you pointed them to a completely blank surface they never hunted. Neither were particulary good in low light. I found that the 5D2 hunted much more that the two models I'd had previously, and it was the slowest too. In short it was the worst AF I'd come across in a Canon digital. You say you want it to shoot, "portraits, parties, nightlife and architecture". I'd have thought portraits and architecture no problem, nightlife and parties I'm thinking a strobe is probably required. In every other way I was delighted with the camera. I did not expect Canon to put their pro AF in the 5D2 but I did expect it to keep up with my 40D. Instead it missed many shots that the 40D would take easily in its stride. </p>

[anthony_thornborough1]

<p>I took the 5DII on hols for a week with a 24-70 f/2.8 L earlier this month and it performed flawlessly in bright day and hand-held relatively low light conditions (restaurant interiors, and street lighting ). I actually found it much easier to use than than the 40D and the exposure system yielded consistently better results, but it's just possible that the AF was slightly more demanding to get just right - though if such was true I'd be inclined to put that down to using the 24-70, rather than the 17-40 f/4 L which was my normal 40D optic and which behaves like a 28-65 point-and-shoot with the 40D's APS-C sensor. <br>

Mmm, interesting. I'll have to check out the 5DII with wider and longer optics soon.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Al I am surprised you found the 350D to be better than the 5DII. My oldest kid has the same body and it does not perform very well in AF compared to my 5DII. I have replied to lots of thes 5DII AF posts as I almost decided not to buy the camera because of what I read on AF and cold weather. Fortunately I bought one anyway and have been quite impressed. Since I shoot lots of skiing (racing and touring) and ice hockey I am failry concerned with AF and cold weather performance. Many would suggest I should have bought the 1DIII and i did consider it hard (but it will probably be replaced next year and was $1000 more and not as good for landscapes and at high ISO which I need for ice hockey in dark arenas).<br>

I had assumed that the 5DII AF issues were user error and very slow lenses / impossible situations but it sounds like there may be some variance between 5DII bodies and perhaps I have a good one. I have noticed the in auto point selection mode the 5DII AF is not very good - indeed it is very similar to the 350D in the test I just performed. Didi you just use this mode?</p>

[des adams]

<p>Philip yes I tried everything I could find. And I agree that the center point of the AF is better than the auto select. I used fast primes. The reason I went with Canon when I dipped my toes in the digital water was I found their AF to be the best. You can search the files here and will probably find I made no complaint about my earlier cameras simply because I had none. (My wife has a Canon 400D and she too found the AF of the 5D2 was slower than her camera). And you can trust me when I say I did not want it to be like this. Of course it's possible to make excellent images with the 5D however I think , certainly in my own case, one was always conscious of the AF being a weak link, whereas in the 350D and 40D one could pretty much simply forget the AF. Clearly there are ways around this, manual focus and zone focusing as I use on my range finders. I suppose one could say that the 5D2 makes a very good medium format camera. Whatever I'll leave it there ... Tom asked how people found the AF and that's how I found it. The files from the camera are gorgeous. </p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Al you may want to take the camera back to the dealer. I have been using Canon for 0ver 25 years and have had a long series of EOS film cameras. My oldest son went digital before I did with the Rebel XT (this is your 350D). since he still lives at home I was able to test the two camera side by side and the 5D2 was faster.<br>

I have shot the 1NRS (my first EOS body), the 3 and the 1V (I have two of these bodies) for about the last 11 years - prior to that I shot FD (and still do). All of these bodies are towards the top end of Canon's range - indded the 1D series is based on the 1V and all shoot 8fps or faster.<br>

I have been shooting and scanning film for a long time and finally decided to buy my first DSLR with the 5DII. I had read a lot about the poor AF but took the plunge anyway. I have not had any significant AF issues with this camera it is really like you describe the 40D as set and forget. I almost always use the center AF point and move the camera afer I have focus (this is a habit from manual focus days where you use the split screen then frame). It really does not appear to be any slower or poorer in AF than the EOS1Vs that I have except in the time it takes to get focus suddenly. Even this is barely noticable - pop photo tested the AF as being about 0.15 seconds slower in this situation than the 1DIII (and the 1DIII is probably slightly faster than the 1V). From some of the recent comment I wonder if there is a problem with some of the AF modules in the 5DII. I trust that you are setting the camera correctly but assure you that the test I did yesterday with my 5DII and son's Rebel XT was performed fairly and that the 5DII was faster except in AF auto selection. I have included a photo taken two weeks ago at a ski race - the skier was about 20 feet away and moving at about 50km/h as you can see (although this is heavily compressed) there are no focus issues. Indeed at this race I took about 550 shots (my son was in the race but I shot all of the athletes in our club) this is 9 skiers, 2 runs and about 20 -30 shots per run. Non of these photos has focus issues. the originals were shot at about ISO 600 -800, 1/800 to 1/1250 shutter speed and F6.3 to about f11 with a 70-200 F2.8 non-IS lens. I have not poseted the full file as it 11.2MB but can do so if you like.</p>

<p>THis leads me to beleive that you camera has an AF problem (the 1DIII had some AF issues as well)</p><div></div>

[zafar1]

<p>I got my 5D MkII two days ago. I have been shooting with 5D for over a year now. The AF on 5D Mk II i decidedly slower then the original 5D using the same lens and center AF point.</p>

<p>It works fine in normal light with normal contrast. However with either of these being low (and the lens not being a particularly fast lens), Mk II hunts wildly whereas with 5D I did not have a problem.</p>

<p>If I have to defend Mk II, I might guess that Mk II is trying to be more precise with less tolerance then 5D (thus a lot more hunting). However I think my 5D focus was also quite accurate so I don't really see better AF from Mk II (when it does lock).</p>

<p> </p>

[stuart_meyer]

<p>I just shot my first wedding with a 5Dii and I can definitely say it's autofocus is worse than my 40D. I lost about 30% of the reception dance floor shots, and about 15% of the ceremony shots. The problems arose with axial motion (towards or away from me). It happened with both the 70-200 IS f/2.8 and the 24 f/1.4. I only use center focus (I don't like the 9 point). When the bride was coming down the aisle with her dad, the camera just fell asleep and wouldn't focus at all, and it took about three presses of the shutter to wake up the autofocus. I shot dance pictures of my kids on stage before this wedding and it performed flawlessly, so I'm perplexed and disappointed. </p>

[wneuetc]

<p>FWIW, the refurbished 5D MkII I received last week has marked autofocus issues similar (at least in part) to those Al reported. It simply refuses to autofocus at various times, regardless of subject matter, light levels, lens (all L lenses) or anything else. Very frustrating and definitely way inferior performance to my 20D (I've switched lenses and compared performance on exactly the same shot and the 20D autofocused impeccably where the 5D MkII failed). And once it's failed to autofocus on a particular shot, it frequently refuses to autofocus on any subsequent shots as well, forcing me to turn the camera on and off to reset it. <br>

This is clearly a defect and I'm returning the camera (and getting a new, not refurbished, 5D MkII). It appears (from this thread and others) that this is a rare problem with the 5D MkII's, but it's good to know it exists and that 5D MkII owners should not expect to have to endure it.<br>

-Wes</p>

[wneuetc]

<p>Followup to my September 22 post:<br>

I received the new 5D MkII two days ago and what a difference in AF performance! The new 5D MkII body quickly locks AF in either single point or auto point selection modes and does so over a wide range of light and subject contrast levels. I've used it with both the 24-105 F4.0 L and the 70-200 F4.0 L lenses with very similar results. Even in dimly lit museum scenes, the AF worked generally quickly and reliably (for instance, 1/5 second, F4.0, ISO 1,600 or an EV100 of about 2, yes?). There were a few OOF shots, but these may have been due to my carelessness about accepting the selection, coupled with the farily large aperture/shallow DOF I was shooting at. I'm even able to get fairly quick AF locks on uniformly lit, blank light colored walls, though occasionally the AF will have to hunt a bit before grabbing the point. All-in-all the performance seems very similar to my 20D. <br>

I'm not saying this is a great AF system, but for me at least, its performance should be adequate. <br>

However I do feel my experience substantiates what other's have discovered - and that's that there may be substantial variation in the AF quality of the 5D MkII's out there and folks that are having problems should get Canon to step up and fix them. <br>

-Wes</p><div></div>

[robin_onishi]

<p>I have a 5d MKII and just brought it in for an adjustment. The "chip was no funcitoning" correct" so the focus was erratic. I've noticed now that for my fast lens, shooting at f 1.2, if the light is low, the focus is horrible. It would be better if it didn't seem to lock, but it locks, takes the picture and it and the plane of focus is unpredicatble and rarely close to where it should be. The other issues is that can anyone get a fine focus, say on an eye? I've gone through several calibrations, yet the eye and lashes are still a bit soft. Not horrible, but the plane focus is just a few mm's off enought to not by tack sharp. <br>

I guess I was spoiled by leica, but it seems that despite for all the technology, just making a very narrow depth of field picture with a perfectly sharp subject requires a lot of ambient light, and post processing.</p>