EOS R1 Autofocus: What Sets It Apart from the EOS R5 Mark II?

#2
Regardless of the new layout, the faster the sensor readout, the more tries the AF engine gets to achieve focus per second.
The R7 shows this quite well: more advanced AF algorithms, much worse AF performance.

From the readout speed alone I would expect a noticeable improvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
#3
koenkooi said:
Regardless of the new layout, the faster the sensor readout, the more tries the AF engine gets to achieve focus per second.
The R7 shows this quite well: more advanced AF algorithms, much worse AF performance.

From the readout speed alone I would expect a noticeable improvement.
Click to expand...

That's definitely a rabbit hole to go down when both of these cameras are being used in situations where these differences may show up. I think it'll be with acquisition/tracking in messy scenes.

Or it'll be that time when tracking a BIF and the 1 in 20 that isn't perfect was the one you wanted to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#8
The more technical Stuff is much appreciated. Especially since Uncle Rog is not longer contributing to the lens-rentals blog, which is very sad indeed. Hope he is well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
#9
This has always been the story of 1 vs 5 series in my experience. The most glaring example were perhaps the 5d3 vs 1dx. All people said was that the AF was the same. But for anyone who used both that juuust wasn’t the case. Same thing goes for comparing and reading just specs. «Everybody» are always underwhelmed when a new Canon body comes out, yet, they perform absolutely stellar and without all the insane caveats of Sony and now Nikon. I don’t know why anyone is surprised the AF in the R1 will beat out both the R3 and R5. It was actually obvious with the specs when it was know in had cross type sensors, it was the big thing being discussed here for years and years, and then almost ignored with all the talking heads said «the R5 II is more of a flagship then the R1» and «I’m not getting an R1 , the R5 II will be better for me» . Using the double cross sensors of the 1dx2 was so much better then older cross type and non cross type.

And just to state again, I feel the R3 was also kind of dismissed and downplayed and ignored by many that went for the R5 and R5 II. A store rep even recommended me the R6 II over the R3 because of the specs saying it’s «basically the same camera». I left. The R3 is the perfect compromise for me and has performed way beyond any other Canon body I’ve owned or tried..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Upvote 0
#11
Canon Rumors Guy said:
They could. They started with contrast detection and then they moved to phase detection on the DPAF equipped EOS cameras.
Click to expand...
I use a 7D m2 and I see these issues when I try to shoot birds in flight. I get really happy when I accidentally get a focused photo. I think Canon deserves more credit for developing these technologies. DPAF in particular has made an incredible leap forward. I can't wait to try an updated mirrorless from Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#12
Considering the R1 is targeted at sports photographers and journalists, giving them a feature like this first, makes sense. Who, if not them will actually encounter quite a lot of horizontal lines on sportswear, stadium architecture, press conference settings and stuff like this. As a nature photographer, I never really noticed a problem with this, but it's probably because I very rarely have to focus on horizontal lines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#13
duzinsan said:
I use a 7D m2 and I see these issues when I try to shoot birds in flight. I get really happy when I accidentally get a focused photo. I think Canon deserves more credit for developing these technologies. DPAF in particular has made an incredible leap forward. I can't wait to try an updated mirrorless from Canon.
Click to expand...

That was the first implementation of DPAF, DPAF II took a big leap and it only continues to get better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#15
This feature is an answer to what has often bothered me when using a mirrorless, compared to a DSLR.
A major innovation! Well done!
Sadly, the "internet experts" will still be focused on "only" 24 MP...disregarding real technological advances (unless they came from soni).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0
#16
koenkooi said:
but a bird against a blue sky during the height of summer shouldn’t be limited by the pixel size
Click to expand...
but
The sensor works by taking the pixel and splitting it in half (thus dual pixel). Canon can then read the sensor and measure the phase difference between each half of the pixel to determine if the feature is in focus and if not, how far away it is.
Click to expand...
I am wondering if the smaller phase difference of smaller pxiels may also need more processing or cause problems.
Just a thought.:unsure:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#17
Viggo said:
This has always been the story of 1 vs 5 series in my experience. The most glaring example were perhaps the 5d3 vs 1dx. All people said was that the AF was the same. But for anyone who used both that juuust wasn’t the case. Same thing goes for comparing and reading just specs. «Everybody» are always underwhelmed when a new Canon body comes out, yet, they perform absolutely stellar and without all the insane caveats of Sony and now Nikon. I don’t know why anyone is surprised the AF in the R1 will beat out both the R3 and R5. It was actually obvious with the specs when it was know in had cross type sensors, it was the big thing being discussed here for years and years, and then almost ignored with all the talking heads said «the R5 II is more of a flagship then the R1» and «I’m not getting an R1 , the R5 II will be better for me» . Using the double cross sensors of the 1dx2 was so much better then older cross type and non cross type.

And just to state again, I feel the R3 was also kind of dismissed and downplayed and ignored by many that went for the R5 and R5 II. A store rep even recommended me the R6 II over the R3 because of the specs saying it’s «basically the same camera». I left. The R3 is the perfect compromise for me and has performed way beyond any other Canon body I’ve owned or tried..
Click to expand...
So the R1 vs R5II situation is sorta the opposite of the 5diii and 1dx situation. The latter had the same AF hardware, but the 1dx had a whole processor dedicated to handling AF as well two additional processors to handle everything else. The 5diii had a single digic handling everything.

With the r1 vs r5ii, the processing appears to be identical. The big difference is the actual AF sensors (cross type vs non). I’m definitely curious to see real world experiences of people who use both.

Also worth noting the price difference between the 1 and 5 series is smaller than it has ever been before
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#19
Viggo said:
This has always been the story of 1 vs 5 series in my experience. The most glaring example were perhaps the 5d3 vs 1dx. All people said was that the AF was the same. But for anyone who used both that juuust wasn’t the case. Same thing goes for comparing and reading just specs. «Everybody» are always underwhelmed when a new Canon body comes out, yet, they perform absolutely stellar and without all the insane caveats of Sony and now Nikon. I don’t know why anyone is surprised the AF in the R1 will beat out both the R3 and R5. It was actually obvious with the specs when it was know in had cross type sensors, it was the big thing being discussed here for years and years, and then almost ignored with all the talking heads said «the R5 II is more of a flagship then the R1» and «I’m not getting an R1 , the R5 II will be better for me» . Using the double cross sensors of the 1dx2 was so much better then older cross type and non cross type.

And just to state again, I feel the R3 was also kind of dismissed and downplayed and ignored by many that went for the R5 and R5 II. A store rep even recommended me the R6 II over the R3 because of the specs saying it’s «basically the same camera». I left. The R3 is the perfect compromise for me and has performed way beyond any other Canon body I’ve owned or tried..
Click to expand...
However, the point missed is that for 98% of the mass consumer ie normal photographers, the 5D now R5 is absolutely the better option for the $$$$ price point. Especially considered it's hybrid dual functionality and without that built in monster grip that many prefer not to haul around.
 
Upvote 0
#20
Except not everyone prefers to haul around an R1 camera for the yes mostly negligible AF difference for the vast amount of photography genres. Let alone its lower mp resolution. For the value, no, the R1 autofocus difference has no tangible edge over the R5. EXIF data suggest that the consumer's eyes simply don't buy your argument. On paper one may be able to claim the technical AF differences however for the majority of practical applications the added cost, size, and lower resolution sensor factor simply doesn't cut it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
There is no longer a shortage of the Canon EOS R1 and EOS R5 Mark II
Replies
19
Views
851
reisi007
reisi007
Canon Rumors
More thoughts on the Canon EOS R1 and EOS R5 Mark II from Paris
Replies
151
Views
12K
bbasiaga
B
Canon Rumors
Canon officially announces the EOS R1 and EOS R5 Mark II
Replies
236
Views
13K
frankchn
F
Richard CR
Canon EOS R5 Mark II Assumes it’s Rightful Ranking at Map Camera
Replies
10
Views
691
Ryrock77
R
Richard CR
Canon Interview: EOS R1 is the true flagship
Replies
266
Views
15K
Omn
O
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu