aleksanderpolo
Regular
- Name
- Polo
Sure, lens design is a big factor; my point was just that if it were that easy of a nut to crack, everyone would be doing it right out of the gate on their first try. Nobody *wants* to produce and market the camera with the slowest AF, right? It's in their best interest to produce sharp lenses, good performing sensors, and fast focus.
The firmware improvements to AF speed mean that in addition to lens design, it's also the algorithms in use that are a big factor. Yes, it's "just" contrast detection, but how you implement that, prioritize, and classify areas is all important. Coming from a software background, it's easy to understand how it takes time to build up an effective algorithm with incremental improvements, bugfixes, and performance enhancements over time.
They may have underwhelmed in the AF department but as I've said with the Fuji line, this just shows how hard of a problem to solve this really is and how far m4/3 has come to be as fast as it is.
they are not competing with the x100. the x10/20 yes; but the x100 is in another league.
I don't know if MFT went that fast....Auto focus wasn't significantly improved until the E-P3 and E-PM1. And Olympus had two generations of E-Ps prior to. Therefore, you have to give Fuji and Canon up to their 3rd generation too.....
And if anyone came with fast auto-focus right out of the box...It was Nikon
What is surprising is that the higher mass zoom lens focuses faster than the lighter 22mm. Probably because the pancake has a less powerful power/weight motor.
The Canon 22mm pancake is a unit focusing lens where the entire lens group is moved in and out to focus, whereas the zoom is internal focusing with much less mass to move. The two original m4/3 pancakes were also unit focusing and suffer today in focusing speed when compared to every subsequent lens which have all featured internal focusing. Samsung and Fuji have the same problem with a number of their current prime lenses featuring unit focusing designs.
Sounds to me like how the Panasonic 20mm ƒ1.7 focuses...
The one thing that people don't really seem to compare is DoF characteristics between an APS-C sensor with an f2 aperture, and smaller (faster, cleaner, more modern) sensors. The EOS M gives a big-camera image in a small body.
In my mind (and in the image) the EOS M is a "compact" camera with a 35mm f2.8 lens (those are the numbers if you scaled the sensor up to FF from 22mm f2 on APS-C). Guess what terrific camera has those same numbers, but can't hold a candle to the EOS-M in image quality? The Contax T3, an absolutely brilliant compact from the recent film era.
I'm sold...the EOS M is my film compact replacement. I like the Ricoh GR and Nikon A too, but I prefer 35mm framing and appreciate the extra speed in this fantastic 22mm prime lens.
All for $299!
Sent from my iPad using SeriousCompacts mobile app
More than a few people have suggested that they plan on using like a fixed lens camera. I guess there's no need to worry about other lenses if you're happy with the one on there. And for that price, there are no competitors for an APS-C sensor fixed lens camera (with the ability to add other lenses if they ever become available).