Why don't professional cameras have them?

The mechanics of the Reuters system are fairly easy to understand but how are the VF images relayed to the operator(s)? Do they use a system like the older Zigviews (which basically use a mini camera to look into the SLR's viewfinder) or a live view system of some sort?

"Easily as fast" (source?) is quite a lot different from "easily as accurate". Live view systems usually operate their AF using contrast detection rather than the phase detection system which is generally faster and more accurate. With the usual caveat regarding Wiki's accuracy! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofocus#Active
 
That's how the modern Zigviews do it - they plug into the video out port and the shutter release socket and away you go!
 
Yup - when I turned off my alarm this morning!
 
Nod said:
"Easily as fast" (source?) is quite a lot different from "easily as accurate". Live view systems usually operate their AF using contrast detection rather than the phase detection system which is generally faster and more accurate. With the usual caveat regarding Wiki's accuracy! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofocus#Active
Click to expand...

As I already said, in Sony alphas, LV uses PDAF (not CDAF). Using the rear screen is exactly the same as using the VF. No impact on AF performance whatsoever.

And sorry to be a pedant but PDAF may be quicker (by some margin), but CDAF should always be as accurate or more so, because its taken from the main sensor and by definition can never suffer from calibration issues.
 
Last edited:
Johnd2000 said:
That's moving the goalposts a bit. You said "all cameras have inferior AF in LV".

I've not used either of those cameras, but if you're looking for a canikon-friendly comparison, then I'd be comfortable with "easily as fast as a 5Dmk2 with the mirror down".
Click to expand...

I never moved the goalposts. The opening question relates to professional cameras. So the 1d and D4 are precisely the correct benchmarks. So citing Sony's use of PDAF is just academic. You're the one moving the goalposts to promote cameras that most would consider unsuitable for professional use.
 
Phil V said:
I never moved the goalposts. The opening question relates to professional cameras. So the 1d and D4 are precisely the correct benchmarks. So citing Sony's use of PDAF is just academic. You're the one moving the goalposts to promote cameras that most would consider unsuitable for professional use.
Click to expand...

Does that mean we should infer that a Hasselblad H4D would be unsuitable for professional use because it doesn't auto-focus as fast as a Canon 1DX or D4?
 
Phil V said:
I never moved the goalposts. The opening question relates to professional cameras. So the 1d and D4 are precisely the correct benchmarks. So citing Sony's use of PDAF is just academic. You're the one moving the goalposts to promote cameras that most would consider unsuitable for professional use.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that ANY camera that costs less than 4k is not a professional one?
 
Musicman said:
Does that mean we should infer that a Hasselblad H4D would be unsuitable for professional use because it doesn't auto-focus as fast as a Canon 1DX or D4?
Click to expand...

You don't do "motion" or unpredictable photography with hassleblad camera's as they don't perform well outside of a studio setting as the ISO range on them is pathetic. I'm talking more about photojournalists all bunched in a group trying to chimp away at celebs getting into a car, which is the perceived benefit of having a tilting screen, yet in the real world just wouldn't work due to how poor live view is.
 
iced_jacob said:
For some professionals fps may not be the primary consideration...(studios, weddings, blah blah..)
Click to expand...

Doh you posted whilst I was writing my other post lol. Yeah naturally, as different genres of photography have vastly different gear requirements etc.

Sports photography and photojournalism though love the FPS. As do wildlife photographers. Its landscape, studio and macro work where FPS never really applies.

Studio work however usually involves tethering (especially with hassleblad) so live view isn't particularly useful there either. Live view is great for macro, but macro doesn't require speed to be successful and is often manually focused anyway (or even manual focus stacked photos, which take AGES).

My point was more for users who truly need the speed (photojournalists are a great example) where AF speed, FPS and ISO are all the most important things as they just chimp to get "that" shot. Live view even on a D4 isn't suitable for photography that requires such speed, as what you'd be wanting to take a photo of probably would have moved on by the time you got a shot ready in LV.
 
James J said:
You don't do "motion" or unpredictable photography with hassleblad camera's as they don't perform well outside of a studio setting as the ISO range on them is pathetic. I'm talking more about photojournalists all bunched in a group trying to chimp away at celebs getting into a car, which is the perceived benefit of having a tilting screen, yet in the real world just wouldn't work due to how poor live view is.
Click to expand...

Yes but the question was about professional cameras NOT the specific needs of photojournalists. There are high-end cameras offered by sony that have tilting screens and fast-focusing LV that can be used by professionals to get professional results. So the OPs question was answered: tilting screens exist on some prof cameras but the two big manufacturers choose not to include those (for their own reasons!)
 
iced_jacob said:
hm...I guess i can keep enjoying my fast live view by myself ;)
Click to expand...

Not quite - there's another fanboy just above you!

I have live view available but apart from testing and a couple of zigview uses, I've never used it. FWIW, I believe I use a Sony sensor but packeged a different way.
 
Musicman said:
Does that mean we should infer that a Hasselblad H4D would be unsuitable for professional use because it doesn't auto-focus as fast as a Canon 1DX or D4?
Click to expand...

iced_jacob said:
Are you saying that ANY camera that costs less than 4k is not a professional one?
Click to expand...

Do some people just come here looking for arguments?:shrug:

This was a discussion regarding AF speed and live view with Sony cameras, what that has to do with professional photography generally or Hasselblads or the Hubble telescope is beyond me!

Before commenting, it might be a good idea to read all of the relevant posts n order to get what we call 'context'. :thumbs:
 
iced_jacob said:
Yes but the question was about professional cameras NOT the specific needs of photojournalists. There are high-end cameras offered by sony that have tilting screens and fast-focusing LV that can be used by professionals to get professional results. So the OPs question was answered: tilting screens exist on some prof cameras but the two big manufacturers choose not to include those (for their own reasons!)
Click to expand...

I think you are missing the point, as professional camera's are designed for two reasons (which ends up in two bodies). First is the professionals that require speed, not just in the AF but in FPS and high ISO. Example being The D3s/D4 cameras. The second is the studio photographer who requires larger prints, who values dynamic range and sharpness over everything else. Example being the D800 and D3x from Nikon.

A tilting screen isn't required by either camp as it only gets used for histogram checking most of the time anyway...
 
Phil V said:
I never moved the goalposts. The opening question relates to professional cameras. So the 1d and D4 are precisely the correct benchmarks. So citing Sony's use of PDAF is just academic. You're the one moving the goalposts to promote cameras that most would consider unsuitable for professional use.
Click to expand...

Lol! Okay then.

People who are thinking 5D's, D800's and the like are pro cameras, like me and I suspect a few others, can now bow out of this thread.

"Unsuitable for professional use"! You crack me up.
 
Johnd2000 said:
Lol! Okay then.

People who are thinking 5D's, D800's and the like are pro cameras, like me and I suspect a few others, can now bow out of this thread.

"Unsuitable for professional use"! You crack me up.
Click to expand...

So we're discussing AF SPEED, not suitability for taking professional pictures, AF SPEED - and you bring up Sony cameras which have decent AF SPEED in live view, then when I say they don't measure against the best for AF SPEED, you move on to cameras not noted for their AF SPEED to make it look like you were right all along:naughty:.

Although, those of you who don't know an f stop from a bus stop and just join threads to see who you can wind up, feel free to bow out at any time:thumbs:
 
If we're into the personal attack stage of the thread, I'm out of here before I say something that gets me banned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top