X-pro 2 unimpressive AF

[petergabriel]

Being used to the x100t and the way its auto focus works, I was surprised to see how bad the x-t1 and x-pro2 with the xf 35mm f1.4 and xf 35mm f2.0 performs in comparison. I went to a store today, because I am keen on buying the coming x-t2. So thought a look at the x-t1 and x-pro2 would be a good indicator of what to expect.

Both cameras set to zone focus, single AF, focus priority and with high performance on - and latest firmware! 

 

No matter if I tried the new or the old 35mm lens model I have never experienced so many focus locks (green squares) on subjects that were severly out of focus.

I mean the subject was a blurred mess and still I got the AF confirmation sound and green squares.

I litteraly never had this issue on my x100t. Either the x100t got the focus right or it didn't (started hunting). It never pretended to have it when it didn't. Also when focusing on something a couple of meters away (where the x-t1 and x-pro2 focused perfectly) and then holding my hand like 40 cm's in front of the lenses (well beyond both lenses close focusing distance) the x100t (and x70, I tested with that camera to) just locked on my hand perfectly.

The x-t1 and x-pro2 with both 35mm lenses tested simply gave up. Or that is to say, both cameras claimed to have focused on my hand, but none of them did. My hand was just a blur.

 

How come two high end cameras can't even focus on my hand in a well lit room when the x100t (and x70) just nails it? It can't be camera duds as I tried both an old and a new model as well as old and new lens. And it can't be my photography skills as the fixed lens models had no problems at all. I know a hand is maybe not the most contrasty subject, but still It was held infront of a bright wall, so the cameras shouldn't fail so miserably.

What are your thoughts and experience?

And please, keep a nice tone :-)

Edited May 28, 2016 by petergabriel

[Patrick FR]

did you shoot in continuous mode - CH or CL? If yes, here are a 2 suggestions

 

1) Enable Mechanical Shutter (MS) only. The camera won’t focus between each shot in CL or CH tracking, if ES only (electronic shutter) or MS+ES is enabled. Shooting fast-moving subjects with the ES doesn’t really make sense (rolling shutter effect).
2) Turn Off Face Detection! If you have Face Detection put to ON, the camera will focus only with CDAF. The faster Phase Detection AF (PDAF) works only if Face Detection is disabled.

[petergabriel]

did you shoot in continuous mode - CH or CL? If yes, here are a 2 suggestions

 

1) Enable Mechanical Shutter (MS) only. The camera won’t focus between each shot in CL or CH tracking, if ES only (electronic shutter) or MS+ES is enabled. Shooting fast-moving subjects with the ES doesn’t really make sense (rolling shutter effect).

2) Turn Off Face Detection! If you have Face Detection put to ON, the camera will focus only with CDAF. The faster Phase Detection AF (PDAF) works only if Face Detection is disabled.

 

As I wrote, I shot in single AF mode, and by that I mean single shot, not continuous :-)

 

I also shot in MS mode. Face detection was off.

 

Both cameras did fine when focusing on all the other stuff in the store, both fast and accaurate, but when when holding my hand in front of the camera, at a distance both cameras should be able to focus upon perfectly fine, none of the cameras could focus at all. They seemed content with a blurry hand :-)

Edited May 28, 2016 by petergabriel

[adzman808]

was your hand back lit by any chance?

[Patrick FR]

I never noticed such a bad AF behaviour

 

To be sure, I just tested it again. Focus on several distant objects, then on by hand (using X-T1 + 35mmF1.4)

 

no issue.

 

When focussing my hand, the AF was slow, but when the green box appreared, the hand was in focus. Red box, out of focus (well, one time I got the red box, but the hand was in focus).

 

Can't duplicate the issue, at least on my X-T1 with 35mmF1.4.

 

in my case, my hand was not back lit

[Aswald]

That's odd.

 

Mine focuses fine and rather quickly too. xp1 and xp2, the same.

 

My hand was side lit by window light.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Aswald

[petergabriel]

The store had plenty of light sources in the ceiling and I tried focusing on my hand in many different spots in the store. So I would say it was a mixture of back and front lit. I wish I could have grapped some shots for you guys to see.

 

If it wasn't for my memory of how my x100t focuses I would never have done the test in the store. It is just the way I always try out a cameras AF. Going from distance to close focus. So I was really surprised that the x100t under the same conditions nailed my usual none scientific test method and the two cameras which supposedly blows the x100t's AF out of the water didn't.

[oscillik]

As I wrote, I shot in single AF mode, and by that I mean single shot, not continuous :-)

 

I also shot in MS mode. Face detection was off.

 

Both cameras did fine when focusing on all the other stuff in the store, both fast and accaurate, but when when holding my hand in front of the camera, at a distance both cameras should be able to focus upon perfectly fine, none of the cameras could focus at all. They seemed content with a blurry hand :-)

sounds like you simply had your hand too close to the lens.

 

Exactly what distance did you have your hand from the lenses?

[petergabriel]

Approx 40 cm's :-)

Edited May 29, 2016 by petergabriel

[oscillik]

Approx 40 cm's :-)

Well, my XF35mmF2 works just as designed, with a close focus range of 35cm.

[johant]

Just tried it with my old X-Pro1, with artificial light. It's slow but precise. No reason why the X-Pro2 would be worse.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Fiddlergene]

I have the xp1, the xt1, and the xp2. With each new release the autofocus improved dramatically. Perhaps when you shot with the xp2 the diopter adjustment was off.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Fiddlergene

[petergabriel]

I have the xp1, the xt1, and the xp2. With each new release the autofocus improved dramatically. Perhaps when you shot with the xp2 the diopter adjustment was off.

It was of when the seller handed med the camera, so I adjusted it, but still, both the x-pro2 and x-t1 with both of the 35mm lenses had the issue, and the x100t and x70 had no issues at all.

 

Really strange!

Edited May 30, 2016 by petergabriel

[umad?]

either you had your hands too close to the subject or the lens is broken. Personally I'd go for the 35mm f/1.4 if shooting low light is a priority. The X-Pro2 really gave new life to that old lens. Very fast and accurate now. 

[petergabriel]

either you had your hands too close to the subject or the lens is broken. Personally I'd go for the 35mm f/1.4 if shooting low light is a priority. The X-Pro2 really gave new life to that old lens. Very fast and accurate now. 

 

So two different camera models and two different lenses broken? I think not :-) And to repeat myself once more: My hand was at least 40 cm's away from both lenses, and the x100t and x70 nailed same test.

[umad?]

Lenses and camera not broken? That it was a human error. Sorry to say so

Edited May 30, 2016 by umad?

[petergabriel]

Lenses and camera not broken? That it was a human error. Sorry to say so

 

Maybe, but I have been using Fujifilm cameras since x100s came out, so I know how they work, and when both x100t and x70 nailed the focus, why would both the x-t1 and x-pro2 fail at the same time with two different lenses?

[mdm]

So, is it possible to see your naileds and faileds, as I'm affraid nobody fully understand what are we talking about here.

[oscillik]

Maybe, but I have been using Fujifilm cameras since x100s came out, so I know how they work, and when both x100t and x70 nailed the focus, why would both the x-t1 and x-pro2 fail at the same time with two different lenses?

Both the X100T and X70 have closer focus range than the XF35mm, which is why it seems that your estimate of the distance of your hand from the XF35mm may be incorrect.

[petergabriel]

Both the X100T and X70 have closer focus range than the XF35mm, which is why it seems that your estimate of the distance of your hand from the XF35mm may be incorrect.

 

It is 28 cm's and 35cm's depending on the lens. I held it at least 40 cm's away. I know my distances :-)

[petergabriel]

So, is it possible to see your naileds and faileds, as I'm affraid nobody fully understand what are we talking about here.

Not unless I go back to the store with an SD-card and replicate my test :-)

[Aswald]

Sometimes we just have to take an experience for what it is. In this case, the cameras fared badly.....or there may have been some unknown external factors. Either that or you have "hard to detect" palms!

 

Perhaps the only way to allay this "unique" experience is to try another time. Maybe at another store with a completely different body and lens. I'd recommend you to give it another go.

[petergabriel]

Sometimes we just have to take an experience for what it is. In this case, the cameras fared badly.....or there may have been some unknown external factors. Either that or you have "hard to detect" palms!

 

Perhaps the only way to allay this "unique" experience is to try another time. Maybe at another store with a completely different body and lens. I'd recommend you to give it another go.

Could the unkown factor be fluorescent light? I know the EVF on both cameras flickered alot in the store.

Or should macro mode be enabled (can it even be enabled anymore?) to reach closest focusing?

[Aswald]

Could the unkown factor be fluorescent light? I know the EVF on both cameras flickered alot in the store.

Or should macro mode be enabled (can it even be enabled anymore?) to reach closest focusing?

 

I think that anything is possible. Lighting may just be the annoying culprit. Too many sub standards in lighting nowadays.

 

OTT, some automobile alarm systems have been known to be sensitive to broadband broadcast towers. When parked at a certain distance from these towers, the alarm either don't work or it immobilizes the car entirely.

 

I don't think the "macro" function will work given the exact scenario. All it does is actually limiting the focus hunting to be near the minimum focus distance. That way, the camera would prevent the lens from hunting to infinity and back. I don't see how that may help but it's worth a try.

 

I hope your next experience at a different store / setup will be a positive one. Don't give up. The X-Pro2 and X-T1 as with most of Fujifilm cameras are really a photographic "companion" rather than just a camera.

Edited June 1, 2016 by Aswald

[gdanmitchell]

So, basically it seems like there are two explanations.

 

1. Fujifilm XT1 and XPro2 cameras are incapable of autofocusing correctly on the targets that you used, and therefore all of the other people getting fine autofocus results are crazy or dense. Or...

 

2. There was something about your test that was unique that you can't understand and that none of us can figure out, given nothing more than your subjective narrative.