Will phase focusing go the way of the dinosaur?

"RichA" wrote in message
...
Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

"Will phase focusing go the way of the dinosaur?"

No

David

On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 08:09:12 +0100, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

"RichA" wrote in message
...
Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today. Your desperate diatribe to justify
phase-focusing sounds good in theory but doesn't hold up to reality. Catch
up with this decade.

James Nagler wrote:
"David J Taylor"
"RichA" wrote in message

Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today.

Now you're just resorting to stupid lies out of desperation.

--
Ray Fischer

On 07/06/10 10:34 AM, Ray Fischer wrote:
James wrote:

snip

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today.

Now you're just resorting to stupid lies out of desperation.

How is this night different from all other nights?

On 07 Jun 2010 17:34:47 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

James Nagler wrote:
"David J Taylor"
"RichA" wrote in message

Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today.

Now you're just resorting to stupid lies out of desperation.

Now you're just resorting to ignorance out of ignorance.

On 07 Jun 2010 17:34:47 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

James Nagler wrote:
"David J Taylor"
"RichA" wrote in message

Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today.

Now you're just resorting to stupid lies out of desperation.

Now you're just resorting to ignorance out of ignorance.

James Nagler wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote:
James Nagler wrote:
"David J Taylor"
"RichA" wrote in message

Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today.

Now you're just resorting to stupid lies out of desperation.

Now you're just resorting to

When YOU got caught lying it would have been smarter for you to shut
up. Instead you're just showing yourself to be a liar AND an asshole.

--
Ray Fischer

James Nagler wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote:
James Nagler wrote:
"David J Taylor"
"RichA" wrote in message

Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today.

Now you're just resorting to stupid lies out of desperation.

Now you're just resorting to ignorance out of ignorance.

List these cameras that do contrast focusing at 10 frames per second.
Or admit that you're just a liar and asshole.

--
Ray Fischer

On 08 Jun 2010 05:45:33 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

James Nagler wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote:
James Nagler wrote:
"David J Taylor"
"RichA" wrote in message

Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today.

Now you're just resorting to stupid lies out of desperation.

Now you're just resorting to ignorance out of ignorance.

List these cameras that do contrast focusing at 10 frames per second.
Or admit that you're just a liar and asshole.

Just because a camera won't shoot 10 frames per second doesn't mean they
can't focus just as fast. The two are disparate functions of any camera.

Now admit that you're nothing but the pretend-photographer DSLR-Troll that
you are.

James Nagler wrote:
On 08 Jun 2010 05:45:33 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

James Nagler wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote:
James Nagler wrote:
"David J Taylor"
"RichA" wrote in message

Forget for the moment the benefits of going away from phase focusing,
such as much lower cost going to contrast focusing. Phase's main
important claim to fame is speed. But that is diminishing, or
contrast is improving. The main problem with phase focusing is the
constant problems with back or front focusing with various lenses,
doesn't matter what brand of camera. This is a pain, one that
contrast focusing apparently does not have or if it does, the
incidence is very small. Most decent DSLR's now come with
compensation features for this, but who wants to have to go though the
elimination process for each lens they own and how often has this
compensation not even been enough, or consistent?

You appear to forget that phase-focusing provides an instantaneous and
continuous measurement not only of the direction of the focus error, but
its magnitude as well, so that the camera knows which direction to move
the lens, and by exactly how much to move it. One lens move. Focus done.

Contrast focus, by comparison, takes time to evaluate how much in focus an
image is, moves the lens in an arbitrary direction, evaluates the focus
once again, has a 50% chance of finding the focus is worse so has to move
the lens in the other direction, has to evaluate the focus again, move the
lens, etc. etc., until the focus is worse again, so it's moved past the
point of best focus, and finally has to move the lens back to /about/ the
correct focus.

You appear to forget that some contrast focusing cameras are just as fast
as phase focusing cameras today.

Now you're just resorting to stupid lies out of desperation.

Now you're just resorting to ignorance out of ignorance.

List these cameras that do contrast focusing at 10 frames per second.
Or admit that you're just a liar and asshole.

Just because a camera won't shoot 10 frames per second doesn't mean they

You decided to be an asshole and now you're making excuses for your
stupidity.

Not impressed.

--
Ray Fischer