How bad or slow is 5D2 auto focusing?

[Mike Markov]

Fairly straight forward question, how slow, non-precise, or bad is the auto focusing on a 5D2? Does it compare to auto focusing on a 550D or 7D?

[Voaky999]

Not bad and not slow if you mostly rely on the centre focus point.

[Mike Markov]

Thanks for the quick reply, I'll keep that in mind if I ever decided to purchase a 5D2. Thanks!

[Shaymus]

Originally Posted by Mike Markov

Thanks for the quick reply, I'll keep that in mind if I ever decided to purchase a 5D2. Thanks!

You make it sound like you are not even in the market for the 5DII...so why ask?

[Albert Nam]

I've used the 7D and 600D (not the 550D) and the 5DII compares favorably to the 600D but is worse than the 7D.

The center point is perfectly precise and is good. The outer points are dodgy in bad light but work very well in good light. Autofocus speed may be slightly slower than the 7D, though I haven't taken the time to compare.

[Numenorean]

Originally Posted by Albert Nam

I've used the 7D and 600D (not the 550D) and the 5DII compares favorably to the 600D but is worse than the 7D.

The center point is perfectly precise and is good. The outer points are dodgy in bad light but work very well in good light. Autofocus speed may be slightly slower than the 7D, though I haven't taken the time to compare.

I just got done shooting a wedding in an aquarium, which was very dark. I couldn't make out the faces of the couple through my viewfinder - just saw profiles. I used outer points and they worked just fine. The key is to find an area with good contrast to use and they will do fine.

[InterMurph]

But in comparison to the III, the II is slower and less accurate.

[NASS Photo]

Originally Posted by InterMurph

But in comparison to the III, the II is slower and less accurate.

True. Until I compared the 5DMII w/ the 5DMIII, I thought it was ok. There is always something that is going to be better.

[EL_PIC]

Originally Posted by InterMurph

But in comparison to the III, the II is slower and less accurate.

It would be nice if folks spoke with data.
AF speed should be quoted in seconds for given settings, lens {center, edge, single, AI servo, subject movement etc}, and light.
If you compared in seconds rather than marketing hype ...
there would not be much delta between cheaper and more pricey systems.
Marketing is the problem w 21st digital photo.

The lenes, max aperture, shoot mode {single/AI}, style, lighting,
and center are what really effects AF speed and accuracy most.
Think about that the next time a company or salesman want you to open your wallet.

[MNUplander]

Originally Posted by EL_PIC

It would be nice if folks spoke with data.

Of course it would. But, most on this forum do not have the equipment, skill or time to accurately measure this information. So, when the OP asks for opinions on this in an open forum, they can expect to get nothing more - opinions.

Originally Posted by EL_PIC

The lenes, max aperture, shoot mode {single/AI}, style, lighting,
and center are what really effects AF speed and accuracy most.
Think about that the next time a company or salesman want you to open your wallet.

However, this is all very true.

[EL_PIC]

FYI Note ... A group of High Schoolers measured AF speed with various cameras lenes settings and techiques using a common stopwatch.
The results would spoil the day for many who follow a brand or upgrade generation.

[MNUplander]

Originally Posted by EL_PIC

FYI Note ... A group of High Schoolers measured AF speed with various cameras lenes settings and techiques using a common stopwatch.
The results would spoil the day for many who follow a brand or upgrade generation.

While I dont disagree that the results of such a test would indeed be surprising, I've been in the presence of many high schoolers (in fact, I used to be one) and I wouldn't make any bets based on the "results" of a test conducted by one.

[HyperYagami]

Originally Posted by MNUplander

While I dont disagree that the results of such a test would indeed be surprising, I've been in the presence of many high schoolers (in fact, I used to be one) and I wouldn't make any bets based on the "results" of a test conducted by one.

+1. no matter how you conduct the "test" someone's going to dispute it.

general opinions are good enough indicators.

[InterMurph]

While it's possible to get good results with outer points, I think it is a fair criticism of the 5D Mark II that its outer points are not nearly as good as the center point.

I am finding the same to be true of the 5D Mark III. The III is much better than the II, but even on the III, the outer points are not as accurate as the center point.

[Gregg.Siam]

Originally Posted by InterMurph

While it's possible to get good results with outer points, I think it is a fair criticism of the 5D Mark II that its outer points are not nearly as good as the center point.

I am finding the same to be true of the 5D Mark III. The III is much better than the II, but even on the III, the outer points are not as accurate as the center point.

Comparing the two is just not the same thing. Yes, the center can be a double cross type, so a single cross type is technically not as accurate, but a loooong way from the performance the the 5D2 outer points. The furthest outer points are horizontal, but the AF is still better than the horizontal 5D2 points.