I got the Sony (HDR-HC3) becuase the Canon equivilant had the mic at the back of the camera which I thought was real lame. I'm doing handheld and some tripod people stuff, no external mic, so getting great sound is real important.

Only thing is that I read somewhere that image stabilization with Sony is not true stabilization, and I notice on my footage, it can look quite jumpy and jerky.

Can someone give me an overview of this, and should I go back to Canon cameras for this one issue, or am I overblowing this. (and does the mic at rear or the Canon perform poorly as I assume). thanks.

I've got both the Sony HC3 & Canon HV20. The Sony has electronic stabilization and the Canon has optical stablization and is much better. The Canon's got a mic input too.

Tony, do you find the Sony is "unacceptable" as far as that goes?

I see the new hdr-hc7's have optical now. Why did take Sony so long to catch on?

The Canons, you are saying you can put an external mic. the mic is still in back? Sonys have better sound still?

Optical stabilization isn't always preferable. I cringe when I read so many posts about "how much better optical is than electronic."
Not so. A good high end optical is of course, better than electronic. A good electronic is better than a poor/avg optical.
Just as an example, for motor mounting, skydiving, paragliding, hanggliding, BASE jumping, or skateboarding, optical on the Sony and Canon low end camcorders cannot be used. It must be disabled. I have at least 400 jumps with the HC3 and HC5 camcorders, around 30 jumps with the Canon (totally useless in freefall or motor mount), and although I own an HC7, it's extremely rare I jump with it because it too, is terrible for motor mount or freefall.
It's not *just* about having the cooler/mo' bettah new feature, but rather...how does that feature impact you and your workflow?

Doug, thanks,. let's get specfic here: I'm shooting people talking and moving around a bit. With the hdr-hc3 (stead shot or digital stabilization), it often seems that I'm getting seasick watching. very jerky and jumpy. Even when I'm concentrating on holding camera steady.

I see now the the new version, the 7, has optical. my guess is that issue would be resolved. Correct? For MY specific use: shooting peole talking and walking a bit would I be better off ditching the 3 and getting the 7 no?

I don't know anything about your sporst stuff, but from everything I read optical is better, both Canon and Sony say that in their blurbs on the camera ie, that optical gets rid of the problem before the image hits the sensor.

..how does that feature impact you and your workflow?"

This is what i'm saying Douglas -- my first shoot with hc3, looks very bad, hence, need for this post. I'm debating what to do.

optical *can* be and often is better. Optical works with a gyro, magnets, sensors, or all of the above communicating with each other. Heavy shakes vertically during a pan might be great but maybe the camera has weak horizontal stabilization.
Some lenses only have vertical stabilization.
In my early JVC cams, we had to open up the cam and glue the piezo sensors in place because you couldn't shut off the IS completely.

OIS/Optical Image Stabilization can be a blessing or a curse. Canon tends to do it better than anyone (IMO) in still camera lenses, and pretty darn good in small camcorders. Sony doesn't do it well in big lenses (IMO) but they do it better than Canon in consumer cams (IMO).

I don't know what is causing your video to look bad without seeing it. Perhaps you've got weird shutter speeds occuring and it's messing with your picture. Or, you're leaving IS enabled while shooting from a tripod. Many options/causes to weirdness in the frame that you might want to blame on IS.
Post a short vid, maybe we can figure it out.

Doug, I'm shooting everything on auto with the hc3. On tripod it's fine. off the tripod hand held pretty bad. Again this camera does not have optical, its their steady shot - digital right?

So I'm thinking of trying the new hc7. I assume that's probable as good as the Canon v20.

JUst thinking what a hassle that will be everytime have to turn off IS and then back on going from tripod to handheld. but maybe if the new version is good enough I wont need the tripod

Just as an example, for motor mounting, skydiving, paragliding, hanggliding, BASE jumping, or skateboarding, optical on the Sony and Canon low end camcorders cannot be used.

So, do I consider my XLH1 and my HV20 as "Canon low end camcorders?"

Thanks---Mike

So, do I consider my XLH1 and my HV20 as "Canon low end camcorders?"

Thanks---Mike

The HV20...absolutely.
I can't imagine anyone crazy enough to attempt to strap an XLH1 onto a skateboard or skydiving helmet, and having never tried it myself, I can't answer whether the OIS can manage it or not.
That said, I have flown with an XDCAM, so I guess an XL series cam isn't far out of the question.
The HV20 absolutely cannot manage high vibration. Neither could the HV10. All of the Sony HC series can. Somewhere here, I've posted identical comparisons. But always with the caveat that if you're not running ATVs, skydiving, aircraft wing/body mounts, etc...these small camcorders and their OIS is fine.
Kevin, you never want OIS enabled on a tripod. It softens the picture and can create various shifts in the vid as well.

The HV20...absolutely.
I can't imagine anyone crazy enough to attempt to strap an XLH1 onto a skateboard or skydiving helmet, and having never tried it myself, I can't answer whether the OIS can manage it or not.
That said, I have flown with an XDCAM, so I guess an XL series cam isn't far out of the question.
The HV20 absolutely cannot manage high vibration. Neither could the HV10. All of the Sony HC series can. Somewhere here, I've posted identical comparisons. But always with the caveat that if you're not running ATVs, skydiving, aircraft wing/body mounts, etc...these small camcorders and their OIS is fine.
Kevin, you never want OIS enabled on a tripod. It softens the picture and can create various shifts in the vid as well.

Sorry, I missed the part where we were only discussing skateboards and helmet cams. I thought the original question was which system is better----Optical or Digital. And besides, my neck muscles would never handle the helmet with my XLH1! :)

M

Douglas,

So between the Sony HVR-Z1, HDR-FX1, HVR-V1, HDR-FX7 (which I believe are digital) or the Canon XH G1, A1 HDV, XLH1 Camcorders, (which I believe are optical), which have the best image stabilization for normal/general use?

Thanks in advance----Mike

Douglas,

So between the Sony HVR-Z1, HDR-FX1, HVR-V1, HDR-FX7 (which I believe are digital)
They all have optical image stabilization.

They all have optical image stabilization.

Sorry, but then let me restate my question then, which system is better, Sony or Canon?

Thanks in advanced----M

Hum,

To quote Sony, "Super SteadyShot® Image Stabilization System

Picture stabilization system that uses motion sensors to detect and compensate for camera "shake" without compromising picture quality like some "other" digital stabilization systems."

Does not say optical, is it optical or digital on the Sony HDR-HC3?

M

The HC3 and HC5 are EIS (electronic). The HC7 is optical.

The HC7 stabilization is superior to the HC3 - hadn't noticed it initially when comparing to my HC1, but with all three side by side (1 and 7 are OIS, 3 is EIS), the 3 was twitchy by comparison when handheld - enough to convince me the 7 was the best choice, and to retire the 3 - the 1 still held up decent in comparison.

The 3 is great for small size, but the 7 is a far superior camera on almost every possible comparison, and just as compact! Kevin, if you can upgrade, do it, you'll be glad you did.

HC1 is EIS. HC3 is EIS.
(Mikko's right, I'd mis-recalled the HC1)

Optical stabilization isn't always preferable. I cringe when I read so many posts about "how much better optical is than electronic."

I didn't mean optical is always better than electronic only that the Canon HV20 stabilizer is better than Sony HC3s, but I've never tried SKY DIVING with them! :)

HC1 has electronic stabilization, not optical. If you disable stabilization and enable full scan, you will see the whole image before the digital stabilization. A1U is also EIS. Cnet and camcorderinfo are dead wrong.

I didn't mean optical is always better than electronic only that the Canon HV20 stabilizer is better than Sony HC3s, but I've never tried SKY DIVING with them! :)
I have seen DSE's post of the footage. You don't want to try sky diving with it! :)

I have a HC-7 and use it on a helmet cam for mountain biking. It still needs lots of post work.

Probably the first thing you'll find with shooting HD is that it's more sensitive to movement... and the small cameras are tough to stabilize handheld. ANY internal image stabilization can only do so much, and the rest is up to the operator/platform. Controlled camera moves are critical (not talking about the extreme sports stuff so much - that you take what you can get I'd guess). Slow pans, keep the camera level, and don't bounce it around a whole bunch. Personally I ended up with a bracket system that the cam mounts to that I feel gives pretty decent control without a full stabilization rig...

The HC3 EIS isn't as proficient as the HC7 OIS in similar movement, nor is it as good as the older HC1 - I got decent results with it though. The OIS of the HV20 does OK, but handles movement differently, and IMO (also noted by others) not as well as the Sony 1 and 7.

Sorry, but then let me restate my question then, which system is better, Sony or Canon?

Thanks in advanced----M

Anyone care to answer. I need a new camera soon.

M

Hi Mike,

All camera manufacturers license their various technologies to one another. For example, LANC is a Sony protocol which is licensed to Canon for their higher-end three-chip camcorders.

Same with OIS. A Sony camcorder equipped with OIS is using a Canon technology. There are different types of OIS, such as Vari-Angle Prism vs. Lens Shift, but you're not going to see a noticeable difference between Canon and Sony OIS on these similarly priced camcorders because those systems all use pretty much the same design from the same core technology.

There is also a type of Sony Super SteadyShot which is EIS, but just as lossless as optical (contrary to popular belief, there is no longer such a big distinction in quality between EIS and OIS anymore -- electrical has improved dramatically and in some cases is just as good if not better than OIS).

The complaints I've been reading about OIS can be easily dismissed as improper handling and operation, i.e., human error. Somebody had mentioned "shooting while walking" and I got a pretty good laugh out of that one. All image stabilization systems require that operator to work with the camera. The camera must be held as steadily as possible to begin with. Only then is EIS or OIS at all effective.

True story: at DV Expo East 2004, I was asked to help out in the booth with the XL2 rollout. I watched as this one guy strolled up to the counter, put the camera on his shoulder, aimed at the lights in the ceiling and started fire hosing the camera, you know, really waving it around, making wild figure eight patterns, etc. Says out loud, "hmm, image stabilization doesn't seem to work very well." Honest to God, true story.

Hi Chris, and thanks,

Pretty much what I thought, a lot of hubub over nothing. OK, some systems may not be as good as others, but any of the Canon optical systems have always looked good to me. I also find no loss of resolution when using OIS as has been stated previously. Sony licensed from Canon should be the same.

The systems have come a long way. I can remember my JVC hunting all over for movement when on a tripod with stabilization on. It was always a rule not to have it on when mounted on a tripod. With the Canon OIS, I have noticed no hunting at all, not that I would recommend it being used on a tripod. I also like the OIS on the HV20, but it can't overcome my unsteady 60 year old hands at full zoom with such a small light camera. I can prove it from my Bruce Willis concert footage recently. Great blues concert!

I still believe that optical is better than digital, electronic, or whatever you choose to call it. I think optical is more intuitive, or knows when to work because of movement, rather than always searching whether there is movement or not. Just my opinion.

Thanks for your input Chris. You are still the man! And, I totally believe your story about DV Expo East 2004. I read and see way too much that affirms. And, I can't wait till Sony's patent on LANC runs out, because I miss it on my HV20.

Thanks, your thorn---Mike

Douglas, thanks:
So your opinion:
I'm shooting just mostly handheld, some tripod, footage of people talking and moving a bit. Would you stick with the HC3? or get rid of it and get one with Optical.

LIke I've said, is seems the steady shot ( which is digtial on hcd) I currently have seems quite jerky.

If you advise to get new camera, would you go HC7 or HV20? have you done test on this ( but remember, I'm not doing sports) still gotta tell you just shooting people talking and moving around, HC3 quite jerky, you don't agree?

Also, what about sound between these two cameras -- for just hearing what subject is saying. I got the sony because the Canon put the HV10 mic at back of Camera. the HV20 is moved up bit, but still not as front as the Sonys

PS
Dave, curious what also is better about the 7 than the 3, and could you speak to the 7 vs the Canon HV 20?

bracket system...for handheld anything that helps for that?

Chris; what is this new EIS you are talking about, surely is not what's on the hdr-hc3. if it's so good, why did sony finally go to ois for the 7?

Douglas, thanks:
So your opinion:
I'm shooting just mostly handheld, some tripod, footage of people talking and moving a bit. Would you stick with the HC3? or get rid of it and get one with Optical.

LIke I've said, is seems the steady shot ( which is digtial on hcd) I currently have seems quite jerky.

If you advise to get new camera, would you go HC7 or HV20? have you done test on this ( but remember, I'm not doing sports) still gotta tell you just shooting people talking and moving around, HC3 quite jerky, you don't agree?

Also, what about sound between these two cameras -- for just hearing what subject is saying. I got the sony because the Canon put the HV10 mic at back of Camera. the HV20 is moved up bit, but still not as front as the Sonys


I can't intelligently comment on the HV20. I have an older HV10. It's useless for the aerial and moto-based work we seem to be doing a lot of lately. With stabilization off, it still is jerky and it's obvious that stabilization isn't really "off."
The HC series Sonys....I have several of them. I can't use the HC7 in the air very well for similar reasons to the Canon. The HC5 is great in air and on ATV, or mounted on the gas tank of a MotoX bike.
No, I don't find the HC3 to be jerky, but perhaps that's just my style of camera movement. I don't flip the camera all over. No matter what cam I'm shooting with, big or small, the goal is to be a human camera mount, smooth and steady. IS is only there to fix my human flaws, not make great video out of jerky junk.

Doug, we are having big communication issues. You keep mentioning ariel photography, and I need help and guidance, and opinions for just shooting people who are standing in front on the camera, and maybe moving a little bit back and forth. I can't fly and airplane, but you could shoot some friends causally and then, please, report back.

PS
Dave, curious what also is better about the 7 than the 3, and could you speak to the 7 vs the Canon HV 20?

bracket system...for handheld anything that helps for that?

Chris; what is this new EIS you are talking about, surely is not what's on the hdr-hc3. if it's so good, why did sony finally go to ois for the 7?

Hi Kevin -

What Spot is getting at is that different IS approaches handle movement differently, but NONE will make up for bad camera work. I shot quite a lot of stuff of my kids (and boy oh boy do they move around...) with the HC3 - I was very happy with the video from that camera - I did use it with brackets (check my old posts for a picture, or if it's gone, I can post again). It's not easy to stabilize these smaller cameras just because of the low mass and small size - they tend move with you... so you have to stabilize the platform somehow. And to top it off, HDV really brings out motion issues.

The 7 has better resolution, it's better in low light, and has mic and headphone jacks the 3 lacked. I felt when I did some side by side testing that the OIS of the HC7 did better than the EIS of the 3 for just general shooting, and for taking out minor suff when mounted on a small steadicam type rig. Might not be better for extreme sports type stuff - I'd guess that those would be two entirely different optimization algorithms...

Dave

I don't think I could have said it better than Dave did. :-)
I will add that for "shooting people" I don't use these small cams. They're too small for that sort of thing in our workflow, unless they're locked down on a good tripod. Small cams like this (for us) are perfect as high-risk cams. I've destroyed 4 small format HD cams so far, and expect to destroy a few more before we move on to the next forma.
Motorcycles, ATV's, horseback/saddlehorn mounts, skydiving, paragliding, BASE jumping...these are all where we use small format cameras. And these sorts of activities will task IS more than anything that handholding will remotely approach.
IS on small cams is next to useless if you can't hold the cam still. This is why manufacturers like Glidecam exist. IS isn't there to make crappy handheld video stable; it's there to remove minute shake.

I've just come off a high-end shoot that happened to use a few different cameras of the 1/3" chip HD flavor, all handheld/all the time. My feeling now is that IS is really useful with this form factor because it has quite a bit of weight to hold for lengths of time in the hands (next time I will probably spec one of the handheld rigs that counterbalances it over the shoulder). The difference between having the IS on and off was night and day to me; in fact for longer lens work sometimes it was almost too steady to still appear to be handheld! In comparing this to my little HV20, I realize that the tiny weight of that camera means there will be less of a fatigue factor over time and in some ways I can keep the actual camera steadier as a result, but the reduced mass lends itself to a higher-frequency chatter in the frame. So my conclusion is that the handheld wonkiness is different but not necessarily more or less between the two styles of camera. And both can neatly be tidied up with a good IS, to a point (really erratic shaking and wobbling will be more of an issue, of course--and forget about trying to erase footsteps).

Regarding using IS on a Steadicam type rig, the common wisdom is that for almost all purposes it is a bad idea as it will counteract what you are trying to achieve with the rig. A cheap stabilizer that allows vibration through may well benefit from IS as it is the better of two evils but most should deliver better and more accurate results with the IS turned off.

YEs Dave thanks!
I just looked at my first professonal gig (not client based, self produced) on a TV with HC3, and surprisingly it was ok. so pleased. On computer was bit worried, seem bit more jumpy there. maybe that was the hard drives fault.

The bigger issue was the sound, which is great tight, but as go farther, you get so much extreaneious noise. maybe not fault of the camera. maybe I gotta stay tight if using on camera mic.

thanks Doug.
I "forgot' to turn steady shot off when using tripod, yet footage was perfect anyway.

I feel better about my HC3 I purchased last year after reading some of these posts. I've enjoyed using mine, but wish it had manual focus, better zoom control, and mic inputs/levels (I bought the sony hotshoe mic adapter, which allows mic's although only AGC.). I haven't been using the steady shot, so I might give it a try.

I was looking into AVCHD, but I think I'll stick with tape till late 2008 to let things stabilize and see what CPU prices due and how editing suites adapt better to multiple processors.

the HC3 does have manual focus.
Select the small button at the front of the camera, the roller wheel is a focus control.
I agree that mic inputs would be nice, and it would be sweet if the zoom had a better ramp, but c'mon...it's a super cheap cam.

I shoot handheld most of the time for my amatuer work. Over the years I feel I've gotten pretty good as holding my old Canon Elura with optical IS. I rarely would see minute camera shake.

Now I have a HC7 and I'm finding it very difficult to avoid minute camera shake. Maybe it's the shooting in HD, or maybe it's the IS. I'm still experimenting and I hope I'll become a better handheld shooter with this camera.

Sorry Doug, I wasn't clear. I do use manual focus but should have said I'd like a manual focus ring on the lens. The little wheel is a little more difficult to use and doesn't have any "feel" to it. I've had other inexpensive Sony cameras that used rings, this is my first with a shuttle focus.

I use my HC3 with an AT Pro-88 mic to document and share projects at work. My biggest adjustment to HDV has been keeping things in perfect focus; manual focus being much more important than it was in DV. I'm in an environment where monitors and bigger rigs are undesirable, so I have to rely on the built-in LCD. Things can look fine on the LCD, but more than once I've gotten back to home base to find my focus was slightly off. Many times it's amateur mistakes like zooming in a little too tight (just beyond focal range) and not being able to see it until you get back to a larger screen.

It's a great camera for less than $1K, allowing me to get places where a larger camera wouldn't do and risk shots I wouldn't try with a more expensive setup.

Charles - I'm going to have to experiment with taking the IS off when on the stabilizer - I've actually got an old Hollywood VS1 that has excellent bearings and balance, and is "right sized" for the small cams - an HC1 is really too heavy for it, but the 7 with a couple extras (WA, big battery) is AOK. It's handheld, but flyweight even fully loaded. I've always figured the IS would complement the stabilizer, but thinking about it, I can see where they might fight!

I think all the fiddling I've done with various stabilizing approaches leads me to the conclusion that the rig needs to be tuned somewhat to the camera size and weight - what works with a loaded Z1 is hopeless overkill for for an HC7...

For the little cams, I think my brackets seem about the best for a simple "handheld" solution - sort of a mini Fig Rig = good horizon stability/horizontal "targeting", decent fore aft if it's balanced, your arms do a passable job of taking the vertical "bounce" out, and it's still lightweight.

If I really need the floating smoothness, the VS1 is always there and I finally can balance it in a few minutes! Unless I score a Merlin on the cheap (as long as I'm dreaming, throw in the new vest/arm too!), it'll have to do!



Kevin - DON'T rely on the footage you see on the computer unless you've got a LOT of horsepower - the display will more than likely be "jumpy" in full resolution while editing - keep in mind that the computer has to recreate the long-GOP frames on the fly, and this is taxing on most machines (IOW the computer has to rebuild 15 i <?> frames on the fly).

It's disconcerting at first since you've probably displayed SD footage without problems - remember HD is about 4X as much info, and HDV compression/decompression factors in unless you transcode the footage to AVI so that the computer isn't chugging along creating the frames... and desperately trying to catch up!

As for the mic, I think the camera probably "zooms" audio with the W/T - I've had cameras where you could turn that on and off, and the Sony gun/zoom can switch modes, don't see a switch on the 7, and don't recall one on the 3, so it may "autozoom" with the lens, thus the changes in ambient sounds. You might want to consider a secondary audio source - wireless (now you need a mic in... DOH!) or perhaps a small recorder closer to the talent (iriver/giant squid mic or maybe a Zoom or similar).



Roger and Spot - For manual focus on the cheap, try the spot focus function - it's amazingly effective. Another option on the cheap is the Giottos LANC (hard to find, but...) - it has manual focus functions for around $30-40... I've got the older RC2020, but I've seen a newer version I'd like to try - the older one is not the greatest controller (focus pretty good, zoom so-so), but maybe the new one is more refined... I use it so I have control when on my bracket rig. ANYTHING is better than that wheely thingy... although I do use it to adjust exposure, it's "accurate" enough for that...

I went from a VX2100 to a HC7. Just like the bigger camera, it just takes practices. The inertia of the 2100 made it easier. But the skill learned eventually comes out. I can hold longer shots now because there is less fatigue.

Dave, I'll look into the spot focus function a little closer.

Less fatigue, and a camera you can take pretty much anywhere in a small bag! That's what really makes the 7 my personal fave. Just learn to hold 'er steady and shoot thoughtfully!

Can someone tell me about zoom control?
on the hc3, you zoom and just juts up fast. is better control meaning that is would go slower and smoother?

YEs Dave! I was mislead by the computer (at 1/2 resolution -- full wont even fit on the screen) jumply, but fine on the TV. and I have dual 1.8 G5 Mac.

On sound, unless I have an overhead boom with shotgun, which is too much hassle for what i"m doing, it seems best best is just to get real tight to the talent. As soon as I even shoot a person full body, I hear all sort of stuff outside the apartment. unless someone has more ideas on that.

George: so practice, meaning you just have to concentrate on a steady hold. not intuitive as you would like to get lost in the moment.

Kevin,

I've found zooming on the HC3 pretty difficult to do smoothly, especially if you are trying to start slow and gradually pick the pace up, then ramp back down to your final zoom. Zoom rate seems to occur in very noticeable, discrete steps.

I was looking today for a more precise rocker-arm type LANC zoom control, but all I found were button units and really expensive tripod mounted systems.

Roger -
Unless you spend a lot, all the LANCs are probably going to be "2 stage", IOW fast or slow... only better control is the on cam control. You might look at the Varizoom brand, I think some of those allow variable speed for a somewhat reasonable price...

Kevin - be one with the camera <wink>! You'll find that as you practice stable holds, you start to feel how the camera fits into the scene you're shooting and with practice you'll "get lost in the moment" fairly easily - any new cam is going to take some setting used to - these micro size monsters are probably the easiest to adapt to - they won't be so apt to get the talent freaked, and they are very easy to control and get different angles and camera techniques handheld or with lightweight gear!

YEs Dave! I was mislead by the computer (at 1/2 resolution -- full wont even fit on the screen) jumply, but fine on the TV. and I have dual 1.8 G5 Mac.


Glad to read your footage was fine on TV. Most of my experience with seeing small jittering was during the editing preview process. I'm looking forward to finishing my current project and seeing how the final product looks.

Roger/Dave
is this zoom control any better in hc7 or HV 20 or gotta go to high end models?

thanks wisdom Dave B!

Kevin,

I'll have to leave that zoom input to Dave, I don't have experience with the 7 or 20.

Kevin -

The zoom lever on the HC3 and the HC7 is pretty similar - the one on the HV20 is fine too, although the physical lever itself is not as comfortable to work with IMO. The main thing I think is tricky is when you use a LANC control (Sony only) for zoom - they seem to be 2 speeds, instead of a dynamic range as you will get with the on cam lever.

The wheelythingy can be used for focus too, but I don't know why you'd bother...

Obviously a focus/zoom ring is preferable like on the HC1, or even better dedicated rings for each function like on the FX1 and 7 or the Z1& V1.

Bigger cams have more room for manual controls, but then again do you want to lug them around for casual video? There are LOTS of places that the HC3 and it's sucessors have opened up the opportunity for really amazing high quality video just cause those little cams can go just about anywhere!

I put together a small backpack camera kit with all the needed accessories for an HC3, and that kit went everywhere cause it was easy to grab and go - the HC7 replaced the 3 in that same kit, and guess which cam goes with me most of the time... it's not the FX7 <wink>

Kevin -

The wheelythingy can be used for focus too, but I don't know why you'd bother...

On this one, I can say I agree 100%. I have the Spot Focus on the first page of my Pmenu. Just touch pmenu, spot focus, and click the item. Faster than the dial and it little more reliable than trying to make sure it was in focus with the screen or viewfinder.

Hey Sony, et al... Next time you implement this, it sure would be comforting if you the distance on the screen during a spot focus or even normal ops.

What is spot focus? as opposed to regular auto focus?