I was photographing outdoor dance festivities on midsummer night (while the natural light gets quite dim it's possible to continue shooting until after 11pm due to the high latitude).
I used 9-point and 25-point dynamic to photograph the dancers. I got a sequence where a child was running towards the camera and to the right side and I missed the whole thing; I started with an in-focus image but failed to follow the subject. Nevertheless, the camera in 25-point dynamic produced two additional frames in focus in the next quarter of a second (8fps) even though the child was running fast and was quite far from the primary point in the third image. All images were in focus. So on this time scale at least the D5's dynamic area AF appears to work fine. However, in some cases when dancing pairs were turning, I wanted to focus on the woman's face and when it was quite dark already I got a frame where the focus was on the shoulder of the man in front of the woman, and not under the primary point where the face was. This suggested that the peripheral point in the 25-point dynamic area was preferred by the camera when the subject under primary point was dimmer and started to be too dim for the AF system to consider it a good target. Anyway, at no point during the evening did it seem like dynamic was not working or its job. I was using 105mm and 35mm f/1.4 AF-S wide open most of the time.
After 11.10pm or so, I switched to group area AF as the dynamic area AF was starting to be too slow and group area was able to focus reliably and fast in even the dimmest remaining natural light.
Well, that's profound, in a cheesy kinda way. But meanwhile, on Planet Nikon, it was discovered that simple adjustments to the cheese returned it to its as-designed operational status. And everyone lived happily ever after, except for Hem and Haw, who eventually joined a cult and now paint sunsets in the Sony desert while they wait for their cameras to cool off and restart..
la puffin wrote:
It's worth trying. It works very well. You have to believe Nikon is progressing in their technology. However, I think there's difference between the D5 and D500 in this and a few other aspects.
She's probably right.
You have a new camera with a new AF system, yet you've been trying to use your old technique and methodology with it. Now you know it's different. You can keep banging your head against the wall with what works on other bodies or try to take advantage of what the new system can do.
It is confusing because the literature from past cameras now describes exactly what the new AF system does.
To try to work with the strengths of the new system, there's a couple of things that I do that you may want to try. No sarcasm here... I shoot professionally and on my off days, I work on my technique. Since you're 75% retired, you may have time
I use a 70-200/2.8 wide open and try to shoot butterflies. About 3-4ft away, around 70-135mm and wide open, try to follow and shoot the butterflies. They are extremely erratic, but it will build up your speed with tracking your subject. The first day may be nothing in focus, but after a week, you may be surprised at an improvement. That'll translate well with what you're trying to shoot.
Also, try shooting with single point, tracking power lines. They are never perfect horizontal, but keeping a single point on them as you follow them can be a challenge initially for some. It's a good exercise in predicting AF. For some, it's not as easy as it sounds. To make it tougher, go faster.
Seriously, when you get better at following erratic movement, and really following predictive movement, you may find that D9/D25 are extremely helpful in giving you some fudge room. After you've tried these two exercises I've described, then you may see how Dynamic AF with the new AF system really works.
My folks used to live by the zoo in Minneapolis - brutally hot and humid in summer, and stupid cold in winter. I'm sure you can find a rink with a league to try out some new chops....Show more →
If you ever tire of denigrating other people's skills and decide to look into the issues being discussed here, try adjusting the dynamic mode's delay in leaving the original focus target. You might be surprised at how effective a properly functioning dynamic focus system can be.
The point is that cameras before the D5 and the D500 had AF systems which reacted much more slowly than the newer cameras so there was more latitude if the photographer had difficulty in keeping the primary focusing point on the subject when using a Dynamic mode.
AF responds much faster now in the D5 and the D500 so one either has to become more dexterous in handling the camera if you choose to use a Dynamic mode to track a moving object; or change to using a Tracking mode and allow the camera to do the tracking for you.
AnnJS wrote:
The point is that cameras before the D5 and the D500 had AF systems which reacted much more slowly than the newer cameras so there was more latitude if the photographer had difficulty in keeping the primary focusing point on the subject when using a Dynamic mode.
AF responds much faster now in the D5 and the D500 so one either has to become more dexterous in handling the camera if you choose to use a Dynamic mode to track a moving object; or change to using a Tracking mode and allow the camera to do the tracking for you.
Exactly, and this is why the new function of the Dynamic mode is essentially useless as you basically have to be as proficient as you would with Single point mode. Nikon should just simplify and give us Single, Group, 3D and Auto because Dynamic is just there taking up useless space in the menus with the way it functions in the D500/D5.
I have not found Dynamic to be useless; it functions as described in the Manual and provides much more leeway than single-point. It shouldn't be too difficult for any reasonably proficient photographer to recover focus on their target within the time limit and choosing a longer Delay can help too.
AnnJS wrote:
The point is that cameras before the D5 and the D500 had AF systems which reacted much more slowly than the newer cameras so there was more latitude if the photographer had difficulty in keeping the primary focusing point on the subject when using a Dynamic mode.
AF responds much faster now in the D5 and the D500 so one either has to become more dexterous in handling the camera if you choose to use a Dynamic mode to track a moving object; or change to using a Tracking mode and allow the camera to do the tracking for you.
It really isn't the system's reaction time - the new system behaves differently (as acknowledged by Nikon). If you had the primary AF point on a target and that point slipped off, the old system would still hang onto it using one of the other points and would do so indefinitely. It didn't just switch back to the primary point slower than the D5/D500 does. It didn't go back unless it completely lost the lock with the other points.
It's not so much that using the new system is too "hard" - I have plenty of action shots to prove it works just fine. I've never liked the somewhat arrogant "you just need to be a better photographer" argument. Every time a camera issue / anomaly comes up - like the Canon 1D MKIII AF issue, the D800 left AF issue, etc. that argument seems to rear its head. In the end, many of these "photographer" problems were then corrected by the camera manufacturers.
The truth is that, for many people, the D5/D500 Dynamic mode isn't "bad" but it would work even better with the old behaviour. Funny thing is, I think the new system is actually superior when using the D5 with the D9 or even D25 area. It's when the AF area gets larger (like D72 / D153) that the old system tends to be "better" for many people and applications. At least IMO.
p.28 #10 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
I agree with Steve and Geoff. Dynamic is a useless word in the new autofocus system. Is the D5 autofocus GREAT. Yes. But if it were really dynamic it would be totally awesome. You don't buy a $6,500 camera so you have to work harder or redevelop your technique. That happens sometimes when you change camera brands. To me brand loyalty is developed with consistency. Just my 2 cents
p.28 #11 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
arbitrage wrote:
Exactly, and this is why the new function of the Dynamic mode is essentially useless as you basically have to be as proficient as you would with Single point mode. Nikon should just simplify and give us Single, Group, 3D and Auto because Dynamic is just there taking up useless space in the menus with the way it functions in the D500/D5.
Since you can use a custom function to remove the dynamic areas from options selectable from the AF area selector, they don't take up space or slow down your choice of AF area mode if you choose not to use them. Just disable those options from the menu.
The new dynamic area modes are useful to me, in fact the 9-point dynamic is now my most often used AF area mode on the D5 and it significantly increases my focus keeper rate in certain situations with very little drawback, if any.
p.28 #12 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
Steve Perry wrote:
It really isn't the system's reaction time - the new system behaves differently (as acknowledged by Nikon). If you had the primary AF point on a target and that point slipped off, the old system would still hang onto it using one of the other points and would do so indefinitely. It didn't just switch back to the primary point slower than the D5/D500 does. It didn't go back unless it completely lost the lock with the other points.
As long as the delay is adjustable, the new system does offer one potential advantage over the old: you don't have to pump the AF button to acquire a new target. Whether or not that would be a real life advantage, I dunno.
p.28 #13 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
ab7638 wrote:
I agree with Steve and Geoff. Dynamic is a useless word in the new autofocus system. Is the D5 autofocus GREAT. Yes. But if it were really dynamic it would be totally awesome. You don't buy a $6,500 camera so you have to work harder or redevelop your technique. That happens sometimes when you change camera brands. To me brand loyalty is developed with consistency. Just my 2 cents
I'll probably never be in the market for a D5, but if I were and discovered that Nikon had messed up dynamic, there's a good chance it would be a deal killer. That's how much I like dynamic. The D5 is an awe-inspiring beast, but I was forced to choose between a D5 without dynamic -- which is what we essentially have now -- and a D4(s) with dynamic, I really don't know if I'd cut the check.
p.28 #14 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
henry albert wrote:
As long as the delay is adjustable, the new system does offer one potential advantage over the old: you don't have to pump the AF button to acquire a new target. Whether or not that would be a real life advantage, I dunno.
Very true and that is one of the advantages to the new system. It's also why I like it a little better than the old system with smaller AF areas. Most of the time when I'm using a smaller AF area, it's because I can - more or less - just keep the primary point where I want it and just need a little help from time to time.
However, I think that advantage goes the other way with larger areas and that's where the old system was a bit better.
Maybe we'll see an option down the road that allows us to pick and choose.
p.28 #15 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
My comment was a little tongue and cheek. I realize I can deselect them. I still use D25 instead of single point programmed to my joystick push back button focus. I prefer group for most things. I only have D500 so can't try D9. I'm sure if I had D9 I'd use it a lot as that is most similar to what I use on my Canon bodies in the guise of Expansion 8-point. I just wish we could program dynamic to assist for a longer delay than we have now. Just today I was shooting flying kingfishers from a bumpy kayak and if D72 or D153 would assist for longer I think it could have helped as my AF point was all over the place with a moving boat and erratic kingfisher. Group did the best in the end as there were no foreground distractions.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
Since you can use a custom function to remove the dynamic areas from options selectable from the AF area selector, they don't take up space or slow down your choice of AF area mode if you choose not to use them. Just disable those options from the menu.
The new dynamic area modes are useful to me, in fact the 9-point dynamic is now my most often used AF area mode on the D5 and it significantly increases my focus keeper rate in certain situations with very little drawback, if any.
p.28 #16 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
Steve Perry wrote:
Very true and that is one of the advantages to the new system. It's also why I like it a little better than the old system with smaller AF areas. Most of the time when I'm using a smaller AF area, it's because I can - more or less - just keep the primary point where I want it and just need a little help from time to time.
However, I think that advantage goes the other way with larger areas and that's where the old system was a bit better.
Maybe we'll see an option down the road that allows us to pick and choose. ...Show more →
D9 & D25 are really small areas to begin with. I personally find them requiring the almost the same skill to maintain a subject within the D9 / D25 space as single point anyways.
For D72 - yes - I do agree, it gives you move space to work with under the old system.
For D153 - I would just switch to 3D tracking - nothing lost there.
So for me - the only real function that is lost is the D72 mode.
p.28 #17 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
Littleguy wrote:
D9 & D25 are really small areas to begin with. I personally find them requiring the almost the same skill to maintain a subject within the D9 / D25 space as single point anyways.
For D72 - yes - I do agree, it gives you move space to work with under the old system.
For D153 - I would just switch to 3D tracking - nothing lost there.
So for me - the only real function that is lost is the D72 mode.
Your comment reminded me that using a D5 vs D500 would make a difference to the perceived size of the different Dynamic modes. On the D500 D25 is actually a fairly large box compared to the entire frame. On the D5 it appears much smaller in the frame. I think the D500 is more in need of the D9 mode than the D5 ever was.
That all said if you put a 500mm lens on either camera the grouping covers the same amount of a given subject at a given distance. (or at least very close, I haven't compared them)
Jun 26, 2017 at 05:30 PM
T-O Shooter Offline • • [X]
p.28 #18 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
henry albert wrote:
I'll probably never be in the market for a D5, but if I were and discovered that Nikon had messed up dynamic, there's a good chance it would be a deal killer. That's how much I like dynamic. The D5 is an awe-inspiring beast, but I was forced to choose between a D5 without dynamic -- which is what we essentially have now -- and a D4(s) with dynamic, I really don't know if I'd cut the check.
I'm happy with my D4s. Had little to no interest in a D5 before the dynamic AF mess up, definitely 0 interest since. I'll work with the D500 as it is, but will not buy another Nikon with the new system. The D4s holds it's own against the D500 with a 70-200VRII on it ( shooting barn swallows in flight ) and the D4s with 200-400VRII ( same situation ) would focus occasionally, where the D500 could never lock on one.
So I think I'm at "good enough"
p.28 #20 · UPDATE - Nikon D5/D500 Dynamic AF Issue
That is an interesting response. It does look like it really came from the design team. The marketing people would never say that it sometimes can focus on something contrasty which is not the intended subject but that it can happen. The designers of course understand the limitations of the system and seem to want to help out.
If a system is designed to respond fast to changes in distance in either direction, chances are it is also likely to focus on a different subject at a different distance.
Note as repeated in Nikon's previous answer: dynamic area doesn't track subject movement laterally but 3D (and auto) is for that. I think a part of the problem is that some users believe that it should track the subject within the dynamic area and this influences how they try to use it. The instructions given seem to the point: do your best to keep the primary point on the subject. If focus is lost, if the subject is good and contrasty, just keep shooting until it picks up the subject again. Or, let go of the button and restart taking care to point at the subject. (I guess having a short blocked shot response allows faster reacquisition of the subject.)
It is quite nice and unusual to get a direct answer from designers at Nikon Japan.
