This is the most impressive and depressing comparison in the report:
LOW LIGHT
Sony a7R III: metering to -3EV, focusing to -3EV
Nikon Z7: metering to -3EV, focusing to -1EV
Canon EOS R: metering to -3EV, focusing to -6EV
That Z7 lowlight focus is pretty pathetic by comparison to the other two. A -1 EV rating goes back several generations of dSLR bodies. Personally, for shooting weddings I would not want anything less than a -3 these days.
Wow that's pretty awful. I recently picked up an A7III to try to shoot certain parts of the day where I'm comfortable with one body and a 50/55mm lens. Sony got a lot of things right. It's the first of the 4 Sony bodies I've had that I can see myself hanging onto long term. It finally feels like a mature product and with customizable buttons I can essentially fool my muscle memory into thinking it's a Canon.
But for receptions? dSLR I still think is the way to go. My 1DX2 trounces it in low light AF around my apartment (in terms of AF-C speed, single shot accuracy is a wash with the 1DX2 in live view) and if you aren't Godox then you have no good flash options.
What was the 5D2? Cause that thing succcccked in low light
My A73 is a KILLER in low light because of the face-detect and eye-AF. And it's on continuous AF to boot. Focusing might be listed at -3EV but the importance of those modes can't be understated.
IrishDino wrote:
What was the 5D2? Cause that thing succcccked in low light
My A73 is a KILLER in low light because of the face-detect and eye-AF. And it's on continuous AF to boot. Focusing might be listed at -3EV but the importance of those modes can't be understated.
MRomine wrote:
So how is this done, do you know, user choice or auto implemented?
Good question, I'd love to know as well. I think that I heard somewhere that the low-light AF feature involved mixing data from both the on sensor PDAF, as well as contrast information from the sensor. Maybe.
Not to diminish the focus performance of the EOS R but I believe it is rated at -6EV with an f1.2 lens on it whereas the Sony and Nikons are rated with f2.0 lenses. So, while I'm sure the R will focus very well (as the performance of dual pixel AF is already proven), I suspect it will not have the advantage over the Sony the numbers would imply.
I've got one on Pre-order. I'll try to check in and let you guys know how it is. I don't intend on using it as a primary wedding camera though--mostly for personal/travel stuff.
LeeSimms wrote:
I'd be really surprised if they z7 didn't focus well in low light — that's not Nikon's style.
Please, Nikon has done more than their share of dumb things with their products in the past. We all hope that the Z7 will grab focus at a high level in low light but I would not put any money on it.
LeeSimms wrote:
Oh, sure — grease spewing shutter assemblies and proprietary raw formats aside — Nikon hasn't made a camera with bad AF in at least 10 years.
Except the d600, d610 and the df. I also thought that the d800 was weak with af in low light and off center focusing.
This is a new venture for nikon with a completely new system. I sure hope that the af is good. All of the other companies first mirrorless cameras were weak with af. I'm started to overlook the one card slot. I like to work with one body and have one back up body. I need the z6 to be as good as or better than the d750 in all af departments in order to buy it. I am having GAS but ... it needs to be my all arounder for the whole wedding day.
The A7(R)III & A9 is rated at -3 EV, but I have personally tested both to be at least -6 EV when adapting the Canon 50 1.2 L, it wasn't fast it did sometimes miss but I was able to get a focus lock consistently at -6 EV remember the Sony can use contrast detect AF too. The numbers shown above are for phase detect or tracking AF only.
The canon EOS R drops off depending on F stop used F1.8 will be -5 EV, 2.8 will be -3.5 EV I have personally tested it at -5 EV with an adapted 50 1.2 EF lens. The native RF mount performs better due to more light reaching the sensor and more native pins without an adapter. The canon can only use phase it offers no ability to use contrast detect for assistance which stinks because contrast is slower but more accurate for critical focus with macro lenses or 1.2 lenses.
The Nikon is a bit better than shown above its -4 EV albeit spotty and no tracking but much better than mentioned previously.
MRomine wrote:
Was just doing some comparative reading.
This is the most impressive and depressing comparison in the report:
LOW LIGHT
Sony a7R III: metering to -3EV, focusing to -3EV
Nikon Z7: metering to -3EV, focusing to -1EV
Canon EOS R: metering to -3EV, focusing to -6EV
That Z7 lowlight focus is pretty pathetic by comparison to the other two. A -1 EV rating goes back several generations of dSLR bodies. Personally, for shooting weddings I would not want anything less than a -3 these days.
As I have mentioned quite a few times already, the Canon camera is measured at f1.2, not f2 compared to all other cameras!! I call that deceiving the costumer.
So it is rated at around -4.5ev at f2, slightly improved vs. the 5div DPAF (-4ev). However, having used the 5div alongside the A9 and A7riii, esp. the A9 was at least as good in focussing in low light with flex spot medium.
My explanation: the 5div was using a much larger focus point area. This sometimes annoyed me when trying to focus accurately with DPAF in LV on the 5div. The size was in between Sony's flex-spot medium to large. When I used medium spot size the A9 was as good on the dance floor in focussing in dim light.
Well, I've got the Z6 in hand. In my dark house, AF is somewhere between D600 and D750 in the dark. In the light it seems pretty solid. I haven't had it out in the daylight, and I don't have a native Z lens (50S on preorder). I've mostly just been messing around with the Sigma 50 Art on the FTZ. Files at high ISO are clean, view finder is good, controls and build are quite good. It feels a little dorky with this big Sigma lens hanging off the front of it. I expect it to make more sense when I get the 50S.
BSPhotog wrote:
Well, I've got the Z6 in hand. In my dark house, AF is somewhere between D600 and D750 in the dark. In the light it seems pretty solid. I haven't had it out in the daylight, and I don't have a native Z lens (50S on preorder). I've mostly just been messing around with the Sigma 50 Art on the FTZ. Files at high ISO are clean, view finder is good, controls and build are quite good. It feels a little dorky with this big Sigma lens hanging off the front of it. I expect it to make more sense when I get the 50S. ...Show more →
I am normally an AF-C shooter all the time with my DSLRs. I have played with both on the Z6 and I didn’t seem to find a discernible difference in speed.
It isn’t replacing a DSLR for wedding work, but it may tag along for some parts of the day. Silent shooting mode is eerie.
