Again I'm not sure what I'm doing differently than most others that are having trouble with focussing in low light. This is iso 8000 1.8 1/160. Locked right on no hunting whatsoever. 35 1.8S. tracked my dog running around the house in the same light, had one misfocussed frame out of a 7 shot burst.
rico wrote:
Thanks for sharing your invaluable experience from the trenches. My sole interest in the Z6 is image quality and AF performance in low light with moving subjects (stage). My tele lenses are set but the question mark was my D4. Based on your report, I will stand pat for now. D4 AF is previous generation but it hits the mark quickly and accurately.
I'll post some high ISO shots in a day or two of a performance I shot over the holiday. The image quality is very good IMHO. But I did have some trouble with the AF hunting. I also had some trouble with some simple stuff like grapes in a vineyard. This was with the 24-70/4 S. I haven't tried the Z6 with a faster lens and FTZ yet.
I'm holding on returning the Z6 for a week or two in hopes of a firmware update to make the AF a little quicker and "confident". I really love the high ISO, size and weight of the Z6 with a 24-70/4 S. If I could afford to have a fun camera for everyday stuff, I'd keep it without question, but I don't have that luxury at this time. It's pretty cool. I was hoping to use it as a 3rd body for the Chiefs/Raiders game next Sunday, but I'm going with my D500 and 14-24 for that, even though it's a huge gap to my 70-200 (I want to get away from DX and don't want to buy a 17-55 DX lens). I hardly ever shoot outside of work and was hoping that this would be an incentive.
My advice is to rent a Z6 if you're up in the air. If you think it might work for you, buy one with a good return policy and treat it like a final purchase. I think if one is committed, then they may try harder to make things work.
sungphoto wrote:
Have you tried it out with any faster adapted lenses? Noticed that mirrorless AF system performance (regardless of brand) is dependent on the max aperture of the lens - I found that the 28 f1.4E would lock focus in situations where the 24-70 f4 S would just endlessly hunt, even though the 28 f1.4E being adapted should theoretically have worse AF performance as it is only using phase detect (and not hybrid contrast plus phase detect AF).
I'm going to try that this week, I haven't had a lens slower than f/2.8 forever. The other thing is that I've had a Breakthrough Photography X4 UV filter on it since day one. I've always used B+W UV filters for protection, and need to take off the BP filter to make sure that isn't messing things up. I've never used BP before, but I've got to eliminate that factor.
la puffin wrote:
I'm going to try that this week, I haven't had a lens slower than f/2.8 forever. The other thing is that I've had a Breakthrough Photography X4 UV filter on it since day one. I've always used B+W UV filters for protection, and need to take off the BP filter to make sure that isn't messing things up. I've never used BP before, but I've got to eliminate that factor.
Yeah to be honest, that's part of what put me off initially about the Z7. My dilemma though was, ok I've put about $4k into the body, FTZ adapter and 24-70 f4, and I'm pretty happy but adapted fast aperture glass was taking a while to autofocus in very dark situations. I didn't want to judge the system based on this though, as adapted F-mount lenses only use phase detect via the adapter, which is super fast and generally pretty accurate in good light, but falls apart in low light compared to hybrid AF mode that uses contrast detect in very low light. I knew the only thing the only fair way to judge the AF system would be with fast native glass like the 35 f1.8 and 50 f1.8, but I was balking at putting another thousand or so to test out one or two native primes to justify owning the system, which is why I swapped out for the Z6 and 35 f1.8 S. Hopefully should have it in hand when I get back home from the shoot I'm on now.
turbodude wrote:
Again I'm not sure what I'm doing differently than most others that are having trouble with focussing in low light. This is iso 8000 1.8 1/160. Locked right on no hunting whatsoever. 35 1.8S. tracked my dog running around the house in the same light, had one misfocussed frame out of a 7 shot burst.
Ha I was just posting about this. I think the reason why people are having issues with AF in low light is because most people are either using the 24-70 f4 S or adapted lenses. Mirrorless systems regardless of the brand being much more affected by the aperture of the lens, a slow f4 lens will not perform very well in a dark room lit by let's say spill from a TV, and adapted lenses will only use phase detect which is great in good light, but not as good as hybrid or contrast detect in very low light conditions.
It'd be good to understand the exact lens and situations people are having issues with in low light, as your experience with the 35 f1.8 S native lens supports my theory that faster aperture native lenses will perform better in low light vs fast aperture adapted lenses.
sungphoto wrote:
Ha I was just posting about this. I think the reason why people are having issues with AF in low light is because most people are either using the 24-70 f4 S or adapted lenses. Mirrorless systems regardless of the brand being much more affected by the aperture of the lens, a slow f4 lens will not perform very well in a dark room lit by let's say spill from a TV, and adapted lenses will only use phase detect which is great in good light, but not as good as hybrid or contrast detect in very low light conditions.
It'd be good to understand the exact lens and situations people are having issues with in low light, as your experience with the 35 f1.8 S native lens supports my theory that faster aperture native lenses will perform better in low light vs fast aperture adapted lenses....Show more →
I think that's the big issue, everyone is trying the 24-70 f4 and saying the focus is subpar. I haven't had any issue with my adatped lenses including my 80-400 afs which is my slowest lens
sungphoto wrote:
Ha I was just posting about this. I think the reason why people are having issues with AF in low light is because most people are either using the 24-70 f4 S or adapted lenses. Mirrorless systems regardless of the brand being much more affected by the aperture of the lens, a slow f4 lens will not perform very well in a dark room lit by let's say spill from a TV, and adapted lenses will only use phase detect which is great in good light, but not as good as hybrid or contrast detect in very low light conditions.
It'd be good to understand the exact lens and situations people are having issues with in low light, as your experience with the 35 f1.8 S native lens supports my theory that faster aperture native lenses will perform better in low light vs fast aperture adapted lenses....Show more →
True. I'm still waiting on my 50s, but I've had a shockingly good experience using fast adapted primes. Even though the AF system will focus at -2EV on the Z6, that's only at f/2. If you're using an f/4 lens, that is a two stop penalty right off the bat.
Has anyone used the 35mm 1.8? I have the Sigma 35 1.4. I'm not sure how much of a difference there would be from a size standpoint compared to the native.
stuuke wrote:
Has anyone used the 35mm 1.8? I have the Sigma 35 1.4. I'm not sure how much of a difference there would be from a size standpoint compared to the native.
Sigma + adapter = 27.8 ounces, 4.8in long
35 = 13 ounces, 3.5in long
I took a hand held shot yesterday with Z6 and 24-70mm F4S at F8 ISO100, 1/100, IBIS on, something I’ve done so many times, with D800 and 20mm F1.8 with no VR control at all.
Being disappointed with that image because it didn’t look sharp at all, I’ve done some testing today.
First, electronic shutter on, then I changed shutter speed taking two shots, one with IBIS, and one without IBIS.
I was always getting better results with IBIS on, until I hit 1/200 and faster, where things got very similar between two.
Then I switched to mechanical shutter, and I was surprised, what I found.
SS 1/25 – sharper with IBIS
SS 1/60 – sharper without IBIS
SS 1/100 –sharper without IBIS
SS 1/125 - Sharper without IBIS
SS 1/200 - Very similar with or without
SS 1/400 - Very similar with or without
This is not any kind of scientific test, but I repeated the same thing at least 10 times at 1/60, 1/100 and 1/125 SS. Images without IBIS were sharper every time (all hand held).
I’m wondering if anyone else experienced this kind of situation on Z6 or Z7, yet?
Thanks
turbodude wrote:
I think that's the big issue, everyone is trying the 24-70 f4 and saying the focus is subpar. I haven't had any issue with my adatped lenses including my 80-400 afs which is my slowest lens
I’m not having any issue with focus with my 24-70, it’s F4 and I know what to expect from that.
cvrle59 wrote:
I took a hand held shot yesterday with Z6 and 24-70mm F4S at F8 ISO100, 1/100, IBIS on, something I’ve done so many times, with D800 and 20mm F1.8 with no VR control at all.
Being disappointed with that image because it didn’t look sharp at all, I’ve done some testing today.
First, electronic shutter on, then I changed shutter speed taking two shots, one with IBIS, and one without IBIS.
I was always getting better results with IBIS on, until I hit 1/200 and faster, where things got very similar between two.
Then I switched to mechanical shutter, and I was surprised, what I found.
SS 1/25 – sharper with IBIS
SS 1/60 – sharper without IBIS
SS 1/100 –sharper without IBIS
SS 1/125 - Sharper without IBIS
SS 1/200 - Very similar with or without
SS 1/400 - Very similar with or without
This is not any kind of scientific test, but I repeated the same thing at least 10 times at 1/60, 1/100 and 1/125 SS. Images without IBIS were sharper every time (all hand held).
I’m wondering if anyone else experienced this kind of situation on Z6 or Z7, yet?
Thanks ...Show more →
Maybe you are on to something. So many people are saying that focus is inconsistent on the Z cameras. Maybe it is the IBIS which is the cause of this inconsistency. My issues with focus were always hand held, continuous focus, never single focus on a tripod when IBIS is turned off.
Things that make you say HMMMMMMMMMM......
Although this would not account for hunting and some of the other issues.
1bwana1 wrote:
Maybe you are on to something. So many people are saying that focus is inconsistent on the Z cameras. Maybe it is the IBIS which is the cause of this inconsistency. My issues with focus were always hand held, continuous focus, never single focus on a tripod when IBIS is turned off.
Things that make you say HMMMMMMMMMM......
Although this would not account for hunting and some of the other issues.
I just repeated the same thing 3 times all over, with SS 1/100. I've got sharper images with IBIS off every time.
This test could be done only hand held, so it could be a bit subjective, but repeatability is 100%.
stuuke wrote:
Has anyone used the 35mm 1.8? I have the Sigma 35 1.4. I'm not sure how much of a difference there would be from a size standpoint compared to the native.
i have both, prefer the 35 1.8s. and i love the 35 1.4 ART, its just the 35s feels better on the z. Any tests you want me to do? i feel like the S is sharper at 1.8, but its percieved, i didnt actually pixel peep, i rarely do that.
There are some hilarious moments, in my opinion of course, especially the dpreview comment near the end. It’s pretty light in tone compared to some reviews, but of value I think.
I only turned on IBIS to test if it worked, and it did. I promptly turned it off. I had hunting issues shooting grapes, which is not really tricky for AF
http://www.shoaps.com/samples/z-004.jpg
ISO 25600. Opened in NX-D, then sent to PS. Shot RAW but picked up camera settings for Normal NR. Generous crop.
My sole interest in the Z6 is image quality and AF performance in low light with moving subjects (stage). My tele lenses are set but the question mark was my D4. Based on your report, I will stand pat for now. D4 AF is previous generation but it hits the mark quickly and accurately.