p.6 #1 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
arbitrage wrote:
I finally got around to downloading the focus point program and had a scan through my really good A7RIV day from Aug 23rd. Let me know what you want me to tell you. I found that on BIF both A7RIV and A9II focus points were off the bird in the sky somewhere near the bird in most of the shots. I'm only looking through my keepers as all my rejects are long gone but rejects weren't just for focus but for head/wing positions etc.
Now with my herons, shorebirds, oystercatchers foraging/feeding along the shoreline I'm seeing most of the A7RIV images with the circle and squares on the head and sometimes when the bird is perfectly side profile on the side of the body. I had a few shots saved of a GBH where I used Tracking (which only shows the circle (no squares)) and it was right on the head. My foraging shorebirds (small Western and Least sandpipers) shot mostly in Zone showed the squares and circle on the head most of the time.
Maybe I should just send you a Drive folder with a selection of the shots or something because not sure how my describing what I'm seeing is helping you compare to past results??
Here are the GBH shots I had saved for now: ...Show more →
"I found that on BIF both A7RIV and A9II focus points were off the bird in the sky somewhere near the bird in most of the shots."
Is the program verified and validated to be able to be confident as to these observations? How do we know what happens on the sensor is what is shown with the program? Maybe there were some comments on that, but I don't have time to read through everything?
p.6 #2 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
Holger wrote:
"I found that on BIF both A7RIV and A9II focus points were off the bird in the sky somewhere near the bird in most of the shots."
Is the program verified and validated to be able to be confident as to these observations? How do we know what happens on the sensor is what is shown with the program? Maybe there were some comments on that, but I don't have time to read through everything?
I have no idea how the program is getting the data for the points but it seems it must be reading it somewhere deep in the EXIF. I've never found past focus point display programs for Canon or Nikon are very accurate or more like the point you see in review doesn't correlate well with focus of the image. I would see just as many sharp shots with the displayed AF points miles off the subject as I would OOF images with the displayed AF points right on the head.
What I will try to do next outing with the RIV and 200-600 is check all my images before deleting my rejects and see if there is any correlation with the red squares not showing and OOF or any correlation with where the displayed points are showing and how sharp the image is. For example, if the displayed points are back on the back of the bird is the head or back sharp?
p.6 #4 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
arbitrage wrote:
...
Here's what is confusing me regarding where the "focus points" are indicating the camera is focusing. Take a look at that last picture that arbitrage posted in his last post of BIF (copied below) and you'll see that the focus points are indicating that none of the focus points are on the BIF; instead they're off to the left. The place in which the focus points (both the red boxes and the green circle) are indicating is completely out of focus, and yet the BIF is in focus (or at least it appears to be in focus on my screen). So, if the red boxes and green circle are supposedly indicating where the camera is focusing at the moment of shutter release (for instance, in that last image, it is absolutely not on the BIF, but is rather on the backround water/waves), why is the area indicated by the red boxes and green circle completely out of focus?
p.6 #5 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
nomenclature wrote:
Here's what is confusing me regarding where the "focus points" are indicating the camera is focusing. Take a look at that last picture that arbitrage posted in his last post of BIF (copied below) and you'll see that the focus points are indicating that none of the focus points are on the BIF; instead they're off to the left. The place in which the focus points (both the red boxes and the green circle) are indicating is completely out of focus, and yet the BIF is in focus (or at least it appears to be in focus on my screen). So, if the red boxes and green circle are supposedly indicating where the camera is focusing at the moment of shutter release (for instance, in that last image, it is absolutely not on the BIF, but is rather on the backround water/waves), why is the area indicated by the red boxes and green circle completely out of focus? ...Show more →
Here is my best guess. The camera is set to AF sensitivity 3. If you test this on static subjects by moving your focusing point off of a near target to a more distant target while continuing to hold down AF-ON it does take a little time till the camera will attempt to focus on the new subject at a distance. You can make this response faster with AF sensitivity 5.
In this killdeer shot most likely I got ahead in my panning of the bird (usually that is the opposite of what happens) and a split second earlier that position of AF points was on the bird. In the split (1/10s) between frames the camera would not have reacted to the grossly OOF water. This is why I think these focus point display programs are not very accurate in telling you what is really going on. You can easily have lots of shots in good focus with displayed AF points miles off the bird and also OOF shots with displayed AF points right on the bird. Everything is slightly delayed.
Next time I shoot some BIF with the A7RIV or even the A9II I will check focus points in this program before deleting the rejects to get a better sampling. The shots I displayed in the previous posts had already been culled out from the OOF ones and the OOF ones deleted.
p.6 #6 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
arbitrage,
Thanks for the explanation, it makes sense. I brought it up because there is, as you point out, a bit more going on than what the focus points indicate. Specifically, it appears that the focus points indicate where and what the focus is going to attempt to focus on in a given moment of time, but they do not indicate what the camera is actually focused on at that exact moment in time. If one presses the shutter button fully at that very moment, there might not have been enough time for the camera to actually focus on the indicated spot. Moreover, after another split second goes by, the focus points might (or likely will change if one is shooting in AF-C continuous mode) have moved to a different location (as indicated by the rapidly dancing boxes in the viewfinder during shooting).
Sep 02, 2020 at 10:48 AM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.6 #7 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
arbitrage wrote:
I found that on BIF both A7RIV and A9II focus points were off the bird in the sky somewhere near the bird in most of the shots.
judging by the size of the green circle, those pics you posted appear to be heavily cropped, which means that there isn't enough focal length for good af results on a7-series bodies.
you are trying to zoom with a sensor, but it's crippling the af because it's not putting enough ospdaf points on the target.
here is a similar situation, but it's not cropped, you can see how small the target is in the frame, compared to the size of the blue circle.
the fix is to use the 1.4x, because it puts more af points on the target, but of course that has compromises of it's own.
p.6 #8 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
osv2 wrote:
judging by the size of the green circle, those pics you posted appear to be heavily cropped, which means that there isn't enough focal length for good af results on a7-series bodies.
you are trying to zoom with a sensor, but it's crippling the af because it's not putting enough ospdaf points on the target.
here is a similar situation, but it's not cropped, you can see how small the target is in the frame, compared to the size of the blue circle.
the fix is to use the 1.4x, because it puts more af points on the target, but of course that has compromises of it's own.
Yeah 1.4TC on a 200-600 on an A7RIV for small/fast BIF...good luck with that one...let me know how it goes...
Yes I did smaller screenshots to minimize the file sizes just around the birds and the points. The sandpipers were very close to MFD so yeah only a TC would have helped. Of course the killdeer was much further cropped but a 1.4TC would have been useless unless I used my A9II. The herons were cropped to a lesser degree.
But I find even for something as simple as a foraging sandpiper, darting back and forth, that the 1.4TC on the RIV decreases the keeper rate significantly. So I stuck with the bare lens and used the pixels to make up for it. Yes less PDAF points on the subject but still more accurate than with the 1.4TC so it really doesn't change the conclusion. The solution is to use my 600GM with 1.4TC or 2xTC but that isn't the point of this thread.
I can post up a couple of the full frames when I'm back from work.
Sep 02, 2020 at 01:35 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.6 #9 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
i've tried the a9/200-600/1.4x for small darting birds, it is... difficult i wouldn't want to do it with an a7riv.
so yeah, please post up a couple of the same missed target af shots, re-sized but no cropping, so we can see target size vs. frame size.
as far as the a7riv/200-600 vs. canon goes, what are you going to use for lenses? if it turns out to be better with the same target size vs. frame size, i'd be interested in seeing that.
p.6 #10 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
Interesting comments about the A7riv and 200-600 in the Sony A7riv Facebook group. One guy said he got better results with bif by changing the af-c priority mode to release. I don’t have the lens so can’t check it out.
p.6 #11 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
john tunney wrote:
Interesting comments about the A7riv and 200-600 in the Sony A7riv Facebook group. One guy said he got better results with bif by changing the af-c priority mode to release. I don’t have the lens so can’t check it out.
I've always used Release from day one so not sure if that has an effect on my success. Every camera I've ever owned has been shot on Release...I don't need the camera telling me if it thinks it is in focus or not and delaying my FPS rate. As we've seen from these recent AF point display programs the point that the camera thinks is in focus is rarely the reality.
p.6 #12 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
I dont think this software had been updated in some time... So not sure I'd rely on A7info for much. Sony's AF system keeps changing (algorithms) so probably not an accurate utility to measure AF accuracy.. I guess nothing beats hands on field testing? And although I do think there may be a slight issue with AF on A7RIV that camera can produce amazing results with the 200600 in experienced hands. Still a very good combo and very versatile thanks to the extra mpx
Holger wrote:
"I found that on BIF both A7RIV and A9II focus points were off the bird in the sky somewhere near the bird in most of the shots."
Is the program verified and validated to be able to be confident as to these observations? How do we know what happens on the sensor is what is shown with the program? Maybe there were some comments on that, but I don't have time to read through everything?
p.6 #13 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
Maxxus46 wrote:
I dont think this software had been updated in some time... So not sure I'd rely on A7info for much. Sony's AF system keeps changing (algorithms) so probably not an accurate utility to measure AF accuracy.. I guess nothing beats hands on field testing? And although I do think there may be a slight issue with AF on A7RIV that camera can produce amazing results with the 200600 in experienced hands. Still a very good combo and very versatile thanks to the extra mpx
Yes, it is continually updated though it is still open to interpretation as to what the data means. I have found that the AF point correlates with the same place when one magnifies the image on the back of the screen, so it appears to be consistent.
This evening, I shot a GBH BIF sequence with my R5/500 IS II similar in framing, light, ISO, etc. with one shot on my a7riv/200-600 a couple of weeks ago. Whereas none of the a7riv images had critical focus (a couple had acceptable focus), 80+% of the R5 images had critical focus. For the R5 images, the recorded AF point appeared on target when the images were in focus and were off for those images which were OOF whereas with the a7riv sometimes the recorded af was on the bird and other times it was not. Nonetheless, when I was comparing some static images of Sandhill cranes shot with the Sony vs. the R5 I found the a7riv images to be sharper and more detailed. Perhaps the R5’s resolution is crippled by its AA filter among other issues? Bottom line, there is no free lunch.
p.6 #14 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
The A7RIV definitely has an edge on detail from the R5 files I have seen. That said, the camera seems different now that I have another R4 (had sold previous body and regretted it) ...I am not seeing as much backfocus issues as I had seen with my previous Raw files. So something definitely changed for the better. For me the compromise is worth it because I value image quality above all else...and the R4 delivers in a big way there. Keep in mind I shoot birds, but also a lot of landscape and macro...R4 can do it all. I can live with an occasional missed shot...hoping it can get me an 80 percent keeper rate and I'll be happy.
armd wrote:
Yes, it is continually updated though it is still open to interpretation as to what the data means. I have found that the AF point correlates with the same place when one magnifies the image on the back of the screen, so it appears to be consistent.
This evening, I shot a GBH BIF sequence with my R5/500 IS II similar in framing, light, ISO, etc. with one shot on my a7riv/200-600 a couple of weeks ago. Whereas none of the a7riv images had critical focus (a couple had acceptable focus), 80+% of the R5 images had critical focus. For the R5 images, the recorded AF point appeared on target when the images were in focus and were off for those images which were OOF whereas with the a7riv sometimes the recorded af was on the bird and other times it was not. Nonetheless, when I was comparing some static images of Sandhill cranes shot with the Sony vs. the R5 I found the a7riv images to be sharper and more detailed. Perhaps the R5’s resolution is crippled by its AA filter among other issues? Bottom line, there is no free lunch....Show more →
p.6 #15 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
Maxxus46 wrote:
The A7RIV definitely has an edge on detail from the R5 files I have seen. That said, the camera seems different now that I have another R4 (had sold previous body and regretted it) ...I am not seeing as much backfocus issues as I had seen with my previous Raw files. So something definitely changed for the better. For me the compromise is worth it because I value image quality above all else...and the R4 delivers in a big way there. Keep in mind I shoot birds, but also a lot of landscape and macro...R4 can do it all. I can live with an occasional missed shot...hoping it can get me an 80 percent keeper rate and I'll be happy.
Prior to the FW update, I mostly used my A7r IV for stationary or semi-stationary targets, mostly birds, even using my GM 600mm lens. For anything that moves/flies fast, I used my A9 II. After the update, I took the 200-600m lens on a local birding location. There, I found out that the AF performance seemed to be excellent. And of course, the high MP sensor is so good that I went back to the location 3 more times and used my GM 600mm. I didn’t use my A9 II at all throughout and I shot the afternoon/evening using only the A7r IV during those 3 days. At the minimum, I used my 1.4X TC and in a single occasion my 2X TC. I am really, really pleased with the results. That camera didn’t miss any beat. The keeper rate is somewhere between 80 and 90% for flying kites and some juvenile hawks. Granted, they are not as fast nor unpredictable as peregrine falcons and burrowing owls, but still quite impressive.
It is close to the feel of getting a new improved high MP camera to me right now . Is this a placebo effect that plays a trick on me? I am not sure but I let the images I captured do the talking... .
p.6 #16 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
Well sorry to say the A7RIV started missing on me again today with FW 1.20 and 200-600, back lit shots gave it trouble. Sadly I’ve decided to relegate the body to stills work only. Back to the A9ii for me... adding a 1.4tc soon
p.6 #17 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
arbitrage wrote:
Here is my best guess. The camera is set to AF sensitivity 3. If you test this on static subjects by moving your focusing point off of a near target to a more distant target while continuing to hold down AF-ON it does take a little time till the camera will attempt to focus on the new subject at a distance. You can make this response faster with AF sensitivity 5.
5(Responsive) / 4 / 3(Standard) / 2 / 1(Locked on):
Select [5(Responsive)] to focus responsively on subjects at different distances.
Select [1(Locked on)] to keep the focus on a specific subject when other things are crossing in front of the subject.
I'm not following....that help guide article and the menu item details say exactly what I said in the post you quoted. The higher the AF sensitivity value, the faster it will shift to a new subject. You can test for yourself as it is fairly obvious if you compare the extreme ends of the scale. Just focus on a near subject, hold down AF so it going continuously and shift your AF point over to a new subject....on a low setting it takes longer till the camera drives to the new subject (ie it holds on the previous subject and doesn't jump to something new). This would allow an obstruction to pass in front of your subject or account for the photographer lagging in tracking and getting the AF point off of the intended subject and delay it jumping to the background (which is what I was discussing in the comment you quoted...ie why it didn't focus on the waves even if the focus point was off the subject).
p.6 #19 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
Maxxus46 wrote:
Well sorry to say the A7RIV started missing on me again today with FW 1.20 and 200-600, back lit shots gave it trouble. Sadly I’ve decided to relegate the body to stills work only. Back to the A9ii for me... adding a 1.4tc soon
The placebo effect is very strong in this thread.
LBJ2 wrote:
I am confident I don't see any evidence v 1.20 improved A7rIV + G 200-600 AF while in high burst mode. I posted settings which seem to work better and frankly with these settings and practice there is a chance to increase the hit rate while in high burst mode with the A7rIV. I’ve been using the G 200-600 since it first came out so I’ve plenty of practice with this lens. It’s a very, very good lens at its price point and FL.
Maxxus responded:
"According to Arbitrage there is a definite improvement with FW 1.20. He tested quite extensively...id suggest asking him for more details"
p.6 #20 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved
LBJ2 wrote:
The placebo effect is very strong in this thread.
LBJ2 wrote:
I am confident I don't see any evidence v 1.20 improved A7rIV + G 200-600 AF while in high burst mode. I posted settings which seem to work better and frankly with these settings and practice there is a chance to increase the hit rate while in high burst mode with the A7rIV. I’ve been using the G 200-600 since it first came out so I’ve plenty of practice with this lens. It’s a very, very good lens at its price point and FL.
Maxxus responded:
"According to Arbitrage there is a definite improvement with FW 1.20. He tested quite extensively...id suggest asking him for more details" ...Show more →
As I've said a few times in this thread. All my recent success came before FW 1.2 and I have no idea if FW 1.2 has made any further difference.
What I do know is I can now take the A7RIV out and not have continuously back focused shots in everything but cloudy light which was the case previously. I can now quickly aim and shoot at fleeting opportunities while out for a day of birding and I'm getting a decent hit rate on my intended part of the bird. On top of that I've managed to get some success with small, fast BIF...nothing like an A9II but still not a total mess.
) and a split second earlier that position of AF points was on the bird. In the split (1/10s) between frames the camera would not have reacted to the grossly OOF water. This is why I think these focus point display programs are not very accurate in telling you what is really going on. You can easily have lots of shots in good focus with displayed AF points miles off the bird and also OOF shots with displayed AF points right on the bird. Everything is slightly delayed.
.