buffalowolff wrote:
Meh. In his test the DR is similar, maybe a little worse on the a1 than the RIV and R5 . According to them: sharpness is similar across them, High ISO noise he says is similar, but he doesn't go through the ranges, just jumps up to 25600 which is useless anyway IMO. Interestingly enough they claim the stabilization is better on the a1 than all of the others, saying the R5 ties the a1, but his chart says the r5 ties the RIV in 2nd place... so who knows, but bodes well for the a1 I guess. anti-flicker works well. ...Show more →
Douglas Liu wrote:
Nothing interesting. He likes the 30fps and the EVF a lot, the rest he was pretty talking about the specs.
What about his BEAF tests?
buffalowolff wrote:
Meh. In his test the DR is similar, maybe a little worse on the a1 than the RIV and R5 . According to them: sharpness is similar across them, High ISO noise he says is similar, but he doesn't go through the ranges, just jumps up to 25600 which is useless anyway IMO. Interestingly enough they claim the stabilization is better on the a1 than all of the others, saying the R5 ties the a1, but his chart says the r5 ties the RIV in 2nd place... so who knows, but bodes well for the a1 I guess. anti-flicker works well. ...Show more →
Stabilization also benefits a from possibility of using electronic shutter almost exclusively because vibration from 2nd curtain acceleration is avoided. And there may be some vibration left from previous shutter activation if burst is used.
Not sure if it played a role in this test but that alone makes stabilization of the A1 more useful.
How reliable is this reviewer? In one sentence, he said that the thought the image stabilization had improved significantly and that he could handhold images down to 1 second. Have other reviewers stated that they believe image stabilization has significantly improved?
somersettr wrote:
"Bird AF feels like it’s still in beta"
Ok - just found this comment from buafflowolff - apparently multiple reviewers are saying the image stabilization is better on the A1. Hope this ends up being true and not just a favorable first impression. For me at least, that would be a significant step forward.
buffalowolff wrote:
Meh. In his test the DR is similar, maybe a little worse on the a1 than the RIV and R5 . According to them: sharpness is similar across them, High ISO noise he says is similar, but he doesn't go through the ranges, just jumps up to 25600 which is useless anyway IMO. Interestingly enough they claim the stabilization is better on the a1 than all of the others, saying the R5 ties the a1, but his chart says the r5 ties the RIV in 2nd place... so who knows, but bodes well for the a1 I guess. anti-flicker works well. ...Show more →
I think the BEAF is going to be very situation dependent. I don't think it will be useful in as many situations as the R5/R6. I think having a custom key programmed to toggle it on/off will be important.
But it does sound like RTT is amazingly sticky now and that may mean that BEAF is not needed as much as we would think. I usually don't use RTT on A9II and instead prefer just Zone AF. I'm thinking I'm going to be using RTT a lot more on the A1 but maybe rely on BEAF as much as I do with my R5.
We've seen some videos like the Bee-eater where the A1's BEAF system is ridiculously good and instantaneous as the bird lands. That will be quicker to have AF than targeting that bird with a RTT point or even Zone AF to some degree. But that is a very clean perch, bird and clean, grossly OOF background. Some might argue a situation where no one needs BEAF anyways. It depends...if that bird lands, looks once towards you and then flies again within a split-second the BEAF might make the difference over aiming with a different AF mode.
I'm sure after a weekend with this camera I'll have a pretty good idea where BEAF stands against the R5 and if BEAF is going to be of much use. Thankfully BEAF is not one of my main driving features to buy this camera. I do hope that FW will improve it but I would not make a purchase based on such hopes of BEAF is a big selling feature to you.
I am interested to see what happens when BEAF misses. If its still on the head or close to on plain with the head/eye then thats a good miss and still means it provides value.
arbitrage wrote:
I think the BEAF is going to be very situation dependent. I don't think it will be useful in as many situations as the R5/R6. I think having a custom key programmed to toggle it on/off will be important.
But it does sound like RTT is amazingly sticky now and that may mean that BEAF is not needed as much as we would think. I usually don't use RTT on A9II and instead prefer just Zone AF. I'm thinking I'm going to be using RTT a lot more on the A1 but maybe rely on BEAF as much as I do with my R5.
We've seen some videos like the Bee-eater where the A1's BEAF system is ridiculously good and instantaneous as the bird lands. That will be quicker to have AF than targeting that bird with a RTT point or even Zone AF to some degree. But that is a very clean perch, bird and clean, grossly OOF background. Some might argue a situation where no one needs BEAF anyways. It depends...if that bird lands, looks once towards you and then flies again within a split-second the BEAF might make the difference over aiming with a different AF mode.
I'm sure after a weekend with this camera I'll have a pretty good idea where BEAF stands against the R5 and if BEAF is going to be of much use. Thankfully BEAF is not one of my main driving features to buy this camera. I do hope that FW will improve it but I would not make a purchase based on such hopes of BEAF is a big selling feature to you....Show more →
Also how good is BEAF during action (flight) on R5? Does it really give more keepers than your A9II? I cancelled my A1 order and will buy one of these (or the mythical Nikon Z8). My primary concern is to have higher keeper rate of birds in action.
Can live without a bird sitting on a stick 😅
Thanks you
arbitrage wrote:
I think the BEAF is going to be very situation dependent. I don't think it will be useful in as many situations as the R5/R6. I think having a custom key programmed to toggle it on/off will be important.
But it does sound like RTT is amazingly sticky now and that may mean that BEAF is not needed as much as we would think. I usually don't use RTT on A9II and instead prefer just Zone AF. I'm thinking I'm going to be using RTT a lot more on the A1 but maybe rely on BEAF as much as I do with my R5.
We've seen some videos like the Bee-eater where the A1's BEAF system is ridiculously good and instantaneous as the bird lands. That will be quicker to have AF than targeting that bird with a RTT point or even Zone AF to some degree. But that is a very clean perch, bird and clean, grossly OOF background. Some might argue a situation where no one needs BEAF anyways. It depends...if that bird lands, looks once towards you and then flies again within a split-second the BEAF might make the difference over aiming with a different AF mode.
I'm sure after a weekend with this camera I'll have a pretty good idea where BEAF stands against the R5 and if BEAF is going to be of much use. Thankfully BEAF is not one of my main driving features to buy this camera. I do hope that FW will improve it but I would not make a purchase based on such hopes of BEAF is a big selling feature to you....Show more →
arbitrage wrote:
I think the BEAF is going to be very situation dependent. I don't think it will be useful in as many situations as the R5/R6. I think having a custom key programmed to toggle it on/off will be important.
But it does sound like RTT is amazingly sticky now and that may mean that BEAF is not needed as much as we would think. I usually don't use RTT on A9II and instead prefer just Zone AF. I'm thinking I'm going to be using RTT a lot more on the A1 but maybe rely on BEAF as much as I do with my R5.
We've seen some videos like the Bee-eater where the A1's BEAF system is ridiculously good and instantaneous as the bird lands. That will be quicker to have AF than targeting that bird with a RTT point or even Zone AF to some degree. But that is a very clean perch, bird and clean, grossly OOF background. Some might argue a situation where no one needs BEAF anyways. It depends...if that bird lands, looks once towards you and then flies again within a split-second the BEAF might make the difference over aiming with a different AF mode.
I'm sure after a weekend with this camera I'll have a pretty good idea where BEAF stands against the R5 and if BEAF is going to be of much use. Thankfully BEAF is not one of my main driving features to buy this camera. I do hope that FW will improve it but I would not make a purchase based on such hopes of BEAF is a big selling feature to you....Show more →
One of the things I don't think I have seen in any review is the use of RTT with BEAF. Given that the BEAF seems to flit on and off in many situations, I'm hoping that BEAF in conjunction with RTT might be much more effective. If the camera identifies an eye I would hope that RTT would do a better job than the A9II at staying on the same spot which should be either still on the eye or on the head if the eye is lost.
My issue with RTT on the A9II is not that it won't follow a flying bird once you have locked onto it, rather it is that one out of five shots will be soft when using RTT for a reason that I don't understand. Like you, I find Zone much more accurate.
So maybe Zone + RTT + BEAF will be killer on the A1!.
Also how good is BEAF during action (flight) on R5? Does it really give more keepers than your A9II? I cancelled my A1 order and will buy one of these (or the mythical Nikon Z8). My primary concern is to have higher keeper rate of birds in action.
Can live without a bird sitting on a stick 😅
Thanks you
I think RTT=RealTime Tracking
The following video was combined from 14 photos. R5 with 100-500 lens, locked on tripod, animal eye AF, e-shutter, focus point was locked on owl's eye before took off. Only first 6 photos were in focus. In another shooting, I handhold the same camera and lens, zone AF, followed the owl and kept it in the centre. Totally took 20 photos, about 70% in focus. FYI.
Note: I had A9 and A9 II before. In my experiences, I don't think R5/R6 BEAF is good enough for BIF, I would rather using zone AF. Even so, A9/A9 II is still a better choice for BIF, at least for me.
Also how good is BEAF during action (flight) on R5? Does it really give more keepers than your A9II? I cancelled my A1 order and will buy one of these (or the mythical Nikon Z8). My primary concern is to have higher keeper rate of birds in action.
Can live without a bird sitting on a stick 😅
Thanks you
No the BEAF on R5 for BIF doesn't give more keepers for any type of fast bird. It has helped keep AF off of near wings on larger herons, eagles etc. I find my A9II gives higher keeper rate just using plain old Zone or Wide on smaller, fast, erratic BIF than the R5 does in any mode. The R5 does light up the Eye-AF square a fair amount even on faster/smaller BIF (at least duck sized). But yeah, if it doesn't give any better results than who cares.
arbitrage wrote:
... The R5 does light up the Eye-AF square a fair amount even on faster/smaller BIF (at least duck sized). But yeah, if it doesn't give any better results than who cares.
