According to Jared Polin in order to achieve full 30FPS on the A1, camera must be set to Hi+ AND Raw compressed--wonder if Tony N checked for compressed.
LBJ2 wrote:
According to Jared Polin in order to achieve full 30FPS on the A1, camera must be set to Hi+ AND Raw compressed--wonder if Tony N checked for compressed.
I can almost assure you it is this:
Priority Set in AF-C
Sets whether to release the shutter even if the subject is not in focus when [Continuous AF] is activated and the subject is in motion.
MENU →(Custom Settings) →[Priority Set in AF-C] → desired setting.
Menu item details
AF:
Prioritizes focusing. The shutter will not be released until the subject is in focus.
Release:
Prioritizes the shutter's release. The shutter will be released even if the subject is out of focus.
Balanced Emphasis:
Shoots with a balanced emphasis on both focusing and shutter release.
Looks good especially Mark Galer's dog shots taken with animal eye af. Look forward to test that myself, with A9 I always used expand flexible spot on dogs and try keep it on the dogs head (impossible at the speed dogs move), so if animal eye AF yields as good or better keeper rate that will make shooting these type of dog images a lot easier.
Bird eye AF looks a bit unstable at detecting the bird eyes. But since this is a flagship camera that is supposed to be the best I am optimistic that Sony will provide firmware updates as they improve the algorithms like they did on the original A9.
randomguy wrote:
Looks good especially Mark Galer's dog shots taken with animal eye af. Look forward to test that myself, with A9 I always used expand flexible spot on dogs and try keep it on the dogs head (impossible at the speed dogs move), so if animal eye AF yields as good or better keeper rate that will make shooting these type of dog images a lot easier.
Bird eye AF looks a bit unstable at detecting the bird eyes. But since this is a flagship camera that is supposed to be the best I am optimistic that Sony will provide firmware updates as they improve the algorithms like they did on the original A9....Show more →
I think the R5's BEAF might be a little more stable but really a lot of the videos we've seen so far showing us the EVF via the Atmos recordings have made some rookie mistakes. They need to be choosing a more suitable AF mode to begin their BEAF search from. The beauty of Sony's AF system compared to the R5 is that with Sony it watches for the head/eye from within the size of the AF Area you choose. Canon forces you to either use the entire frame (like Sony's Wide) or use just a Small square like Sony's Small Flex Spot. Just by selecting Zone, instead of Wide used in most of the videos would have made the results even more stable I think. Also maybe using RTT variants could have helped but also maybe could have hindered. On the flip side, Jared Polin's method of starting all his RTT out of Small Flex Spot is not a great method either. I'd have used at least a Expand Flex Spot or Med Flex Spot. But really for Jared's singled out athletes he would have been way better off iwth Zone:RTT or maybe even Wide:RTT for most of his examples.
But overall the consistency of the Eye-AF on the A1 is pretty similar to my R5 experience. And I really think by choosing better starting AF modes it will be excellent. Seeing it on that running Sanderling and on the Godwit seemed about on par with what the R5 does. I'll be pointing the R5 and A1 onto identical subjects ASAP when I get the camera to really get a good idea of the differences.
Regardless, the BEAF to me is just the icing on the cake...there is a lot of other things about the A1 that have fixed all my complaints about the previous Sony bodies as far as interface and lag and lockouts go. Plus all the extra MPs, FPS, AF calculations etc....CAN'T WAIT ANY LONGER
arbitrage wrote:
I think the R5's BEAF might be a little more stable but really a lot of the videos we've seen so far showing us the EVF via the Atmos recordings have made some rookie mistakes. They need to be choosing a more suitable AF mode to begin their BEAF search from. The beauty of Sony's AF system compared to the R5 is that with Sony it watches for the head/eye from within the size of the AF Area you choose. Canon forces you to either use the entire frame (like Sony's Wide) or use just a Small square like Sony's Small Flex Spot. Just by selecting Zone, instead of Wide used in most of the videos would have made the results even more stable I think. Also maybe using RTT variants could have helped but also maybe could have hindered. On the flip side, Jared Polin's method of starting all his RTT out of Small Flex Spot is not a great method either. I'd have used at least a Expand Flex Spot or Med Flex Spot. But really for Jared's singled out athletes he would have been way better off iwth Zone:RTT or maybe even Wide:RTT for most of his examples.
But overall the consistency of the Eye-AF on the A1 is pretty similar to my R5 experience. And I really think by choosing better starting AF modes it will be excellent. Seeing it on that running Sanderling and on the Godwit seemed about on par with what the R5 does. I'll be pointing the R5 and A1 onto identical subjects ASAP when I get the camera to really get a good idea of the differences.
Regardless, the BEAF to me is just the icing on the cake...there is a lot of other things about the A1 that have fixed all my complaints about the previous Sony bodies as far as interface and lag and lockouts go. Plus all the extra MPs, FPS, AF calculations etc....CAN'T WAIT ANY LONGER...Show more →
If High ISO RAW files look great, I'd be super thrilled. You do far more BIF photography than I do, but with the lenses I had at my disposal (the 100-400 and 200-600 with the 1.4 and 2.0x TC) I had to raise my ISO fairly high in order to compensate for the effective aperture when using very fast shutter speeds.
the initial samples of any camera usually look like junk mostly due to the lack of experience / artistic talent of the so-called internet expert reviewers but I have to say these files look darned good even for harsh light shooting. Almost hard to believe they are in camera JPEG and not converted from RAW. the pixel level sharpness looks great and noise doesn't look too shabby.
LBJ2 wrote:
According to Jared Polin in order to achieve full 30FPS on the A1, camera must be set to Hi+ AND Raw compressed--wonder if Tony N checked for compressed.
I had the same thought, posted that same explanation but deleted it after seeing you beat me to it. Yep, I bet that's it.
speedmaster20d wrote:
the initial samples of any camera usually look like junk mostly due to the lack of experience / artistic talent of the so-called internet expert reviewers but I have to say these files look darned good even for harsh light shooting. Almost hard to believe they are in camera JPEG and not converted from RAW. the pixel level sharpness looks great and noise doesn't look too shabby.
FWIW, the jpegs out of the a9ii were pretty good as well.
arbitrage wrote:
I think the R5's BEAF might be a little more stable but really a lot of the videos we've seen so far showing us the EVF via the Atmos recordings have made some rookie mistakes. They need to be choosing a more suitable AF mode to begin their BEAF search from. The beauty of Sony's AF system compared to the R5 is that with Sony it watches for the head/eye from within the size of the AF Area you choose. Canon forces you to either use the entire frame (like Sony's Wide) or use just a Small square like Sony's Small Flex Spot. Just by selecting Zone, instead of Wide used in most of the videos would have made the results even more stable I think. Also maybe using RTT variants could have helped but also maybe could have hindered. On the flip side, Jared Polin's method of starting all his RTT out of Small Flex Spot is not a great method either. I'd have used at least a Expand Flex Spot or Med Flex Spot. But really for Jared's singled out athletes he would have been way better off iwth Zone:RTT or maybe even Wide:RTT for most of his examples.
But overall the consistency of the Eye-AF on the A1 is pretty similar to my R5 experience. And I really think by choosing better starting AF modes it will be excellent. Seeing it on that running Sanderling and on the Godwit seemed about on par with what the R5 does. I'll be pointing the R5 and A1 onto identical subjects ASAP when I get the camera to really get a good idea of the differences.
Regardless, the BEAF to me is just the icing on the cake...there is a lot of other things about the A1 that have fixed all my complaints about the previous Sony bodies as far as interface and lag and lockouts go. Plus all the extra MPs, FPS, AF calculations etc....CAN'T WAIT ANY LONGER...Show more →
BEAF. Is that a new acronym? Reminds be of the slogan "Where's the BEAF?" Maybe Sony needs to incorporate that in their advertising?
buffalowolff wrote:
I can almost assure you it is this:
Priority Set in AF-C
Sets whether to release the shutter even if the subject is not in focus when [Continuous AF] is activated and the subject is in motion.
MENU →(Custom Settings) →[Priority Set in AF-C] → desired setting.
Menu item details
AF:
Prioritizes focusing. The shutter will not be released until the subject is in focus.
Release:
Prioritizes the shutter's release. The shutter will be released even if the subject is out of focus.
Balanced Emphasis:
Shoots with a balanced emphasis on both focusing and shutter release.
Maybe.
I've always used Balanced Emphasis with no complaints. But I've never counted if I was getting exact FPS as advertised TBH. However, I certainly see the logic of the "Release" setting may have some level of impact depending on the shooting situation. Have you been able confirm with your own tests? If so, what kind of frame rate drops did you see between Balanced Emphasis and Release and what method did you use to count FPS? Just curious.
galenapass wrote:
I had the same thought, posted that same explanation but deleted it after seeing you beat me to it. Yep, I bet that's it.
He did say he got 30FPS on a still subject so he must have switched it at some point. Although maybe he hadn't realized to switch it when trying for the BIF where he only got 19FPS.
Tony will most likely come out with a longer review that comes to totally different conclusions. At least that is what happened between his early R5 review and his later R5 reviews and R5 comments in other videos.
