Arka wrote:
That's just not true. The A9 and A1 AF systems are a generational advance over even the best DSLR AF, and are a major reason why DSLRs are falling by the wayside.
1. A9 and A1 AF systems operate reliably at much higher frame-rates - 20-30FPS versus 14FPS.
2. PDAF sensors on the Sony (and also Canon) are right on the sensor.
3. On the A1, there are over 1000 sensors, and they cover the entire viewfinder area. Nikon PDAF is on a separate module, has only 100 or so cross-type sensors, and covers far less of the viewfinder area - maybe 60%?
4. Nikon AF declines if you use live view (e.g., for video) because you lose PDAF. This is not an issue with Sony at all, and a pretty minor issue on the Canon 1Dx.
5. The A1 AF is effective even in its more demanding resolution environment - 50MP versus 20MP for the D6.
6. Sony eye-tracking functionality is a true game changer that Nikon DSLR AF cannot replicate.
All of these distinctions lead to significant real world advantages. I have never considered my Nikon DSLRs to be even remotely equal to either my A9 or A1 in the AF department. The Nikon requires some skill (and a little luck) to consistently score keepers. The Sony consistently delivers perfectly focused results with very little effort - I felt like I was cheating when I started using the A9 regularly, and the A1 takes that AF effectiveness and transparency up yet another notch. I don't really even have to think about it anymore - just follow the eyes.
That's where Nikon needs to be. I hope that Nikon doesn't assume as you do that they've already matched the competition with their aging DSLR AF - that is far from being true. ...Show more →
You are telling me about technology (and what you write is totally correct) and I am speaking about performance.
I am not sure what DSLRs you are talking about, but I owned an a9II, D5 and D6. I also owned a D850 when I owned the D5 and the D5 was in a totally different league in terms of actual AF performance although they were sharing the same AF sensors.
In my usage the D6 was overall a tab better than the a9II in terms of tracking. More keepers and more accurate focusing. That is obviously within the limits of DSLR focusing (meaning more centered AF points, only limited eye AF capability at close reach).
I have only very limited experience with the a1 since I sold all my FE mount lenses. I hear it's better than the a9II so I would think it's also probably a bit better than the D6.
1bwana1 wrote:
Mirrorless is currently almost 80% of camera sales revenue. Sony is number 1 in mirrorless sales in both revenue and units. Canon is second, and Nikon is 7th. How is that not a threat to Nikon.
Nikon used be in second place overall. Sony is now in second, Nikon third. How is that not a threat to Nikon?
I really don't get your statement?
I apologize, I have stopped answering to partial quotations.
Please go back to what I wrote and read the whole thing instead of isolating one sentence that is not the main point.
brian_sp wrote:
not quite, it couldn't do high mp so it couldn't do "everything" better
You could get an A7R3 (or shortly thereafter an A7R4) for that (just as you'd get a 5D or D850 from Nikon or Canon respectively). The A9 was competing with the 1Dx and D6, and it did everything that those cameras could do. In that sense, Sony was slicing and dicing its feature sets in a manner similar to its competition.
Now the A1 does most of what the A7R4 does while giving nothing up on speed and AF accuracy.
bernardl wrote:
You are telling me about technology (and what you write is totally correct) and I am speaking about performance.
I am not sure what DSLRs you are talking about, but I owned an a9II, D5 and D6. I also owned a D850 when I owned the D5 and the D5 was in a totally different league in terms of actual AF performance although they were sharing the same AF sensors.
In my usage the D6 was overall a tab better than the a9II in terms of tracking. More keepers and more accurate focusing. That is obviously within the limits of DSLR focusing (meaning more centered AF points, only limited eye AF capability at close reach).
I have only very limited experience with the a1 since I sold all my FE mount lenses. I hear it's better than the a9II so I would think it's also probably a bit better than the D6.
I'm referring to the D5 and D850. I have little experience with the D6 but my understanding is that it's an evolution over the D5. In my experience the A9 was way ahead of the any Nikon DSLR in terms of where it could track (i.e., anywhere in the viewfinder), how it could track (eye-AF was far more accurate and depicted in realtime on the EVF), and overall accuracy. Also, Nikon DSLR AF performance via live view is expectedly miserable due to the lack of PDAF.
My use cases involved fast moving people and the occasional wildlife or pet adventure.
I've not seen how much better Nikon's mirrorless AF is after firmware updates and iterations of the Z cameras, but I suspect that'll be the platform Nikon builds its next flagship camera from, not its DSLR tech.
For me, I give slight edge to A9 ii over D6 mainly because of wider AF point coverage over the frame.
I have D6 and shoot side by side with my friend who is using A9 ii quite a bit.
When I shoot small fast bird like kingfisher in flight, I think D6 is perfectly capable of tracking a kingfisher as long as I can keep it within the focus area of the frame. Programmable group focus is very handy here. However, A9 which has AF coverage of over 90% of the frame though has a clear advantage here.
For slower birds where I can keep the bird in the focus area, D6 is perfectly capable and is at least as good as A9 there.
For Z7 ii vs A7r IV, I find AF to be comparable, one is better than the other under certain circumstance. A7r IV is clearly better than Z7 ii at tracking a person runnning straight toward the camera at decent speed. Running perpendicular to the camera is not an issue for either camera.
Both camera AF is handicapped by blackout EVF and slight lag.
In low light, Z7 ii hunts less than A7r IV. A7r IV will pick up the eyes at further distance than Z7 ii but at that distance, I don't think there is significant difference between eye or face detection as even with 50/1.2@ f1.2, the whole face should be in focus anyway.
I think at the moment, the lack of mirrorless body with AF in the class of A1/A9 hurts Nikon quite a bit but I seriously don't think that A7 iii/ A7r IV AF is head and shoulder above Z6/Z7 ii ( that may change with A7 IV but at least for the next few days, Nikon is holding its own against A7 series quite well ).
They finally gave us the AF teaser we'd been waiting for. So they're trying to say that it's really pretty good for sport. I guess I'd rather see that on a cheetah but I can't complain too much.
Sounds like it might be a little faster than 5 FPS
Good question @arebitrage ... are those simulated AF points? They were pretty "sticky" to say the least.
I'm not sure about this marketing approach... dragging out the announcement over a month or so with four teaser videos...it's a little annoying IMO. Oh well... we wait.
How about human eye focus as a person run straight toward the camera or even during a jump or eye recognition from the side of the face?
The clip shows that it recognize a car and motorbike as well. And I guess if you do car racing, you probably would want the headlight in focus rather than random other part of the car, no?
Whether you need object recognition for car race or not, I guess that depends on the person.
I think if you need to be negative about everything that Nikon does, there is really no need to follow Nikon and just be done with the brand already.
Nikon's plan for announcement date is known for awhile now. The video was just a filler until announcement date and not the other way around.
I don't see anybody ask when Sony shows eye detection clip whether it is simulated or real EVF recording? Why
a person has to ask when Nikon shows a clip. jee bias much?
suteetat wrote:
How about human eye focus as a person run straight toward the camera or even during a jump or eye recognition from the side of the face?
The clip shows that it recognize a car and motorbike as well. And I guess if you do car racing, you probably would want the headlight in focus rather than random other part of the car, no?
Whether you need object recognition for car race or not, I guess that depends on the person.
I think if you need to be negative about everything that Nikon does, there is really no need to follow Nikon and just be done with the brand already.
Nikon's plan for announcement date is known for awhile now. The video was just a filler until announcement date and not the other way around.
I don't see anybody ask when Sony shows eye detection clip whether it is simulated or real EVF recording? Why
a person has to ask when Nikon shows a clip. jee bias much? ...Show more →
Sony痴 are surely simulated. That is why I知 asking if these are.
saaketham wrote:
The Nikon bashers are getting real nervous 🥶🥶🥶
Or maybe Sony fans don't use headlights on their cars 🤔🤔🤔
Or maybe I知 sitting on $7K worth of Nikon gear specifically waiting for this camera and I知 going to be honest about what I知 seeing so I can make my decision. Just add me to the Hide list because I知 going to be in these Z9 threads a lot.
suteetat wrote:
How about human eye focus as a person run straight toward the camera or even during a jump or eye recognition from the side of the face?
The clip shows that it recognize a car and motorbike as well. And I guess if you do car racing, you probably would want the headlight in focus rather than random other part of the car, no?
Whether you need object recognition for car race or not, I guess that depends on the person.
I think if you need to be negative about everything that Nikon does, there is really no need to follow Nikon and just be done with the brand already.
Nikon's plan for announcement date is known for awhile now. The video was just a filler until announcement date and not the other way around.
I don't see anybody ask when Sony shows eye detection clip whether it is simulated or real EVF recording? Why
a person has to ask when Nikon shows a clip. jee bias much? ...Show more →
I think this is a little harsh. My first thought when I watched this was if it was a real EVF or some kind of simulated overlay and my only bias is to wanting to keep all my Nikon gear. I would absolutely love for this to be exactly what our EVF experience is like but I keep a healthy skepticism on marketing material until we have some really solid info.
).
bias much?