p.1 #1 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
I’ve had the A7R2 since around the time it was released and I’m looking to add another body for general shooting other than landscape. AF performance will be a big factor, but I haven’t really tracked which cameras have the best AF. Can someone rank (or at least group) the Sony full frame bodies by AF performance? Specifically how do the A7R bodies (II, III & IV) rank against each other and how do they compare to the various A7 and A9 bodies? Im mainly interested in Eye AF, tracking and low light acquisition. Thanks.
p.1 #2 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
Sure I'll give it a shot, in order. Dashes indicate a big gap in autofocus performance. Some could be argued but I'd say this is a good general guideline.
(Stacked sensor design)
A1
A9II
A9
-
-
(Real time tracking)
A7IV
A7SIII
A7C
A7RIV
-
(Real time Eye-AF and Animal Eye-AF)
A7III
A7RIII
-
-
A7RII
RX1RII
-
A7II
A7SII (No PDAF)
A7
A7S (No PDAF)
A7R (No PDAF)
RX1R (No PDAF)
RX1 (No PDAF)
p.1 #3 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
I would love to know where the APS-C cameras fit in to this list. I’m in a similar situation with my main camera being an A7R2 but I decided to get an A6400 instead of a faster and much more expensive full frame body. So far I’m happy with my choice but I still don’t know how this level of performance fits in with full frame options.
p.1 #4 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
PaulMoorePhoto wrote:
I would love to know where the APS-C cameras fit in to this list. I’m in a similar situation with my main camera being an A7R2 but I decided to get an A6400 instead of a faster and much more expensive full frame body. So far I’m happy with my choice but I still don’t know how this level of performance fits in with full frame options.
The A6100, 6400, ZV-E10 and A6600 have Real Time Tracking and should provide a similar level of performance to the A7C, though only the A7C, ZV-E10 and A6600 will provide Eye-AF in video and only the A7C and ZV-E10 provide Animal Eye AF in video..
p.1 #5 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
I can only talk about the cameras that I've used:
A1>A9II>A9>A7RIV>A7III.
I think A7IV should be around A9II since it's really really new? A friend who has both A7RIII and A7III said the A7III is better, I think A7RII will be a lot worse than any of those since it's much older.
SCOR wrote:
I’ve had the A7R2 since around the time it was released and I’m looking to add another body for general shooting other than landscape. AF performance will be a big factor, but I haven’t really tracked which cameras have the best AF. Can someone rank (or at least group) the Sony full frame bodies by AF performance? Specifically how do the A7R bodies (II, III & IV) rank against each other and how do they compare to the various A7 and A9 bodies? Im mainly interested in Eye AF, tracking and low light acquisition. Thanks.
p.1 #6 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
Wait. What’s the difference between A9 and A9II? And isn’t A1 like significantly better than A9 series? I know it does double the AF calculations per second.
p.1 #8 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
I do not believe af performance is only about software (and its functions). For an example, when birding with A9, I often trust on plain old single point in middle just because it gives me more control when avoiding branches. Object recognition (and face and eye recognition) does its job best when photographing people in man made environment.
Fast readout from sensor and plenty of processing power are the hardware fundamentals of good af performance. I would also like to add that although A9 has generally good af, and when photographing people it is excellent, there seem to a short delay between what is happening and what one sees in viewfinder. In bird photography this is obvious, not so in other types of photography I do.
A7r3 is already a classic Sony camera because of its all-round performance and image quality. A7r3 is not a king in af department but already much better than what most comparable DSLR were (D810 to me). The accuracy of af is also much better in any mirrorless compared to DSLR.
p.1 #9 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
The A9II has better AF than the A9, I can feel it when using both side by side, I think it's mostly a software-based upgrade, but also from what I'm reading on the Sony official announcement they may not even be using the same processor, you can see it in the Sony official A9II announcement, I used both for some time before moving to the A1.
From Sony official A9II announcement:
The camera is able to function while continuously calculating Auto Focus and Auto Exposure at up to 60 times per second, with newly optimized AF algorithms that provide notably enhanced AF precision and performance, ensuring that even the most erratic subject motion that is associated with sports are captured with high precision.
Upgraded BIONZ X™ image processing engine gains maximum benefit from the sensor’s fast readout speed; processor works with front-end LSI to enhance speed in AF/AE detection, image processing, face detection and accuracy, and more
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
Wait. What’s the difference between A9 and A9II? And isn’t A1 like significantly better than A9 series? I know it does double the AF calculations per second.
p.1 #10 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
The A9II has better AF than the A9, I can feel it when using both side by side, I think it's mostly a software-based upgrade, but also from what I'm reading on the Sony official announcement they may not even be using the same processor, you can see it in the Sony official A9II announcement, I used both for some time before moving to the A1.
From Sony official A9II announcement:
The camera is able to function while continuously calculating Auto Focus and Auto Exposure at up to 60 times per second, with newly optimized AF algorithms that provide notably enhanced AF precision and performance, ensuring that even the most erratic subject motion that is associated with sports are captured with high precision.
Upgraded BIONZ X™ image processing engine gains maximum benefit from the sensor’s fast readout speed; processor works with front-end LSI to enhance speed in AF/AE detection, image processing, face detection and accuracy, and more
p.1 #11 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
Be 4 full frame Sony's missing from the discussion, A850, A900, A99 and A99ii.
First 2 would likely be ranked quite low but has a reputation for being very accurate using their "special" center spot.
A99 would likely match or outperform the first generation A7's and the A99ii would be up to the third generation performance.
p.1 #12 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
a7IV/a7rIV/a7C
If we shoot people in flight, PIF
A1/a9II/a9
If we also shoot Birds in flight, BIF
Rest
If we shoot perched people or birds
Dec 26, 2021 at 04:07 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
EdwardDye wrote:
I can only talk about the cameras that I've used:
A1>A9II>A9>A7RIV>A7III.
I think A7IV should be around A9II since it's really really new? A friend who has both A7RIII and A7III said the A7III is better, I think A7RII will be a lot worse than any of those since it's much older.
No, the A7 IV despite being new does not have a stacked sensor and has a lot less AF calculations per second because of that. It will have all the new AF algorithms, however, and it should also be better than the A7r IV because with less MP and a bigger processor it should be able to process AF information more quickly. The A9 will still have a lot better AF, however, because of at least double and likely triple the AF calculations per second.
Dec 26, 2021 at 10:02 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
EdwardDye wrote:
The A9II has better AF than the A9, I can feel it when using both side by side, I think it's mostly a software-based upgrade, but also from what I'm reading on the Sony official announcement they may not even be using the same processor, you can see it in the Sony official A9II announcement, I used both for some time before moving to the A1.
From Sony official A9II announcement:
The camera is able to function while continuously calculating Auto Focus and Auto Exposure at up to 60 times per second, with newly optimized AF algorithms that provide notably enhanced AF precision and performance, ensuring that even the most erratic subject motion that is associated with sports are captured with high precision.
Upgraded BIONZ X™ image processing engine gains maximum benefit from the sensor’s fast readout speed; processor works with front-end LSI to enhance speed in AF/AE detection, image processing, face detection and accuracy, and more
The A9 II compared to the A9 has the same sensor, but upgraded algorithms and probably some extra processing power. They have similar AF capabilities, but the A9 II is probably just a bit better, but don't expect much.
p.1 #15 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
I don't feel that they have similar AF capabilities, if you talking about just AF speed I agree they are about the same, but A9II AF feels more reliable and smarter, it track people better because the upgraded algorithms and the extra processing power, i don't know why a lot of people always feel a software based upgrade is not going to make that much difference, but remember how big of a improvement the A9 got from its firmware update?
Steve Spencer wrote:
The A9 II compared to the A9 has the same sensor, but upgraded algorithms and probably some extra processing power. They have similar AF capabilities, but the A9 II is probably just a bit better, but don't expect much.
p.1 #16 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
derKoekje wrote:
Sure I'll give it a shot, in order. Dashes indicate a big gap in autofocus performance. Some could be argued but I'd say this is a good general guideline.
(Stacked sensor design)
A1
A9II
A9
-
-
(Real time tracking)
A7IV
A7SIII
A7C
A7RIV
-
(Real time Eye-AF and Animal Eye-AF)
A7III
A7RIII
-
-
A7RII
RX1RII
-
A7II
A7SII (No PDAF)
A7
A7R
A7S (No PDAF)
RX1R (No PDAF)
RX1 (No PDAF)
Excellent list. Pretty much spot on.
I still see quite a few FM’ers use the A7RII for landscape shots.
That’s great. The A7RII seemed to be ahead of its time.
p.1 #17 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
derKoekje wrote:
A7II
A7SII (No PDAF)
A7
A7R
The A7 has PDAF, the A7R has none. Not sure why you ranked the A7SII above the A7.
Dec 26, 2021 at 01:18 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
EdwardDye wrote:
I don't feel that they have similar AF capabilities, if you talking about just AF speed I agree they are about the same, but A9II AF feels more reliable and smarter, it track people better because the upgraded algorithms and the extra processing power, i don't know why a lot of people always feel a software based upgrade is not going to make that much difference, but remember how big of a improvement the A9 got from its firmware update?
Well, you have your views and I expressed mine. Let's just leave it at that.
p.1 #20 · Ranking Sony full frame bodies by autofocus performance?
QuietOC wrote:
The A7 has PDAF, the A7R has none. Not sure why you ranked the A7SII above the A7.
Because I rank the autofocus capabilities of the A7S II slightly higher than the A7 despite the lack of PDAF. Just being contrast-detect doesn't mean it should rank at the bottom of the list. I'd rank the AF performance of the Panasonic S-models above anything before third-gen bodies. Anyway, didn't know that about the original A7R.
