ruthenium wrote:
"Sony is basically pointing me now towards A7RV for my casual shooting" - this is my feeling as well. When I bought the A1, I thought I would not need another camera for many years. How wrong I was - the G.A.S. never goes away. I have practically decided that I am going to add A7RV this summer (I am not selling the A1, though).
Regarding the A1, I purchased the camera because of the features it offered. The most outstanding one is the fast and accurate autofocus. It is this feature that I expect Sony should maintain and possibly refine and improve through FW updates.
At the moment, I feel that there are some problems after the latest update (1.31). The problem that happens to me from time to time is when, in review, I see the small square on the bird's eye, yet the bird's eye and the head are not in focus. Thus, the eye AF engaged and did not have problem locating the eye - but the focus distance was miscalculated, apparently. This does not happen every time, yet the overall accuracy of the eye AF has decreased, in my experience. This is disappointing. I can only hope that there is going to be an update sooner or later. ...Show more →
I agree! On my last safari, in January and early February, I was very displeased to find that some shots which should have been no brainers for the A1's AF were OOF. Many of these were big cats like lions or cheetah and particularly on my initial shots of a given animal. The cat would be OOF, sometimes a little bit, sometimes totally. But the nearby vegetation was tack sharp. This also happened with birds, but after a few OOF shots, the AF seemed to kick in. It is very irritating that Sony's FW 1.31 caused this problem, which had not existed before that firmware. Sony should give us a new firmware for the A1 that reverses this and takes us back to the much better AF in FW 1.30.
AGeoJO wrote:
I was wondering whether the A1 with the latest FW suffers from the same issue as the A7r IV when used in combo with the 200-600mm lens. It certainly looks more and more like it. Even back then, the issue was noticed not universally and not across the board but only by a percentage of A7r IV users. How big the percentage is now, of course, hard to figure out. I am not denying the issue but personally, I am not encountering any issues but I feel for you, Leon… .
It isn't just the A1 with the 200-600. I see the AF issues with the A1 + 100-400 with 1.4x. My safari photographic guide sees it with his A1 and 200-600. Both of us noticed this issue after the FW 1.31 "upgrade".
Daran wrote:
During AF-C AF is measured using the PDAF pixels. When the subject is constantly moving, that will return a sequence of approximate phase distances, or rather a set of such distances within the tracking area. These are not precise (there is noise involved), the subject edges to focus on are usually complex shapes and if the subject is fast enough, they won't really go to zero. Hence the question of whether the subject is or will be in focus when the image will be taken isn't necessarily binary.
So my interpretation of balanced priority, that seems to agree with my observations, is that it will shoot about as long as the subject isn't definitely OOF. Whereas AF priority shoots only if the camera is positive the subject is in focus, which given above may still be wrong. Release priority obviously shoots no matter what PDAF is reporting.
So while AF priority may make sense for reasonably still subjects, I can attest that it will skip BIF shots that would have been in focus....Show more →
"it will shoot about as long as the subject isn't definitely OOF. Whereas AF priority shoots only if the camera is positive the subject is in focus" - this is what makes "Balanced Emphasis" confusing to me, because I would think that "the subject isn't definitely OOF" means that "the camera is positive the subject is in focus."
I guess there must be some numerical accuracy criterium calculated by the camera. Perhaps the tolerance is different between the two settings: strict in "AF" and relaxed in "Balanced Emphasis". I cannot think of a better explanation.
ruthenium wrote:
"it will shoot about as long as the subject isn't definitely OOF. Whereas AF priority shoots only if the camera is positive the subject is in focus" - this is what makes "Balanced Emphasis" confusing to me, because I would think that "the subject isn't definitely OOF" means that "the camera is positive the subject is in focus."
I guess there must be some numerical accuracy criterium calculated by the camera. Perhaps the tolerance is different between the two settings: strict in "AF" and relaxed in "Balanced Emphasis". I cannot think of a better explanation.
Well, as said, it isn't just a single number either. But I'm not sure what your remaining question is. If there are too many soft images in your bursts, setting this to AF will help, but it will also drop shots that actually were in focus. Which may or may not be OK for what you shoot. I rather prefer to have more work with culling than missing some shots in the sequence when the action happens. Balanced seems to work well for that.
AGeoJO wrote:
I was wondering whether the A1 with the latest FW suffers from the same issue as the A7r IV when used in combo with the 200-600mm lens. It certainly looks more and more like it. Even back then, the issue was noticed not universally and not across the board but only by a percentage of A7r IV users. How big the percentage is now, of course, hard to figure out. I am not denying the issue but personally, I am not encountering any issues but I feel for you, Leon… .
Thank you , the thing that makes it worse is that this combo for me was fantastic with fw1.20 . As others have posted (mines same) it will show box on the eye but the shots appear rather soft . With things like Peregrines in flight I used to be able to just leave bird eye priority in AF to on . If it recognised the eye even in flight it would nail it if I could keep it in frame . Since fw1.31 if I leave bird eye priority in AF on it gives me a high percentage of softer images regardless if it recognises the eye or not . If I turn it off totally its better but unfortunately will tend to grab shoulders more
I was out today with fellow photographers shooting the local peregrines again (they are mating ) , two of those friends have A1 200-600 with fw1.31 and both have said they are getting far more soft shots since latest update, even one said he's getting some for perched birds
We was comparing setting , one uses Zone the other uses zone tracking , one uses tracking speed 3 the other uses 5 . One uses OSS1 on lens the other uses OSS3, one uses AF-C Balanced Emphasis the other uses Release , these are settings they've always used and got good results with older FW
I don't know what else to try , all I want is the consistency back
Any ideas what to try ?
For BIF I used to use
Zone , tracking speed 2 , AF-C Release , Bird Eye priority in AF turned on, OSS3 on lens up to 1/1600 turned to off if over , 10m to infinity , auto ISO base iso set to 500
Has anyone tried to correlate the focus issues with the firmware update for the 200-600 that came out in November (a couple of months after 1.31)? Perhaps that was a factor.
While a bit anecdotal, there are YouTube videos and user postings on DPReview that recommend using full focus range over limited focus settings, like 10m-Infinity. I always use the full focus range setting and I don't seem to experience the focusing issue since upgrading to 1.31.
Was out with the A1 again this am. The first 4 shots are good examples of when it seems to have no issues. I have enough clear cut distance behind the subject and once it locks on it seems to mostly be OK with some pulling off while swinging the lens to track the path. When the subject is flying and close to something like phrags, it has trouble locking on and then it drifts off and on and the keeper rate is lower than before. The last image is a use case that it has always nailed. Doesn't matter if it's at 600mm or 850mm with the TC. If there no competing background or branches in the foreground it just works as always
I updated camera first and was using it for a while , after doing the 200-600 update only difference I found was the OSS seemed to handle better at lower shutter speeds . A lot of birds perched tend to be in poor lit areas under tree cover , usually I’d be down at 1/250 but since the lens update I can comfortably go down to 1/160 even 1/60 but with less hit rate
rjensen11 wrote:
Has anyone tried to correlate the focus issues with the firmware update for the 200-600 that came out in November (a couple of months after 1.31)? Perhaps that was a factor.
While a bit anecdotal, there are YouTube videos and user postings on DPReview that recommend using full focus range over limited focus settings, like 10m-Infinity. I always use the full focus range setting and I don't seem to experience the focusing issue since upgrading to 1.31.
I photograph birds, wildlife/mammals, people and dogs so I'm constantly switching subjects. But right after the last firmware update the bird eye AF was noticeably more erratic or distinctly less "confident" in grabbing the eye. I don't remember eye AF being less affective on non bird subjects. Is it safe to say firmware 1.31 only affected bird eye AF?
Regardless, I'm hoping for a worthy firmware update on the a1.
There are so many insanely detailed tests for lens quality I wonder if anyone will ever come up with a "tracking score" for camera/lens combinations. I know there is no such thing as a standard bird or animal eye. Still, there must be some quantifiable measurement you can make about how the camera responds to lateral movement and movement away/towards the camera. Too much to ask?
A9Lon wrote:
I photograph birds, wildlife/mammals, people and dogs so I'm constantly switching subjects. But right after the last firmware update the bird eye AF was noticeably more erratic or distinctly less "confident" in grabbing the eye. I don't remember eye AF being less affective on non bird subjects. Is it safe to say firmware 1.31 only affected bird eye AF?
Regardless, I'm hoping for a worthy firmware update on the a1.
I think it mainly applies to (bird) Eye AF. If I de-activate Eye AF, I cannot see much fault with AF accuracy, although I am no longer using the 200-600G. In my case, the symptoms are erratic bird Eye AF: even when no birds are in the viewfinder, there will often be erratic jumping around of the Eye AF square, and on occasion it crashes the AF function.
I have to say that in terms of results, I don't have much to complain, i.e. the erratic behavior of the Eye AF function does not seem to disturb the AF accuracy much, but it sue does not help in getting a solid, stable and consistent operation.
Main thing is, when a thread like this runs on and on, there will 100% be a real issue with the firmware. I can understand that it will be quite hard for Sony to troubleshoot an issue like this, but it is sad they got the A1 to this state to begin with, when so many (I got in relatively late) state that it was reliable to the point of being perfect up to firmware 1.20. Sad they fluked with their flagship body this way, even if not all users are affected, and the issue likely is confined to mainly Bird Eye AF. Given it's top of the line price, this is an unworthy level of support.
ChrisMak wrote:
Main thing is, when a thread like this runs on and on, there will 100% be a real issue with the firmware. I can understand that it will be quite hard for Sony to troubleshoot an issue like this, but it is sad they got the A1 to this state to begin with, when so many (I got in relatively late) state that it was reliable to the point of being perfect up to firmware 1.20. Sad they messed with their flagship body this way.
This whole sorry saga makes me curious about how Canon, Nikon, Sony et al have designed their eye AF systems because they all seem very different in terms of implementation and effectiveness. From everything I've read, Canon's sounds like the best
It's equally baffling to me why Sony can't roll back firmware or even part of the firmware relating to eye AF. It almost sounds like everything's interlinked or interdependent, which seems like a very inefficient way to create software/firmware.
wordfool wrote:
This whole sorry saga makes me curious about how Canon, Nikon, Sony et al have designed their eye AF systems because they all seem very different in terms of implementation and effectiveness. From everything I've read, Canon's sounds like the best
It's equally baffling to me why Sony can't roll back firmware or even part of the firmware relating to eye AF. It almost sounds like everything's interlinked or interdependent, which seems like a very inefficient way to create software/firmware.
It's not interlinked, Sony just doesn't want to make it more complicated by allowing users to downgrade firmware. It might be the case that the firmware updater on the camera has a hard check on the version number of the new firmware being higher then the one already on the camera. That would be a bit weird if there's no option to override this check, but possible. Then in order to flash older firmware, a different connector (internal as opposed to USB) would be needed, which might be what some people got from the Sony support as an answer (that a different PCB is needed -> which would mean access to the internal connector on the PCB).
A9Lon wrote:
I photograph birds, wildlife/mammals, people and dogs so I'm constantly switching subjects. But right after the last firmware update the bird eye AF was noticeably more erratic or distinctly less "confident" in grabbing the eye. I don't remember eye AF being less affective on non bird subjects. Is it safe to say firmware 1.31 only affected bird eye AF?
Regardless, I'm hoping for a worthy firmware update on the a1.
Well, I don't have a second A1 with 1.30 to directly compare, but in my opinion 1.30 was able to more often accurately focus on the (human) iris.
I'm wondering if Sony relaxed the bird/eye algorithm, to try to recognize more bird species... Instead of grabbing an eye shape, they might grab the head shape - with feathers not usually giving clear vertical lines to focus on, focus is worse.
Does anyone out there have a stuffed bird, and a spin platter? That would allow some testing.
skid00skid00 wrote:
I'm wondering if Sony relaxed the bird/eye algorithm, to try to recognize more bird species... Instead of grabbing an eye shape, they might grab the head shape - with feathers not usually giving clear vertical lines to focus on, focus is worse.
Does anyone out there have a stuffed bird, and a spin platter? That would allow some testing.
I recently bought a metronome for this purpose, to test tracking (with a bird attached at the top of the inverted pendulum rod). Unfortunately, I have been busier than usual lately, and could not find time to try this experiment.
skid00skid00 wrote:
I'm wondering if Sony relaxed the bird/eye algorithm, to try to recognize more bird species... Instead of grabbing an eye shape, they might grab the head shape - with feathers not usually giving clear vertical lines to focus on, focus is worse.
Does anyone out there have a stuffed bird, and a spin platter? That would allow some testing.
No stuffed bird here, but I can confirm anecdotally that BEAF seems to grab random non-eye parts of birds more than it did before.
.
