johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
CanadaMark wrote:
You don't think that Nikon ambassadors try out other gear? While ambassadors are of course inherently biased so long as they are employed by Nikon (or whatever brand they work for), I would bet they try out the competition, probably a whole lot more than most of us here do. Ambassadors also move around from time to time, and they take with them their experience from their prior 'camp'. It's very likely a job requirement to familiarize themselves with system differences for when they are talking to the public or potential customers. It's common in any kind of sales or marketing position to be intimate with the competition, as that helps highlight the differences to potential customers and answer people's questions who may be coming from other brands.
This "reality" you are referencing, I'm curious to what your sources are - is this based on extensive personal experience with all the cameras in question? That reality does not match my experience, nor that of my colleagues, nor that of other reputable reviewers. All the current flagships are capable of ~90-95%+ keeper rates, and the Z8 has the Z9 AF according to Nikon. After actually using the best every brand has to offer, I think what you will find is that each camera behaves a little differently (not necessarily worse), and you may prefer the nuances of one AF system over another for your particular shooting style or subject matter. Maybe one acquires a little faster but is more easily confused, or maybe one takes longer to acquire but tracks a little better. Maybe you're a portrait shooter and one deals with glasses or long eyelashes better than the other. When I rented a R3 and A1 to compare to the Z9, it was clear that all 3 represented the best of the best. The more time I spent, the more I got used to them and I started to learn what one system might do slightly better (or different) than another. Since I shot mostly BIF these days, I preferred the Z9 primarily for it's ability to track a target flying behind partial obstruction (like tall grass) and also for it's ability to stay on the bird's eye and not get confused by the wingtips when shooting perpendicular to to the flight path. I made the best decision I could with the time I had based on a long list of requirements. Another person may have preferred the A1 or R3 for different reasons or for how they behaved with an entirely different subject matter or shooting environment. To categorically state that one AF system was better than the other, you would need an incredible amount of time, more subject matter than the average person has access to, and some way of controlling the biggest variable of all - the person behind the camera.
The fact of the matter is that AF is incredibly difficult to evaluate objectively, and if you can't very easily get a keeper rate so high that brand is the last thing on your mind, the problem is behind the camera, not with the camera. I think investing in a high-end MILC system today has more to do with things like lens selection, resolution preferences and ergonomics rather than the relatively small differences between AF systems. The other issue with making a purchase decision too heavily focused (no pun intended) on the AF systems in cameras as capable as these is that something as little as a FW update could completely change things.
As already mentioned, the Fro's AF tests are notoriously bad, highly uncontrolled, and he is sometimes using the wrong or suboptimal settings - whether this is intentional or not I have no idea but some of the things he says makes you wonder who is paying him. In one of his earlier Z9 videos you could clearly see he neglected to set the camera to people detection and was complaining about performance photographing....people. Just look at how much his Z8 video is being discussed already on these forums alone - what he's doing is working, and he is directly profiting off it. It's YouTube marketing 101 - controversy gets clicks. If you talk to other professionals in the industry or look to sources that don't include a 'sniff test' as part of the review, I think you will find that they talk more about preferences and subtle differences rather than camera A is better than camera B. That's why it gives me pause when I see comments like "you're going to get a few more keepers with Sony and Canon bodies" or "It's just a reality that Sony and Canon are a step up at the moment." Typically those types of comments are made by people who have not even shot with the bodies they are comparing and are revealing their confirmation bias.
...Show more →
I don't know anything about Fro as he drives me nuts, so I never watch him, but I do think you overestimate the research any brand ambassador does. They're photographers who make a living and who are at the top of their game. Their priority isn't, and shouldn't be, to do comparisons for their 'brand.' All they sign onto is to use that brand's gear, feature it and not say anything too negative about it. Do anything else, and their ambassadorship is over.
In this context, while not about brand ambassadors, it's very interesting to me how Gordon at Cameralabs apparently didn't get any Z8 to test. He must have pissed off Nikon at some point. Morten Hilmer, an excellent photographer in his own right and a brand ambassador, got a Z8 for 8 days. Thomas Heaton got one for one morning, while being escorted by a Nikon employee.
Years ago, when I approached a Nikon PR guy to get loaners, he suggest I start with a point-and-shoot and if Tokyo liked what I wrote, I could move up. I declined.
This is all a game and it's not to your/our benefit.
|
