groob
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
armd wrote:
It's more than that and I've described the issues in multiple threads. On the positive side, I've found the Nikon cockpit recognition in the "airplanes" subject detection to be the best in the business. It recognizes warbirds from mustangs to F-35's to helio's without fail and it's better than Canon/Sony. I haven't shot enough motorsports to comment conclusively in that domain. For people, it does a fine job recognizing the eyes in SD, though it has a tendency to focus on the lash, eyebrow, cheek, nose, more so than either Sony/Canon. For sports it is reasonably comparable provided one masters the nuances of the AF system though with the new ball detect that Canon offers, it is likely behind. With respect to mammals, it doesn't tend to eye detect as far away as the other brands though it's about as accurate and all of these systems fail on some ungulates, elephants, hippos, alligators, etc. So, in this application the three systems are fairly comparable.
Nikon's AF appears to be tied to the EVF feed so proper exposure is critical to achieve best results. For perched birds, I find both Sony/Canon to do a better job of detecting and tracking the bird against busier backgrounds. Frequently, I have to change AF modes or do a handoff to follow the subject (typically a custom 1x1 followed by AA, etc.). For BIF against the sky, all three systems are nearly comparable though again Sony/Canon can detect the subject and in particular the eyes at a longer distance.
The greater distinctions for BIF occur when water is involved. It's very dependent on lighting, backgrounds, and other intangibles though some generalizations can be made. I find the Canon and Sony bodies detect and track better in nearly all phases when the subject is a bird striking through the water such as eagles, osprey, etc. For whatever reason, I've found the Nikon AF wanders off the subject for several frames before, during, and immediately after the strike with a great deal of regularity. It doesn't appear to be focusing on another more contrasty subject, rather it seems as though the predictive calculations are off. This occurs in spite of different AF modes and settings such as changing the AF to erratic. With respect to diving birds, where the subject hits the water and then emerges a short time later (think Pelicans, Kingfishers), they're reasonably similar. Again, depending on the lighting, of the three systems, the Canon seems to get fooled the least by bird reflections and generally stays firmly on the subject's eye. Both Nikon and Sony are a bit less fastidious this way though I suspect that this could be an easy firmware update.
Now, the disclaimer, namely these are a few of my observations after several years' experience with all three systems and it isn't meant to be an endorsement/indictment of any particular brand. Your experience may differ depending on the lenses, lighting, subject, experience, or a myriad of factors. No system is perfect and they all have strengths and weaknesses from price, ergonomics, size, weight, and other intangibles. In the final analysis, the user is the arbiter of what is best for him/herself.
...Show more →
I only shoot Nikon, so can’t compare. But I have no AF issues whatsoever. Took thousands of photos in Costa Rica this summer and barely had any out of focus. And I have no problem with BiF, including ducks landing and taking off, which you’d think would re-create your issue with eagles and ospreys. I literally put the camera in AA with subject recognition and don’t touch it for 99% of subjects. If it has trouble, which it almost never does, I switch to 3D or single point, and it works perfectly. The literal two times I didn’t use AA in Costa Rica were shooting howler monkeys and a turtle. Not surprisingly, AA in bird mode didn’t detect those all that well. Switched to 3D for the monkeys and single point for the turtle. Problems solved. And by switch, I mean that I hit a button that was programmed to those modes.
It’s also worth mentioning that another Nikon user shoots the same subjects you do in the same location and has no autofocus issues, as detailed on BCG. So, statements like Nikon’s AF isn’t up to snuff are dramatically overblown. If you can’t get a subject in focus, it’s not the camera that’s the issue.
Finally, this seems to just be me, but what in the world are people doing with all the customization? Outside of assigning a few buttons different AF modes, I just shoot in manual and change my settings as appropriate with the buttons assigned to those tasks by default. It’s unfathomable to me that more is needed. Mirrorless bodies do all kinds of cool things, but they didn’t change the exposure triangle.
|
