p.13 #1 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
Thank you for clarifying
bernardl wrote:
Yes, apologies for my earlier inaccurate answer, it is indeed a3 set to 1 and erratic that provides the most reliable eye pupil focusing results for me. As mentioned, along with the other settings I proposed.
Add to that AF-C mode in Focus + Release configuration. Important one I should have mentioned. And that's a1. In summary, my recommendation, in decreasing order of importance/impact is the following:
- Use your lenses as open as possible depending on situation, f1.2 provides the best AF performance. Pro lenses have more responsive focus adjustment and will obviously deliver better results,
- Use AF-C in Focus + Release mode (setting a1)
- Set setting a3 to the lower possible value (highest possible reactivity) of 1 and use erratic
- Use custom AF area set as a box covering the area of the EVF where the face is likely to be seen with subject recognition limited to people (other types of subjects not selected), that's in the Photo shooting menu under "AF subject detection options"
- Deactivate IBIS if you don't really need it
- Set your EVF View mode to adjust for use of viewing when possible (not setting reflected), setting d9. I am not sure this one really impacts though
- When possible, shoot in short bursts instead of single shot. It provides a lot more data for the camera to get one absolutely perfect. All Sony bodies I tried also performed better this way as well.
And indeed, there is nothing complex about Nikon's AF, once set up the shooting experience is basically point and shoot.
p.13 #2 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
Beautiful shots. I understand that ultra shallow DOF may seem silly but I do often like the look and I don't think it's unprofessional. It's simply a creative choice. It's also fairly lens dependent. A head and shoulders or tight headshot with a 135mm f1.8 will have very thin DOF but there's nothing outrageously OOF besides the ears. It makes for the smoothest possible bokeh and nice falloff with the hair. I also like some shots where only one eye is the focal point and in focus with a half turned face. Critical focus on the eye is always critical.
One of my favorite shoots (and shots) from many years ago was of some family members where I used my 90mm macro lens to get ultra tight shots of their eyes wide open at f2.8. Very little was in focus besides their eyes. The falloff was dreamy. They and their mom loved them. If focus was missed even slightly it would have ruined the shot along with all of the headshots and even the head and shoulders shots. DOF is very thin at these distances, especially with an 85mm f1.2 or f1.4 (one of my other favorite lenses I was using). Could I have tried to 3D track the eye in each shot? Probably. Could I have tried to use AF single point on the eye? Probably. Would these methods risk missing focus on the eye with that thin of DOF? Without a doubt. Eye-AF has made for an absolutely thoughtless workflow that allows me to focus (pun intended) on everything else going on with a shoot and not even worry about checking focus after the fact. In AF-C it achieves perfect focus even if the subject is moving as long as my shutter speed is high enough. It's that good. If I encountered a system/camera/lens that regressed my workflow back to having to do more to achieve the same or worse result I'd hate it.
I'm hopeful that this Nikon issue is a non-issue for me. But if it is or can't be relied upon it would be a huge factor in my decision to stick with the camera or use something else. I lean heavily on eye-AF and I've become too accustomed to it being flawless to accept inaccuracies now. Unless there is some true defect with the algorithm or other strange issue going on I am confident that I can get consistent results on Nikon with the right settings and quality lenses. But only time will tell. I'll report back once I'm able to do more testing and have better lenses.
urbanwild wrote:
Yes to the first question......easy peasy and I think Nikon was praised for its control over which eye / face you can toggle back and forth with back in the day. One subject to focus on in an uncomplicated field shouldn't be a challenge for these systems in reasonable light.
Sharing the Trump shot was a half-joke because it supported my statement about how the pros will shoot with a tighter aperture to ensure they had the appropriate amount of detail (they weren't shooting at f1.2 in close). If you look back at the shot, you'll notice that his whole head is in focus. When people (like me at times) shoot wide open and get too close because we're excited to shoot wide open, the shots look less professional to me. It's all good fun trying to get a razor thin depth of field just right, but in most cases it doesn't do much in terms of professional-looking images. So eye-AF only hitting the lashes......well, you're probably taking a limited shot anyway regardless of system and retina sharpness from my perspective (others may rightfully disagree).
Where I will agree with you above is with the eye glasses. I definitely find eye- AF will get tricked by eye glasses with my Zf eye-AF (will have to check through Z8 shots). Not sure how this compares with other systems. But again, what I really want is a shot that has the nose, glasses, eye lashes, eyes and the ears all in focus at the least in most images. So I'm fighting myself more than the camera by not stepping back or adjusting my aperture.
I'm not concerned with getting 100% focus accuracy in all types of situations. I think that's a lot to expect out of any system and you can drive yourself nuts trying to sort it out. My livelihood doesn't depend on it and I get many more images than I need in most situations with the AF. What's more important to me are the lenses, feel of the camera, workflow, and more importantly, the IQ / output. I've never been upset with Nikon's AF enough to worry about it, but a search through my images will tell you if your shooting needs differ from mine.
Best advice I can give you though - step away from the keyboard and pick up the Z8 You will learn more from shooting than you will from more time on this thread for now! Congrats on the Z8. It's a phenomenal camera. I'll close this message up with a couple of shots taken with the Z8, an ftz and the 400mm f2.8 (f-mount).....the ironman athletes were cycling at about 35km/h towards me. I used area mode eye-AF. If you go to my website, you'll see more like this. With the Z8, it was like a hot knife through butter getting these athletes in focus. The last shot I added was from a fundraiser where I would have changed the area of the AF box so that I ensured I had the lead rider(s). All of the shots below would have been at f2.8 at 400mm (moving vehicle on the last one I may add). The Z8 is great!
p.13 #3 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
AlphaPhotography wrote:
Beautiful shots. I understand that ultra shallow DOF may seem silly but I do often like the look and I don't think it's unprofessional. It's simply a creative choice. It's also fairly lens dependent. A head and shoulders or tight headshot with a 135mm f1.8 will have very thin DOF but there's nothing outrageously OOF besides the ears. It makes for the smoothest possible bokeh and nice falloff with the hair. I also like some shots where only one eye is the focal point and in focus with a half turned face. Critical focus on the eye is always critical.
I can appreciate what you're saying, but the first shot is a good example where there's still lots of depth of field to get the tip of the nose and past the eye. So even if you only want one eye in focus, it's still nice to have more facial details. My earlier point is you should never be in a situation where the eyelashes are in focus but not the iris and I think this first image shows this well.
The second shot we'll have to agree that we have different perspectives. While I don't think it's a bad shot at all, I think it would be a better shot with a little more depth of field. It would even be better if both eyes were equally sharp as the face is straight on. But I appreciate artistic freedom and would imagine there could be a time when this small depth of field on a face could work nicely......but for me it would be limited applications.
p.13 #4 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
ronno wrote:
Re ” Still in my experience eyelash af is very rare. Heck, it’s rare with a Z6ii and 85 1.2. “
Yes, I had good focus with the Z6/Z7II and fast lenses - however as we have noted, the issues arise when using slower lenses (f/4.0…) and the light dims.
This is precisely why this issue is absurd. If you shoot a subject 5 feet from the camera at 100mm f/4, the DoF slightly over 2". DoF behind the subject is slightly more than 1". Please show me the human whose eyeball is more than 1" from their eyelash. Also, please show me who is shooting portraits at 100mm and 5 feet from the subject. This has never made any sense, which is why I think the 3 people who talk about it are doing something wrong.
p.13 #5 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
groob wrote:
This is precisely why this issue is absurd. If you shoot a subject 5 feet from the camera at 100mm f/4, the DoF slightly over 2". DoF behind the subject is slightly more than 1". Please show me the human whose eyeball is more than 1" from their eyelash. Also, please show me who is shooting portraits at 100mm and 5 feet from the subject. This has never made any sense, which is why I think the 3 people who talk about it are doing something wrong.
p.13 #6 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
There are times when the camera indicates that it has locked eye focus, when it has missed entirely. It's not just an issue of eyelashes versus eyeball… Sometimes it's far enough off that the eyes are not in focus at all, ruining the shot.
Besides, just because you don’t shoot that way, doesn’t mean nobody else does…
groob wrote:
This is precisely why this issue is absurd. If you shoot a subject 5 feet from the camera at 100mm f/4, the DoF slightly over 2". DoF behind the subject is slightly more than 1". Please show me the human whose eyeball is more than 1" from their eyelash. Also, please show me who is shooting portraits at 100mm and 5 feet from the subject. This has never made any sense, which is why I think the 3 people who talk about it are doing something wrong.
p.13 #7 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
ronno wrote:
There are times when the camera indicates that it has locked eye focus, when it has missed entirely. It's not just an issue of eyelashes versus eyeball… Sometimes it's far enough off that the eyes are not in focus at all, ruining the shot.
Besides, just because you don’t shoot that way, doesn’t mean nobody else does…
Ok, then you admit there is no such thing as an eyeball versus eyelash issue--which is what I said. And if focus "misses entirely," don't you think the photographer should be able to recognize that? Which is also my point -- if the subject is out of focus, why are you taking the photo and then blaming the camera for taking an OOF photo? Wouldn't it be even more obvious that your subject is OOF when you're zoomed in to 120 mm and standing 5 feet from the subject? None of this makes any sense.
Somehow, the eyelash shooters have defied the laws of math and physics and found situations where the camera is focused correctly just before they take the photo but then winds up >4" out of focus when they take the photo. Again, this doesn't make sense beyond operator error.
p.13 #8 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
Eye AF is machine learning.
By now all the brands have stunningly good AF algos, the difference will be in their ability to get access to the widest possible set of training data to identify the eyes in a moving subject. But that will only make a difference for border cases that only represent a few % of images at best.
Either way, my hunch is that Nikon is bound to win this race because of their superior offering for online images storage. They just need to expand this offering to more cameras in their range beyond the Z6III.
p.13 #9 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
groob wrote:
Ok, then you admit there is no such thing as an eyeball versus eyelash issue--which is what I said. And if focus "misses entirely," don't you think the photographer should be able to recognize that? Which is also my point -- if the subject is out of focus, why are you taking the photo and then blaming the camera for taking an OOF photo? Wouldn't it be even more obvious that your subject is OOF when you're zoomed in to 120 mm and standing 5 feet from the subject? None of this makes any sense.
Somehow, the eyelash shooters have defied the laws of math and physics and found situations where the camera is focused correctly just before they take the photo but then winds up >4" out of focus when they take the photo. Again, this doesn't make sense beyond operator error....Show more →
So we shouldn't blame the camera for the AF not working, we should blame the operator for not noticing the AF didn't work and for pressing the shutter button anyway.
p.13 #10 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
That's maybe the most bizarre part. I've had a couple people DM me with examples of missed focus where the camera shows that it nailed focus but clearly missed. I think due to the hostility in this thread they did not want to get involved in all the drama but they have had these same missed focus issues with their Nikon Z8/Z9. I honestly don't know what is going on. Some users claim they get perfect focus every time, others are having ongoing issues to the point where they are switching systems. One user messaged me with several missed focus wildlife examples. The camera shows it nailed focus on subjects across multiple examples and frames but it missed often. My best guess is it's just an algorithm thing where Nikon's focus system in eye-AF can get confused and miss where Sony and Canon don't (or do far less). Someone else speculated that Sony and Canon are using AI chips/detection now while Nikon is not (yet). I'm not that worried about it going into the future because I can't imagine that it's something that Nikon won't fix with the Z9II and beyond but I hope it doesn't turn out to be an issue with my Z8.
It's silly that the "solution" according to some members here is "just don't take photos where DOF is thin".
ronno wrote:
There are times when the camera indicates that it has locked eye focus, when it has missed entirely. It's not just an issue of eyelashes versus eyeball… Sometimes it's far enough off that the eyes are not in focus at all, ruining the shot.
Besides, just because you don’t shoot that way, doesn’t mean nobody else does…
p.13 #12 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
I have hundreds of posts on FM dating back years to when I shot with Sony. You can read through them all if you'd like. There's no agenda besides to learn about and discuss camera gear, lenses, photography and more recently videography. I shoot with Canon and now also Nikon.
If you are bothered by this thread why do you keep posting here? There's plenty of other discussions to participate in or contribute to.
RoamingScott wrote:
I actually think the most bizzare part is your recency towards instigation through your posts and threads.
p.13 #13 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
It all depends on what firmware you’re running. I hated my Z8 after the first shoot. Then I upgraded to the latest firmware. It tracks perfectly now. And like any tool, you have to learn its quirks. All three systems are about equal now, they just have things to learn.
And a proper lens makes a huge difference. Especially in lower light.
p.13 #14 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
Each system has own problem/problems. It is a fact you want to acknowledge or not.
if there is no problem with the Nikon AF, then why this thread is still going, and going, and going?
Just do not say all these people are trolls and Nikon haters, that's a buxxShit!
Sony has a "Sony colors" problem. Sony colors still sucks. It is a fact you want to acknowledge or not.
Canon seems has a problem with the Video codecs and files sizes. Lenses are too big and too expensive.
And so on so on.
None of them care about you or your needs. This is a childish fight.
p.13 #15 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
Thanks for keeping the thread alive 😁
tester_V wrote:
Each system has own problem/problems. It is a fact you want to acknowledge or not.
if there is no problem with the Nikon AF, then why this thread is still going, and going, and going?
Just do not say all these people are trolls and Nikon haters, that's a buxxShit!
Sony has a "Sony colors" problem. Sony colors still sucks. It is a fact you want to acknowledge or not.
Canon seems has a problem with the Video codecs and files sizes. Lenses are too big and too expensive.
And so on so on.
None of them care about you or your needs. This is a childish fight. ...Show more →
p.13 #16 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
I agree. It's weird that people will pretend otherwise regardless of system. In another recent thread there was one Canon fanboy adamantly defending every flaw ad nauseum. I don't understand people putting blinders on for the sake of brand loyalty. They're just brands. They all have their flaws and quirks. It's much better to discuss and learn about them openly so companies can become aware of them and fix them through firmware and/or new hardware.
And the video codecs and file sizes on Canon have always driven me nuts, especially with my previous R5. For a while their compressed formats were nearly impossible to edit on most machines except for some of the newer Mac's with Apple Silicon. I'd also love to see options for lower resolution compressed raw file sizes. I think Sony is the only one who offers this currently. But Sony's firmware support SUCKS. A family member has an A1 and the lack of updates has bothered him since he spent so much on their flagship camera.
tester_V wrote:
Each system has own problem/problems. It is a fact you want to acknowledge or not.
if there is no problem with the Nikon AF, then why this thread is still going, and going, and going?
Just do not say all these people are trolls and Nikon haters, that's a buxxShit!
Sony has a "Sony colors" problem. Sony colors still sucks. It is a fact you want to acknowledge or not.
Canon seems has a problem with the Video codecs and files sizes. Lenses are too big and too expensive.
And so on so on.
None of them care about you or your needs. This is a childish fight. ...Show more →
p.13 #17 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
Here's Julia Trotti commenting on and showing off a lack of iris focus on a side facing subject.
I don't know if Sony can do this better, though in my experience, it's likely, but it proves my earlier point that if your DOF is SO thin that the outer edge of the eyeball is in focus (closest part to you) and the iris is out of focus, you're shooting at the wrong aperture regardless.
?t=216
3:35 mark
Most of her examples at f/1.2 are highly distracting because of the razor thin DOF, which adds nothing to the shots and only detracts.
p.13 #18 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
If I can get a GFX100S, a camera with a far worse AF system than a Nikon Z8 to do this: GF1S1277 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr GF1S1362 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
On top of having a Nikon Z9 do this: Z09_9308 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr Z09_8974 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr Z09_8938 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Also going to chuck in some Z9 portraits while I'm at it: Z09_9610 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr Z09_4284 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr Z09_4510 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr Z09_4520 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr Z09_9463 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr Z09_2256 1 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr Z09_8483 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Long story short. Is the AF system "perfect?" No. Can it get the job done? Yes. AlphaPhotography wrote:
Beautiful shots. I understand that ultra shallow DOF may seem silly but I do often like the look and I don't think it's unprofessional. It's simply a creative choice. It's also fairly lens dependent. A head and shoulders or tight headshot with a 135mm f1.8 will have very thin DOF but there's nothing outrageously OOF besides the ears. It makes for the smoothest possible bokeh and nice falloff with the hair. I also like some shots where only one eye is the focal point and in focus with a half turned face. Critical focus on the eye is always critical.
One of my favorite shoots (and shots) from many years ago was of some family members where I used my 90mm macro lens to get ultra tight shots of their eyes wide open at f2.8. Very little was in focus besides their eyes. The falloff was dreamy. They and their mom loved them. If focus was missed even slightly it would have ruined the shot along with all of the headshots and even the head and shoulders shots. DOF is very thin at these distances, especially with an 85mm f1.2 or f1.4 (one of my other favorite lenses I was using). Could I have tried to 3D track the eye in each shot? Probably. Could I have tried to use AF single point on the eye? Probably. Would these methods risk missing focus on the eye with that thin of DOF? Without a doubt. Eye-AF has made for an absolutely thoughtless workflow that allows me to focus (pun intended) on everything else going on with a shoot and not even worry about checking focus after the fact. In AF-C it achieves perfect focus even if the subject is moving as long as my shutter speed is high enough. It's that good. If I encountered a system/camera/lens that regressed my workflow back to having to do more to achieve the same or worse result I'd hate it.
I'm hopeful that this Nikon issue is a non-issue for me. But if it is or can't be relied upon it would be a huge factor in my decision to stick with the camera or use something else. I lean heavily on eye-AF and I've become too accustomed to it being flawless to accept inaccuracies now. Unless there is some true defect with the algorithm or other strange issue going on I am confident that I can get consistent results on Nikon with the right settings and quality lenses. But only time will tell. I'll report back once I'm able to do more testing and have better lenses.
p.13 #19 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
I honestly think that if you're dealing with severe backlighting you put the camera on "idiot mode" and manage the AF box yourself. RoamingScott wrote:
Here's Julia Trotti commenting on and showing off a lack of iris focus on a side facing subject.
I don't know if Sony can do this better, though in my experience, it's likely, but it proves my earlier point that if your DOF is SO thin that the outer edge of the eyeball is in focus (closest part to you) and the iris is out of focus, you're shooting at the wrong aperture regardless.
?t=216
3:35 mark
Most of her examples at f/1.2 are highly distracting because of the razor thin DOF, which adds nothing to the shots and only detracts.
p.13 #20 · After testing Z8 and having focus issues I may go to the Sony A7RV
AlphaPhotography wrote:
I agree. It's weird that people will pretend otherwise regardless of system.
Nobody is pretending. The problem is we're on the internet, and you're having trouble separating competent people from incompetent, and there's no way to hold people accountable or judge their competence from forum posts. At some point it's just best to get the camera in hand and see for yourself what's possible. I do this every time a new camera emerges that I get a sense I might choose as my next workhorse - rent for a long weekend and put it through its paces, and decide for myself if it's a good creative partner. No sense chasing your tail with so much speculative nonsense, or trusting others to make up your mind for you.
You will learn more from shooting than you will from more time on this thread for now! Congrats on the Z8. It's a phenomenal camera. I'll close this message up with a couple of shots taken with the Z8, an ftz and the 400mm f2.8 (f-mount).....the ironman athletes were cycling at about 35km/h towards me. I used area mode eye-AF. If you go to my website, you'll see more like this. With the Z8, it was like a hot knife through butter getting these athletes in focus. The last shot I added was from a fundraiser where I would have changed the area of the AF box so that I ensured I had the lead rider(s). All of the shots below would have been at f2.8 at 400mm (moving vehicle on the last one I may add). The Z8 is great!
