Steve Spencer
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: New Z9 Specs (NR) Aug 10th, 2021 | |
arbitrage wrote:
Steve Spencer wrote:
1bwana1 wrote:
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yes, but so should excessive built-in automation that can't be overridden and I suspect that Nikon will have less of automation that takes over and can't be controlled. Thom was suggesting that Nikon will have less fully automated modes, but also less automation that can't be overridden. Camera makers can error in either direction, as an example eye AF that makes it hard to override the camera's default choice of which eye to focus on is excessive automation and if that can't be easily overridden then that too is a flaw. Thom's point, which is counter to my person preferences, is that people often are willing to settle for excessive automation but are less tolerant of less automation being built in. I think the Z9 will have little excessive automation, but may not have as much automation built-in. I am fine with that trade off, but I am not sure that the trade off won't hurt them in the marketplace.
I can't think of any automation in AF subject selection or tracking that cannot be overridden simply and quickly with a single button click in my a1. That includes which eye is selected in Eye AF, including either the default choice, and the current choice. It extends to all of the subject selection, and tracking configuration at all levels down to MF with no focus aids.
Of course a properly designed system enables this level of choices and the agility to respond in real time to changing requirements easily and quickly. In fact I can change the whole AF, AE, Shooting Mode, and Drive Modes in a single button press if I choose. I can have many buttons with many instant reconfigurations of automation and AI.
Describing deep levels of configurable automation as "excessive" seems a bit like a weak attempt at justification for a reduced feature set.
I expect no less from the Z9. I believe that Nikon will deliver on this. Possibly in an promised future firmware update announced with the camera. If this turns out not to be true, it will properly be seen as shortcoming. That is what TH seems to be concerned with.
Just because you can't think of it doesn't mean the problems aren't there or could be there compared to a different system. Let me give two examples that are automation in the Sony system that you cannot override easily:
1) say you are shooting a scene with a number of people and you want to focus on a person in the middle of scene using eye AF. Sony automates focussing on the closest person and the closest eye. It is not easy to switch people. This is a cumbersome process. One could argue the automation is over done.
2) In focus acquisition and tracking there is often a tradeoff between how quickly the subject is acquired and how well the AF system avoids focussing on the background. Sony doesn't let you set that tradeoff on the fly. You are stuck with the automated preference of the camera.
You just haven't thought very carefully about the different things that could be set on the fly if you think any system has given you choices about all of them. Which things are automated and which things are under user control is always a decision that software designer have to make. The claim that everything is under user control just doesn't hold water. No one is going to want a system with that little automation. It is equally true, however, that a system can have way to much automated and having control over a few more parameters on the fly might be nice.
Yes, over-automation is possible and for me that is true for the Sony system but I also understand why some like the automation even if I don't.
Not sure about point #2, but #1 is incorrect. Sony gives you many, many options to control exactly where the system will seek out an eye. If you want limited Eye-AF systems just go over to Canon and Nikon. With Sony you can choose anything from a tiny Small Flex Spot up to an entire sensor and have it look only in that area for the eye. You can be as precise or as automated as you so choose. After that you have the option for the system only to continue to look and track the eye in that area or you can engage a Tracking On custom button (I use my AF-ON button) that will then track that eye over the entire frame. If you instead opt to use a Wide AF area to detect eyes then the option is there to toggle with the joystick between whatever eyes the system detects. I believe Nikon and Canon have this ability also.
In regards to #2, I'm not sure what type of system you are envisioning that would allow you to have total control over AF acquisition v. background distraction on the fly. I've not encountered any camera from Nikon, Canon nor Sony that allow you to do that. All of them have some sort of scale (fairly simple for Nikon and Sony and overly complicated and useless for Canon) to fine tune the system into how reactive you want it to be versus how "sticky" you want it to be.
With #1 I was just talking about the automated wide AF mode. I should have been more clear about that. With regard to #2 I was simply pointing to the limits of the current systems. The system that I am envisioning is one that uses AI in a new way and is designed to consider different types of backgrounds and their properties to aid focus acquisition. Nobody has done this yet, but it should be possible. In such a system one way this could be done is that the operator selects the type of AI that will work best for the background in the scene. Imagine sky, leafy, and woody backgrounds for example and AI designed to aid focus acquisition given the type of background. Such a system could potentially be powerful and a nice improvement in AF.
Personally, what I would like to see is AF systems that require the operator to select the AI for the scene and potentially several types of AI and then the user directs the system where to start. This is quite far from an automated systems, but it is what I would prefer. A large group of people, however, seem to prefer more automated modes--like wide area AF with Sony eye AF. Thom seems to be arguing that he thinks the Z9 won't or might not have these types of automated modes and he worries that might hurt sales. Personally, it won't affect my purchase, but I think he is right it might affect Z9 sales if the camera has less of these automated modes.
|
