Interesting A-mount/E-mount comparison

AarSee

Senior Member
Messages
4,679
Reaction score
306
Location
MI, US
Gary Friedman posted a blog video explaining the workings of the A-mount & E-mount while focusing in AF-C.

Youtube video Link

It is titled "Sony E-mount and moving objects", but he discusses the differences between the systems and how they focus.

I believe it is still relevant to the A-mount forum.
 
Gary Friedman posted a blog video explaining the workings of the A-mount & E-mount while focusing in AF-C.

Youtube video Link

It is titled "Sony E-mount and moving objects", but he discusses the differences between the systems and how they focus.

I believe it is still relevant to the A-mount forum.
 
That's a little disappointing that E-mount was crippled for action photography right from the get go so that video was better on them. My favorite thing to photograph is nature and wildlife, including birds.
 
Interesting to see.

Its a shame that PDAF on sensor is not quite there yet. I don't think Sony will be launching any new A-Mounts soon. E- Mount lens range and prices are not that great. Action shots let me down on the Sony NEX 5n, thats why I moved to the SLT
 
That's a little disappointing that E-mount was crippled for action photography right from the get go so that video was better on them. My favorite thing to photograph is nature and wildlife, including birds.
Mine too. I shoot birds and wildlife probably 85% of the time. I do so with both a DSLR and an A6000 mirrorless. Birds in flight is a particular favorite specialty of mine.

Here's the thing: My A6000 is actually better and faster at tracking, more accurate, more reliable, and easier overall regardless of the size or speed of the bird, than my DSLR. Not that my DSLR is in any way bad - it's actually quite good, and has always been reliable for virtually any in flight tracking need I have. And it does have longer focal length lenses to work with, whereas the A6000 is limited to a 70-200mm F4 lens which is excellent, or a slower consumer 55-210mm with a 1.7x extender for a 357mm optical reach when I need more distance in a pinch.

The one thing I find may be missing from Mr. Friedman's comments is: when shooting birds in flight, even in the sunniest weather possible, it's extremely rare to almost non-existent to ever shoot at such small apertures, for the simple fact of needing fast shutter speeds...and for the fact that even when very very sunny, rather than stop down the aperture more, most BIF shooters will simply crank up the shutter speed even more. I can go through my BIF shots in sunny bright Florida over 5 different cameras and 6 years of DSLRs and mirrorless, and the number of BIF shots I have at smaller than F10 is about 30 shots...and they're all at F11. Vs over 7,000 shots, mostly ranging between F4 and F9. Despite a ridiculous abundance of sunlight here in Florida, I cannot dig up very many BIF shots at apertures smaller than F11. I went back 3 years through my DSLR shots, and found 6 shots at F11 and two at F13. None at anything smaller. And all of those were with relatively slow shutter speeds of 1/400 to 1/600, which means had I adjusted my shutter speed faster, it would have opened the aperture even more.

So in reality, I cannot see any situation where a mirrorless camera is going to be asked to shoot a bird in flight with an aperture set to F25 - even standing in the highest desert in the world at noon with no clouds in the sky. And that seems to match my real world experience, where the A6000's focus tracking is simply superb and practically faultless for BIF.

You can hate mirrorless cameras for as many reasons as you can come up with, but this 'focus tracking issue' simply doesn't apply for wildlife and bird in flight shooters - in fact, I'd love to find out if any BIF shooters with any DSLRs routinely find themselves shooting BIFs at F16 to F25...and if so, to know just what conditions they live in. I personally love my Alpha mount, love my DSLR, love my long lenses - and look forward to buying a future replacement which may well be the next SLT advancement. But I also love my A6000 mirrorless, and the very simple fact that it's one of the best BIF cameras I've ever used.
 
Interesting to see.

Its a shame that PDAF on sensor is not quite there yet. I don't think Sony will be launching any new A-Mounts soon. E- Mount lens range and prices are not that great. Action shots let me down on the Sony NEX 5n, thats why I moved to the SLT
 
That's a little disappointing that E-mount was crippled for action photography right from the get go so that video was better on them. My favorite thing to photograph is nature and wildlife, including birds.
Shoot those things wide open - or nearly so - which you would probably do anyway. No penalty.
 
The thing that is annoying to me about E mount is the complete and utter lack of any kind of fast telephoto lens. And the fact that to keep the E mount cameras compact, they won't be able to come out with a fast long telephoto lens for these cameras. If the A6000 had a native 300 2.8 and 500mm F4, more people would consider these for "pro" use. But only having a 70-200 F4, that's not really a "pro" lens. Sharp, yes! telephoto, yes! Long and Fast, no :(

So yes, I would agree that the lack of telephoto camera.
 
Last edited:
Well, there are certainly plenty of annoyances in E-mount, and in A-mount, and in every other brand/mount. You can't really get away from annoyances - you can only decide which ones you can live with, and recognize that certain systems handle specific things better - or worse - than other systems. A do-it-all-perfectly system remains elusive.
 
I'm sure he recognizes that you don't shoot BIF at f11 or f25. He was showing focus as these setting to illustrate what happens when you are shooting in low light conditions--which is certainly a justified complaint of mirrorless, even the sainted A6000.
 
I'm sure he recognizes that you don't shoot BIF at f11 or f25. He was showing focus as these setting to illustrate what happens when you are shooting in low light conditions--which is certainly a justified complaint of mirrorless, even the sainted A6000.
But he very specifically mentions how this particular element of the focus system on mirrorless cameras is a difficulty for those shooting moving subjects in AF-C, like birds in flight. His words.

And already there are several posts right here by people who shoot wildlife and birds in flight, who watched that video, and come away thinking that this will seriously impact their ability to shoot such things with an A6000. So my only point is to counter THAT particular comment and fear...BIF is well within the wheelhouse of the mirrorless cameras with the faster PDAF on sensor systems, at the settings almost all BIF and action shooters will be shooting at...not those wishing to track a moving subject in low light with a heavily stopped down aperture (something I imagine would be exceedingly rare).

His comments specifically applied to AF-C use at stopped down apertures - not AF-S low light acquisition, nor focus ability at typical low light apertures, which will usually be much more wide open, and much more likely to be done in AF-S mode.
 
I'm sure he recognizes that you don't shoot BIF at f11 or f25. He was showing focus as these setting to illustrate what happens when you are shooting in low light conditions...
No, he was showing what happens when you are shooting while stopped down - even when light is abundant. The particular aperture used during AF is an extremely important factor and is separate from the factor of sufficient lighting.
 
Last edited:
The one thing I find may be missing from Mr. Friedman's comments is: when shooting birds in flight, even in the sunniest weather possible, it's extremely rare to almost non-existent to ever shoot at such small apertures, for the simple fact of needing fast shutter speeds
No argument from me. I was very careful to say (toward the end) that this is the kind of thing that will happen if you're tracking subjects in AF-C mode using a small f/stop. Not using a small f/stop? The camera should do OK.

There are a lot of people for whom this situation may never come up. My purpose with the video is to let people better understand how the camera evolved, and to touch on the strengths and weaknesses of each platform. It's always useful to know under which circumstances your equipment will hit its limits, even if you never push it that far.

Gary
 
No argument from me. I was very careful to say (toward the end) that this is the kind of thing that will happen if you're tracking subjects in AF-C mode using a small f/stop. Not using a small f/stop? The camera should do OK.

There are a lot of people for whom this situation may never come up. My purpose with the video is to let people better understand how the camera evolved, and to touch on the strengths and weaknesses of each platform. It's always useful to know under which circumstances your equipment will hit its limits, even if you never push it that far.
Fully agree. I think where the feeling that a counter-statement was needed wasn't so much from your comments and test alone, but from the takeaway some seemed to be getting out of it in the responses you see above, where somehow the conclusion is that the mirrorless cameras are incapable, insufficient, or poorly equipped for wildlife or bird shooting. I just wanted to clarify that this is something that most birders would rarely or never encounter, and in my dual experience shooting DSLRs and the A6000 side by side for the past year has proven an extremely adept camera at tracking fast-moving subjects such as birds in flight. I have about as abundant of sunlight as any birder could ever hope to have, so if anyone will have to stop down apertures, it's me (and indeed with my still bird photos, I am often wandering in the F14-F18 area)...but that's strictly AF-S stuff - when I switch to BIF, and AF-C, my shutter speeds jump to 1/1000 to 1/3000, and with desire to keep the ISOs down, that invariably results in apertures reasonably wide - at least F9 or better.

I don't disagree with your conclusion of how desire for video inclusion on still cameras has forced compromises on still camera systems - as someone with no interest in video shooting at all, I would be extremely pleased to see dedicated stills cameras available. But I accept it's just one of those things we have to accept and work around, and hope the manufacturers can just keep the video functionality and controls out of the way of stills functionality and controls - so it's something I can ignore and won't compromise my shooting style. I might have a little more worry about this AF-C and small aperture issue being a video compromise, but in analyzing all the shooting I've done over the years, I fortunately find no occasion where I've wanted or needed an aperture that small while shooting in AF-C mode.

I do thank you for taking the time to reply on the issue.

--
Justin
galleries: www.pbase.com/zackiedawg
 
Last edited:
Fully agree. I think where the feeling that a counter-statement was needed wasn't so much from your comments and test alone, but from the takeaway some seemed to be getting out of it in the responses you see above, where somehow the conclusion is that the mirrorless cameras are incapable, insufficient, or poorly equipped for wildlife or bird shooting.
What we're witnessing here is the general predisposition of people to only grasp extreme conclusions rather than take the time to understand the complex array of tradeoffs. That's why you'll only see extreme political posts on facebook rather than, for example, nuanced discussion of tort reform. :-)

Thanks for helping to refine my message!

Gary
 
I wonder why E-mount cameras work this way: i.e. focusing in closed down aperture in AF-C. Is this something that can be easily changed, or an inherent design limitation?

Is this because the aperture open/close cycle being too slow since the aperture mechanism is designed for video? But Gary says it does not work this way in AF-S and from what I know there's no significant shutter lag in AF-S. Sounds like a contradiction?

To me it sounds more like an engineering decision to keep aperture closed down simply because AF is capable of focusing at small f/stops and focusing mistakes at small f/stops are just not too big to be visible at these small f/stops. Could this be the case?
 
I think I really want to buy one of these. I never had a chance to try one when they were new and went from SRT to X570 directly. I would have loved to be able to change prizms like that
 
Fully agree. I think where the feeling that a counter-statement was needed wasn't so much from your comments and test alone, but from the takeaway some seemed to be getting out of it in the responses you see above, where somehow the conclusion is that the mirrorless cameras are incapable, insufficient, or poorly equipped for wildlife or bird shooting.
What we're witnessing here is the general predisposition of people to only grasp extreme conclusions rather than take the time to understand the complex array of tradeoffs. That's why you'll only see extreme political posts on facebook rather than, for example, nuanced discussion of tort reform. :-)

Thanks for helping to refine my message!

Gary
Gary,

My reason for posting your video was to show some rhyme & reason for the technical changes from A-mount to E-mount. I thought your video explained it very well.

I knew some individuals might take this post as a slight to their favorite camera mount. Oh well.

I have my feet in both camps, mount wise. I find the A-mount great for most things, but the e-mount can bring strengths to the mix also.

Interesting times in which we live!

Thanks again for your hard work testing.
 
I wonder why E-mount cameras work this way: i.e. focusing in closed down aperture in AF-C. Is this something that can be easily changed, or an inherent design limitation?

Is this because the aperture open/close cycle being too slow...
That's a factor. It's much easier to leave the lens stopped down instead of re-opening it for every shot. The same procedure is what makes 10-12fps AF-C possible with SLTs - the lens has to stay at a fixed aperture for that as well. The frame rate of an SLT is forced to slow down considerably if the user wants AF at full aperture for each shot.
since the aperture mechanism is designed for video?
I wouldn't say it's about video, exactly. The video procedure doesn't have to be the same as the stills procedure.
But Gary says it does not work this way in AF-S and from what I know there's no significant shutter lag in AF-S. Sounds like a contradiction?
Shutter lag is not the same thing as 'AF lag' or 'diaphragm lag', and those are the things you're talking about.
To me it sounds more like an engineering decision to keep aperture closed down simply because AF is capable of focusing at small f/stops and focusing mistakes at small f/stops are just not too big to be visible at these small f/stops. Could this be the case?
I'm sure Sony figured that the approach they chose would not make a huge difference to a majority of users in actual practice... and it probably doesn't.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top