Question about Z8 "Hybrid Focus" Controls

Both Hudson Henry and Thom Hogan have suggested settings for hybrid focusing that are much simpler than this.

Lazer42 said:

I have been experimenting at setting up my Z8 using different options and wanted to try the "hybrid focus" that many seem to use where you can acquire the focus with subject detect and then hand off to the 3D tracking (have I got that right)?

Right now, I have my AF-on button set to activate AF-on for whatever mode I have selected. The Display button is configured as an "emergency" button and just does the full area AF w/subject detection so that if I see something suddenly (e.g., a flying bird) and don't have time to try to get focus in a more reliable way I can at least hit the button and give the camera a chance to get it before it's too late.

I have the Fn1 button set to AF-on+3D tracking, and this allows me to acquire focus using the AF-On button and whatever box or point is appropriate and then if I hold down Fn1 the 3D tracking will take the handoff.

However, I have found that this does not work if trying to hand off from the full area AF. If I am using that "emergency" Display button, I have to release it before trying to activate the 3D tracking with Fn1. On the other hand, if I just choose the full area AF as my regular mode and use the AF-On button to activate it, then I can use the 3D-tracking hand off.

Is there a different way to configure this to allow it to work the way I want?

Click to expand...

Not unless you are will to, like me, use a half depress shutter button to initiate AF-ON and use the AF-ON button for 3D-tracking + AF-ON.

However, handing over AF duties from one programmed button (not the shutter button) requires releasing the first button before AF duties transfers to the new button. I press and hold the new button and then release the first button, which reduces the time for hand over.

Lazer42 said:

I have been experimenting at setting up my Z8 using different options and wanted to try the "hybrid focus" that many seem to use where you can acquire the focus with subject detect and then hand off to the 3D tracking (have I got that right)?

Click to expand...

So, couple of things. We're talking about focus point persistence. You need CSM #A7 to be set to AUTO (the default). But, that also implies that there's a point to hand off. In Auto-area AF, that may not be true, or there may be multiple points active. The way all of us are configuring—there are multiple ways to do it—is to use Subject Detection in a mode to pick a point, then handing off that point to 3D-tracking or using Single Point AF to pick a specific point and hand that off to 3D-tracking. There is the issue of how precise a point Subject Detection picked (body, face, eye), as 3D-tracking will do something slightly different in each of those cases, and if, for instance, the eye stops being seen because the bird/animal/human turns its head, 3D-tracking may no longer have something to track.

I know we want autofocus to "just do the right thing," but we encounter so many situations and variables focus systems need to get even more "intelligent" before they'll accomplish what somewhat who knows the controls perfectly can do by reacting.

The real issue in all the autofocus systems currently made is how you re-aquire when focus is lost. It's why I have multiple focus button scenarios I can choose.

It's important to settle on custom settings that work for you. This is the outcome of testing by experimentng with the camera.

This BCG thread has useful advice to get up and running:


My primary modus operandi with a Pro Nikon ILC - using BBAF - is to customize as many key functions to operate with the Right Hand Only - as feasible. Compared to the cameras launched 10-6 years ago, the D6 and now Z9 and Z8 have refined and improved the options for righthand customization. The following is how I set up my Z9's, but a Z8 can be setup almost identically:

the Red Record Button to scroll Focus settings;

Leveraging the AFmode+AFOn option.... Fn1 = 3D; Fn2 = "single-point" Custom Group Area (CA1 1*1) as I no longer bother with Single-point mode;

Lens Fn was set to AutoAF+AFOn but I now use the Lens Fn1 and Fn2 to Recall a preset focus position (the on-Lens controls are setup differently on Z vs F Nikkors);

Depending on the subject and challenges, sometimes I have 3D or AutoAF on BBAF so change the Fn button accordingly....

These days I use the Display button for AutoAF+AFOn (this works like a 2nd BBAF),

Thom Hogan said:

Lazer42 said:

I have been experimenting at setting up my Z8 using different options and wanted to try the "hybrid focus" that many seem to use where you can acquire the focus with subject detect and then hand off to the 3D tracking (have I got that right)?

Click to expand...

So, couple of things. We're talking about focus point persistence. You need CSM #A7 to be set to AUTO (the default). But, that also implies that there's a point to hand off. In Auto-area AF, that may not be true, or there may be multiple points active. The way all of us are configuring—there are multiple ways to do it—is to use Subject Detection in a mode to pick a point, then handing off that point to 3D-tracking or using Single Point AF to pick a specific point and hand that off to 3D-tracking. There is the issue of how precise a point Subject Detection picked (body, face, eye), as 3D-tracking will do something slightly different in each of those cases, and if, for instance, the eye stops being seen because the bird/animal/human turns its head, 3D-tracking may no longer have something to track.

I know we want autofocus to "just do the right thing," but we encounter so many situations and variables focus systems need to get even more "intelligent" before they'll accomplish what somewhat who knows the controls perfectly can do by reacting.

The real issue in all the autofocus systems currently made is how you re-aquire when focus is lost. It's why I have multiple focus button scenarios I can choose.

Click to expand...

I have largely been experimenting with it. The truth is I've nit really found 3D auto tracking to be all that effective, partly for the reasons you mention - it tends to lose track if the subject moves the wrong way or for similar reasons. However, I've seen enough people complement it that I have wanted to try.

At least in my usage, I've found subject tracking and keeping the AF box over the subject to be much more reliable for, for instance, BIF, though I do have the movie button programmed to turn off subject detection because in some cases it has been a liability. For instance, the subject detection can't seem to understand Canadian geese. Almost no matter what I do or what the lighting is or size of the subject in the frame it loves to identify the brown part of their body as a subject and ignore the head. Thus, I turn it off for a subject like that.

(Truth be told, I am finding it can't keep up with BiF regardless of the mode, which is totally inconsistent with what I have seen from others, so I am honestly starting, after 3 cameras with the same general issue, to wonder if there is a problem with my lens. I've tried everything and can't think of any other explanation at this point. It can display tremendous sharpness at times but well in excess of 50% of the time in those same situations just gives me something that's either relatively or very poor. The EVF sure makes it look like the AF is glued to the birds as they fly across the frame and my shutter will be as high as 1/4000 for relatively slow moving birds but they're still almost always a tad out of focus or blurry!)

Lazer42 said:

Thom Hogan said:

Lazer42 said:

I have been experimenting at setting up my Z8 using different options and wanted to try the "hybrid focus" that many seem to use where you can acquire the focus with subject detect and then hand off to the 3D tracking (have I got that right)?

Click to expand...

So, couple of things. We're talking about focus point persistence. You need CSM #A7 to be set to AUTO (the default). But, that also implies that there's a point to hand off. In Auto-area AF, that may not be true, or there may be multiple points active. The way all of us are configuring—there are multiple ways to do it—is to use Subject Detection in a mode to pick a point, then handing off that point to 3D-tracking or using Single Point AF to pick a specific point and hand that off to 3D-tracking. There is the issue of how precise a point Subject Detection picked (body, face, eye), as 3D-tracking will do something slightly different in each of those cases, and if, for instance, the eye stops being seen because the bird/animal/human turns its head, 3D-tracking may no longer have something to track.

I know we want autofocus to "just do the right thing," but we encounter so many situations and variables focus systems need to get even more "intelligent" before they'll accomplish what somewhat who knows the controls perfectly can do by reacting.

The real issue in all the autofocus systems currently made is how you re-aquire when focus is lost. It's why I have multiple focus button scenarios I can choose.

Click to expand...

I have largely been experimenting with it. The truth is I've nit really found 3D auto tracking to be all that effective, partly for the reasons you mention - it tends to lose track if the subject moves the wrong way or for similar reasons. However, I've seen enough people complement it that I have wanted to try.

At least in my usage, I've found subject tracking and keeping the AF box over the subject to be much more reliable for, for instance, BIF, though I do have the movie button programmed to turn off subject detection because in some cases it has been a liability. For instance, the subject detection can't seem to understand Canadian geese. Almost no matter what I do or what the lighting is or size of the subject in the frame it loves to identify the brown part of their body as a subject and ignore the head. Thus, I turn it off for a subject like that.

(Truth be told, I am finding it can't keep up with BiF regardless of the mode, which is totally inconsistent with what I have seen from others, so I am honestly starting, after 3 cameras with the same general issue, to wonder if there is a problem with my lens. I've tried everything and can't think of any other explanation at this point. It can display tremendous sharpness at times but well in excess of 50% of the time in those same situations just gives me something that's either relatively or very poor. The EVF sure makes it look like the AF is glued to the birds as they fly across the frame and my shutter will be as high as 1/4000 for relatively slow moving birds but they're still almost always a tad out of focus or blurry!)

Click to expand...

If you are struggling to keep the focus point on the subject, it's pretty likely that you are not fully acquiring focus. You probably should go back to basics. Make sure the subject is properly exposed - being underexposed reduces contrasts and hurts AF performance. If you are using subject detection, make sure it is set for Animals - not Auto and other subjects. Use the Wide modes - Wide Small or another Wide mode (or Custom set up in a similar manner). The Wide modes do two things - they include subject recognition and they use nearest subject priority. Beyond that, you need to learn to be able to keep the subject in the frame and ideally in a medium to smaller area of the frame. It takes practice - lots of practice.

Subject recognition is not a panacea. Consider the hierarchy of focus operation. The camera looks for a high contrast target, specific animal shapes, the animal's head, and then the eye. As you look through the EVF, you should be seeing the AF sensors on the subject, the head, and at least some of the time on the eye. If you are not seeing the AF points flipping back and forth with the head and the eye, you probably need to look at why your AF technique may not be good enough.

ericbowles said:

Lazer42 said:

Thom Hogan said:

Lazer42 said:

I have been experimenting at setting up my Z8 using different options and wanted to try the "hybrid focus" that many seem to use where you can acquire the focus with subject detect and then hand off to the 3D tracking (have I got that right)?

Click to expand...

So, couple of things. We're talking about focus point persistence. You need CSM #A7 to be set to AUTO (the default). But, that also implies that there's a point to hand off. In Auto-area AF, that may not be true, or there may be multiple points active. The way all of us are configuring—there are multiple ways to do it—is to use Subject Detection in a mode to pick a point, then handing off that point to 3D-tracking or using Single Point AF to pick a specific point and hand that off to 3D-tracking. There is the issue of how precise a point Subject Detection picked (body, face, eye), as 3D-tracking will do something slightly different in each of those cases, and if, for instance, the eye stops being seen because the bird/animal/human turns its head, 3D-tracking may no longer have something to track.

I know we want autofocus to "just do the right thing," but we encounter so many situations and variables focus systems need to get even more "intelligent" before they'll accomplish what somewhat who knows the controls perfectly can do by reacting.

The real issue in all the autofocus systems currently made is how you re-aquire when focus is lost. It's why I have multiple focus button scenarios I can choose.

Click to expand...

I have largely been experimenting with it. The truth is I've nit really found 3D auto tracking to be all that effective, partly for the reasons you mention - it tends to lose track if the subject moves the wrong way or for similar reasons. However, I've seen enough people complement it that I have wanted to try.

At least in my usage, I've found subject tracking and keeping the AF box over the subject to be much more reliable for, for instance, BIF, though I do have the movie button programmed to turn off subject detection because in some cases it has been a liability. For instance, the subject detection can't seem to understand Canadian geese. Almost no matter what I do or what the lighting is or size of the subject in the frame it loves to identify the brown part of their body as a subject and ignore the head. Thus, I turn it off for a subject like that.

(Truth be told, I am finding it can't keep up with BiF regardless of the mode, which is totally inconsistent with what I have seen from others, so I am honestly starting, after 3 cameras with the same general issue, to wonder if there is a problem with my lens. I've tried everything and can't think of any other explanation at this point. It can display tremendous sharpness at times but well in excess of 50% of the time in those same situations just gives me something that's either relatively or very poor. The EVF sure makes it look like the AF is glued to the birds as they fly across the frame and my shutter will be as high as 1/4000 for relatively slow moving birds but they're still almost always a tad out of focus or blurry!)

Click to expand...

If you are struggling to keep the focus point on the subject, it's pretty likely that you are not fully acquiring focus. You probably should go back to basics. Make sure the subject is properly exposed - being underexposed reduces contrasts and hurts AF performance. If you are using subject detection, make sure it is set for Animals - not Auto and other subjects. Use the Wide modes - Wide Small or another Wide mode (or Custom set up in a similar manner). The Wide modes do two things - they include subject recognition and they use nearest subject priority. Beyond that, you need to learn to be able to keep the subject in the frame and ideally in a medium to smaller area of the frame. It takes practice - lots of practice.

Subject recognition is not a panacea. Consider the hierarchy of focus operation. The camera looks for a high contrast target, specific animal shapes, the animal's head, and then the eye. As you look through the EVF, you should be seeing the AF sensors on the subject, the head, and at least some of the time on the eye. If you are not seeing the AF points flipping back and forth with the head and the eye, you probably need to look at why your AF technique may not be good enough.

Click to expand...

I didn't said anything about not being able to keep the focus point on the subject.

Thom Hogan said:

Lazer42 said:

I have been experimenting at setting up my Z8 using different options and wanted to try the "hybrid focus" that many seem to use where you can acquire the focus with subject detect and then hand off to the 3D tracking (have I got that right)?

Click to expand...

So, couple of things. We're talking about focus point persistence. You need CSM #A7 to be set to AUTO (the default). But, that also implies that there's a point to hand off. In Auto-area AF, that may not be true, or there may be multiple points active. The way all of us are configuring—there are multiple ways to do it—is to use Subject Detection in a mode to pick a point, then handing off that point to 3D-tracking or using Single Point AF to pick a specific point and hand that off to 3D-tracking. There is the issue of how precise a point Subject Detection picked (body, face, eye), as 3D-tracking will do something slightly different in each of those cases, and if, for instance, the eye stops being seen because the bird/animal/human turns its head, 3D-tracking may no longer have something to track.

I know we want autofocus to "just do the right thing," but we encounter so many situations and variables focus systems need to get even more "intelligent" before they'll accomplish what somewhat who knows the controls perfectly can do by reacting.

The real issue in all the autofocus systems currently made is how you re-aquire when focus is lost. It's why I have multiple focus button scenarios I can choose.

Click to expand...

Since I don't play in the pros' sandbox, I wasn't aware of FPP - although I have had access to li mited FN-button switching of AF mode in my Z50 with a firmware update. I've always thought that the Z50's UI needs manual subject designation with handoff to a tracking mode AND focus/tracking reset with focus box position remaining where it was when you reset (in the Z50 at least, the designating reticle reverts to frame center).

Dang them pro bodies, getting the good stuff.

Seriously, though, these two customizations would go a long way to realizing the potential of 3D-tracking and qualitative subject ID modes on the down-ladder Z bodies. What else do those bodies need to inherit from the Z9/8 to make this happen? Do we think those bodies will be so graced by Nikon?

Lazer42 said:

At least in my usage, I've found subject tracking and keeping the AF box over the subject to be much more reliable for, for instance, BIF,

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by that sentence, as "subject tracking" is a mode not found on the Z8/Z9 but on the lower end cameras. This is one of the problems of solving issues: terminology gets in the way. I believe you're saying subject detection, and then convoluting it with what we'd just say is normal focus.

The fact that you imply that you're moving the AF box also brings up something. In Nikon's Subject Detection, the box does not have to be on the part of something you want it to focus on, it only has to be "on the subject." For instance, it can be on the body of a bird/animal but still find head/eyes outside the box. If you start moving the box to put on the head/eye, you're actually causing the system to recompute on all your moves, which means you're fighting the system, not using it.

SCoombs said:

For instance, the subject detection can't seem to understand Canadian geese. Almost no matter what I do or what the lighting is or size of the subject in the frame it loves to identify the brown part of their body as a subject and ignore the head. Thus, I turn it off for a subject like that.

Click to expand...

There are other examples, as well. Leopards confuse the system, but for some reason cheetahs, which have similar patterns, do not tend to. Lions it almost always gets dead on right. But this is true of all the AF systems. I find that the Sony system, for instance, is great when the bird eye color is in contrast to the bird head color, but if the colors are the same—particularly dark eye on dark bird—it gets very confused.

To a large degree, all this is what training the systems were subjected to and then tested on, which will tend to always have gaps.

SCoombs said:

(Truth be told, I am finding it can't keep up with BiF regardless of the mode,

Click to expand...

And this tells me you have another problem you haven't identified. That's because plenty of us have no problems.

SCoombs said:

wonder if there is a problem with my lens.

Click to expand...

Is your lens third party with built-in stabilization?

Thom Hogan said:

I'm not sure what you mean by that sentence, as "subject tracking" is a mode not found on the Z8/Z9 but on the lower end cameras. This is one of the problems of solving issues: terminology gets in the way. I believe you're saying subject detection, and then convoluting it with what we'd just say is normal focus.

The fact that you imply that you're moving the AF box also brings up something. In Nikon's Subject Detection, the box does not have to be on the part of something you want it to focus on, it only has to be "on the subject." For instance, it can be on the body of a bird/animal but still find head/eyes outside the box. If you start moving the box to put on the head/eye, you're actually causing the system to recompute on all your moves, which means you're fighting the system, not using it.

Click to expand...

Yes, I unseratand how it works and youre right that I meant subject detection. What I was saying is that if you have an animal that is moving you need to move the camera to keep your area box on the subject to keep the subject detection locked onto them, which Ib was saying has yielded more succesful shots for me than 3D tracking.

Thom Hogan said:

And this tells me you have another problem you haven't identified. That's because plenty of us have no problems.

Click to expand...

I agree that most people do not seem to have this problem, and that's got me scratching my head.

The lens is a Nikkor 200-500mm. I've posted at least two threads in the Nikon lens forum with more details of my efforts to try to figure out what is going on, but as of yet I'm still not sure.

The subject detection box (or 3d tracking indicator, when I've tried that) stays on the bird and stays green, indicating a lock, but then I'll get 10 or 20 photos in a burst and in all of them the birds are just slightly blurred regardless of how high the shutter speed is. I've also tried it with the VR on or off, regular and sport mode, since some people have said high shutter speeds mess up the VR.

Lazer42 said:

What I was saying is that if you have an animal that is moving you need to move the camera to keep your area box on the subject to keep the subject detection locked onto them, which Ib was saying has yielded more succesful shots for me than 3D tracking.

Click to expand...

First guess: you're using Wide-area (L) or (S). For many situations these aren't adequate enough, and you should be using C1 or C2 with a big enough box.

However, you're now pointing at the number one thing I have to correct in the field at workshops with students: camera handling. When subjects are moving, any subject following movement has to be really good, or you start having additional issues.

VR should be on Sport, not Normal. The reason for this is that Normal tries to recenter the optics on each image taken, so you get viewfinder jitter that causes you to react wrong. Sport does not recenter, and makes it easier to follow (non-erratic) motion.

But the number one issue almost always ends up being that the photographer doesn't realize how they're moving the camera. The last workshop I did I had everyone watch one person at a time on a moving target. They all discovered very quickly that the front of their lens was moving up and down. They weren't absolutely following the subject. Which gets me back to the first guess: with the smaller areas, the subject is dramatically changing position vis-a-vis the box.

SCoombs said:

The lens is a Nikkor 200-500mm.

Click to expand...

The 200-500mm is a good but not great lens. In my working with people using it, two other things always come up: (1) it's slower to acquire initial focus; and (2) at 500mm it's a bit softer than some of the other options.

Add everything up, and, yes, it's easy to get sub-par results. And I've seen similar issues with other brands (the recentering thing for VR is a Nikon exclusive, though).

But this is a tricky subject, because generally those using such a lens are trying to save money to get high-end pro results. You might not get all the way there. I sold my 200-500mm a long time ago, which should say something.

Thom Hogan said:

Lazer42 said:

What I was saying is that if you have an animal that is moving you need to move the camera to keep your area box on the subject to keep the subject detection locked onto them, which Ib was saying has yielded more succesful shots for me than 3D tracking.

Click to expand...

First guess: you're using Wide-area (L) or (S). For many situations these aren't adequate enough, and you should be using C1 or C2 with a big enough box.

However, you're now pointing at the number one thing I have to correct in the field at workshops with students: camera handling. When subjects are moving, any subject following movement has to be really good, or you start having additional issues.

VR should be on Sport, not Normal. The reason for this is that Normal tries to recenter the optics on each image taken, so you get viewfinder jitter that causes you to react wrong. Sport does not recenter, and makes it easier to follow (non-erratic) motion.

But the number one issue almost always ends up being that the photographer doesn't realize how they're moving the camera. The last workshop I did I had everyone watch one person at a time on a moving target. They all discovered very quickly that the front of their lens was moving up and down. They weren't absolutely following the subject. Which gets me back to the first guess: with the smaller areas, the subject is dramatically changing position vis-a-vis the box.

Click to expand...

I've noted in the other threads that I have similar results even with still subjects. Photos that are at all sharp are the exceptions, maybe 20-30%. Even on a sturdy tripod, FoCal conplains that the focus behaves erratically - on all three cameras Ive tried it on, even the Z8, which it shouldn't.

Also, shouldnt a shutter speed of, say, 1/4000 eliminate camera shake even without a VR active?

Something else I've noted: although the zoom ring feels very secure, if I touch it *at all* while taking a shot, the hit rate goes down markedly. I assumed I was moving it slightly when hitting the shutter, but even if my fingertips are lightly resting on it I get the same results. I've gotten improved results by holding it in creative ways to avoid touching the ring, but it still isn't what it should be.

In contrast, I'm sitting here now playing around with my 70-300 Dx and everything, for the most part, is sharp. I know it's a lot smaller and lighter, but the difference is very striking for even just birds standing around where I feel like the 200-500 isn't moving much (e.g., the single point AF dot barely moves while holding it).

Thom Hogan said:

Thom Hogan said:

The lens is a Nikkor 200-500mm.

Click to expand...

The 200-500mm is a good but not great lens. In my working with people using it, two other things always come up: (1) it's slower to acquire initial focus; and (2) at 500mm it's a bit softer than some of the other options.

Add everything up, and, yes, it's easy to get sub-par results. And I've seen similar issues with other brands (the recentering thing for VR is a Nikon exclusive, though).

But this is a tricky subject, because generally those using such a lens are trying to save money to get high-end pro results. You might not get all the way there. I sold my 200-500mm a long time ago, which should say something.

Click to expand...

I've definitely gotten some incredibly sharp photos at 500, so the actual optics are good. The focus just seems inconsistent on any camera I put it on.

I find the initial focus speed fine, but I have wondered if it's somehow not keeping up as the camera's AF tells it to move to follow the subject.

I am considering getting the 180-600 as I'd assume just by virtue of it being a Z lens it should be better. Money is definitely a consideration, but that's not the only one. The bigger issue may be the simple question of available options. Short of a prime, are there even kther options? The zoom is something I find very useful for the situations I'm usually using this in, and other zooms that only go to, say, 400, aren't long enough.

Lazer42 said:

Even on a sturdy tripod, FoCal conplains that the focus behaves erratically - on all three cameras Ive tried it on, even the Z8, which it shouldn't.

Click to expand...

And do you get reliable focus on other lenses tested the same way?

SCoombs said:

Also, shouldnt a shutter speed of, say, 1/4000 eliminate camera shake even without a VR active?

Click to expand...

No. As I've written for decades, VR has a tendency to add a diffraction like blur once your shutter speed is above a certain point. That's because the frequency of the VR adjustment is interacting with the frequency of your subject capture.

SCoombs said:

Something else I've noted: although the zoom ring feels very secure, if I touch it *at all* while taking a shot, the hit rate goes down markedly.

Click to expand...

The weakness of the 200-500mm is the cam adjusting the focal length internally. As I noted in my review of the lens, there's a really "stiff point" midway through the zoom. I've gotten several reports of 200-500mm's needing to be fixed that seem to center around the zooming.

SCoombs said:

In contrast, I'm sitting here now playing around with my 70-300 Dx and everything, for the most part, is sharp.

Click to expand...

A really good indicator that something is wrong with your 200-500mm. The 70-300mm DX shouldn't be as sharp as the 500mm, all else equal.

Thom Hogan said:

And do you get reliable focus on other lenses tested the same way?

Click to expand...

Honestly I'm not sure as I haven't really used FoCal with other lenses as I haven't had significant problems with them.

Thom Hogan said:

No. As I've written for decades, VR has a tendency to add a diffraction like blur once your shutter speed is above a certain point. That's because the frequency of the VR adjustment is interacting with the frequency of your subject capture.

Click to expand...

So what is the best practice: turn off VR completely if shutter speed is greater than X? What is X? Yet if you do this, shouldn't 1/4000 for instance be fast enough to eliminate camera shake?

Thom Hogan said:

Thom Hogan said:

The weakness of the 200-500mm is the cam adjusting the focal length internally. As I noted in my review of the lens, there's a really "stiff point" midway through the zoom. I've gotten several reports of 200-500mm's needing to be fixed that seem to center around the zooming.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Interesting. I haven't noticed a stiff point, in any case, even playing with it after reading your post.

Thom Hogan said:

Thom Hogan said:

IA really good indicator that something is wrong with your 200-500mm. The 70-300mm DX shouldn't be as sharp as the 500mm, all else equal.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

It's definitely not sharper if we're talking about peak sharpness, but it was letting me get at least average sharpness more often.

That said, this really may be something intermittent because I put the 200-500 back on today and had a pretty easy time getting nicely sharp shots today, though admittedly I didn't have many BiF opportunities and the only ones I really got were perhaps slightly off. Here is the best one:



It's not far off, but it's ever so slightly off. On the Z7ii or D500 I'd attribute this to AF miss, but as discussed above it seems that most people using the Z8/9 have not experienced much in the way of misses like that.

For stills it was easy today, unlike the last few times out:







Even this one is pretty good. The imperfections here I attribute to my not using a smaller aperture for a scene like this.











As nice as most of them are, the perched gull is to me a next level of sharpness that the lens is obviously capable of but rarely hits on.

A good discussion.

Thom Hogan said:

Lazer42 said:

Even on a sturdy tripod, FoCal conplains that the focus behaves erratically - on all three cameras Ive tried it on, even the Z8, which it shouldn't.

Click to expand...

And do you get reliable focus on other lenses tested the same way?

Thom Hogan said:

Also, shouldnt a shutter speed of, say, 1/4000 eliminate camera shake even without a VR active?

Click to expand...

No. As I've written for decades, VR has a tendency to add a diffraction like blur once your shutter speed is above a certain point. That's because the frequency of the VR adjustment is interacting with the frequency of your subject capture.

Click to expand...

Would it be possible for the nikon sw team to make an "VR auto disable" function when the shutterspeed becomes to fast to be usefull ?

Thom Hogan said:

Thom Hogan said:

Something else I've noted: although the zoom ring feels very secure, if I touch it *at all* while taking a shot, the hit rate goes down markedly.

Click to expand...

The weakness of the 200-500mm is the cam adjusting the focal length internally. As I noted in my review of the lens, there's a really "stiff point" midway through the zoom. I've gotten several reports of 200-500mm's needing to be fixed that seem to center around the zooming.

Thom Hogan said:

In contrast, I'm sitting here now playing around with my 70-300 Dx and everything, for the most part, is sharp.

Click to expand...

A really good indicator that something is wrong with your 200-500mm. The 70-300mm DX shouldn't be as sharp as the 500mm, all else equal.

Click to expand...

mrbr said:

Would it be possible for the nikon sw team to make an "VR auto disable" function when the shutterspeed becomes to fast to be usefull ?

Click to expand...

Yes, and I asked for that at least twice. However, there is the benefit of VR stabilizing the view, so if you're handholding and not really stable at that, you're better off with the VR than the acuity loss.
Thing is, we have features like "Auto ISO," but the engineering teams think of features specifically, not generically. It took a long time before we got bracketing of things other than exposure. It took awhile before we got minimum shutter speed with Auto ISO.

Conceptually, you have to think more from the user side than the designer side to get things right. It's why I've long argued for "programmability" in our cameras. I know better than a non-photographic engineer what might be useful. Moreover, I'm also more likely to experiment when given the opportunity. I'd rather have an "Auto [User Choice]" function than a defined one.

Thom Hogan said:

mrbr said:

Would it be possible for the nikon sw team to make an "VR auto disable" function when the shutterspeed becomes to fast to be usefull ?

Click to expand...

Yes, and I asked for that at least twice. However, there is the benefit of VR stabilizing the view, so if you're handholding and not really stable at that, you're better off with the VR than the acuity loss.

Click to expand...

Yes, I understand.

Maybe it would be possible to electronically stabilise the viewfinder/ LCD image data ( reduced data volume from sensor data ! ) when VR ( ibis and Lens-VR ) is disabled and the focal lenght surpasses a certain value ( eg menu auto iso min. shutterspeed setting possibilities ) ?

Thom Hogan said:

Thing is, we have features like "Auto ISO," but the engineering teams think of features specifically, not generically. It took a long time before we got bracketing of things other than exposure. It took awhile before we got minimum shutter speed with Auto ISO.

Conceptually, you have to think more from the user side than the designer side to get things right. It's why I've long argued for "programmability" in our cameras. I know better than a non-photographic engineer what might be useful. Moreover, I'm also more likely to experiment when given the opportunity. I'd rather have an "Auto [User Choice]" function than a defined one.

Click to expand...

I was inspired after reading this thread and having a bit of trouble focussing on a bird on the weekend to look at some of the options for setting this up. I already have the AF-ON button set to 3D tracking and was using wide large with the shutter button for initial acquisition, but found it sometimes just wouldn't detect an animal face (seems great for humans) and I didn't have any quick way to switch to something else before the bird disappeared.

After a frustrating time trying to assign either single point AF or C2 (customised to a small subject detection box) to the Fn-3 button, I realised you just can't do it. Thom's book suggested it was possible, but I realised this morning I was reading the original version which has now been corrected.

It's a shame most/all functions can't be assigned to most/all buttons. I guess it's a case of moving functions I do use away from the more programmable buttons.