Z6 with 24-70 f/4

I had 81 keepers and 40 I set aside from "softness" or maybe OOF, who knows, but I ran the keepers through Lightroom and chose the following

There was a lot of focus issues even with the keepers. You'd think that focusing at a distant comp at f/8 would result in a sharp focus from foreground to background but more often than not the foreground would be slight OOF, the mid-range be sharp, then the distance would be slightly OOF, ya know like I'd shot at f/1.4 instead of the f/8 I shot everything on

Even these exhibited what I'm talking about but you'd never know unless you could check these out at full rez on a desktop monitor. After awhile I just told myself "just look at the composition, not the mini-focus details"

If anyone here has had "focus issues" like I'm talking about with this lens I'd like to hear from you. Anyway...

Curious why you're at 1/100 and not a slightly faster SS? Even with VR I wouldn't choose 1/100 in pursuit of sharp images. 81/40 is a rough ratio.

I had that camera body and lens and never had issues. When you're describing foreground soft, mid ground sharp, background soft... were you focusing mid ground?

--
http://jimlafferty.com
Evocative beats academic.

toomanycanons said:

I had 81 keepers and 40 I set aside from "softness" or maybe OOF, who knows, but I ran the keepers through Lightroom and chose the following

There was a lot of focus issues even with the keepers. You'd think that focusing at a distant comp at f/8 would result in a sharp focus from foreground to background but more often than not the foreground would be slight OOF, the mid-range be sharp, then the distance would be slightly OOF, ya know like I'd shot at f/1.4 instead of the f/8 I shot everything on

Even these exhibited what I'm talking about but you'd never know unless you could check these out at full rez on a desktop monitor. After awhile I just told myself "just look at the composition, not the mini-focus details"

If anyone here has had "focus issues" like I'm talking about with this lens I'd like to hear from you. Anyway...

Click to expand...

I can confirm similar experience with my Z6 and 24-70/f4. But I do believe the issue is with the Z6 as I have similar issues with other lenses like 85mm f1.8 G. Shooting with Z6 +FTZ+85mm f1.8 G single focus point on stationary subject and will have at least 30% missed focus, 30% acceptable (not perfect) and only 40% perfectly sharp images.

On Z5II 24-70 f4 looks like different lens. Much better autofocus and keeper rates is between 80-90% now.

Thanks for the quick responses. I have real steady hands and can shoot 1/40 shutter all day, sometimes 1/20, 1/60 is a no brainer so I figured 1/100 I'd be good to go, especially combined with the Z6 in body stabilization. I have Auto ISO set for 1/100 minimum shutter. I know you've heard me say that these are the first shoots where I've used Auto ISO, wondering if maybe that somehow messes with focus on the 24-70 f/4?

So, no, I don't think 1/100 is too low but then I'm examining all manner of possibilities. Maybe 1/100 just isn't a good shutter speed with the Z6 (the dreaded "shutter shock" or whatever)

I shoot f/8, Single Point aiming at the center of my composition. It's hit and miss, sometimes it nails at least center focus, other times it doesn't nail anything, like these from the reject folder. Nothing special about the comps or the way I shot, just point straight forward and press the shutter

Again, tough to see here at 1024 but trust me, nothing is in sharp focus on either of these shots where many others shot before and after are in sharp enough focus





That's two out of forty in the reject folder. But...and this is a big but...I had 81 keepers so there's that

"On Z5II 24-70 f4 looks like a different lens. Much better autofocus and keeper rates is between 80-90% now

Are your AF settings the same? Single Point? Can the Z5II's AF be changed in different ways in the menu from the Z6?

What can be fooling my Z6 into taking soft images? What could I change in the settings? I should know by now, I've had two Z6 for two years but I haven't whined about soft images till lately :-|

toomanycanons said:

"On Z5II 24-70 f4 looks like a different lens. Much better autofocus and keeper rates is between 80-90% now

Are your AF settings the same? Single Point? Can the Z5II's AF be changed in different ways in the menu from the Z6?

What can be fooling my Z6 into taking soft images? What could I change in the settings? I should know by now, I've had two Z6 for two years but I haven't whined about soft images till lately :-|

Click to expand...

Yes, same focus settings. I do prefer to shoot single focus point. On Z5II when single focus point is selected the square is noticeable bigger than square of the Z6. I don't know whether this has something to do with the focus accuracy. I would expect that smaller focus square should be much more precise but this is not the case with Z6. My Z6 is for sale now, but no buyers so far....

toomanycanons said:

"On Z5II 24-70 f4 looks like a different lens. Much better autofocus and keeper rates is between 80-90% now

Are your AF settings the same? Single Point? Can the Z5II's AF be changed in different ways in the menu from the Z6?

What can be fooling my Z6 into taking soft images? What could I change in the settings? I should know by now, I've had two Z6 for two years but I haven't whined about soft images till lately :-|

Click to expand...

You can try AF-C instead of AF-S on Z6 this seems to give me a slightly better results. On Z5II I use AF-A and it works like a charm.

I believe that part of your difficulty is attributable to the fact that you are using single point autofocus at the center of the frame to capture the images. It is important to remember that single point focus method is just that. If you specify that the focal point is at the center of the frame, then the designated distant object at the center of the image determines the focal distance, period. The forward and backward edges of the depth of field are then determined by the ISO, subject distance, and aperture selections. For example, at the hyper-focal distance, the image behind the focal plane remains sharp to infinity theoretically, whereas the points forward of the focal plane only remain in focus about halfway to the camera image sensor plane.

Unless the camera fails to lock focus, there has to be something out there in focus at the focal plane. The associated depth of field may or may not not include other desirable image objects, as you have observed. Thus, your dilemma.

An additional problem can also result from an indistinct subject such as the scattered rocks and jumbled vegetation at the center of the frame in the examples given. This is not a lens deficiency. It is a known challenge to the camera autofocus system.

Two suggestions are in order. First, review the various focusing methods available for the occasion, and choose a more appropriate focus option. You can toggle the auto and/or program mode info for a hint. Secondly, I have found it useful in the NX Studio app to turn on the focal point indicator to reveal the actual focal point captured in the image data. This helps to see just how distinctive the lines and edges are for the object at the focal point and whether or not the desired subject was grabbed.

A second example using bird photography might be helpful. Before subject detection became more prominent, single point focus for birds was my chosen method of focus. I frequently missed both perched and low flying birds with wooded backgrounds when the camera failed to focus properly, the Z6 focus speed not being particularly fast. The keeper rate, even for less distant quarry, on the 24-200 full frame and Z50 cropped sensor 50-250 zooms wasn’t all that great. Also, the longer telephoto lenses produce quite shallow depths of field at longer subject distances, even at f8.

Accurate focus is one of the virtues of subject detection. Nevertheless, even with highly accurate eye detection, larger birds and animals captured at longer distances may not be in focus over their entire body. In closing, I might add that the focal performance of my 24-70 f4s on the Z5II and Z50II, both with subject detection, is significantly better than with the Z6 and Z50. Nevertheless, there are still occasions when single point autofocus is preferable. Landscapes is usually not one of them unless a particular, distinct object is chosen, etc. Hope this bit of conjecture helps. Best wishes.

Greetings. I just sold my Z6 for a Z5ii, and I also have the 24-70F4. I do not think it is a problem with the body or lens. If this is what you are using:

"Single Point aiming at the center of my composition." This is too small for these types of photos.

For landscape I would use Auto Area AF. This way the camera is looking at the entire scene. You should see multiple green boxes appear to show what is in focus. Move around to frame your composition. I think you will get better results. Best of luck.

toomanycanons said:

Thanks for the quick responses. I have real steady hands and can shoot 1/40 shutter all day, sometimes 1/20, 1/60 is a no brainer so I figured 1/100 I'd be good to go, especially combined with the Z6 in body stabilization. I have Auto ISO set for 1/100 minimum shutter. I know you've heard me say that these are the first shoots where I've used Auto ISO, wondering if maybe that somehow messes with focus on the 24-70 f/4?

So, no, I don't think 1/100 is too low but then I'm examining all manner of possibilities. Maybe 1/100 just isn't a good shutter speed with the Z6 (the dreaded "shutter shock" or whatever)

I shoot f/8, Single Point aiming at the center of my composition. It's hit and miss, sometimes it nails at least center focus, other times it doesn't nail anything, like these from the reject folder. Nothing special about the comps or the way I shot, just point straight forward and press the shutter

Again, tough to see here at 1024 but trust me, nothing is in sharp focus on either of these shots where many others shot before and after are in sharp enough focus

That's two out of forty in the reject folder. But...and this is a big but...I had 81 keepers so there's that

Click to expand...

First, single AF point at the center would certainly results in defocused parts if you use this only method to focus on so different scenes.

You should place your point on a detail at the hyperfocal distance to ensure results (or even, simply, usage of full auto focusing may end up with better overall keepers rate... but that's just a guess, I never use that ).

https://photographylife.com/hyperfo...e, at its simplest,appear blurry in the image.

Personally, on Z6, I used to use tracking box and place it on a detail in the scene that I judge is placed at the right distance. On Expeed7 cameras, I use 3D tracking the same way most of the time, unless I need very precise focus point.

Then, if you want any confirmation/analyse about issues I'd rather post or allow for full Raw downloads. Jpegs, even full size, won't show all the settings you used and small Jpegs won't allow to ensure any conclusion.

It can only be a couple things. First, check to see what your release mode is. You want release on focus. Next, put the camera on a tripod, choose the small area focus, not pinpoint, and take some images. Try it with VR on and off. Maybe try it with manual focus and high magnification. That should tell you what the camera/lens is capable of. I have the same camera and lens and if something is out of focus it's because I did something wrong!

This seems like advice worth pursuing. My Z6 had the latest firmware and I only ever used either 3D tracking in AF-C, or face tracking where appropriate. I missed more images than I’d like, but it never climbed higher than 2-3%.

Thanks for all the replies, I'll investigate all the advice given. As it is, I'm headed out the door to the same area (40 minutes away up at 9,300' and higher) with my venerable D610 paired with my FX 70-300 AF-P to see if I can get the images I want just using a telephoto. Wish me luck

We have a big storm coming in tonight with the snow level at 10,000' and lower and if it's a big dump all the aspens that are just now turning might be gone so today's my last chance

jlafferty said:

Curious why you're at 1/100 and not a slightly faster SS? Even with VR I wouldn't choose 1/100 in pursuit of sharp images. 81/40 is a rough ratio.

I had that camera body and lens and never had issues. When you're describing foreground soft, mid ground sharp, background soft... were you focusing mid ground?

Click to expand...

1/100s is acceptable given the focal length as it does satisfy the minimum shutter speed rule. I do agree that you increase your chances the faster your shutter speed is but even at 70mm, 1/100s should have been plenty here, especially if IBIS was used.

I am wondering if the focus position is the bigger issue here, where being off by one point could mean something being not tack sharp, even at f/8 or smaller apertures. I know with my own shooting, I sometimes choose the wrong distance and have to reshoot.

If not done already ,maybe the OP can show us where in the frame they focused as i suspect it's just going to come down to that and not enough DOF given the focal length used.

--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *

toomanycanons said:

I had 81 keepers and 40 I set aside from "softness" or maybe OOF, who knows, but I ran the keepers through Lightroom and chose the following

There was a lot of focus issues even with the keepers. You'd think that focusing at a distant comp at f/8 would result in a sharp focus from foreground to background but more often than not the foreground would be slight OOF, the mid-range be sharp, then the distance would be slightly OOF, ya know like I'd shot at f/1.4 instead of the f/8 I shot everything on

Even these exhibited what I'm talking about but you'd never know unless you could check these out at full rez on a desktop monitor. After awhile I just told myself "just look at the composition, not the mini-focus details"

If anyone here has had "focus issues" like I'm talking about with this lens I'd like to hear from you. Anyway...

Click to expand...

Have you run tests on a tripod with a static scene to see if it's maybe a lens issue?

while the 24-70 is not known to have a high level of copy variation, that is still a possibility.

I'd also be curious as to where you focused within the frame on each shot.

From what I remember my 24-70 f/4 was sharp all throughout, and so I would be curious as to your technique and any other tests you've done with the lens. It almost makes me wonder if this is just a DOF issue given the focal lengths and aperture combos you're using. For example the image shot at 39mm (without knowing the subject distance or where you focused) f/8 may not be enough to get everything in focus or atl east most things in focus.

In my experience, the times when something wasn't entirely in focus it ended up being my technique or something I did (a setting I used, like an aperture that is not small enough given the scenario for example) or accidentally having the camera in AF-C mode, which is another possibility for why images may not be tack sharp (focus could be moving slightly if you're using AF-C on accident, particularly if you're focusing on things that can move live branches or leaves).

--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *

One thing bothers me about discussing various focus methods, i.e. single point pin vs. small area or whatever... some of these photos look like nothing is in focus. So I agree *something* is going on.

Sometimes I inadvertently move the focus point off center and don't notice it. But even then, something in the image is in focus, just not the right thing.

I suggest what others have, i.e. set up a test that includes several objects spaced apart. I wouldn't bother with a tripod, do it in enough light to get a reasonable shutter speed, and take a series of pictures at a fairly wide aperture, say f/4 for your zoom, one focused on the near object, one focused on the far object. Do it with a few lenses.

That should be an easy enough test to do, and may help isolate where the problem is.

(I come from the Pentax world, and Pentaxians know how to troubleshoot mis- focus issues because of the rather basic fine focus adjustment process that DSLRs with mirrors sometimes require) :-D

I'm always willing to admit user error. That said:

-I've always shot Single Point. Always. Always AF-S, never AF-C or AF-A

-For the longest time I was shooting for clients who wanted the foreground in sharp focus, on 45 MP cameras. I used Single Point focused on the foreground, f/10

-But that was then, this is now. Now I'm shooting snapshots with 24 MP bodies at f/8 and pixel peeping more than I should

-I showed two images where nothing was in sharp focus. Even at 1/100. Pointing straight ahead should have gotten at least something in focus but, like I've said, it's kinda hit and miss

-OTOH, the final image above was shot handheld at 1/13 and it's sharp all around. What you see is the one image that WAS sharp all around, not the other ones in the same sequence where the entire frame was "soft" "out of focus" call it what you will

-I'm going to try f/10, Auto AF (using all the focus points, the camera chooses), basically everything to see if it makes a difference. When I've shot what I call "snapshots" only meaning they weren't work images, I never pixel peeped them like I'm doing now

-I'm going to read this article on Photography Life:

https://photographylife.com/autofocus-modes#auto-area-af-modefor as well as what works for you all

-I'm convinced the Z6 is doing what I'm telling it to do, and the 24-70 f/4 is behaving normally and it's some user error item that I just need to figure out

In the meantime, I did blanket the same area today with my D610/70-300 but haven't had time to check them out. DSLR, FX lens, who knows what I got? The aspens were golden and stunning, hope I captured that

n/t

Those are 1000x600 images. Nothing can be judged by these thumbnails.

Rene Gr said:

Those are 1000x600 images. Nothing can be judged by these thumbnails.

Click to expand...

So true. That's why I said "... tough to see here at 1024..." in my second comment on this thread