Animal Eye AF

Started 5 months ago | Questions
Chikubi
Chikubi Senior Member • Posts: 1,889
Re: Animal Eye AF

George1958 wrote:

Animal Eye AF is a preset, a bit like landscape, fireworks , portrait found on a scene dial. Its nice to have but totally unnecessary. Attention to DoF and composition will get you the same outcome, and also avoids things like just off eyes with sharp lashes.

If its useful great, but to me its just another one of those marketing gimmicks designed to capture more photographers than images of animals.

Put the other way around , the history shows that photographers have been shooting everything from wild big game to the family pet pouch for decades without any problem, and before there ever was a Sony cameras and also without animal Eye AF.

This is pretty much it in a nutshell. Not necessary at all if you take the time to actually learn how to use AF as opposed to letting the camera drive for you.

tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 44,201
Re: All my cameras have it
2

Laybourne wrote:

Bob A L wrote:

They will all let me focus on any animal's eye as long as it is visible. But if my camera ever starts picking out what to focus on by itself, it's going in the trash bin. That's my job.

Reminds me of the author who said it was his job to hunt and peck the keys on his keyboard. He drew a few chuckles and winces from the real authors in the room whose job it was to write stories.

I fail to see the relevance. The hunt and pecker could have been as good or better a writer than any of them. Skill at a keyboard is irrelevant to skill at writing.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
George1958 Contributing Member • Posts: 745
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

Cute Cats!

 George1958's gear list:George1958's gear list
Sigma DP1s Sigma SD15 Olympus PEN E-P3 Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS 7D Mark II +7 more
J A C S
J A C S Forum Pro • Posts: 15,206
Re: All my cameras have it
1

golfhov wrote:

it does but skilled people like tools too. Last time I checked the sidelines of sporting events weren't full of manual focus cameras, wedding shooters seem to have forsaken the assistant with the light meter for most of their event work, and I don't even know if you can still purchase flash bulbs....maybe black powder?

The new feature will change the way horse races are shot.

OP rainydiary Regular Member • Posts: 248
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

Chikubi wrote:

George1958 wrote:

Animal Eye AF is a preset, a bit like landscape, fireworks , portrait found on a scene dial. Its nice to have but totally unnecessary. Attention to DoF and composition will get you the same outcome, and also avoids things like just off eyes with sharp lashes.

If its useful great, but to me its just another one of those marketing gimmicks designed to capture more photographers than images of animals.

Put the other way around , the history shows that photographers have been shooting everything from wild big game to the family pet pouch for decades without any problem, and before there ever was a Sony cameras and also without animal Eye AF.

This is pretty much it in a nutshell. Not necessary at all if you take the time to actually learn how to use AF as opposed to letting the camera drive for you.

How if you taken shot during the cat running ?

Does the cat's eye in image still sharp ?

Chikubi
Chikubi Senior Member • Posts: 1,889
Re: All my cameras have it
1

golfhov wrote:

Chikubi wrote:

Laybourne wrote:

Bob A L wrote:

They will all let me focus on any animal's eye as long as it is visible. But if my camera ever starts picking out what to focus on by itself, it's going in the trash bin. That's my job.

I would hate to see how you feel about your camera metering for you, tracking a subject, or bracketing on it's own......

Reminds me of the author who said it was his job to hunt and peck the keys on his keyboard. He drew a few chuckles and winces from the real authors in the room whose job it was to write stories.

And yet the author who said it was his job to hunt and peck the keys on his keyboard is what makes your story salient, not the others. Sounds like he was a bit more clever with his wordcraft and knew better what it takes to make oneself standout from the rest. Actual skill nearly always wins in the end.

it does but skilled people like tools too. Last time I checked the sidelines of sporting events weren't full of manual focus cameras, wedding shooters seem to have forsaken the assistant with the light meter for most of their event work, and I don't even know if you can still purchase flash bulbs....maybe black powder?

Skilled folks do indeed like tools, but they don't necessarily prefer tools that take away control from them, force too much reliance on the camera, or sacrifice consistency/reliability for innovation's sake. There's a reason why most flagship pro cameras are usually a lot more stripped down than the consumer models, and it's because they're designed for users that have a solid skillset to begin with and aren't willing to sacrifice performance and reliabilty for the sake of keeping up with the Jones'.

I don't think anyone really cares that new features are added to cameras as long as the option to not use them exists as well, like on most advanced cameras. Where people do get annoyed, however, is when those features are somehow touted as being necessary or become a primary determiner as to what make one camera better than another when most knowledgeable shooters know that not to be the case.

I also think that a lot of cameras - particularly MILCs - are becoming over-bloated with features that, in my experience, can make them fairly overwhelming to a large number of shooters. I see it all the time in my beginning and intermediate photo classes and it's problematic - I have students that frequently feel they'll never be able to learn their cameras well and feel like giving up. That's not a good thing.

tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 44,201
Re: Animal Eye AF
2

rainydiary wrote:

How if you taken shot during the cat running ?

Does the cat's eye in image still sharp ?

That's the whole idea behind eye AF, to quickly and accurately focus on eyes on a subject that is moving around. Anybody can do it with a stationary subject.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 44,201
Re: Animal Eye AF
2

Now do it while your cat is moving around. While I don't have a camera with animal eye AF to deny that it an extremely useful feature for some people is a very narrow minded point of view.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
Chikubi
Chikubi Senior Member • Posts: 1,889
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

rainydiary wrote:

Chikubi wrote:

George1958 wrote:

Animal Eye AF is a preset, a bit like landscape, fireworks , portrait found on a scene dial. Its nice to have but totally unnecessary. Attention to DoF and composition will get you the same outcome, and also avoids things like just off eyes with sharp lashes.

If its useful great, but to me its just another one of those marketing gimmicks designed to capture more photographers than images of animals.

Put the other way around , the history shows that photographers have been shooting everything from wild big game to the family pet pouch for decades without any problem, and before there ever was a Sony cameras and also without animal Eye AF.

This is pretty much it in a nutshell. Not necessary at all if you take the time to actually learn how to use AF as opposed to letting the camera drive for you.

How if you taken shot during the cat running ?

Does the cat's eye in image still sharp ?

You don't need eye AF to shoot moving animals and have them in focus. As someone already mentioned earlier, at most distances, with a decent lens and a properly chosen aperture, you should have more than enough DOF to have the eyes as well as the whole animal in proper focus. Take a look at any BIF photos here or elsewhere. Birds in flight are far more demanding than cats, dogs, etc. and they have no problem getting the bird, eyes and all, in focus without using eye AF.

See for yourself: https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=birds%20in%20flight

Don't fall into the trap of thinking you need some fancy feature or a particular camera to do basic work.

golfhov Forum Pro • Posts: 10,980
Re: All my cameras have it
1

Chikubi wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Chikubi wrote:

Laybourne wrote:

Bob A L wrote:

They will all let me focus on any animal's eye as long as it is visible. But if my camera ever starts picking out what to focus on by itself, it's going in the trash bin. That's my job.

I would hate to see how you feel about your camera metering for you, tracking a subject, or bracketing on it's own......

Reminds me of the author who said it was his job to hunt and peck the keys on his keyboard. He drew a few chuckles and winces from the real authors in the room whose job it was to write stories.

And yet the author who said it was his job to hunt and peck the keys on his keyboard is what makes your story salient, not the others. Sounds like he was a bit more clever with his wordcraft and knew better what it takes to make oneself standout from the rest. Actual skill nearly always wins in the end.

it does but skilled people like tools too. Last time I checked the sidelines of sporting events weren't full of manual focus cameras, wedding shooters seem to have forsaken the assistant with the light meter for most of their event work, and I don't even know if you can still purchase flash bulbs....maybe black powder?

Skilled folks do indeed like tools, but they don't necessarily prefer tools that take away control from them, force too much reliance on the camera, or sacrifice consistency/reliability for innovation's sake. There's a reason why most flagship pro cameras are usually a lot more stripped down than the consumer models,

This is actually demonstrably wrong. Advanced cameras of every manufacturer tend to have MORE tools.

and it's because they're designed for users that have a solid skillset to begin with and aren't willing to sacrifice performance and reliabilty for the sake of keeping up with the Jones'.

No they feature whatever they think their customers want to do the job.

I don't think anyone really cares that new features are added to cameras as long as the option to not use them exists as well, like on most advanced cameras. Where people do get annoyed, however, is when those features are somehow touted as being necessary

Have you seen a single post here that said it was "necessary"? One? Where we have multiple posts calling it "useless" despite never having used it

or become a primary determiner as to what make one camera better than another when most knowledgeable shooters know that not to be the case.

Did you not see the OPs question? And a "knowledgeable" shooter uses ANYTHING that gets the job done. You can pick any feature you want. Most comparably the intelligent/3d tracking systems on flagship DSLRs. A similar tool just the user has to find the eye first.

I also think that a lot of cameras - particularly MILCs - are becoming over-bloated with features that, in my experience, can make them fairly overwhelming to a large number of shooters.

Agreed. BUT as you said most of these features can be activated/ deactivated. So it does give bloated menus BUT most of these models are highly customizable. A moot point once the camera is configured to a users preferences

I see it all the time in my beginning and intermediate photo classes and it's problematic - I have students that frequently feel they'll never be able to learn their cameras well and feel like giving up. That's not a good thing.

No BUT the animal eye af isn't in "entry" level models and is deactivated by default. So you are making a pedantic point. Cameras have become complicated IF a user chooses. At the same time they can throw it in auto and then tip toe through more control as they learn. And we have DOZENS of automated features that could be discussed same as you are dismissing animal eye af. Obviously this is a more niche feature BUT the OP asked. It isn't something that was raised for no reason........well unless the OP is being disengenuous

 golfhov's gear list:golfhov's gear list
Panasonic LX10 Sony a7R II Sony a7 III Samyang 14mm F2.8 ED AS IF UMC Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +11 more
J A C S
J A C S Forum Pro • Posts: 15,206
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

tbcass wrote:

Now do it while your cat is moving around. While I don't have a camera with animal eye AF to deny that it an extremely useful feature for some people is a very narrow minded point of view.

It would be, I guess, if it can do it. What evidence do you have that the animal eye AF can track a running cat with a precision that just tracking its head, for example, would not be enough?

golfhov Forum Pro • Posts: 10,980
Ignorance is bliss
1

There are users who are actually finding this DOES change the way they shoot. It's just another tool in the bag. Use it or not.

I do love that you haven't used it and you are one of the most vocal about it's usefulness

 golfhov's gear list:golfhov's gear list
Panasonic LX10 Sony a7R II Sony a7 III Samyang 14mm F2.8 ED AS IF UMC Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +11 more
biza43 Forum Pro • Posts: 10,961
Re: Animal Eye AF

rainydiary wrote:

Hi all

Now only sony's has animal eye AF. Does it just gimmick ?

No.

For Canon and Nikon without animal eye AF does it hard to shot dog or cat ?

no.

Thank

-- hide signature --

www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

 biza43's gear list:biza43's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR XF 90mm +1 more
ZX11
ZX11 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,961
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

Nutty Lutty wrote:

tbcass wrote:

Just a thought but maybe you are satisfied with what you have because you have never used anything better?

I imagine there are still a chosen few who are content with square wheels and attribute their disdain for the round ones to their "skill" at driving.

Are you equating Sony pasting another feature onto their plastic cameras with the invention of the wheel?

Of course Sony's marketing team/social media influencers would like buyers to think so. But to me, those features are right up there with the days when one could determine the best camera by the megapixel number printed on the body. Brainless features for big box store salesmen to push.

"Look ma, this camera has 20 features. Now with insect eye detection!"

-- hide signature --

"Very funny, Scotty! Now beam me down my clothes."
"He's dead, Jim! You grab his tri-corder. I'll get his wallet."

 ZX11's gear list:ZX11's gear list
Canon EOS 700D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM
ZX11
ZX11 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,961
Sony's social media boiler room

Bob A L wrote:

They will all let me focus on any animal's eye as long as it is visible. But if my camera ever starts picking out what to focus on by itself, it's going in the trash bin. That's my job.

Sony's marketing team will destroy you for belittling their newest brainless feature epoxied onto their cameras.  Insect eye detect is now being added to new Sony models while food detect is being tested with foodie focus groups.

-- hide signature --

"Very funny, Scotty! Now beam me down my clothes."
"He's dead, Jim! You grab his tri-corder. I'll get his wallet."

 ZX11's gear list:ZX11's gear list
Canon EOS 700D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 44,201
Re: Animal Eye AF
2

Chikubi wrote:

You don't need eye AF to shoot moving animals and have them in focus. As someone already mentioned earlier, at most distances,

MOST? Well not all.

with a decent lens and a properly chosen aperture, you should have more than enough DOF to have the eyes as well as the whole animal in proper focus.

Unfortunately that is not true, especially with large sensor cameras and at telephoto distances. What about in instances where the lighting and movement require f2.8 or greater and 1/500 sec shutter speed?

Take a look at any BIF photos here or elsewhere. Birds in flight are far more demanding than cats, dogs, etc. and they have no problem getting the bird, eyes and all, in focus without using eye AF.

See for yourself: https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=birds%20in%20flight

How many shots were out of focus? You only see the ones in focus because people don't post their duds.

Don't fall into the trap of thinking you need some fancy feature or a particular camera to do basic work.

I understand. Your camera doesn't have it and you desperately need to think that any feature you don't have is of no use. Don't fall into that trap because you are 100% wrong. None of my cameras have it either but I'm smart enough and broad minded enough to see the usefulness and possibilities even if I wouldn't need it myself. Denial of the usefulness of features that they don't have is all to common among DPR posters.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
golfhov Forum Pro • Posts: 10,980
Speed of acquisition
2

For starters

For compatabile subjects it isolates the eyes too. Anybody who has worked extensively with various larger dog breeds knows/nose at close distances their snout can be problematic and cause bad misses even stopped down a little

This is something you may know if you had used it.......

 golfhov's gear list:golfhov's gear list
Panasonic LX10 Sony a7R II Sony a7 III Samyang 14mm F2.8 ED AS IF UMC Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD +11 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 44,201
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

J A C S wrote:

tbcass wrote:

Now do it while your cat is moving around. While I don't have a camera with animal eye AF to deny that it an extremely useful feature for some people is a very narrow minded point of view.

It would be, I guess, if it can do it. What evidence do you have that the animal eye AF can track a running cat with a precision that just tracking its head, for example, would not be enough?

What evidence do you have that it can't? This whole discussion is based on the premise that it works well. Any feature that does not work is useless.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
J A C S
J A C S Forum Pro • Posts: 15,206
Re: Ignorance is bliss
1

golfhov wrote:

There are users who are actually finding this DOES change the way they shoot. It's just another tool in the bag. Use it or not.

I guess there are. They are hiding pretty well though.

I do love that you haven't used it and you are one of the most vocal about it's usefulness

I am not. I am just calling your buffs. I am ready to be convinced that it is useful, and so far, I just heard that a few people deeply believe that it would be.

J A C S
J A C S Forum Pro • Posts: 15,206
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

tbcass wrote:

J A C S wrote:

tbcass wrote:

Now do it while your cat is moving around. While I don't have a camera with animal eye AF to deny that it an extremely useful feature for some people is a very narrow minded point of view.

It would be, I guess, if it can do it. What evidence do you have that the animal eye AF can track a running cat with a precision that just tracking its head, for example, would not be enough?

What evidence do you have that it can't?

A proof by - prove me wrong, even though I did not prove anything. I love it. I have to use it in my work.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads