Animal Eye AF

Started 4 months ago | Questions
Donald B
Donald B Forum Pro • Posts: 13,479
Re: Ignorance is bliss

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

Good marketing. Concidering all face and eye detect are pdaf the camera is going to focus on the closest part of t h e animal anyway.guess which part of that's going to be

No. It actually attempts to focus on the eye. Nothing else. In practice it can fail. Have you used it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=sony+animal+eye+af&oq=sony+animal+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0l2j69i60l2.8476j0j9&client=ms-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Don

You wouldn’t no what it was focusing on because the dof on the dog was in front of the eye.

What are you going on about? Depends on the dog and angles

The eye wasn’t in the center of the focus plane. Good PDAF though.

I have no idea which article or video you are commenting on because there were many inn that link.

I ve done a lot of reading and testing my own system. And eye detect is a big con.

On YOUR system it may be. Same as the Z was recently heavily tested here and DPR explained the struggles. Sony's eye af has been used by hundreds or thousands of member here consistently over the years and is demonstrably accurate.

no it’s not. Didn’t you see the a74 tests was miles out. As I said go do some serious testing and you will figure it out .dof plays a big part of the con .and PDAF is go into focus on the closest eye anyway when a face is turned. It’s about as funny as someone the other day posting that his phone has great face detect on a full body portrait lol . Of coarse it did because the dof is 10 feet . As I said I have done some extensive testing in my studio over the last week . You are better off using back button focus lock and Caf tracking. For half body shots and head and shoulders.

Don

Don

Sigh.......

-- hide signature --

Olympus EM5mk2 ,EM1mk2
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1

golfhov Forum Pro • Posts: 10,815
I don't use Olympus anymore .......well occasionally
1

Donald B wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

Good marketing. Concidering all face and eye detect are pdaf the camera is going to focus on the closest part of t h e animal anyway.guess which part of that's going to be

No. It actually attempts to focus on the eye. Nothing else. In practice it can fail. Have you used it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=sony+animal+eye+af&oq=sony+animal+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0l2j69i60l2.8476j0j9&client=ms-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Don

You wouldn’t no what it was focusing on because the dof on the dog was in front of the eye.

What are you going on about? Depends on the dog and angles

The eye wasn’t in the center of the focus plane. Good PDAF though.

I have no idea which article or video you are commenting on because there were many inn that link.

I ve done a lot of reading and testing my own system. And eye detect is a big con.

On YOUR system it may be. Same as the Z was recently heavily tested here and DPR explained the struggles. Sony's eye af has been used by hundreds or thousands of member here consistently over the years and is demonstrably accurate.

no it’s not. Didn’t you see the a74 tests was miles out.

Yes. I cannot answer that one. The errors I saw were a pre release body and prerelease lens. I would "assume" firmware but don't know

Yes. AsAs I said go do some serious testing and you will figure it out

I have. I own an a7iii and a7rii. I made a dummy rig and purposefully set the eyeball an inch back from the "eyelashes" . Consistently the camera would focus on the PUPIL in AF-c. FWIW it focused on the eyelash in AF-s. I only ran the test one time so why the AF-s failed I couldn't gather. I also didn't care because I don't shoot dummy heads. I shoot humans and use AFc

I h.dofof plays a big part of the con .and PDAF is go into focus on the closest eye anyway when a face is turned. It’s about as funny as someone the other day posting that his phone has great face detect on a full body portrait lol . Of coarse it did because the dof is 10 feet

Yes. BUT I am not talking about using a cellphone. You expanded the conversation to human eye AFC and I regularly use 1.4 lenses at close distances and the a7iii with human eye detect RARELY misses.

. As I said I have done some extensive testing in my studio over the last week .

With an a7iii.....or any other recent Sony model? Even my a7rii does a decent job.

You are better off using back button focus lock

You can use BBF for eye detect on the recent a7xx models. That is how I shoot

and Caf tracking.

That is essentially what CeyeAf is. It just automatically hunts the eye instead of you having to isolate it. On the recent Sony models it is just faster than me to identify, very accurate, and tracks tenaciously

For half body shots and head and shoulders.

You know not all cameras operate the same way right.........

Don

Don

Sigh.......

-- hide signature --

Olympus EM5mk2 ,EM1mk2
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1

 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
Donald B
Donald B Forum Pro • Posts: 13,479
Re: I don't use Olympus anymore .......well occasionally

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

Good marketing. Concidering all face and eye detect are pdaf the camera is going to focus on the closest part of t h e animal anyway.guess which part of that's going to be

No. It actually attempts to focus on the eye. Nothing else. In practice it can fail. Have you used it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=sony+animal+eye+af&oq=sony+animal+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0l2j69i60l2.8476j0j9&client=ms-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Don

You wouldn’t no what it was focusing on because the dof on the dog was in front of the eye.

What are you going on about? Depends on the dog and angles

The eye wasn’t in the center of the focus plane. Good PDAF though.

I have no idea which article or video you are commenting on because there were many inn that link.

I ve done a lot of reading and testing my own system. And eye detect is a big con.

On YOUR system it may be. Same as the Z was recently heavily tested here and DPR explained the struggles. Sony's eye af has been used by hundreds or thousands of member here consistently over the years and is demonstrably accurate.

no it’s not. Didn’t you see the a74 tests was miles out.

Yes. I cannot answer that one. The errors I saw were a pre release body and prerelease lens. I would "assume" firmware but don't know

Yes. AsAs I said go do some serious testing and you will figure it out

I have. I own an a7iii and a7rii. I made a dummy rig and purposefully set the eyeball an inch back from the "eyelashes" . Consistently the camera would focus on the PUPIL in AF-c. FWIW it focused on the eyelash in AF-s. I only ran the test one time so why the AF-s failed I couldn't gather. I also didn't care because I don't shoot dummy heads. I shoot humans and use

i came to the same conclusion as you on my Olympus. It couldn’t face or eye detect using saf only caf. I rang Olympus and they told me that face and eye detect use PDAF only. And my camera wasn’t  applyinglens correction. It was miles out until I did a lens adjustment and used caf face detect. The other night it worked flawlessly taking 500 full body portraits. Olympus still haven’t got back to me so it’s interesting you have the same problem as I had.

Don

I h.dofof plays a big part of the con .and PDAF is go into focus on the closest eye anyway when a face is turned. It’s about as funny as someone the other day posting that his phone has great face detect on a full body portrait lol . Of coarse it did because the dof is 10 feet

Yes. BUT I am not talking about using a cellphone. You expanded the conversation to human eye AFC and I regularly use 1.4 lenses at close distances and the a7iii with human eye detect RARELY misses.

. As I said I have done some extensive testing in my studio over the last week .

With an a7iii.....or any other recent Sony model? Even my a7rii does a decent job.

You are better off using back button focus lock

You can use BBF for eye detect on the recent a7xx models. That is how I shoot

and Caf tracking.

That is essentially what CeyeAf is. It just automatically hunts the eye instead of you having to isolate it. On the recent Sony models it is just faster than me to identify, very accurate, and tracks tenaciously

For half body shots and head and shoulders.

You know not all cameras operate the same way right.........

Don

Don

Sigh.......

-- hide signature --

Olympus EM5mk2 ,EM1mk2
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1

Donald B
Donald B Forum Pro • Posts: 13,479
Re: I don't use Olympus anymore .......well occasionally

Donald B wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

golfhov wrote:

Donald B wrote:

Good marketing. Concidering all face and eye detect are pdaf the camera is going to focus on the closest part of t h e animal anyway.guess which part of that's going to be

No. It actually attempts to focus on the eye. Nothing else. In practice it can fail. Have you used it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=sony+animal+eye+af&oq=sony+animal+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0l2j69i60l2.8476j0j9&client=ms-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Don

You wouldn’t no what it was focusing on because the dof on the dog was in front of the eye.

What are you going on about? Depends on the dog and angles

The eye wasn’t in the center of the focus plane. Good PDAF though.

I have no idea which article or video you are commenting on because there were many inn that link.

I ve done a lot of reading and testing my own system. And eye detect is a big con.

On YOUR system it may be. Same as the Z was recently heavily tested here and DPR explained the struggles. Sony's eye af has been used by hundreds or thousands of member here consistently over the years and is demonstrably accurate.

no it’s not. Didn’t you see the a74 tests was miles out.

Yes. I cannot answer that one. The errors I saw were a pre release body and prerelease lens. I would "assume" firmware but don't know

Yes. AsAs I said go do some serious testing and you will figure it out

I have. I own an a7iii and a7rii. I made a dummy rig and purposefully set the eyeball an inch back from the "eyelashes" . Consistently the camera would focus on the PUPIL in AF-c. FWIW it focused on the eyelash in AF-s. I only ran the test one time so why the AF-s failed I couldn't gather. I also didn't care because I don't shoot dummy heads. I shoot humans and use

i came to the same conclusion as you on my Olympus. It couldn’t face or eye detect using saf only caf. I rang Olympus and they told me that face and eye detect use PDAF only. And my camera wasn’t applyinglens correction. It was miles out until I did a lens adjustment and used caf face detect. The other night it worked flawlessly taking 500 full body portraits. Olympus still haven’t got back to me so it’s interesting you have the same problem as I had.

Don

I h.dofof plays a big part of the con .and PDAF is go into focus on the closest eye anyway when a face is turned. It’s about as funny as someone the other day posting that his phone has great face detect on a full body portrait lol . Of coarse it did because the dof is 10 feet

Yes. BUT I am not talking about using a cellphone. You expanded the conversation to human eye AFC and I regularly use 1.4 lenses at close distances and the a7iii with human eye detect RARELY misses.

. As I said I have done some extensive testing in my studio over the last week .

With an a7iii.....or any other recent Sony model? Even my a7rii does a decent job.

You are better off using back button focus lock

You can use BBF for eye detect on the recent a7xx models. That is how I shoot

and Caf tracking.

That is essentially what CeyeAf is. It just automatically hunts the eye instead of you having to isolate it. On the recent Sony models it is just faster than me to identify, very accurate, and tracks tenaciously

For half body shots and head and shoulders.

You know not all cameras operate the same way right.........

Don

Don

Sigh.......

i will keep you posted “if” they get back to me.

Don

-- hide signature --

Olympus EM5mk2 ,EM1mk2
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1 em5mk1

tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 43,861
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

I used to make the same argument relative to sensor resolution but when I did some fine art photographers who print 24x36 and larger photos claimed they need all the resolution they can get because people would stare at their photographs at distances of a foot or so in an effort to find details. I know I do it myself when I see large photos at shows and I have seen others do it as well. It seems the larger the photo the closer people tend to get. Another consideration is the tendency of people to view photos at 100% on their computer screens for the same reason. It's fun to pick out details in the photo.

-- 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 Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +10 more
Chikubi
Chikubi Senior Member • Posts: 1,886
Re: Animal Eye AF

tbcass wrote:

I used to make the same argument relative to sensor resolution but when I did some fine art photographers who print 24x36 and larger photos claimed they need all the resolution they can get because people would stare at their photographs at distances of a foot or so in an effort to find details. I know I do it myself when I see large photos at shows and I have seen others do it as well. It seems the larger the photo the closer people tend to get. Another consideration is the tendency of people to view photos at 100% on their computer screens for the same reason. It's fun to pick out details in the photo.

That's a fair enough point. I was mostly thinking along my own experience because my main print size is close to what you had chosen, but now that you mention it I have also seen the tendency for people to get up close to really large prints. In 2012, I attended a show at the University of Chicago of work by Dawoud Bey where most of the prints were from large format film and were printed very large - like 4-5' on the long side - and I admit that getting up close to them made a world of difference in the impact they had on me. I had seen some of them online previously and wasn't really blown away, but in person it was another thing altogether.

From an article about the show: http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/reviews/velez/dawoud-bey-5-18-12.asp

If you like detail, and also a bit of cinematic surrealism, you might like the work of Gregory Crewdson if you don't already know it. He lives for massive amounts of detail, his prints are huge typically, and alot of the fun is looking through them to pick out fine details he includes despite the overall theme of the image itself being interesting in its own right. Also, if you like history, take a look at shorpy.com if you have never checked it out. Lots of hi-res scans of turn-of-the-century 8x10 plates and later medium format images as well. Tons of of detail and the clarity almost makes you feel like you're there in person. Much fun to be had.

tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 43,861
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

Chikubi wrote:

That's a fair enough point. I was mostly thinking along my own experience because my main print size is close to what you had chosen, but now that you mention it I have also seen the tendency for people to get up close to really large prints.

I chose that size because it's between average and very large prints.

In 2012, I attended a show at the University of Chicago of work by Dawoud Bey where most of the prints were from large format film and were printed very large - like 4-5' on the long side - and I admit that getting up close to them made a world of difference in the impact they had on me. I had seen some of them online previously and wasn't really blown away, but in person it was another thing altogether.

Nothing can compete with the impact of huge prints and that includes large high res screens, at least for me. I can imagine others might feel differently.

If you like detail, and also a bit of cinematic surrealism, you might like the work of Gregory Crewdson if you don't already know it. He lives for massive amounts of detail, his prints are huge typically, and a lot of the fun is looking through them to pick out fine details he includes despite the overall theme of the image itself being interesting in its own right. Also, if you like history, take a look at shorpy.com if you have never checked it out. Lots of hi-res scans of turn-of-the-century 8x10 plates and later medium format images as well. Tons of of detail and the clarity almost makes you feel like you're there in person. Much fun to be had.

Thanks for that info.

-- 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 Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +10 more
(unknown member) Forum Member • Posts: 78
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

ZX11 wrote:

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!"

Some good observations there.

Canon would like nothing more than for people to "determine the best camera by the megapixel number printed on the body." After all, that's why they released the 5DSR (if we're being honest, apart from MP, what did that camera have going for it?), and are now leaking rumors of an upcoming +80MP body.

J A C S
J A C S Forum Pro • Posts: 15,060
Re: Animal Eye AF

Nutty Lutty wrote:

ZX11 wrote:

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!"

Some good observations there.

Canon would like nothing more than for people to "determine the best camera by the megapixel number printed on the body." After all, that's why they released the 5DSR (if we're being honest, apart from MP, what did that camera have going for it?), and are now leaking rumors of an upcoming +80MP body.

Yeah, the 5DSR became a market hit...

tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 43,861
Re: Animal Eye AF
1

Nutty Lutty wrote:

Canon would like nothing more than for people to "determine the best camera by the megapixel number printed on the body." After all, that's why they released the 5DSR (if we're being honest, apart from MP, what did that camera have going for it?), and are now leaking rumors of an upcoming +80MP body.

Touche'

-- 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 Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +10 more
JoseCar New Member • Posts: 2
Re: two second is not fast

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

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads