Fuji AF communication (not performance!)

[gumert]

Hi All,

15 year hobbiest on-again-off-again shooter here. I started with a D40 that I did some traveling (landscapes or portraits of well behaved adults) with, upgraded to a D5300 that I did some traveling and racing with (landscapes, portraits of well behaved adults, race cars), had kids/took some time off, bought a used J5 about 6 months ago that's lived the family photo life (landscapes, portraits of spastic animals children), and now I'm trying to figure out what's next. I was initially considering FF, so I bought a used Z6II and A7III with the intent of A/Bing the two and selling the one I didn't like.

Along the way, I made three realizations:

• I rarely shoot above ISO 2000, so I don't need the size/weight penalty of FF gear. If I'm going to go APS-C, I would rather go with a company that doesn't make FF gear, since it's almost inevitable that some FF glass will wind up on a Sony/Cannon/Nikon APS-C body because of lack of APS-C glass or lower quality APS-C glass relative to FF glass for those brands (see: the FF lenses I have for my D5300)
• The Z6II has great hand feel, the A7III not so much
• The A7III does a great job communicating what it is focusing on. Yes, its AF system is generally pretty good, but it also does a good job of telling me when I need to intervene (switch focus modes, re-engage tracking, whatever)

Here's what I'm talking about in terms of the A7III communicating what it is/isn't focused on. These are A7Info screen shots that look very similar to what you see when shooting (green AF boxes if you're not looking at an eye/face). The red target is rendered by A7info and shows the "true" focus target.


Green focus boxes = where the camera was focused. Look, it's in focus!


Like above, green focus boxes = where the camera was focused. Sadly, they're not on my intended subject, but I'm the one to blame for not paying enough attention when I was still new to the camera

The bottom line on the A7III: if it says something is in focus, it's in focus 99% of the time.

On the other hand, here's the Z6II


Focus box in focus!

[ATTACH alt=""I see an eye!" - Z6II. It's not in focus and the camera let me take the shot even with the shutter release in focus priority"]3392421[/ATTACH]
"I see an eye!" - Z6II. It's not in focus and the camera let me take the shot even with the shutter release in focus priority




Forward focused (see the sharp fingers on the messy counter?)




Forward focused in reasonable light



I've done some poking around in Fuji land and it seems that the consensus is that the AF has improved with the X-T5/X-H2/X-H2s, but it's still not on par with Sony/Canon.

Ultimately, I'm OK with not as good face/eye detect and tracking as long as Fuji bodies don't offer false positives like the Z6II.

What are your experiences?

 

[Nokiron]

Hi All,

15 year hobbiest on-again-off-again shooter here. I started with a D40 that I did some traveling (landscapes or portraits of well behaved adults) with, upgraded to a D5300 that I did some traveling and racing with (landscapes, portraits of well behaved adults, race cars), had kids/took some time off, bought a used J5 about 6 months ago that's lived the family photo life (landscapes, portraits of spastic animals children), and now I'm trying to figure out what's next. I was initially considering FF, so I bought a used Z6II and A7III with the intent of A/Bing the two and selling the one I didn't like.

Just trying to figure out why you chose the Z6II and the much older A7III, why not the A7IV? Was that not available for your budget? It's a drastic difference and they have changed the body quite a lot since the A7III.

For the rest of the thread, it sounds like it would be just fine with an X-H2s. Even if Sony is still the best "point in a direction and get what you want in focus" kind of body you will probably be close enough with an X-H2s, especially since you can burst a couple of photos with that stacked sensor (provided you want to sort and delete all the additional photos).

It seems like there is some issues with false positives on the newer Fuji bodies, but it seems like that's in the more extreme situations. There is nothing really conclusive yet.

A bonus with the Fuji is all the nice compact lenses that are available. Just make sure you pick the ones with linear motors that can keep up with the X-H2s.

 

[gumert]

Hi All,

15 year hobbiest on-again-off-again shooter here. I started with a D40 that I did some traveling (landscapes or portraits of well behaved adults) with, upgraded to a D5300 that I did some traveling and racing with (landscapes, portraits of well behaved adults, race cars), had kids/took some time off, bought a used J5 about 6 months ago that's lived the family photo life (landscapes, portraits of spastic animals children), and now I'm trying to figure out what's next. I was initially considering FF, so I bought a used Z6II and A7III with the intent of A/Bing the two and selling the one I didn't like.

Just trying to figure out why you chose the Z6II and the much older A7III, why not the A7IV? Was that not available for your budget? It's a drastic difference and they have changed the body quite a lot since the A7III.

Yup - budget. I'm more of a stills person than a video person and the changes in stills land didn't justify the extra $500 new. If you're willing to go used, you can get a used A7III for quite a bit less than a IV. I would rather spend that money on glass if/when I decide to commit to the system.

For the rest of the thread, it sounds like it would be just fine with an X-H2s. Even if Sony is still the best "point in a direction and get what you want in focus" kind of body you will probably be close enough with an X-H2s, especially since you can burst a couple of photos with that stacked sensor (provided you want to sort and delete all the additional photos).

I was mulling over an X-H2s. From what I've read/watched, the X-T5 and the X-H2 have the same AF system, but the X-H2s is better. I'm just not really sure how much better the X-H2s is?

If I can avoid culling I'll be happy, but sometimes it's helpful to get the right pose/expression. I don't want to have to take extra shots to ensure I have good focus though.

From my experience with the A7III, I would call it "focuses where it says it is focused." It will choose the right subject most of the time when left to its own devices, especially if your subject is a person and they're looking at you, but I found myself having to tell it where to focus a decent amount today due to having a lot of stuff in frame in front of eyes/faces, shooting the side and back of my kids' heads, etc. Thanks to the AF system telling me where it was trying to focus, it was easy to know when I needed to jump in and I didn't miss any shots.


Not the most amazing photo in the world, but no clear eyes/faces are in frame either

On the Z6II side, you get better face/eye detection if you use wide-l, which means you're going to be actively involved in AF activities most of the time. However, the body doesn't do a great job of confirming what's in focus, so I found myself taking more shots to avoid missing something.

It seems like there is some issues with false positives on the newer Fuji bodies, but it seems like that's in the more extreme situations. There is nothing really conclusive yet.

Boo. False positives are the bane of my existence in Nikon land. I'm thinking I'll rent a Fuji or two in mid to late January to take it for a test drive.

A bonus with the Fuji is all the nice compact lenses that are available. Just make sure you pick the ones with linear motors that can keep up with the X-H2s.

Compact lenses would be nice, especially since I've found myself liking wide/fast lenses (35mm f/1.4), which are big in the FF world. The lens I have on the Z6II is quite a bit faster to focus than the lenses I have for the A7III, but that's not really my problem.

My most used lens on my D5300 was a 70-300. The FF equivalent is quite a bit larger.

 

[Nokiron]

Hi All,

15 year hobbiest on-again-off-again shooter here. I started with a D40 that I did some traveling (landscapes or portraits of well behaved adults) with, upgraded to a D5300 that I did some traveling and racing with (landscapes, portraits of well behaved adults, race cars), had kids/took some time off, bought a used J5 about 6 months ago that's lived the family photo life (landscapes, portraits of spastic animals children), and now I'm trying to figure out what's next. I was initially considering FF, so I bought a used Z6II and A7III with the intent of A/Bing the two and selling the one I didn't like.

Just trying to figure out why you chose the Z6II and the much older A7III, why not the A7IV? Was that not available for your budget? It's a drastic difference and they have changed the body quite a lot since the A7III.

Yup - budget. I'm more of a stills person than a video person and the changes in stills land didn't justify the extra $500 new. If you're willing to go used, you can get a used A7III for quite a bit less than a IV. I would rather spend that money on glass if/when I decide to commit to the system.

I was just thinking that the extra $500 for that peace of mind that you will never have the problem you are describing in this thread seems very much worth it.

For the rest of the thread, it sounds like it would be just fine with an X-H2s. Even if Sony is still the best "point in a direction and get what you want in focus" kind of body you will probably be close enough with an X-H2s, especially since you can burst a couple of photos with that stacked sensor (provided you want to sort and delete all the additional photos).

I was mulling over an X-H2s. From what I've read/watched, the X-T5 and the X-H2 have the same AF system, but the X-H2s is better. I'm just not really sure how much better the X-H2s is?

Quite a lot, the stacked sensor really helps with the readout.

It seems like there is some issues with false positives on the newer Fuji bodies, but it seems like that's in the more extreme situations. There is nothing really conclusive yet.

Boo. False positives are the bane of my existence in Nikon land. I'm thinking I'll rent a Fuji or two in mid to late January to take it for a test drive.

It's still early days, but there will hopefully be an update or two that addresses the issues. If you would like to watch a video, this one demonstrate the issues. The X-H2s performs better but it's not totally unsimilar.

A bonus with the Fuji is all the nice compact lenses that are available. Just make sure you pick the ones with linear motors that can keep up with the X-H2s.

Compact lenses would be nice, especially since I've found myself liking wide/fast lenses (35mm f/1.4), which are big in the FF world. The lens I have on the Z6II is quite a bit faster to focus than the lenses I have for the A7III, but that's not really my problem.

My most used lens on my D5300 was a 70-300. The FF equivalent is quite a bit larger.

The small 16F2.8, 23F2, 35F2 and 50F2 are pretty fantastic.

 

[Powerdoc]

Hi All,

15 year hobbiest on-again-off-again shooter here. I started with a D40 that I did some traveling (landscapes or portraits of well behaved adults) with, upgraded to a D5300 that I did some traveling and racing with (landscapes, portraits of well behaved adults, race cars), had kids/took some time off, bought a used J5 about 6 months ago that's lived the family photo life (landscapes, portraits of spastic animals children), and now I'm trying to figure out what's next. I was initially considering FF, so I bought a used Z6II and A7III with the intent of A/Bing the two and selling the one I didn't like.

Along the way, I made three realizations:

• I rarely shoot above ISO 2000, so I don't need the size/weight penalty of FF gear. If I'm going to go APS-C, I would rather go with a company that doesn't make FF gear, since it's almost inevitable that some FF glass will wind up on a Sony/Cannon/Nikon APS-C body because of lack of APS-C glass or lower quality APS-C glass relative to FF glass for those brands (see: the FF lenses I have for my D5300)
• The Z6II has great hand feel, the A7III not so much
• The A7III does a great job communicating what it is focusing on. Yes, its AF system is generally pretty good, but it also does a good job of telling me when I need to intervene (switch focus modes, re-engage tracking, whatever)

Here's what I'm talking about in terms of the A7III communicating what it is/isn't focused on. These are A7Info screen shots that look very similar to what you see when shooting (green AF boxes if you're not looking at an eye/face). The red target is rendered by A7info and shows the "true" focus target.


Green focus boxes = where the camera was focused. Look, it's in focus!


Like above, green focus boxes = where the camera was focused. Sadly, they're not on my intended subject, but I'm the one to blame for not paying enough attention when I was still new to the camera

The bottom line on the A7III: if it says something is in focus, it's in focus 99% of the time.

On the other hand, here's the Z6II


Focus box in focus!

[ATTACH alt=""I see an eye!" - Z6II. It's not in focus and the camera let me take the shot even with the shutter release in focus priority"]3392421[/ATTACH]
"I see an eye!" - Z6II. It's not in focus and the camera let me take the shot even with the shutter release in focus priority


Forward focused (see the sharp fingers on the messy counter?)


Forward focused in reasonable light

I've done some poking around in Fuji land and it seems that the consensus is that the AF has improved with the X-T5/X-H2/X-H2s, but it's still not on par with Sony/Canon.

Ultimately, I'm OK with not as good face/eye detect and tracking as long as Fuji bodies don't offer false positives like the Z6II.

What are your experiences?

My experience , is that I screwed many pictures . I tend to blame myself more than camera, and I move on to the next shot.

--
It's all about photography

 

[gumert]

I was just thinking that the extra $500 for that peace of mind that you will never have the problem you are describing in this thread seems very much worth it.

I don't intend the problem I'm describing to be related directly to subject. It's more about the camera communicating where it is/isn't focused. Here's a quick rundown of cameras I've owned.

D40/D5300: focused on their indicated AF point basically every time. I would hop between their whole sensor (let the camera choose) and single point (I choose) AF modes as needed. Both bodies made it very obvious when I needed to switch AF modes.

Z6II: Eye/face aside, the Z6II doesn't do a great job of telling you what is/isn't in focus in any of its AF modes. It generally doesn't miss in single point, but I don't want to have to run a modern mirrorless camera in single point AF all the time. The Z6II just doesn't give me a blatant indicator that I need to switch from whole sensor to a zone or to single point.

A7III: like the D40/D5300, it's focused where it says it is basically every time. Its face/eye detect is nice, but it's only really helpful for half the shots I take. I tend to start in whole sensor AF, then go to zone if the camera isn't focusing where I want, then finally go to Sony's single pointish AF mode (flexible spot). There are no surprises.

I was mulling over an X-H2s. From what I've read/watched, the X-T5 and the X-H2 have the same AF system, but the X-H2s is better. I'm just not really sure how much better the X-H2s is?

Quite a lot, the stacked sensor really helps with the readout.

Oh, I see - faster readout could potentially create a more reactive AF system.

The small 16F2.8, 23F2, 35F2 and 50F2 are pretty fantastic.

Even the 23 f/1.4 is (nearly) half the size of the 35mm f/1.4 I use most often with the A7III.

Powerdoc, post: 66721135, member: 1922618"]
My experience , is that I screwed many pictures . I tend to blame myself more than camera, and I move on to the next shot.

On my D40/D5300 and the A7III, I agree 100%. If I missed a shot, it's on me. I'm not sure that I feel that way about the Z6II. Sure, I could use it in single point AF mode all the time, but...

[/QUOTE]