Stacked Sensor the only way to improve AF?

[ghostfox_1]

X-type AF sensors are desperately needed in these FF bodies.

Why?

 

[Droster]

Canon, for example, has clearly not needed stacked sensors to have vastly improved AF in their two new sub-$1500 models. So maybe it's just about the programming, and not so much about the sensor tech?

I think you have a point. It wouldn't surprise me if the Z6/7 with "proper" firmware could do a significantly better job on eye-AF. I use a Z6 and basically don't use eye-AF at all. I get a very high hit rate with single point focus and "focus a recompose". I get that if your subject is moving that won't work so well, but for static portraits it works great.

I also have the bottom of the line Z5 full frame camera and eye focus works great, near perfect, for still non moving portraits in decent to good lighting, 1 person at a time and group portraits. I don't use Z5 for sports or fast moving subjects. For those and events, I use the Z9.

This is interesting. I have seen other posts on the 'Z' eye-AF issue and it seems different people have very different experiences. Not sure why this is, could it be it depends on the lighting, age or other factors of different subjects?...type of lighiting? no idea.

I will ask you this, since you have both the Z5 and Z9, how would you compare their eye-AF performance for non-moving subjects (e.g. portraits). My experience is with a Z6 with latest firmware and it is near unusable. Even if the little yellow box finds the subject's eye, many times (maybe most times) the eye will not be in focus. That has been my experience.

I have the Z6, Z6ii and Z9 and even with the Z9 eye-AF will still not nail focus every time. In fact it's going to be ever so slightly off more often than nailing absolute focus but because everything is still in the depth of field range of acceptable focus, it'll still work.

But for moving subjects the Z9 is two shoulders and three heads above the Z6/ii. There's no contest.

So yes the processor and software algorithms matter and the hardware needs to be good enough to support the software. Last gen hardware is incredibly mediocre.

 

[Laqup]

I will ask you this, since you have both the Z5 and Z9, how would you compare their eye-AF performance for non-moving subjects (e.g. portraits). My experience is with a Z6 with latest firmware and it is near unusable. Even if the little yellow box finds the subject's eye, many times (maybe most times) the eye will not be in focus. That has been my experience.

If this happens with various people and lenses then it is definitively a "you" issue. E.g. due to shooting humans with shutters speeds below 1/125s or other crazy settings (like handheld AF-S at f/1.2 only). If you are always using the same lens, maybe there is the issue.

I am the first one to flame the Z5/Z6/Z7 for their lousy AF speed, but the actual accuracy on static subjects is far from "unuseable" but actually pretty decent. The Z5/Z6/Z7 (II) are not really fun on moving targets due to the missing speed though.

If you are using proper settings, please share some examples.

 

[Fullframer]

Canon, for example, has clearly not needed stacked sensors to have vastly improved AF in their two new sub-$1500 models. So maybe it's just about the programming, and not so much about the sensor tech?

I think you have a point. It wouldn't surprise me if the Z6/7 with "proper" firmware could do a significantly better job on eye-AF. I use a Z6 and basically don't use eye-AF at all. I get a very high hit rate with single point focus and "focus a recompose". I get that if your subject is moving that won't work so well, but for static portraits it works great.

I also have the bottom of the line Z5 full frame camera and eye focus works great, near perfect, for still non moving portraits in decent to good lighting, 1 person at a time and group portraits. I don't use Z5 for sports or fast moving subjects. For those and events, I use the Z9.

This is interesting. I have seen other posts on the 'Z' eye-AF issue and it seems different people have very different experiences. Not sure why this is, could it be it depends on the lighting, age or other factors of different subjects?...type of lighiting? no idea.

today had 630pm photo shoot. Golden hour. Was using Z5 for still portraits. Eye focus worked well. I have latest firmware on my camera. Not sure if
That helps? I wa Salei
Using the Z9 at same
Time. Z9 focuses faster. But Z5 nailed the shots.

I will ask you this, since you have both the Z5 and Z9, how would you compare their eye-AF performance for non-moving subjects (e.g. portraits). My experience is with a Z6 with latest firmware and it is near unusable. Even if the little yellow box finds the subject's eye, many times (maybe most times) the eye will not be in focus. That has been my experience.

 

[wcan]

I will ask you this, since you have both the Z5 and Z9, how would you compare their eye-AF performance for non-moving subjects (e.g. portraits). My experience is with a Z6 with latest firmware and it is near unusable. Even if the little yellow box finds the subject's eye, many times (maybe most times) the eye will not be in focus. That has been my experience.

If this happens with various people and lenses then it is definitively a "you" issue. E.g. due to shooting humans with shutters speeds below 1/125s or other crazy settings (like handheld AF-S at f/1.2 only). If you are always using the same lens, maybe there is the issue.

I am the first one to flame the Z5/Z6/Z7 for their lousy AF speed, but the actual accuracy on static subjects is far from "unuseable" but actually pretty decent. The Z5/Z6/Z7 (II) are not really fun on moving targets due to the missing speed though.

If you are using proper settings, please share some examples.

Well I was using strobes and my shutter speed was 1/200th, opening f/8. When I used eye-AF, terrible results. When I used single point AF....flawless. It was an adapted Canon lens, but since it worked fine with single point AF, seems like it should have worked with eye-AF as well.

 

[Fullframer]

I will ask you this, since you have both the Z5 and Z9, how would you compare their eye-AF performance for non-moving subjects (e.g. portraits). My experience is with a Z6 with latest firmware and it is near unusable. Even if the little yellow box finds the subject's eye, many times (maybe most times) the eye will not be in focus. That has been my experience.

If this happens with various people and lenses then it is definitively a "you" issue. E.g. due to shooting humans with shutters speeds below 1/125s

True.

or other crazy settings (like handheld AF-S at f/1.2 only). If you are always using the same lens, maybe there is the issue.

I shoot handheld, the 85mm F1.8 S wide open at F1.8, the eye AF works well on my base Z5 body. Humans at 1/100th second. During a photo shoot today at 645pm, golden hour. Tack sharp, great results.

I am the first one to flame the Z5/Z6/Z7 for their lousy AF speed, but the actual accuracy on static subjects is far from "unuseable" but actually pretty decent. The Z5/Z6/Z7 (II) are not really fun on moving targets due to the missing speed though.

If you are using proper settings, please share some examples.

 

[Terrible Photographer]

X-type AF sensors are desperately needed in these FF bodies.

Why?

Because having sensors that only see one axis of detail creates alot of false positives, or even scenarios where the camera can't lock at all, so you have tilt the body to get a lock. It's actually super frustrating, especially when shooting in really dark situations.

 

[astirusty]

Regardless of how it is done, I think we can all agree improved AF is needed. Okay, maybe owners of Z9 disagree.

 

[vtpeters]

According to pcmag.com:

<snip>... We've seen some cameras hit 30fps (the Sony a1), and the Nikon Z 9 manages 11MP photos at 120fps because of its stacked chip and dual processors. </snip>

The Z9 has, to my knowledge, no dual processors. It only has one EXPEED 7 processor (the Z6/Z7 mark II models have dual processors of the previous generation).

 

[ghostfox_1]

X-type AF sensors are desperately needed in these FF bodies.

Why?

Because having sensors that only see one axis of detail creates alot of false positives, or even scenarios where the camera can't lock at all, so you have tilt the body to get a lock. It's actually super frustrating, especially when shooting in really dark situations.

Does it though? The machine learning handles things pretty well, and unless you're shooting a subject with no contrast and literally 0 vertical detail the af system will find something.

That generally goes for the z7 I used, and my z9, though I never shot in absolutely pitch black conditions (astro aside, but that's manual focus).

I think long term we'll get them, but I'm not sure they're "desperately needed" by any stretch. If they were, you'd think Canon or Sony would have them by now.

 

[ghostfox_1]

According to pcmag.com:

... We've seen some cameras hit 30fps (the Sony a1), and the Nikon Z 9 manages 11MP photos at 120fps because of its stacked chip and dual processors.

The Z9 has, to my knowledge, no dual processors. It only has one EXPEED 7 processor (the Z6/Z7 mark II models have dual processors of the previous generation).

You're correct.

 

[Fullframer]

Regardless of how it is done, I think we can all agree improved AF is needed. Okay, maybe owners of Z9 disagree.

Yes. I have no problems on the Z9.

 

[Fullframer]

According to pcmag.com:

... We've seen some cameras hit 30fps (the Sony a1), and the Nikon Z 9 manages 11MP photos at 120fps because of its stacked chip and dual processors.

The Z9 has, to my knowledge, no dual processors. It only has one EXPEED 7 processor (the Z6/Z7 mark II models have dual processors of the previous generation).

Z9 has EXPEED 7. The most powerful Nikon processing engine ever. 10x faster than Z7ii previous generations

Stacked sensor in Z9 Achieves the world’s fastest scanning speed, 12x faster data readout than the acclaimed Z 7II

 

[Restoc]

Yes !!

Z9 AF still cannot achieve some performances that olders DSLR AF can.

Just look at what Nikon says in its Z9 Reference Guide as limits of the Z9 AF ( hidden somewhere in the chapter troubleshootings and solutions)

As example try to focus on lines ( electric wire of horizontal branch wating a bird or any line paralle to the AF pixels lines : null chance)

Second example : try to focus on a bird through a little hole beetween branches using the smallest and accurate Single focus point or 3D pioint and compare with what the D850 can achieve in term of accuracy (smallest focus surface non troubled by surounding context or foreground) .

Z9 with medium-long lenses remains sticked very frequently on the back ground without any hope to come back for focusing on the point you want under the properly and stabilized red focus square you place carefully on a smaller subject.

All of these are only due to the lower capability of OSPDAF technology.

So lets hope Nikon will renew with its own AF inventive designs rather to follow only Sony ( or Canon) sensors fashion.

 

[areallygrumpyoldsod]

Regardless of how it is done, I think we can all agree improved AF is needed. Okay, maybe owners of Z9 disagree.

Yes. I have no problems on the Z9.

Nor me and I have two Z9.

 

[ghostfox_1]

Yes !!

Z9 AF still cannot achieve some performances that olders DSLR AF can.

Just look at what Nikon says in its Z9 Reference Guide as limits of the Z9 AF ( hidden somewhere in the chapter troubleshootings and solutions)

As example try to focus on lines ( electric wire of horizontal branch wating a bird or any line paralle to the AF pixels lines : null chance)

Well, yes, if your subject has literally 0 horizontal detail, but this never happens in the real world (and if it does, I'd love to see examples). Even branches have some. I never had this problem with my 7 or 9 in real world use.

Second example : try to focus on a bird through a little hole beetween branches using the smallest and accurate Single focus point or 3D pioint and compare with what the D850 can achieve in term of accuracy (smallest focus surface non troubled by surounding context or foreground) .

I have. It works fine, and did with my z7 as well. The issue is being steady enough to keep the af point on it.

Z9 with medium-long lenses remains sticked very frequently on the back ground without any hope to come back for focusing on the point you want under the properly and stabilized red focus square you place carefully on a smaller subject.

Very rarely, and usually only if your subject has 0 contrast and the background has a lot and you're way off focus in the first place.

All of these are only due to the lower capability of OSPDAF technology.

No. They're mostly user side issues.

So lets hope Nikon will renew with its own AF inventive designs rather to follow only Sony ( or Canon) sensors fashion.

But Sony and Canon either have these same problems, at which point you should mention it, or they don't, which means the tech is fundamentally solid. Which is it?

 

[areallygrumpyoldsod]

Yes !!

Z9 AF still cannot achieve some performances that olders DSLR AF can.

Just look at what Nikon says in its Z9 Reference Guide as limits of the Z9 AF ( hidden somewhere in the chapter troubleshootings and solutions)

As example try to focus on lines ( electric wire of horizontal branch wating a bird or any line paralle to the AF pixels lines : null chance)

Well, yes, if your subject has literally 0 horizontal detail, but this never happens in the real world (and if it does, I'd love to see examples). Even branches have some. I never had this problem with my 7 or 9 in real world use.

Second example : try to focus on a bird through a little hole beetween branches using the smallest and accurate Single focus point or 3D pioint and compare with what the D850 can achieve in term of accuracy (smallest focus surface non troubled by surounding context or foreground) .

I have. It works fine, and did with my z7 as well. The issue is being steady enough to keep the af point on it.

Z9 with medium-long lenses remains sticked very frequently on the back ground without any hope to come back for focusing on the point you want under the properly and stabilized red focus square you place carefully on a smaller subject.

Very rarely, and usually only if your subject has 0 contrast and the background has a lot and you're way off focus in the first place.

All of these are only due to the lower capability of OSPDAF technology.

No. They're mostly user side issues.

So lets hope Nikon will renew with its own AF inventive designs rather to follow only Sony ( or Canon) sensors fashion.

But Sony and Canon either have these same problems, at which point you should mention it, or they don't, which means the tech is fundamentally solid. Which is it?

The disadvantages of Mirrorless AF over DSLR are vastly overplayed and overwhelmed by the advantages -- not least of which is 3D-tracking with Subject Detection, almost full sensor coverage and the large array of choices one can access immediately via programmable FN buttons.

Folk REALLY should try using a Z9 in pin-point or starlight AF modes if they really want to see how accurate AF-S can be.

Focus Peaking and 100% zoom are also huge steps forward.

I shot wildlife, action, spots and aviation with D6/D5, D850 and most of the prior Single Digit and 8xx Nikon DSLR pro/semi-pro bodies AND now do 5-10x better with my pair of Z9. My prime target while on Safari are big cats who are most active in very low light and I have had no issues with AF and the fact one can immediately adapt if , for example, high grass is blocking AF, by simply pressing a FN button with an alternative Af-mode + AF-ON assigned as a role to the button -- most certainly not possible with DSLRs.