Nikon Z AF

link

Ghostfox1
Members 61 posts
May 7, 2023, 4:34 p.m. May 7, 2023, 4:34 p.m.
link
@BurnImage has written:

@Ghostfox1 has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@Ghostfox1 has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@Ghostfox1 has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@Ghostfox1 has written:

@Dibyendu has written:

Btw after almost 200 posts, the information content of this thread can be summarized as follows:

Z6/Z7 cameras have trouble with eye focusing in low light (credit Felbo)

Z7 has trouble at F9 in studio conditions (credit AnotherMike)

Sony A9 has aperture drive that helps in low light conditions by keeping aperture open during focusing (credit BurnImage)

Mind, no proof has been provided of these. It's all "but I've seen this".

At which point I'm happy to report people I know who shoot in the studio don't report the same issues with the z7s they use. So...

Good grief really? Legitimate grown up discussions have been held about low light AF such as in a studio at f8. Aperture drive mode on Sony has been discussed and debated as a solution provided by another brand. What proof do you want? Are you suggesting all that was made up and that Aperture drive mode on Sony does not exist?

Or is your mind simply closed to the possibility that sometimes another brand might have an implemented a solution to a particular requirement in a better way?

AKA.... Nikon is perfect and no other brand is ever better at something?

Here we go again, with you making up things I said.

I have seen no actual proof provided of these claims (regarding the Z6/7), and as I said I've heard evidence to the contrary to these claims, so if one is valid they both are. This would point to user error (as it is often the case).

I have never said nikon is perfect.

If you want to have an adult discussion, don't make things up.

OMG you have it bad don't you! Aperture Drive AF has been explained including its benefits. The usual Nikon shrill answer is to ignore all the facts, declare Nikon is infallible and then blame the user. I HAVE MADE NOTHING UP

Where did I say that's what I was pointing out? I explicitly said (if you could read, and comprehend what's in front of you, which you seem to struggle with) "regarding the z6/7".

Please point out where I said anything about the sony AF mode. I'll wait.

Also please point out where I said nikon was perfect. I'll still wait.

So what exactly is your point then, aside from having a meltdown if anyone points outs useful features on another brand? On this thread so far I've not seen you offer one useful tip about Z6/7. ALL you have done is batter anyone else who DARES to suggest alternative approaches.

My point is exactly what I said. No proof has been provided, and if we're going off word of mouth I know people who don't struggle with these same issues.

Given that you don't have nikon cameras anymore, and I don't have a z7 anymore, I can't offer specific setting advice and do testing to provide example images showing how and why you set something up incorrectly. You have also failed to provide images and settings showing where the camera failed to focus, so I can't provide any feedback there.

I'm doing what I always have, which is to show that making claims without proof is bad, given the abundance of evidence showing it can be done, and not allowing a brand to get bashed without pushback.

You also keep making claims you can't back up because they're made up, which sure activates the almonds. In other words, provide proof, or nobody should take you seriously.

So you're saying I have to provide "proof" to a legitimate question that was asked, backed up by more discussion with @AnotherMike and then discussed some more? What proof do you want? The Sony manual, or the missed shots I long since deleted because they were.....err missed???? Are we all liars by discussing tech? Did we have a meltdown like you? Did you provide images to prove you are right and we are wrong ( despite nobody having the faintest clue what your question is, let alone the answer)

Yes, that's how claims work. You provide objective evidence if you make the claim.

I've also seen multiple people claim the earth is flat, but that doesn't make it true. Note, to be absolutely clear since you have reading comprehension issues, I'm not claiming you believe the earth is flat.

I can happily link to any number of sources showing portraits with nikon z6/7s. Just go to flickr for example. You'll see tons. And given the average photographer on there is (likely) much less serious than you claim to be, I'm sure if they can do it, you can too.

I really am just wasting time on this though, because you're not actually here in good faith or to learn anything, and as you don't have the gear can't make any changes and do proper testing.
link

NoImage
Members 240 posts
May 7, 2023, 4:39 p.m. May 7, 2023, 4:39 p.m.
link
@Ghostfox1 has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@Ghostfox1 has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@Ghostfox1 has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@Ghostfox1 has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@Ghostfox1 has written:

@Dibyendu has written:

Btw after almost 200 posts, the information content of this thread can be summarized as follows:

Z6/Z7 cameras have trouble with eye focusing in low light (credit Felbo)

Z7 has trouble at F9 in studio conditions (credit AnotherMike)

Sony A9 has aperture drive that helps in low light conditions by keeping aperture open during focusing (credit BurnImage)

Mind, no proof has been provided of these. It's all "but I've seen this".

At which point I'm happy to report people I know who shoot in the studio don't report the same issues with the z7s they use. So...

Good grief really? Legitimate grown up discussions have been held about low light AF such as in a studio at f8. Aperture drive mode on Sony has been discussed and debated as a solution provided by another brand. What proof do you want? Are you suggesting all that was made up and that Aperture drive mode on Sony does not exist?

Or is your mind simply closed to the possibility that sometimes another brand might have an implemented a solution to a particular requirement in a better way?

AKA.... Nikon is perfect and no other brand is ever better at something?

Here we go again, with you making up things I said.

I have seen no actual proof provided of these claims (regarding the Z6/7), and as I said I've heard evidence to the contrary to these claims, so if one is valid they both are. This would point to user error (as it is often the case).

I have never said nikon is perfect.

If you want to have an adult discussion, don't make things up.

OMG you have it bad don't you! Aperture Drive AF has been explained including its benefits. The usual Nikon shrill answer is to ignore all the facts, declare Nikon is infallible and then blame the user. I HAVE MADE NOTHING UP

Where did I say that's what I was pointing out? I explicitly said (if you could read, and comprehend what's in front of you, which you seem to struggle with) "regarding the z6/7".

Please point out where I said anything about the sony AF mode. I'll wait.

Also please point out where I said nikon was perfect. I'll still wait.

So what exactly is your point then, aside from having a meltdown if anyone points outs useful features on another brand? On this thread so far I've not seen you offer one useful tip about Z6/7. ALL you have done is batter anyone else who DARES to suggest alternative approaches.

My point is exactly what I said. No proof has been provided, and if we're going off word of mouth I know people who don't struggle with these same issues.

Given that you don't have nikon cameras anymore, and I don't have a z7 anymore, I can't offer specific setting advice and do testing to provide example images showing how and why you set something up incorrectly. You have also failed to provide images and settings showing where the camera failed to focus, so I can't provide any feedback there.

I'm doing what I always have, which is to show that making claims without proof is bad, given the abundance of evidence showing it can be done, and not allowing a brand to get bashed without pushback.

You also keep making claims you can't back up because they're made up, which sure activates the almonds. In other words, provide proof, or nobody should take you seriously.

So you're saying I have to provide "proof" to a legitimate question that was asked, backed up by more discussion with @AnotherMike and then discussed some more? What proof do you want? The Sony manual, or the missed shots I long since deleted because they were.....err missed???? Are we all liars by discussing tech? Did we have a meltdown like you? Did you provide images to prove you are right and we are wrong ( despite nobody having the faintest clue what your question is, let alone the answer)

Yes, that's how claims work. You provide objective evidence if you make the claim.

I've also seen multiple people claim the earth is flat, but that doesn't make it true. Note, to be absolutely clear since you have reading comprehension issues, I'm not claiming you believe the earth is flat.

I can happily link to any number of sources showing portraits with nikon z6/7s. Just go to flickr for example. You'll see tons. And given the average photographer on there is (likely) much less serious than you claim to be, I'm sure if they can do it, you can too.

I really am just wasting time on this though, because you're not actually here in good faith or to learn anything, and as you don't have the gear can't make any changes and do proper testing.

Have you added anything constructive to this thread? NO
Are you bloating this thread with insults? YES
Are you watering down the useful content in this thread with a barrage of baseless insults? YES
You continually say you are wasting your time and are leaving this thread. PLEASE DO

PS If you STILL cannot grasp why the Z6/7 might suffer with AF at f8 through f11 in low key studio lighting you really need some lessons.
link

XRay
Members 159 posts

May 7, 2023, 4:41 p.m. May 7, 2023, 4:41 p.m.
link

@bobn2 has written:

@XRay has written:

Under controlled lighting conditions with strobes, you can achieve a.... how do I describe this... let's just say, an ultra clean, super detailed look, and it requires those smaller apertures.

I don't understand that, either. If 'ultra clean, super detailed' depends on lens performance, most lenses are operating at their best f/4-5.6, or sometimes lower for modern mirrorless lenses.

Yes, a lot of lenses peak in resolution before f8/f9. Some way before. The Sigma Art 40 peaks in resolution at around f2.8, yet smaller apertures give "the look".

I've thought about this topic a lot, and can't say that I've come to a conclusive answer. I think part of "the look" is from the strobes, to be more specific, from the flash duration, eliminating motion blur further than we are normally accustomed to. I think part of it is also something that falls into the realm of human visual perception. For example, for some shots, more of the subject being in sharp focus gives our brain the impression of "very sharp", "very detailed", even more so than if just some of the subject were sharper to an even higher degree.

I'd love more input on this. AnotherMike? BurnImage?
link

NoImage
Members 240 posts

May 7, 2023, 4:48 p.m. May 7, 2023, 4:48 p.m.
link

@XRay has written:

@bobn2 has written:

@XRay has written:

Under controlled lighting conditions with strobes, you can achieve a.... how do I describe this... let's just say, an ultra clean, super detailed look, and it requires those smaller apertures.

I don't understand that, either. If 'ultra clean, super detailed' depends on lens performance, most lenses are operating at their best f/4-5.6, or sometimes lower for modern mirrorless lenses.

Yes, a lot of lenses peak in resolution before f8/f9. Some way before. The Sigma Art 40 peaks in resolution at around f2.8, yet smaller apertures give "the look".

I've thought about this topic a lot, and can't say that I've come to a conclusive answer. I think part of "the look" is from the strobes, to be more specific, from the flash duration, eliminating motion blur further than we are normally accustomed to. I think part of it is also something that falls into the realm of human visual perception. For example, for some shots, more of the subject being in sharp focus gives our brain the impression of "very sharp", "very detailed", even more so than if just some of the subject were sharper to an even higher degree.

I'd love more input on this. AnotherMike? BurnImage?

My answer would be forget about your lens MTF and sharpest aperture in the studio. If your creative vision and/or client needs want front to back focus then stop down. Thats where the traditional f8 to f11 comes from and it's still valid today.

However, if you and/or your client want creative shallow dof then open up that aperture accordingly.

Don't even think about diffraction and the like. This is where sometimes tech specs get in the way of actual photography.

You are choosing the correct aperture for artistic intent, not the sharpest setting of your lens according to some review or personal tests.

If I have free reign and time on a shoot I tend to do a bit of both. Some safe shots at about f9 then open up to maybe even 1.4 and crack a few more off.

raythentic likes this.

favorite 1
link

Sagittarius
Members 689 posts

May 7, 2023, 5:14 p.m. May 7, 2023, 5:14 p.m.
link

@BurnImage has written:

@Sagittarius has written:

@BurnImage

@primeshooter has written:

My personal experience is such that the R5, beats the Z6/7 I and II variants so much so that it isn't even funny, the R5 wins hands down in every situation and is simpler to be in the correct AF mode, etc etc.

Do you think it is reasonable. I do not

I agree with his appraisal as it's factually correct. Maybe we could all learn to choose language that's more diplomatic and doesn't upset people on the other side of the argument (me included).

On that point, you are picking on one side of the argument and glossing over the vitriol of Nikon brand warriors firing even bigger missiles in the other direction (mostly based on emotion not facts).

You can't have it both ways, surely you can see that?

I commented on your statement that entire OP was reasonable which it wasn't.
link

XRay
Members 159 posts

May 7, 2023, 5:22 p.m. May 7, 2023, 5:22 p.m.
link

@LenShepherd has written:

@primeshooter has written:

A9 tech from 2017 still beats the z7 ala the rest of nikons small bodies by a long way.

Most test sites back in 2017 did not agree with this claim.

Do you think many experts were wrong?

I love how you'll now try to argue that "tests sites" are somehow legitimate experts because their conclusion fit's your shill game.

@LenShepherd has written:

As people like Thomas Hogan point out Nikon is good at improving AF by firmware updates over time - and Sony tends to stick in a time warp - indicating if there was any truth in this claim it is less true now than in 2017.

Let's not confuse ambition with reality. Nikon is good at attempting to catch up to the competition through firmware updates. The "hopeful firmware updates" are a great tactic for keeping customers on the hook, and not much else.

And no disrespect to Thom. From what I've seen from his posts here, he seems to be a good guy, and I do agree with a lot of his opinions, but the situation is simply that... he's another guy with another opinion, just like the rest of us.

primeshooter likes this.

favorite 1
link

NoImage
Members 240 posts

May 7, 2023, 5:29 p.m. May 7, 2023, 5:29 p.m.
link

@Sagittarius has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@Sagittarius has written:

@BurnImage

@primeshooter has written:

My personal experience is such that the R5, beats the Z6/7 I and II variants so much so that it isn't even funny, the R5 wins hands down in every situation and is simpler to be in the correct AF mode, etc etc.

Do you think it is reasonable. I do not

I agree with his appraisal as it's factually correct. Maybe we could all learn to choose language that's more diplomatic and doesn't upset people on the other side of the argument (me included).

On that point, you are picking on one side of the argument and glossing over the vitriol of Nikon brand warriors firing even bigger missiles in the other direction (mostly based on emotion not facts).

You can't have it both ways, surely you can see that?

I commented on your statement that entire OP was reasonable which it wasn't.

The entire OP was reasonable if you are open to various brands and discussing their pros and cons. I can see it might not come across as reasonable to somebody who is brand enthusiastic to the the point of disregarding any alternatives.

primeshooter likes this.

favorite 1
link

XRay
Members 159 posts

May 7, 2023, 5:30 p.m. May 7, 2023, 5:30 p.m.
link

@LenShepherd has written:

Back then Sony could not use Nikon lenses, and now Sony cannot take much advantage of the several Nikon S grade lenses that are superior to Sony lenses.

If there's any advantage at all, it that Nikon simply has more availability of "phase fresnel" lenses which appeal primarily as retired boomer, park and zoo, wet dream lenses. Nikon is going after the low hanging fruit that's about to get passed on to the next of kin. It's their target market right now before the window closes. No surprises there.

And the majority of E mount Sigma Art lenses edge out S lenses. And luckily for Z shooters, can be adapter to the Z cameras. So please, just stop.
link

primeshooter
Members 217 posts

May 7, 2023, 5:32 p.m. May 7, 2023, 5:32 p.m.
link

@bobn2 has written:

@primeshooter has written:

By using the word circlejerk (btw it's two words) when you got nothing else to say tells me alot about your mental age.

btw, 'a lot' is two words...

Aware. Phone just blurbs it together. An autocorrect disaster today...
link

primeshooter
Members 217 posts

May 7, 2023, 5:39 p.m. May 7, 2023, 5:39 p.m.
link

@Sagittarius has written:

@tommy has written:

Primeshooter, I think your initial post was perfectly fine. I'm usually not confrontational, however the tone of AndyMiller's response is totally uncalled for. He probably hasn't used or tried the R5. And, not that it was important for the purpose of his discussion, but he did let us know that he has 2 Z9s. I enjoy a level headed discussion which some people don't seem to get. Not mocking you Andy, just try to respect other people's opinions and voice your own without accusing others of being trolls (whatever that means?)

First paragraph of the Primeshooter's OP was bashing Nikon Z 6/7 and Z 6/7 II and DPReview. Second paragraph was a question. People have a problem with first paragraph. The reaction would be different if OP would use just second paragraph.

Bashing is just the new woke - 'I'm offended' word for being critical. I'll take it. Have a good day.

XRay likes this.

favorite 1
link

primeshooter
Members 217 posts

May 7, 2023, 5:43 p.m. May 7, 2023, 5:43 p.m.
link

@Dibyendu has written:

My opinion is that the OP used unnecessarily inflammatory language.

dprevived.com/t/nikon-z-af/2911/post/29242/

I like Bob's ability to completely skip over all inflammatory stuff and focus on the actual information content.

Inflammatory language...We have become a tad sensitive these days' haven't we...I wonder how folks handle actual problems in their daily lifes if what I wrote in the OP gets them so bent out of shape. As usual YMMV.

davesurrey likes this.

favorite 1
link

LenShepherd
Members 65 posts

May 7, 2023, 6:26 p.m. May 7, 2023, 6:26 p.m.
link

@BurnImage has written:

Or is your mind simply closed

There seems in this thread to be only one mind closed - and it seems to be yours - to the probability
1/ you are usually wrong
2/ a very significant majority seem to have a different experience to you
3/ that anybody with a different experience to you must in your opinion be a "shill" - and you cannot be one.

Why Sony apparently needs a "aperture drive mode" is irrelevant to there being no problem shooting in a studio with Nikon ML using appropriate camera settings for studio work.
link

LenShepherd
Members 65 posts

May 7, 2023, 6:56 p.m. May 7, 2023, 6:56 p.m.
link

@XRay has written:

And no disrespect to Thom. From what I've seen from his posts here, he seems to be a good guy, and I do agree with a lot of his opinions, but the situation is simply that... he's another guy with another opinion, just like the rest of us.

Perhaps you misunderstand.

Unlike most of us Thom extensively tests Nikon, Canon and Sony and publishes the data for each item.

He tests - and then publishes his findings along with the way he tested.

Thom's reports are clearly more than "just another opinion".

Mackiesback, Ghostfox1, Dibyendu and 1 other user like this.

favorite 4
link

hlmuc
Members 61 posts

May 7, 2023, 7:26 p.m. May 7, 2023, 7:26 p.m.
link

@XRay has written:

"phase fresnel" lenses which appeal primarily as retired boomer, park and zoo, wet dream lenses.

What an arrogant, offensive, revealing comment - you aware that this is telling more about yourself than about those that you try to address? I wonder why you find pleasure in such statements.
link

NoImage
Members 240 posts

May 7, 2023, 7:31 p.m. May 7, 2023, 7:31 p.m.
link

@LenShepherd has written:

@XRay has written:

And no disrespect to Thom. From what I've seen from his posts here, he seems to be a good guy, and I do agree with a lot of his opinions, but the situation is simply that... he's another guy with another opinion, just like the rest of us.

Perhaps you misunderstand.

Unlike most of us Thom extensively tests Nikon, Canon and Sony and publishes the data for each item.

He tests - and then publishes his findings along with the way he tested.

Thom's reports are clearly more than "just another opinion".

You’re right about Thom there. Highly respected. He hasn’t published a review of the Sony A9II that I can find, just the original A9. But he has reviewed the Sony A1. Against the peers, including the Z9 he said this in his review summary:

["Thom Hogan - SansMirror"]
That said, I repeat what I wrote in the first paragraph in this section: the Sony A1 is the best all-around mirrorless camera you can buy. It performs extremely well as either a pixels camera or a speed camera, which pretty much only the Canon R5 can also make a real claim to. Thus, the Sony A1 currently stands nearly alone in terms of top mirrorless cameras.
[/quote]

www.sansmirror.com/cameras/camera-reviews/sony-nex-camera-reviews/sony-a1-camera-review.html

BAD2EDC1-3B15-45C4-84CD-C8DD833F0946.jpeg
JPG, 1.6 MB, uploaded by BurnImage on May 7, 2023.
link

Sagittarius
Members 689 posts

May 7, 2023, 7:57 p.m. May 7, 2023, 7:57 p.m.
link

@BurnImage has written:

@LenShepherd has written:

@XRay has written:

And no disrespect to Thom. From what I've seen from his posts here, he seems to be a good guy, and I do agree with a lot of his opinions, but the situation is simply that... he's another guy with another opinion, just like the rest of us.

Perhaps you misunderstand.

Unlike most of us Thom extensively tests Nikon, Canon and Sony and publishes the data for each item.

He tests - and then publishes his findings along with the way he tested.

Thom's reports are clearly more than "just another opinion".

You’re right about Thom there. Highly respected. He hasn’t published a review of the Sony A9II that I can find, just the original A9. But he has reviewed the Sony A1. Against the peers, including the Z9 he said this in his review summary:

["Thom Hogan - SansMirror"]
That said, I repeat what I wrote in the first paragraph in this section: the Sony A1 is the best all-around mirrorless camera you can buy. It performs extremely well as either a pixels camera or a speed camera, which pretty much only the Canon R5 can also make a real claim to. Thus, the Sony A1 currently stands nearly alone in terms of top mirrorless cameras.

www.sansmirror.com/cameras/camera-reviews/sony-nex-camera-reviews/sony-a1-camera-review.html
[/quote]
And this is what he said about Z9 "...the Z9 is the best Z System camera, by far, and arguably one of the two or three best cameras you can buy, period" And this was with FW 1.x. Now with FW3.10 it is even better.
link

felbo
Members 10 posts
May 7, 2023, 8:11 p.m. May 7, 2023, 8:11 p.m.
link
@Dibyendu has written:

Btw after almost 200 posts, the information content of this thread can be summarized as follows:

Z6/Z7 cameras have trouble with eye focusing in low light (credit Felbo)

well its a bit out of context, I write in the beginning in studio with Z6 Z7 + strobes I got some problems, later I found EV 7-8 in studio solved the problem (for me). EV 8 is 640 LUX
link

NoImage
Members 240 posts

May 7, 2023, 8:13 p.m. May 7, 2023, 8:13 p.m.
link

@Sagittarius has written:

@BurnImage has written:

@LenShepherd has written:

@XRay has written:

And no disrespect to Thom. From what I've seen from his posts here, he seems to be a good guy, and I do agree with a lot of his opinions, but the situation is simply that... he's another guy with another opinion, just like the rest of us.

Perhaps you misunderstand.

Unlike most of us Thom extensively tests Nikon, Canon and Sony and publishes the data for each item.

He tests - and then publishes his findings along with the way he tested.

Thom's reports are clearly more than "just another opinion".

You’re right about Thom there. Highly respected. He hasn’t published a review of the Sony A9II that I can find, just the original A9. But he has reviewed the Sony A1. Against the peers, including the Z9 he said this in his review summary:

["Thom Hogan - SansMirror"]
That said, I repeat what I wrote in the first paragraph in this section: the Sony A1 is the best all-around mirrorless camera you can buy. It performs extremely well as either a pixels camera or a speed camera, which pretty much only the Canon R5 can also make a real claim to. Thus, the Sony A1 currently stands nearly alone in terms of top mirrorless cameras.

www.sansmirror.com/cameras/camera-reviews/sony-nex-camera-reviews/sony-a1-camera-review.html

And this is what he said about Z9 "...the Z9 is the best Z System camera, by far, and arguably one of the two or three best cameras you can buy, period" And this was with FW 1.x. Now with FW3.10 it is even better.
[/quote]

yep, the best Z camera by far ……