Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Changing Camera Brands 
Thread started 10 Jan 2018 (Wednesday) 17:58
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Long time Canon user....but this A7R iii looks too good!

 
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
18,958 posts
Likes: 1112
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Jan 28, 2018 18:25 |  #76

George Zip wrote in post #18550686 (external link)
5D4 user here.

The one thing that really intrigues me with mirrorless is the viewfinder . Being able to see exposure in real time without chipping really appeals to me. I see that as a genuine benefit.

I'm still not sure what a huge benefit eye af is. How hard is it to move a focus point onto an eye?

Ever shot moving model at f1.4/f1.2, even when model is moving just a bit. I don't know 5dmk4 AF, only have 5dmk3 but is pain to nail at at f1.2 even when model is stationary.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,154 posts
Gallery: 140 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2923
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited 6 months ago by Tom Reichner. (3 edits in all)
     
Jan 28, 2018 18:54 |  #77

George Zip wrote in post #18550686 (external link)
I'm still not sure what a huge benefit eye af is. How hard is it to move a focus point onto an eye?

Imagine little kids running helter-skelter all over a playground ..... climbing up the ladder, then "whooshing" down the sliding board ...... then dashing over to the rope swing ....... then going round and round as fast as they can on the merry-go-round.

If you want to track this action from a bit of a distance with a long telephoto, and keep the kid's face filling the frame, then how would you ever make sure that perfect focus on the kid's eye is maintained at all moments, unless you had eye autofocus? . Do you actually think that you would be able to do this perfectly, without the aid of eye autofocus? . If so, then you are a spectacular individual with otherworldly hand-eye coordination.

Or, if you don't shoot running kids, then think of sports photography. . Imagine a tennis player running and dashing wildly about the court, and you standing there trying to get a close-up of his facial expression as he is playing. . How would you do that if you had to move the focus point manually? . As soon as you adjusted your focus point selection, he would be out of the frame and you would have to try to find him in the viewfinder and change the point again and reacquire focus on his eye ........ can you even imagine how impossible it would be to capture perfectly focused face closeups in such a situation if you didn't have eye autofocus?

Sadly, this technology only seems to work on human eyes at this time. . If it ever gets to the point where it could be used on ANY moving object (user programmable), then it would revolutionize wildlife photography for me.

mystik610 wrote in post #18551297 (external link)
And yes having to move focus point during something as dynamic as a wedding .....

That is actually kind of funny, when you compare it to the two types of scenarios that I described above.

A wedding, dynamic? . Compared to what? . They don't even run at weddings - the quickest movement there is is when they walk briskly down the aisle or when the girls step forward to catch the bouquet. . Compared to the all-out running and leaping you have in sports, or birds in full flight, that doesn't seem dynamic at all.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,868 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Likes: 7235
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 6 months ago by mystik610. (2 edits in all)
     
Jan 28, 2018 19:30 |  #78

George Zip wrote in post #18550686 (external link)
I'm still not sure what a huge benefit eye af is. How hard is it to move a focus point onto an eye?

The problem is that even when pointing the AF point to the eye, the camera does not know where something as small as they eye is....so very often it's critically focusing on side of the face, and not actually the eye.

And yes having to move focus point during something as dynamic as a wedding very often means you're missing a shot when the AF point is in the wrong part of the frame during a fleeting moment. Eye AF greatly eliminates the need to move your AF point as your subject moves across the frame, so you're less likely to miss a key moment.

Even during posed portraits, eye AF minimizes the breaks between poses because you're not having to move your AF point as your subject's eyes move across the frame. Your subject is able to pose freely as you shoot and really helps maintain a nice flow of shots and poses. i.e.:


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - Sony 50 1.8 - Sony 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
George ­ Zip
My neighbours are looking at me a bit strangely
Avatar
1,353 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 1859
Joined Aug 2015
     
Jan 28, 2018 20:02 |  #79

I'm sold. Canon please provide :-)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
George ­ Zip
My neighbours are looking at me a bit strangely
Avatar
1,353 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 1859
Joined Aug 2015
     
Jan 28, 2018 20:53 |  #80

I read somewhere that on the 5D4, if you shoot in live view using the face detect, that it focus's on the eye. Not sure if it's true. Even if it is correct, that Sony system looks to be a much better implementation.

I have never tried it as I shoot through the viewfinder.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,868 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Likes: 7235
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
Jan 28, 2018 20:58 |  #81

George Zip wrote in post #18551356 (external link)
I read somewhere that on the 5D4, if you shoot in live view using the face detect, that it focus's on the eye. Not sure if it's true. Even if it is correct, that Sony system looks to be a much better implementation.

I have never tried it as I shoot through the viewfinder.

Face detect isn't very accurate as it will focus on things like the nose instead of the eye. In terms of accuracy, its usually better to place an AF point on the eye than to rely on face detect.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - Sony 50 1.8 - Sony 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
George ­ Zip
My neighbours are looking at me a bit strangely
Avatar
1,353 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 1859
Joined Aug 2015
     
Jan 28, 2018 23:30 |  #82

mystik610 wrote in post #18551360 (external link)
Face detect isn't very accurate as it will focus on things like the nose instead of the eye. In terms of accuracy, its usually better to place an AF point on the eye than to rely on face detect.

For sure.

my comment was just from what I heard from some dude. The 5d4 will allegedly lock on an eye in face detect. Sounds like BS to me, I imagine more would have been made of it if that was true.

Maybe I should give it go. I never shoot in live view so there is not much point really




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,244 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3010
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jan 29, 2018 00:54 |  #83

I love face and eye detection on my Fuji's when it works... which is definitely not as good as Sony.

I like that with the Sony you can set up a specific button for Eye-AF like you would for BBF or AE-L. On Fuji it's basically another focus mode, and it tends to pick up faces of subjects I don't want and random things in the background sometimes.

I use it for single subject shots all the time and it does well (though doesn't always pickup eyes), but my a7S was definitely a bit better in this regard and I know the new bodies have only gotten better. I got to play around with my friend's new a7Riii over the weekend and it was pretty impressive even with the adapted Sigma 24/1.4 he had on it for the day.

As for it's usefulness in general... I think eye/face AF is amazing.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Superintendent
Junior Member
22 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Connecticut
     
Feb 20, 2018 15:05 |  #84

I recently departed from my Canon 5D Mark IV and went with the Sony A7R3. Before that I have been a loyal Canon user the last 14 years. In short, I have zero regrets in switching over. Currently, most of my lens arsenal are non-native (35 & 50ART, Canon 16-35 f4, 100-400 Mark II, 135L) and perform wonderfully on a Metabones V adapter. Eye AF really is a game changer and was one of the selling points for me as I want to dive more into portraiture photography. Recently, I did a sunset/blue hour flight in NYC via Flynyon with the A7R3 and my Sigma 35 ART. I am blown away with how incredible the dynamic range is. The Canon was no slouch but the difference between the two is eye opening.

Just my two cents.


Canon 5D Mark IV Gripped | 16-35L f4 | Sigma 85 1.4 | Sigma 50 ART | 135L | 100-400L Mark II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,358 views & 82 likes for this thread
Long time Canon user....but this A7R iii looks too good!
FORUMS General Gear Talk Changing Camera Brands 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is allen456
729 guests, 358 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.