A curious question about the Z cameras

[DRwyoming]

There are a few things that don’t compute in those statements. First, how does one get ES flash sync of 1/200 with a sensor that reads in 1/120s? i may be misunderstanding how flash sync speed works without amechanical shutter but that doesn’t seem possible. So both A1 and Z9 should have sensor read speeds faster than 1/200s which negates the fact that 120 AF calculations is just the sensor read speed.

EDIT: dpreview pegs the z9 sensor read speed at 1/270s so AF calculations run at about half the sensor read speed.

The second thing is whether the z6/7 even reach 60Hz read speeds. That’s the published number for the canon R5 and the Z7ii at least has more rolling shutter effect than the R5 which would indicate a slower sensor. The z6 on the other hand might read at that speed.
i‘LL have to see what I can find but some of those numbers don’t add up.

I think you're conflating the sensor read speed which has been reported as 4.2ms for the Z9 and sets limits on things like flash synch speed and the need for a mechanical shutter with sensor read rate which is how many times per second a complete image can be transferred off the sensor to the EVF or the AF processing module. They're related but different measures of a sensor's performance.

IOW, the 4.2ms states how fast a single image can be transferred from the sensor to processing or to the EVF, the 120Hz frame read rate tells how many complete images can be transferred per second and among other things that dictates how many times per second the AF sensor data can be transferred to the Expeed 7 processor so that can perform AF calculations. Yes, the latter (frame refresh rate) has to be slower than the limiting single frame read speed.

This information is still trickling out of different sources, much of it may be incorrect at this point, and we'll likely learn more with time. But when a simple statement like 'The Z9 performs 120 AF calculations per second' is thrown out there it's subject to interpretation. I mean after all any of these modern cameras are likely performing millions of AF calculations per second if you're talking about what's happening in the code but it seems clear to me they're talking about how frequently AF sensor data is fed to the AF processing engine(the AF system sample rate) and that's limited by the max sensor frame rate that's been published as 120 FPS for the Z9.

Sure, I'm reading a lot into very little info at this point and like all this Z9 speculation stuff I could be dead wrong and have completely misinterpreted that statement but to me it seems clear that what they meant by that claim is new data from the AF points on the sensor are fed to the AF processing engine 120 times per second.

Like all things Z9, we'll learn more when units get out into the world for hands on testing. Perhaps I've got this all wrong, we'll see...

 

[DRwyoming]

How do you know that?
Measuring “hertz” on image sensors is way above my education level. I just take “their” word for it, in real world use my A1 focuses faster than my brain.

Hertz as a unit in this context just means 'per second' whether you're talking about 60 Hz AC as 60 complete cycles per second or 120 Hz sensor frame rate as 120 images off the sensor per second.

BTW, nowhere did I claim Nikon's cameras would perform better AF or perform that AF faster than anything Sony, Canon or anyone else makes. I didn't offer any performance comparisons at all between brands. All I'm doing is interpreting the statement thrown out by the OP that the Z9 performs 120 AF calculations per second. I suspect it does and that's limited by the sensor readout rate that's been published at 120 frames per second.

But whether Nikon's AF processing makes the best use of those frequent AF samples and whether their AF system holds up to the hype or how it compares with other high end cameras I make no claims as I've neither seen nor tested a Z9

 

[FB101]

I think you're conflating the sensor read speed which has been reported as 4.2ms for the Z9 and sets limits on things like flash synch speed and the need for a mechanical shutter with sensor read rate which is how many times per second a complete image can be transferred off the sensor to the EVF or the AF processing module. They're related but different measures of a sensor's performance.

IOW, the 1/270" states how fast a single image can be transferred from the sensor to processing or to the EVF, the 120Hz frame read rate tells how many complete images can be transferred per second and among other things that dictates how many times per second the AF sensor data can be transferred to the Expeed 7 processor so that can perform AF calculations. Yes, the latter (frame refresh rate) has to be slower than the limiting single frame read speed.

This information is still trickling out of different sources, much of it may be incorrect at this point, and we'll likely learn more with time. But when a simple statement like 'The Z9 performs 120 AF calculations per second' is thrown out there it's subject to interpretation. I mean after all any of these modern cameras are likely performing millions of AF calculations per second if you're talking about what's happening in the code but it seems clear to me they're talking about how frequently AF sensor data is fed to the AF processing engine(the AF system sample rate) and that's limited by the max sensor frame rate that's been published as 120 FPS for the Z9.

Sure, I'm reading a lot into very little info at this point and like all this Z9 speculation stuff I could be dead wrong and have completely misinterpreted that statement but to me it seems clear that what they meant by that claim is new data from the AF points on the sensor are fed to the AF processing engine 120 times per second.

Like all things Z9, we'll learn more when units get out into the world for hands on testing. Perhaps I've got this all wrong, we'll see...

very fair points, I had not thought about the fact that read-out speeds is actually impacted by the lower of two factors - how fast the sensor is read (1/270s) which also impacts flash sync speed - and how fast the data can be moved off chip to the processor and that seems to be 1/120s which would impact all subsequent calculations like AF and exposure evaluation.
Thanks for the additional insight!

 

[DRwyoming]

I didn’t mean to imply you were comparing anything to Sony. My thought is we just have to take their word for it and see if we approve of the results.

I serve my apprenticeship 30 years ago but I still know what Hz is, I don’t know specifically how an image sensor cycles

Fair 'nuff.

 

[Woodyg3]

I'm pretty sure I answered that in the first response on this thread.

The Z9 sensor reads out at 120 Hz which is where that 120 AF calculations per second comes from. The current Z6 II and Z7 II sensor reads out at 60 Hz or IOW, 60 times per second data is fed to the AF system for processing. Sure the processing is more sophisticated on the Z9 but in terms of how many AF samples are calculated per second I'm certain that is just a statement on the sensor readout rate as that's the rate at which AF point data is fed to the AF processing engine.

Indeed, you did answer. I was simply frustrated with the massive number of off topic and inflammatory posts. Sorry about that. I always value the information you post here.

 

[Whiskeyman]

With all of the discussion about processor speed, one element is often missed, and that is overall system design. While processor speed is very important, so is the design of the system "boards" that the processors reside upon and hold communications channels and pathways for all of the camera's operations. A system (camera) can have the best processors, but be hindered greatly in performance by bad board design. Differences can add to, or reduce, the disparities in performance between the systems.

 

[O]

missed because your z7 was hunting.....

Love it LOL

With all of the discussion about processor speed, one element is often missed, and that is overall system design. While processor speed is very important, so is the design of the system "boards" that the processors reside upon and hold communications channels and pathways for all of the camera's operations. A system (camera) can have the best processors, but be hindered greatly in performance by bad board design. Differences can add to, or reduce, the disparities in performance between the systems.

Lots of fun in this forum.........

The D6 is better and stickier than the A1 for sports action..........hmmm

Why, because Thom Hogan plainly said, "for sports action he prefers hands down the D6 over the A1 he has as the D6 sticks better"

Interesting technical discussions and fascinating noticing the depth or peoples knowledge, i learn a lot..............

It made me think, what do all these fractional technical difference's in cameras really do for photography, when 90% of the result comes from the person behind the camera.

Lets hope that the Z9 inherits a little of this glue LOL

Happy days

Oz down under

 

[O]

That's because he is a genius that knows how it works. Normal people like the A1

love the come back mate

Oz down under

 

[Woodyg3]

In fairness, You said it was just marketing so you didn’t add much either

I said that the 120 AF calculations per second sounded like marketing rather than a true technical specification. I stand by that. I've never read any camera specifications for "number of AF calculations per second." Have you?

Edit: I dug into this a little more and admit that both Sony and Nikon have used this strange "calculations per second" as a spec for their recent cameras. I've never heard of this before. Thanks for getting me to dig into this a bit more.

 

[John Navitsky]

I said that the 120 AF calculations per second sounded like marketing rather than a true technical specification. I stand by that. I've never read any camera specifications for "number of AF calculations per second." Have you?

pretty sure both nikon and sony put an actual claim in writing that the z9 and a1, respectively can do 120 af calcs per second. if they’re putting it in writing i suspect it can be traced back to real specifications

 

[Woodyg3]

pretty sure both nikon and sony put an actual claim in writing that the z9 and a1, respectively can do 120 af calcs per second. if they’re putting it in writing i suspect it can be traced back to real specifications

So I just did a quick Google search, and, sure enough, found a few different times Sony gave a spec for the number of AF calculations per second for their cameras. I found only one for Nikon, which was for the Z9, and never found this spec for any other camera body or brand. I'd really like to know just exactly what they are talking about. Thanks for getting me to check my facts, John. Maybe calculations per second makes is more relatable to the majority of camera buyers than processor speed.

 

[John Navitsky]

i’m pretty sure sony started the use of this metric. i suspect it doesn’t make sense on a dslr, and this (waves hand at the general mirrorless pro sport body era) is the first time it’s been useful in a marketing sense

 

[FB101]

When you pick up an A1 and look through the viewfinder, a light goes off and you say to yourself "so that's what that means..." lol

I got whiplash the first time I focused with the A1, I wasn’t ready for it. Then I scared myself because 30fps is insane (I toned it down to 20fps since).
i can’t wait for everybody to get their z9s so that we can stop debating just how meaningful and useful the leap forward is.

 

[O]

I got whiplash the first time I focused with the A1, I wasn’t ready for it. Then I scared myself because 30fps is insane (I toned it down to 20fps since).
i can’t wait for everybody to get their z9s so that we can stop debating just how meaningful and useful the leap forward is.

May i ask what did this leap forward actually do to the actual image for you, and what did it do for the capture............that is different to say using a fast DSLR like a D6 of 1 D x mk III.
Oz down under

 

[FB101]

May i ask what did this leap forward actually do to the actual image for you, and what did it do for the capture............that is different to say using a fast DSLR like a D6 of 1 D x mk III.
Oz down under

i don’t get to shoot nearly as often as I’d like so I’ll be the first one to admit my skills are nowhere near as honed as when I was in my twenties and shot multiple times a week.
So what I got is reliability and predictability of the outcome, even with my lacking skills, the camera has my back. It’s also been fun to tackle subjects and type of photography I know I couldn’t reliably do with my D500/850. I have gotten shots I wouldn’t have gotten before and I am just starting.

And because I know the camera has my back on the technical stuff, I can concentrate on composition and paying more attention to what’s in the frame and backgrounds.

Finally, but that‘s not A1/z9 specific, shooting wysiwyg with zebras is a game changer for me - once I figured out how to use that setup, I have not messed up an exposure once. Which means I dare to try more radical exposures in camera because I can see what it will do.

it’s been freeing, liberating and allows me to experiment far more with the image itself because I know that the camera rarely misses the basics.

i can’t say that I am “there“ yet and that images suddenly transformed - that would be a lie - but the fact that I can experiment more freely also means I have a much better chance of getting to the next level. I have not shot the D6 but I have shot the D5 and all the generations of canon 1D and 1Dx bodies - I have never felt such a step change in speed and responsiveness, but also simply reliability of outcome.

Hope that helps.

 

[O]

i don’t get to shoot nearly as often as I’d like so I’ll be the first one to admit my skills are nowhere near as honed as when I was in my twenties and shot multiple times a week.
So what I got is reliability and predictability of the outcome, even with my lacking skills, the camera has my back. It’s also been fun to tackle subjects and type of photography I know I couldn’t reliably do with my D500/850. I have gotten shots I wouldn’t have gotten before and I am just starting.

And because I know the camera has my back on the technical stuff, I can concentrate on composition and paying more attention to what’s in the frame and backgrounds.

Finally, but that‘s not A1/z9 specific, shooting wysiwyg with zebras is a game changer for me - once I figured out how to use that setup, I have not messed up an exposure once. Which means I dare to try more radical exposures in camera because I can see what it will do.

it’s been freeing, liberating and allows me to experiment far more with the image itself because I know that the camera rarely misses the basics.

i can’t say that I am “there“ yet and that images suddenly transformed - that would be a lie - but the fact that I can experiment more freely also means I have a much better chance of getting to the next level. I have not shot the D6 but I have shot the D5 and all the generations of canon 1D and 1Dx bodies - I have never felt such a step change in speed and responsiveness, but also simply reliability of outcome.

Hope that helps.

Thank you for your reply and i appreciate your experiences, its very interesting and helpful.

It helps a lot with the rational of getting a Z9. I don't want to go back to the weight and size thing again hence a Z8 may be the ticket.

Oz down under

 

[Venkatesh VT]

May i ask what did this leap forward actually do to the actual image for you, and what did it do for the capture............that is different to say using a fast DSLR like a D6 of 1 D x mk III.
Oz down under

I dont know about others.How ever i could get 100 %BIF shots with A1+200-600 (i used to shoot with D 500 /D 850 & 500 PF)which i could never get earlier.As long as i kept the bird in the frame the tracking was oustanding.In one of the series i shot a brahminy kite flying towards me (against light) till it flew over my head.All shots were in focus & i got very nice images(totally back lit ).
I have had the camera for only one week now & am still learning the ropes.I am sure these kind of camears(A1,Z9,R3 & R1) would be game changers & the technology would trickle down to lower versions.I am hoping for a Z8(lighter than Z9) to pair with my 500 PF unless Sony brings out a 500 PF

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Anjin San]

not sure what UHH is. Seems like it may be a bonus to not be familiar. DPR gets pretty confrontational and boring with the endless brand wars and "my dog is bigger than your dog" discussions about someone's favorite camera brand or model. I've been a member of this forum since shortly after Steve started it. I've always liked the respect folks showed each other and the discussions about nature and wildlife photography without the childish "my brand is better than your brand" stuff that I see on other photo oriented forums like DPR. I hope this one does not become like that.

Jeff

Ugly Hedgehog forum. There are some good comments there but by and large it is just one giant flame war with very little attempt to be civil. Some people get warned or banned or censored…but the favored few have different rules applied to them. I’ve deselected all topics except for image discussion, the humor forum, and the risqué image forum but even there some of the images are bad while some are excellent art images that happen to be naked women…

 

[O]

I think the ZFC is an excellent concept and may indirectly generate more potential people to embrace more serious photography which is great, these people may well move up in models from the ZFC.

I have my silver DF (full Frame) with an Italian hand made leather half case, maybe it will become a collectors piece who knows.

Oz down Under

 

[Harry.G]

@Venkatesh VT - what is that hazey outline around the Birds wings ? extremely apparent in image 2 , and noticible in image 3 ..


Harry.G

 

[Venkatesh VT]

@Venkatesh VT - what is that hazey outline around the Birds wings ? extremely apparent in image 2 , and noticible in image 3 ..


Harry.G

I feel that could be due to high DR

 

[bfs208]

I feel that could be due to high DR

Could it be the result of over sharpening in post?

 

[gdecamp]

@Venkatesh VT - what is that hazey outline around the Birds wings ? extremely apparent in image 2 , and noticible in image 3 ..


Harry.G

Looks like some kind of over sharpening was used or some other type post processing.

 

[Venkatesh VT]

Looks like some kind of over sharpening was used or some other type post processing.

Could be .I am still experimenting with which software to use for A1 raw files

 

[Wes Peterson]

@Venkatesh VT - what is that hazey outline around the Birds wings ? extremely apparent in image 2 , and noticible in image 3 ..


Harry.G

looks like a bit of a sloppy dodge and burn or its the result of crushing the highlights and bringing up the shadows.