Bird-eye autofocus - game changer?

[Don'sPhotoStream]

I would purchase what is available now, rather than wishing and hoping for a firmware update or body and lens that may become available at some point… life is short

 

[Bisonbison]

I consider bird eye AF a game-changer (I'm using a Sony a1) particularly with active birds at close range. YMMV.

Thanks Doug, having looked at your images over the years (from all the way back when you used a manual focus Leica Telyt), I really appreciate your input on this. And that image of the Kinglet is a great example.

After reading all the comments and suggestions, I reread your original post. It sounds like if you go to the Canon R6, you are actually doing both longer lenses and getting bird eye AF. To me, this would make a huge difference. Getting the 500mm PF and using it with your 1.4x TC would also make a big difference but you're still going to need to move the focus point around manually. Unless you are able to fill the frame with your 300mm right now, I think that is your biggest issue. You really don't want to be doing heavy crops on tiny birds in the image. Depending on how many other lenses you have for the Z50, and what you want to photograph, switching may be a good option. There may be a firmware update coming soon for the Zii cameras that offer better AF tracking modes that could be a potentially cheaper route to get what you want. Either way, I recommend longer lenses to allow you to fill the frame, then automated tracking to make it easier to get sharp images. If the R6 gets you there with the 800mm F/11 and you don't have a lot invested to wait and see, that could be a good route to go. My only hesitation on that solution is what to do when you want a faster lens down the road.

I have only the kit lens and the 300mm + 1.4x TC. I pared down the kit drastically a while back and I don't think I've even used the kit lens, come to think of it. Yes, a fast lens down the road may or may not be available, but I'll have to go with what's available today and roll the dice and see. I will rent the combo before I commit.

Just to give you another body option around the same price, the new Sony A7IV has bird eye AF as well, and the Sony 200-600 is much cheaper then the Canon 100-500. Not saying it’s better or worse then the Canon but giving you another option.
For me the bigger game changer is silent shutter and blackout free shooting. I’d give up bird eye AF for those in a used Sony a9 which is cheaper then either a new R6 or a7IV.
It’s great we have so many options now, although it makes choosing harder

Thanks for your suggestion of the A7IV, I think it would have been an excellent option, were it not for the low fps and rather limited buffer from the reviews I watched. The 200-600mm is much cheaper, but I've not been able to find a good used A9. I think I am ok with not having blackout free (at my price point). Even the Z50 has silent shutter and I use it quite a bit. Besides I haven't used an A9 or other blackout free cameras, so I don't know what I am missing

Thanks everyone for your input. I will rent an R6 when the weather gets a little better and will report back when I've had a chance to use it myself.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Not much help have never used a mirrorless yet still waiting. My wife uses a Z50 and a Tamron 100-400 or 18-400 I have used both lenses on D500, D850 and D6 and they did very good jobs on BIF but my wife struggles at getting focus on BIF with her Z50.

That being said my favorite lenses for BIF have been : 3rd place Tamron 150-600 G2, 2nd place (very close to the the first place) Nikon 500 PF, but what is living on my D850 as I wait for a Z9 is the 1st place Nikon 600 f/4 E. You can check out the Belted Kingfisher in flight shots I posted recently in the wildlife photography forum with the first place duo.

 

[sid_19911991]

@Bisonbison

Based on your requirements, I can think of 3 options. I would have taken option 1 if I were you.

Option 1 -
The Sony A7 iv with the Sony 200-600. For its price range, 200-600 is by far the sharpest of all the lenses by a country mile. Its AF is pretty good too. Sony A7 iv probably gives you better image quality than R5, R6, Z9, D500, & A1. It has the same chip as that of the A1.

Option 2 -
Canon R6 adapted with Sony 200-600 or Canon RF 100-500. Avoid Canon F11 800. F11 has limited use, IMO. Canon 100-400 is too short for birding on a full frame low megapixel body.

Option 3 -
Used Nikon D500 with the 500 pf. Best budget DSLR combo for the price. While it does not have bird eye AF, the 500 pf makes up for it in terms of image quality & reach. Also, R6 produces a lot of chroma noise in my opinion, D500 not so much.

 

[Roy]

Hi folks,
I would like your feedback about how much of a ‘game changer’ bird-eye af is in the cameras that have it - R5/6, A1 and now Z9?
I am primarily interested in bird photography and had been thinking of getting a 500mm pf and waiting for a mirrorless D500 (currently use a Nikon Z50 and a 300mm pf with and without a 1.4xTC)
Would I benefit more/get a higher keeper rate from getting a great long lens and staying with the same crop body I have or from getting a newer full frame body with this bird-eye AF voodoo and some relatively affordable lenses?
I am thinking about getting a Canon R6 as it’s the only one of these bird eye AF bodies I can realistically afford right now. I would most likely get an R6 with the RF 100-400mm and 800mm f11. If I get a decent price for my current gear and assuming it’s in stock, I may just be able stretch to an RF 100-500mm.

I welcome your thoughts, suggestions and feedback on this choice.

Thanks!

If AF is that critical then I couldn't recommend the canon 800mm f11 - on most cameras past f5.6 AF can struggle or is at least restricted...

 

[DavidT]

Anyone who shoots anything with eyes and has a camera with eye af knows it’s a game changer. Only those who don’t have it or have a camera that does it poorly would think otherwise.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Anyone who shoots anything with eyes and has a camera with eye af knows it’s a game changer. Only those who don’t have it or have a camera that does it poorly would think otherwise.

I will be curious to see what the pro who owns our only full line camera store in Idaho says when he gets back from Africa with the Z9. He is a full line dealer for Nikon, Sony and Canon and says he turns off eye AF in all of the top line mirrorless cameras he has tried. He wants to control where the camera focuses and for him group AF was a big step from single point when got my D4S and let him try it. Then when it became available in the D500 and D850 he added group for BIF to his classes ... ditto for auto ISO when he played with my D4s. His work is amazing and all straight out of camera except a crop now and then (he likes tiff so not happy that Nikon took it away in the Z's from what he has said). Anxious to play with it when I get the Z9 since I have not experienced it yet.

 

[DavidT]

I will be curious to see what the pro who owns our only full line camera store in Idaho says when he gets back from Africa with the Z9. He is a full line dealer for Nikon, Sony and Canon and says he turns off eye AF in all of the top line mirrorless cameras he has tried. He wants to control where the camera focuses and for him group AF was a big step from single point when got my D4S and let him try it. Then when it became available in the D500 and D850 he added group for BIF to his classes ... ditto for auto ISO when he played with my D4s. His work is amazing and all straight out of camera except a crop now and then (he likes tiff so not happy that Nikon took it away in the Z's from what he has said). Anxious to play with it when I get the Z9 since I have not experienced it yet.

Just because he’s a pro doesn’t make him right. Bottom line is the a1 will find an eye and keep with it better than anyone I have ever seen moving a focus point around manually. It’s his camera he can turn off what he likes but frankly that’s like buying a Porsche and pushing it rather than driving it.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Just because he’s a pro doesn’t make him right. Bottom line is the a1 will find an eye and keep with it better than anyone I have ever seen moving a focus point around manually. It’s his camera he can turn off what he likes but frankly that’s like buying a Porsche and pushing it rather than driving it.

As he always says when he is teaching there is not just one way to get great photographs.

His results, not being a "pro" are what make him "right" for "him" and the many customers he sells big prints to.

He has early access to any camera in the Nikon, Sony and Canon line and he tests them out over a broader range of subjects than I do for sure. He has been slow to switch to mirrorless because of what he has perceived as slow and inconsistent AF on wildlife compared to many DSLR's.

Only recently has he started recommending the new Sony and Canon mirrorless and now he hopes the Z9 for wildlife.

Like Steve he has not done a full review on the Z9 yet but said he would when he got back from Africa but early comment quite positive. So will he change what he thinks of eye af etc. after he gets back ???

When we first met he was single point AF and rarely "dynamic range 9" and no auto ISO and aperture priority for simplicity and efficiency with wildlife. When I showed him the efficiency of Manual with auto ISO and group in the D4s and it became available in D500 and D850 (which of course he sold a lot more of than D4s, D5, D6 etc..) he changed what he used and recommended in his classes. He does change his way of shooting when it makes him more efficient.

So anxious to see what he finds out in Africa wringing out the Z9. He has never had the chance to do a long term with the Sony A1 in Africa like @Steve has, since when he was going to do so COVID shut things down over there in 2020 just as he was scheduled to go.

 

[Doug Herr]

If AF is that critical then I couldn't recommend the canon 800mm f11 - on most cameras past f5.6 AF can struggle or is at least restricted...

It's DSLRs that struggle past f/5.6

 

[FB101]

Eye AF is one of the elements that contribute to shooting differently with the most recent mirrorless cameras, together with advanced tracking, high fps, zebras etc…
‘Take a picture like the one below. Maybe 1 out of 100 I could have kept the spot AF on the eye with a sticky AF setting and not have the camera refocus on the wing; maybe 1 out if 1000 I could have hit that precise time when the wing just cuts the eye in the middle… but with eye AF and 30fps, I have a handful of similar shots (Regardless of whether it is a good shot, a desirable shot or not, it’s now possible reliably).

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

 

[abc123brian]

Anyone who shoots anything with eyes and has a camera with eye af knows it’s a game changer. Only those who don’t have it or have a camera that does it poorly would think otherwise.

Eye AF is a very nice feature and very convenient. saying game changer is subjective, but if you go back to the original question and look the situation described, would you rather have eye AF or a lens longer than 300mm for birding? Which would be the bigger game changer, eye AF or going from a 300mm lens to 500mm or 600mm lens appears to be the actual question? They technically would both be game changers, but to me I’d rather not crop away the majority of the image every time due to a short lens. Just the tracking ability of the original A9 before any eye AF was quite good and better than things before it. I would take that with a 200-600mm before I’d take the same camera after firmware update bringing eye AF but only a 300mm lens. For the original poster’s situation, I’m not sure it will matter because going R6 they are going to get both longer glass and eye AF. They don’t have a collection of gear so nothing holding them back from changing so might as well have both.

 

[DavidT]

Eye AF is a very nice feature and very convenient. saying game changer is subjective, but if you go back to the original question and look the situation described, would you rather have eye AF or a lens longer than 300mm for birding? Which would be the bigger game changer, eye AF or going from a 300mm lens to 500mm or 600mm lens appears to be the actual question? They technically would both be game changers, but to me I’d rather not crop away the majority of the image every time due to a short lens. Just the tracking ability of the original A9 before any eye AF was quite good and better than things before it. I would take that with a 200-600mm before I’d take the same camera after firmware update bringing eye AF but only a 300mm lens. For the original poster’s situation, I’m not sure it will matter because going R6 they are going to get both longer glass and eye AF. They don’t have a collection of gear so nothing holding them back from changing so might as well have both.

My response was more directed at posters who discount the power of eye af. To the OP they are picking one over the other when in reality they would be best served by both.

 

[FB101]

Hi folks,
I would like your feedback about how much of a ‘game changer’ bird-eye af is in the cameras that have it - R5/6, A1 and now Z9?
I am primarily interested in bird photography and had been thinking of getting a 500mm pf and waiting for a mirrorless D500 (currently use a Nikon Z50 and a 300mm pf with and without a 1.4xTC)
Would I benefit more/get a higher keeper rate from getting a great long lens and staying with the same crop body I have or from getting a newer full frame body with this bird-eye AF voodoo and some relatively affordable lenses?
I am thinking about getting a Canon R6 as it’s the only one of these bird eye AF bodies I can realistically afford right now. I would most likely get an R6 with the RF 100-400mm and 800mm f11. If I get a decent price for my current gear and assuming it’s in stock, I may just be able stretch to an RF 100-500mm.

I welcome your thoughts, suggestions and feedback on this choice.

Thanks!

‘Actually tricky question because you are also overlapping dx vs fx and resolution in that question. So what problem are you trying to fix? You can’t get close enough or your shots are not in focus when facing challenging AF dynamics?

With birds, typically the first issue is filling the frame so I’d err towards 500pf on your z50 but if you can fill the frame and can still get closer, then you can transition to FF. Just remember that the r6 is 20mp FF while your z50 has the pixel density of a 51mp FF sensor - that’s a massive drop and you will need to reduce your distance to subject by 50% to make that up… (same focal length but 500mm vs 420mm is not that huge of a difference).

 

[Bisonbison]

@Palmor, @sid_19911991
I looked at the A7IV again and I was originally mistaken about the fps and buffer. The fps depends on file format and buffer is quite good. Plus the fact that it’s 33MP vs R6’s 20MP and 12fps, will have to think carefully about this. The Sony 200-600mm being much less expensive than the Canon 100-500mm is also a plus. Thanks again for suggesting that option.

 

[Craig Yuill]

My response was more directed at posters who discount the power of eye af. To the OP they are picking one over the other when in reality they would be best served by both.

The OP asked about choosing between 1) getting a current body with eye AF and using a less-than-ideal long lens now, and 2) buying better, longer glass now and updating later to a future body that (hopefully) has eye AF. It may come as a shock to those who seem to be able to buy a1, R5, and Z9 bodies with the latest, greatest glass on a whim, but not all of us have substantial budgets with which to purchase gear. If you can do so, great. Have fun. But getting both a new body AND a new lens is simply not an option for a lot of us. We love our bird photography, but we have budgets (sometimes rather restricted ones) to work within.

Getting back to the original question - is eye AF a “game changer”? IMHO, it really depends on one’s circumstances and needs. It is possible to get photos of birds with sharply-focused eyes without eye AF. Perhaps not as frequently or as easily, but it is possible. Would eye AF be a nice feature to have? Sure! Is it worth blowing a budget over and taking on debt? Not in my opinion.

It might make some sense for the OP to just sit tight and wait a bit longer before making a purchase. Wait for more long Z-mount lenses, like the Nikon 200-600mm lens that is on the roadmap, to be introduced and tested. Wait for an update to the Z50 (or high-res Z5-class body) with better AF to appear.

I wish the OP all the best (photographically and fiscally) when it comes to ultimately deciding what to do. (Update - I noticed the OP is considering a Sony aIV option. Whatever works.)

 

[Bisonbison]

Thank you all for your thoughtful and considered feedback. I really appreciate it. I am certainly working within a budget. I had been setting aside some funds to swap my 300mm pf for a 500mm pf. At the moment I find myself in the position where if I sell my current gear and add to the funds, I may be able to get myself something better than my current kit. I don’t mind looking at another brand/model if it helps me get more consistent sharply focused images. I feel a quicker camera with better AF especially if its targeted at birds, would get me that.
With my current gear, depending on the species, I can get close. A longer lens is always a nice to have, but it would also be nice to take advantage of the improved AF in newer bodies to get good images more often and consistently/reliably. Right now luck plays a significant role.
I'd like to get more like the first 3 images or better. But more often they are unusably out of focus (despite being close and framing the bird well) or like the last two images ...
I am not in a hurry to get new gear, I would happily buy used if I could stretch to something better.

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.

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.

 

[DavidT]

Thank you all for your thoughtful and considered feedback. I really appreciate it. I am certainly working within a budget. I had been setting aside some funds to swap my 300mm pf for a 500mm pf. At the moment I find myself in the position where if I sell my current gear and add to the funds, I may be able to get myself something better than my current kit. I don’t mind looking at another brand/model if it helps me get more consistent sharply focused images. I feel a quicker camera with better AF especially if its targeted at birds, would get me that.
With my current gear, depending on the species, I can get close. A longer lens is always a nice to have, but it would also be nice to take advantage of the improved AF in newer bodies to get good images more often and consistently/reliably. Right now luck plays a significant role.
I'd like to get more like the first 3 images or better. But more often they are unusably out of focus (despite being close and framing the bird well) or like the last two images ...
I am not in a hurry to get new gear, I would happily buy used if I could stretch to something better.
View attachment 29795
View attachment 29796
View attachment 29797
View attachment 29798
View attachment 29800

I’d swap gear and start over if that’s an option for you. It will be well worth the money.

 

[Bisonbison]

While this strays from my original question, I hope you will indulge me. Based on some of your suggestions, I have been looking at used A9Mk1/Mk2s and am seeing Mk1s for a few hundred less than a new R6 or A7IV ($2499) and Mk2s for around $3k. If I were to go the A9 route, is the A9ii worth the extra $800-$1k more than an A9Mk1? If not, I may be able to add a 1.4x TC as well. I am just a little hesitant about getting a 5yo camera. Thoughts?

 

[arbitrage]

A few thoughts....if you start considering cameras like R6 and A9 you are losing a lot of "reach" unless getting a much longer focal length lens. Your Z50 is like a ~47MP FF sensor and an R6 at 20MP or A9 at 24MP is a big step back. You are using up to 420mm on ~47MP right now. You would want to get RF 100-500 with 1.4TC as needed OR Sony 200-600 with 1.4TC as needed to be happy with the "reach".

Another consideration is how interested you are in BIF photography because IMO that swings the decision away from BEAF (Bird-Eye AF) towards a stacked sensor camera. Assuming you aren't budgeting for an R3, A1 or Z9 which have the best of both worlds (stacked and BEAF).

If you are really interested in BIF then I'd recommend an A9 and 200-600. That will get you better results and a way better blackout/slideshow free shooting experience than say an A7IV with BEAF or even an R5/6. The R5/6 ES 20FPS shooting experience is still pretty good for BIF and doesn't often distort wings due to the slower sensor scan but it still doesn't have the accuracy of A9 nor the ability to latch onto and not let go of fast/erratic BIF.

However, if BIF isn't as important then I'd lean towards R6/100-500 or even a used adapted EF lens (like 100-400II/1.4TC). R5 if you can budget for that over R6. BEAF is great for birds not in flight. I find it to be of little use for BIF. Sure it can activate during BIF but I don't see it making a difference to my success over an A9 shooting in regular Wide or Zone AF mode (non-tracking versions). To even get it to activate for BIF you have to be very smooth in your panning. Most BIF is shot at a far enough distance that DOF covers the eye anyways. Only if you have large birds at close range may BEAF help in keeping AF off the near wing where as a non-BEAF camera like A9 may go to the near wing and DOF isn't enough to get a sharp head/eye. But even then I only see BEAF working for large birds at close range some of the time.

If you end up looking at A9/A9II then the advantages of A9II for me were the better buttons and dials (especially the much larger AF-ON button), slightly longer/better grip, dual UHS-II slots (versus one II, one I on A9) and a bit snappier operation especially when using a custom button to bring up a Recall shooting function. That may not be worth it to you. The AF is identical IMO between the A9 and A9II.

If you went Canon then I'd really try to go to the R5 over R6 just for the pixels. The R5/R6 are amazing value for what they can do. They can do most BIF remarkably well and they have the BEAF which makes shooting non-flight so easy and enjoyable. Only when I pushed the R5 to the fringe BIF cases is where I found it couldn't compete with A9.

Last comment, just to confuse things even more, is that if BIF is not your thing then just adding 500PF to the Z50 with the high accuracy of the on-sensor AF on the Z50 and better reach of the 500PF may be all you need.

 

[DavidT]

While this strays from my original question, I hope you will indulge me. Based on some of your suggestions, I have been looking at used A9Mk1/Mk2s and am seeing Mk1s for a few hundred less than a new R6 or A7IV ($2499) and Mk2s for around $3k. If I were to go the A9 route, is the A9ii worth the extra $800-$1k more than an A9Mk1? If not, I may be able to add a 1.4x TC as well. I am just a little hesitant about getting a 5yo camera. Thoughts?

I’d do some research as I haven’t shot the a9 but I don’t think it has bird eye af. Maybe they updated it but I don’t believe so. If looking Sony the a1 and new a74 I believe it is are probably your best choices.

The a9III is likely to come out end of this year and likely positioned as a sports camera and step up some features against the R3.

@Steve can help as I believe he has an a9.

 

[DavidT]

While this strays from my original question, I hope you will indulge me. Based on some of your suggestions, I have been looking at used A9Mk1/Mk2s and am seeing Mk1s for a few hundred less than a new R6 or A7IV ($2499) and Mk2s for around $3k. If I were to go the A9 route, is the A9ii worth the extra $800-$1k more than an A9Mk1? If not, I may be able to add a 1.4x TC as well. I am just a little hesitant about getting a 5yo camera. Thoughts?

I forgot to mention for me if a mirrorless camera doesn’t have a stacked sensor giving me the ability to shoot electronic shutter without rolling shutter issues than I have no interest in the camera. Right now that’s the R3(mostly) Z9, a9,a1 and possibly the new a74 (haven’t paid much attention to the new body). The R5/6 are close but don’t deliver what I would want.

 

[StefanSC]

@Bisonbison

I just returned an A9 (6.0 firmware with Animal Eye Detect AF) and Sony 100-400 that I had on loan for the past week-end. Ran a few thousand frames through it and my hot-takes are as follows:

1) The ergonomics of the A9 are poor to say the least. Half the time I tried to change the focus point using the joystick I ended up starting recording video. Worst feeling shutter button I've ever used (and I shoot a Panasonic G9). I don't have large hands but my knuckles rubbed against the lens. And I had to keep my eye a bit away from the EVF in order to use all buttons on the right side.

2) Very fast clearing buffers. First Sony I've used that didn't lock me out of things when writing to card.

3) Real Time Tracking with the nearly live EVF is so easy to use. And it gives you so much confidence in what you are doing. It's not perfect, mind you, as I did encounter situations where it said it is in focus but it wasn't, and it likes to either grab branches in front of a subject or just stick to infinty focus, but as far as "easy to use, no effort required" goes it is one of the easiest AF systems I've tried.

4) Sony were honest when they said about A9 Animal Eye AF that it won't work very well with animals that don't have cat/dog like faces. With cats and dogs, it finds them no problems. With birds, only rarely and never when the bird is in flight.

Overall, I wouldn't mind a Sony A9 with the 200-600 or even one of the new 150- 500/600 lenses from Sigma and Tamron as the 100-400 is on the shorter side for birds. And you will most likely see an improvement in your shots based on the ease of usage of the Sony.

That being said, looking at the pictures you posted, I'm tempted to say the following: If there isn't anything defective with your gear and you can't get those kind of shots consistently with your current gear, then it might be worth it to invest in the photographer (books about Z AF, trainings) as you might be doing something wrong.

 

[arbitrage]

I’d do some research as I haven’t shot the a9 but I don’t think it has bird eye af. Maybe they updated it but I don’t believe so. If looking Sony the a1 and new a74 I believe it is are probably your best choices.

The a9III is likely to come out end of this year and likely positioned as a sports camera and step up some features against the R3.

@Steve can help as I believe he has an a9.

A9/A9II don't officially support birds (despite Sony showing a Snowy Owl in the original Animal Eye-AF presentation).
That said, if the bird is large enough in the frame I found the system did find bird eyes for a select number of species. It could do owls (tested on Barred Owl), it was decent at Dunlin like shorebirds and it could do female pintails and mallards. It also came on with Song Sparrow sometimes and occasionally a few other sparrow/finches. However, I mostly just left the feature switched off on my A9/A9II.

As per animals in my limited experience it worked on racoons really well and deer fairly well. It certainly doesn't just have to be a dog/cat. Many report success with seals and bears etc.

 

[Calson]

With new image processors in the cameras new functionality can be implemented. I saw that with the D500 where Group AF worked well for the first time and made a great deal of difference when photographing hummers darting about. Eye focus is a similar advance where much faster processing of more data from the AF sensors is needed.

The D5 is much better at acquiring focus with fast approaching subjects, always the most difficult situation for cameras, but it has far less resolution than my D850 which is important with wildlife photography with greater camera to subject distances. If the Z9 provides the autofocus capabilities of the D5/D6 in the field along with the 45MP sensor it will be a game changer for wildlife photography.