Improvement in keeper rate with the Sony a1 vs Nikon D850 for these BIF conditions?
- Thread starter santiago
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
santiago
Active member
Yes, that could give you a second chance if single misses tracking on take-off... going to try it!
santiago
Active member
Explosive as hell, very windy environment and very fast bird, you blink and they are 50 meters away
santiago
Active member
Hopefully you are right! Static is absolutely fine, but my impression is that it will be tough for the a1 to track the eye in flight (in this situation and for this bird). Maybe a 600mm will help there, not sure
John Navitsky
Well-known member
i think the larger the subject is in the frame, the better and faster you are going to acquire focus. but i suspect the longer the lens, the harder it is going to be on you to keep the subject in the frame, esp. if it's tracking explosive action.
i shoot dog sports, and i don't know how many images i have where the dog's head is cut off because it jumped up and i wasn't quite able to keep up
santiago
Active member
Right, lens button with registered focus area does it
arbitrage
Well-known member
BEAF for flight is a hit and miss affair with all three of the big systems that I've used (A1, Z9, R5). For something that launches that fast and may be a bird that isn't as typical as some of the AI algorithms in the database I doubt you'll see Eye-AF come on very often. I have seen Eye-AF come on for some fairly fast BIF like swallows but only for times when the swallow actually flies in a straight line and I can pan smooth enough to keep it relatively centred in the frame. If you had a grouse give you a nice pass by, perpendicular to the camera then you may see BEAF come on.
That said, I don't think BEAF for BIF is very important anyways. Maybe for larger birds where it can avoid near wing focus or body focus when the head is way out on a long neck. But for smaller and faster birds where you usually aren't filling the frame at all then I think not having BEAF activate isn't a big deal.
Personally, seeing your recent images, I'd have shot all of those in Wide Non-Tracking unless you could get the camera to recognize the head/eye while it was sitting partly covered on the ground and then I'd have used Flex Spot Tracking to see if it would keep up when it burst out.
abc123brian
Well-known member
We don’t really know what is coming other than what has been announced. Seeing how the new 400mm is lighter, I would expect the same for the 600mm but that hasn’t been announced, just on the road map. There is also the 800mm PF which will be available soon. The 400mm PF should be interesting and I’m waiting for the 200-600mm. The weight of the Z9 isn’t as big of a deal for me as the overall size which makes it hang more awkwardly for me. Overall I haven‘t found it to be a big deal but an ungripped body would be nice.
santiago
Active member
Will try Expand Spot which is how the a1 calls it I believe. Experimented with non-tracking and had not much success, can you please elaborate on your reasoning? Also Zone a lot better than Wide (I thought bird close to background and not much contrast is too much for Wide). Many thanks once more!
arbitrage
Well-known member
You'd probably only want to use non-tracking if in Wide (and maybe in Zone). Otherwise it will be too difficult to keep the Flex Spots on the bird. In my experience non-tracking Wide does a lot better with not getting confused by non-moving subjects in the frame. If you do try Wide (non-tracking) remember that Sony AF algorithms prioritize what is in the centre of the frame and what is closer to the camera so I always try to engage my subject when it is closer to the centre of the frame and then I can get lazy with my tracking from there on
But without being there it is hard for me to say for sure if Wide would be my preferred mode. There may be something in the environment that is just too distracting for Wide. The mode you should never use is Wide with Tracking...that one is a recipe for tracking just about everything in the scene that you don't want to track
The mode you should never use is Wide with Tracking...that one is a recipe for tracking just about everything in the scene that you don't want to track
LOL, been there done that!
santiago
Active member
So helpful, most grateful!You'd probably only want to use non-tracking if in Wide (and maybe in Zone). Otherwise it will be too difficult to keep the Flex Spots on the bird. In my experience non-tracking Wide does a lot better with not getting confused by non-moving subjects in the frame. If you do try Wide (non-tracking) remember that Sony AF algorithms prioritize what is in the centre of the frame and what is closer to the camera so I always try to engage my subject when it is closer to the centre of the frame and then I can get lazy with my tracking from there on
If the Z9 ever arrives I will have to try and remember all of this ... but by then @Steve Z9 book may be out
Our equivalent upland birds would be Chukar and Gray Partridge and a bit slower and bigger Greater Sage Grouse. We also encounter a few Sharp-tailed Grouse. My keeper rate was highest with the D6 but not that much greater than the D850 (with battery grip and EN EL 18 battery) if both using the same lens 600 f/4 E , 500 pf, Tamron 70-200 G2 f/2.8 with our without the 1.4 TC. But 14 max frames per second compared to 9 max gave me more choices. Yes all hand held ... not BBF tried for a year just not the way I was wired ... used the D6 and D850 with single point to start and then f1 button push to go to group AF. All the Nikon glass I have, old age(73) and a stubborn bent is why I did not switch to Sony I have been getting a "hand full" of BIF experimenting with my Z6II and Z100-400 with and without the 1.4 TC okay on Geese and other slow big birds but that slow frame rate and slow EVF refresh rate is a pain for BIF. If I am serious about shooting BIF right now or small birds deep in the brush I grab the D850 and the 600 f/4 E every time.
Our equivalent upland birds would be Chukar and Gray Partridge and a bit slower and bigger Greater Sage Grouse. We also encounter a few Sharp-tailed Grouse. My keeper rate was highest with the D6 but not that much greater than the D850 (with battery grip and EN EL 18 battery) if both using the same lens 600 f/4 E , 500 pf, Tamron 70-200 G2 f/2.8 with our without the 1.4 TC. But 14 max frames per second compared to 9 max gave me more choices. Yes all hand held ... not BBF tried for a year just not the way I was wired ... used the D6 and D850 with single point to start and then f1 button push to go to group AF. All the Nikon glass I have, old age(73) and a stubborn bent is why I did not switch to Sony
I have been getting a "hand full" of BIF experimenting with my Z6II and Z100-400 with and without the 1.4 TC okay on Geese and other slow big birds but that slow frame rate and slow EVF refresh rate is a pain for BIF. If I am serious about shooting BIF right now or small birds deep in the brush I grab the D850 and the 600 f/4 E every time.
Roy
Well-known member
My keeper rate for BIF with the D850 is about 90%-95%.
I only tried the A1 for a 2 days so its probably me but I only got about 80%-85% keepers...
RugglesZ9
Member
If you are waiting for a replacement for the z9, you have a long wait. If you are waiting for firmware updates to the z9, keep the order. I'm expecting firmware to close any gap. If you like Sony well enough, it doesn't matter.
santiago
Active member
I had missed this and I find it most intriguing... thank you very much! As you point out, fsi22 has been doing a ton of work on the comparison between the A1 and the OM-1, so perhaps there is a chance he can comment on his thoughts about both for this particular scenario...Although you might not have looked beyond full frame yet, you might also want to consider the Olympus OM-1 and a lens like the 300mm Pro or PanaLeica 200mm (600mm and 400mm FOV respectively).
People who own both the A1 and OM-1 are finding that the OM-1 has significantly faster AF acquisition than the A1 and a higher keeper rate when AF needs to be acquired instantaneously at close range.
It also has Bird AI which will help you with finding grouse before they take flight.
Olympus OM-1 vs Sony Alpha 1: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.www.dpreview.com
OM-1 PL200 + 2x tc and Swallows: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
OM vs A1 V2 - Swallows: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
Lastly, I'll mention that the image samples shared in these threads were shot in adverse conditions (rain, with a 2x TC) to push the AF tests to the max. Under more realistic circumstances, the IQ from this sensor and with high quality glass will be comparable to what you're getting currently (assuming you crop).
If you crop, the 300mm Pro will work great for you - otherwise you can use a brighter, faster lens like the 200mm or 40-150 Pro.
Aside from weight, weather-sealing and IBIS, there's the price advantage: $2200 vs $6500 for the A1 or $5500 for the Z9.
Edit: Oh, and an insane 50 fps with full autofocus! So even if its AF tracking is somewhat worse than that of the A1 (and it doesn't seem to be), it's mathematically impossible to get more keepers with an A1 than with an OM-1. Worth a look IMO.
faunagraphy
Active member
My pleasure! I thought you had decided on the A1. Isn't it working out for you?
By the way, here's another blog post that might interest you. It refers to the A9 and the older E-M1X, but might still be applicable for you. This photographer found that although Sony has significantly better AF tracking, AF acquisition speed on Olympus is a lot better, which makes it a better system for situations requiring instantaneous AF, perhaps like your shooting grouse as they burst from cover.
Sony A9 Vs Olympus E-M1x Focus Accuracy Tests | David McAughtry Photography
This is an AF test for birds in flight test of the flagship wildlife cameras from Sony and Olympus - the Sony A9 vs Olympus E-M1x. See which one wins!
mcaughtry.photo
It's also worth noting that while the A1's AF performance is comparable to that of the A9, the OM-1's AF is far better than that of the E-M1X in every respect.
santiago
Active member
I am testing again the A1 over the next 3-4 days, I was hoping for the FE 600mm prime but the one I was sent got lost so it will have to be the FE 400mm again.My pleasure! I thought you had decided on the A1. Isn't it working out for you?
By the way, here's another blog post that might interest you. It refers to the A9 and the older E-M1X, but might still be applicable for you. This photographer found that although Sony has significantly better AF tracking, AF acquisition speed on Olympus is a lot better, which makes it a better system for situations requiring instantaneous AF, perhaps like your shooting grouse as they burst from cover.
Sony A9 Vs Olympus E-M1x Focus Accuracy Tests | David McAughtry Photography
This is an AF test for birds in flight test of the flagship wildlife cameras from Sony and Olympus - the Sony A9 vs Olympus E-M1x. See which one wins!mcaughtry.photo
It's also worth noting that while the A1's AF performance is comparable to that of the A9, the OM-1's AF is far better than that of the E-M1X in every respect.
As these things go, it is complicated... I found that the A1, when it manages to acquire focus, to be superb. But then my not very scientific findings have some overlap with fsi22's thorough tests (again, really grateful for those by the way): mainly that with busy backgrounds and when close (close for me is 15m or so), it sometimes fails to acquire focus fast. In my "problem", these are the best chances, when the bird jumps close or you manage to locate the hiding spot on the ground. So I am doubting whether the OM-1 might be better or equally good at a much lower price point.
I would love to test the OM-1 as well but not available here with the 300mm Pro. At the moment, I am slightly concerned by: the equivalent 600mm FOV (difficult to frame properly), much more limited cropping (perhaps less need if you get the bird first!), will the 300mm Pro deliver the same IQ than the FE 400mm.
Then my impression is that it might be the case that if I improve my understanding of the A1 and technique and manage to acquire focus quickly, with the A1 tracking and the quality of the FE 400mm lens, it is difficult to make a better use of your chances?
So, annoyingly, I thought I had settled on the A1, and now the issue is open again... but I guess that is explained by the fact that I am learning in spades here!!!
Last edited:
santiago
Active member
As my test of the FE 600mm has been derailed I am going to do some shooting with the A1 on APS-C mode with the FE 400mm, this is simply to reduce the FOV to simulate how difficult it is to keep the bird in the focus area (it will be slightly lighter and physically shorter but better than nothing). I know of course this should be the same as cropping in post perhaps other than for the following: might this help AF and BEAF in difficult situations (busy background, small subject) if (big if) you still keep the subject in the focus area you are using? Also, I have read here that the A1 might "optimize" the images in APS-C?
Last edited:
arbitrage
Well-known member
I don't know where that guy got that information but the A1 does nothing to an APS-C image. It is identical to shooting FF and cropping in post.
I also found that the A1 doesn't seem to improve its Bird Eye AF when in APS-C as I found the R5 and Z9 do. Those two cameras would often recognize a bird's eye if you switched into APS-C when it wasn't recognizing it a moment earlier in FF. The A1 doesn't seem to have that same behaviour. Sometimes I find BEAF works better in FF than APS-C which I don't understand.
santiago
Active member
Great, so it will just be a handling test then! Thank you very much for your input
santiago
Active member
Thanks to the great input received from all of you, I have concluded, subject to further advice if you are kind enough to provide it, that for the particular problem described in this thread:
1/ The Sony A1 + FE 600mm is better at my problem than the D850, but not by enough to justify the $19,496 price tag (will quote B&H prices as of this morning throughout). One factor that I weighed for this conclusion is that I found it only at the limit in terms of maneuverability when handholding while hiking on this uneven terrain (for me)
2/ Although I have not been able to test the OM-1 + OL 300mm f4 at the problem (not available for hire here), I perhaps should take the chance at the $5,098 price tag? My main concern is that it is very difficult to frame properly with this problem and you need to crop (at least a bit) and there is not much room here with 20MP. I have asked a related question about this on a separate thread.
3/ Another option that could be in addition to or instead of 2/ is to get the Nikon 500mm PF f5.6 + MB-D18 power grip for $3,993.9. I will miss some shots for sure, but then when you get one (which you still do), you have plenty of room to crop. I have not tested the 500mm PF yet but that one is available to hire so I plan to. I do not think it makes real sense to do both 2/ and 3/ because in the end you are going to enjoy one rig more than the other one... I think I can also resell a new 2/ combo losing little money, so that would justify as it might be that 2/ is a lot better than 3/. If anybody has tested both and wants to venture an opinion, please do!
All thoughts most welcome as always and thank you again to everybody
1/ The Sony A1 + FE 600mm is better at my problem than the D850, but not by enough to justify the $19,496 price tag (will quote B&H prices as of this morning throughout). One factor that I weighed for this conclusion is that I found it only at the limit in terms of maneuverability when handholding while hiking on this uneven terrain (for me)
2/ Although I have not been able to test the OM-1 + OL 300mm f4 at the problem (not available for hire here), I perhaps should take the chance at the $5,098 price tag? My main concern is that it is very difficult to frame properly with this problem and you need to crop (at least a bit) and there is not much room here with 20MP. I have asked a related question about this on a separate thread.
3/ Another option that could be in addition to or instead of 2/ is to get the Nikon 500mm PF f5.6 + MB-D18 power grip for $3,993.9. I will miss some shots for sure, but then when you get one (which you still do), you have plenty of room to crop. I have not tested the 500mm PF yet but that one is available to hire so I plan to. I do not think it makes real sense to do both 2/ and 3/ because in the end you are going to enjoy one rig more than the other one... I think I can also resell a new 2/ combo losing little money, so that would justify as it might be that 2/ is a lot better than 3/. If anybody has tested both and wants to venture an opinion, please do!
All thoughts most welcome as always and thank you again to everybody
Bottom line is if the a1 can’t do it no camera can.
santiago
Active member
The question is with what success ratio... the D850 can do it and the A1 does it with a better ratio, but is it high enough to justify the investment... it looks tight to me at the moment
arbitrage
Well-known member
The framing of the Olympus combo is the same as the Sony combo.
You could also look at the 100-400 Olympus lens instead of the 300 but maybe that would be too slow an aperture? What FF equivalent FOV would be your ideal to frame with? There are some other m43 options with shorter focal lengths and f/2 or f/2.8 apertures that maybe would work better? Like a 200mm that would frame at 400 FF?
From what I've read on this Olympus OM-1, for short bursts with quick acquisition it may be the best out there but for longer tracking sequences the A1 will best it in tenacious tracking.