John Navitsky
Well-known member
i would suggest there are also just a lot more z8s out there as well as a different skill set profile of z8 vs z9 owners which will skew "perception".
Nikon z9 vs Z8…. Not what I expected…
- Thread starter Skye.prf
- 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).
Excellent point, John. I personally know a lot more beginner to intermediate photographers that own a Z8 than the number of the same owning a Z9. The typical professional or advanced Z owner is also a bit more forgiving of focus issues because they have so many ways to choose to focus and get the shot. I think advanced photographers more routinely push their cameras to the performance limits, so they aren't surprised when they hit or exceed what a camera can do - or they readily experiment with other techniques to get what they want.
lukemeup
Well-known member
After shooting with a Z9 for 1.5 years and getting a Z8 and using them side by side for a month and ultimately opting to just keep the Z8 - I noticed no difference in performance whatsoever. The only difference for me was less weight to carry around + worse battery life (but not as bad as some paint it). Tradeoffs. YMMW.
maxxus46
Active member
It is physically impossible to have any real difference between the Z8/Z9 from an AF or imaging performance standpoint. Both of these cameras have the exact same sensor, readout speed, chipset, even viewfinder. Any difference is either software (algorithms programmed into FW) or simply perceived under different conditions. That said, as a former Sony A1 owner, and now shooting a Z8, there is little to complain about in my opinion. The Z8 actually does some things better than the A1 I used to own. Took me a few weeks to adapt but I can get ANY shot with my Z8 that I could with my A1. So really, nothing to complain about when the camera costs $2500 less than the A1. My suggestion is spend some time learning the cameras AF system. Once you do, there's very Little you cannot capture
maxxus46
Active member
maxxus46
Active member
But the R5 had a standard BSI CMOS sensor, where the R3 has a stacked sensor with much faster readout speeds... Which absolutely affects AF performance (along with reduced rolling shutter , higher framrate, blackout free viewfinder experience). Hence the R3 is a very different camera
I wouldn't disagree that there is sometimes something to this, but when talking about the particular kinds of issues people tend to talk about with regard to AF in Z8/9 the thing is that most of these issues concern operations which are to a large degree out of the user's hands. In particular many of these sorts of discussions concern subject detection and while there are some ways that a user can mess up and make SD a lot more difficult for their camera, generally speaking it's a case where the user hits a button and the SD either focuses or it doesn't.
Also noteworthy are the issues that I, ajrmd, Horshack on DPR, and others have been able to demonstrate, where the SD does show focus but the focus is actually on a completely different plane - something it does very consistently at ~EV6 and below. That is a whole other can of worms.
I always like to go back to the different experiences we saw people report with the z7ii because there were some pretty compelling dynamics at play there. This was a camera which a lot of people said couldn't reliably AF with motion, meanwhile others said the same sort of things as we're talking about here: it was a matter of differences in skill, etc. I was considering upgrading my old Nikon to mirrorless so I paid close attention. I eventually decided to trust the "it's a skill issue" side and got the camera, only to be disappointed in the AF.
In particular, two videos stood out to me. One was Jarod Polin trying to use SD to shoot a kid going down a slide and it just wouldn't stay with the kid. He's a controversial figure, but there's little question of his skill with a camera. I went and put my kid on the slide in the same way and my Z7ii wouldn't do it, either.
A second was a video Ricci made after the Z7ii's update that was supposed to improve subject tracking. He took the camera outside on a dark night under some streetlights so that there was some light but it was still very, very dark for a camera. He put the camera on a tripod and then had it AF on him as he walked towards the camera in that very poor light, and it was totally flawless. It was amazing. Yet with the same firmware and the same settings my Z7ii couldn't do it in good daylight. We're just talking about a camera on a tripod here, using SD - it's almost impossible to think of where user skill could come into the picture.
Why the difference, then? I don't know. I still wonder about the possibility that Nikon is at times substituting ICs for theoretically equivalent ones depending on supply factors and that some of these are performing slightly differently, especially with different firmware revisions. This is not that unusual a thing for a manufacturer to do to help keep production up when supply or cost issues crop up. This could also explain why we had that weird situations where SOME Z8s, but not all, had a green tint problem.
I have nothing to support it but have long theorized that Nikon is sometimes using substitute ICs when supply or cost issues crop up which could interfere with production. This is not at all that unusual a thing for electronics manufacturers to do. It's the only thing I can think of that might explain why there are seemingly two radically different sets of experiences out there with Z8 users, even users of comparable ability. It might also explain why there are significantly fewer complaints about the Z9, if they prioritize the Z9 for the original, correct ICs.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
i think we sometimes see that in daylight as well. the most prevalent cases i've seen is people focusing through foreground clutter. often there will be a gap in the clutter with the subject, the box on the subject, but focus actually catches on the foreground (branch, grass, whatever).
my theory there is that while the camera uses the sensor and subject detection to detect the subject, the actual af is performed by either the af sensors embedded on the sensor, the image using contrast detection, or a combination and i think in some cases, we see it using the af sensors that may not be exactly where the subject detection is telling it to look, perhaps because it's the closest af sensor, or perhaps it thinks the subject is bigger than it is and using sensors from a more broad area than appropriate in the situation.
it's hard to say, but regardless, i think we can all agree the system is far from perfect and things do go wrong.
i certainly won't attempt to refute the example. there are lots of situations where things go sideways. and while i don't suggest the results are invalid, nor will i suggest the test was not valid or informative, i will say Jarod tends not to be willing to learn the strengths of the system and change things up to set things up for success.
again, the test is ok, "i do this and this happens". however, all the tools have strengths and weaknesses, and it's useful to understand those, but when it comes to _employing_ the tools, you factor those things in and compensate to get the best result.
It's possible it's just randomness, but there's also a possibility that Ricci unconsciously sets himself up for success in the inverse way I describe above, taking into account factors we don't even realize are pertinent.
That may be true. For instance, if I want to get a kid going down the slide I know that dynamic area will usually be much more effective on the Z8 and while I have long since sold my z7ii I suspect it would be true there as well. However, I think what is important to remember is that my point wasn't about whether or not the z7ii or any other camera can effectively photograph any particular situation - if it was, then yes recognizing that a different method might be more effective would be a good idea. Rather, my point was about how different people using theoretically identical cameras have found somewhat significant differences in performance for the same mode or approach. In other words, there were plenty of people who said their z7ii did the slide perfectly with SD even as myself and Polin and certainly other experienced photographers found it didn't and needed more of a "manual" approach.
It's hard for me to imagine factors which would be relevant to something like this.
Johan Schmidt
Well-known member
Flagships always seem to have more 'torque & grunt' for AF
TurtleCat
Well-known member
That was definitely the case when it was mechanically driven. I think the limiting factor is the motor coils in the lenses and not the voltage from the body. It is interesting to note the different experiences everyone has. It would be interesting if people reached out to people like Ricci and Thom and others directly to see what their specific response is vs extrapolating from their other writings.
I don't own a Z8 and only used a rental unit for a weekend. It overheated.
As @EricBowles mentioned above, camera companies drop the cripple hammer all the time to differentiate (justify) among models at different price points, most often through software.
Given the difference in thermal performance between the 8 and 9, there is no question that some performance will be throttled back on the 8. No idea whether AF is one of those.
As @EricBowles mentioned above, camera companies drop the cripple hammer all the time to differentiate (justify) among models at different price points, most often through software.
Given the difference in thermal performance between the 8 and 9, there is no question that some performance will be throttled back on the 8. No idea whether AF is one of those.
JerryF
Member
Before I went mirrorless (Z9) I always had better AF experience with the battery pack attached to the D850. Not really beacuse of the extra power available but because of the extra mass. The mirror slap and thus vibration was better damped by the extra mass even on hand held shots (at least that was my perception). What if the AF systems are exactly the same between the Z8/9 BUT the extra mass and/or different ergonomics simply allow the shooter to hold the camera more steady thus improving AF performance? Maybe lighter isn't alway better in some cases? Just thinking out loud YMMV.
A lot of the time I shoot birds on a tripod and gimbal. I would imagine the difference in body type would be less significant under those circumstances.
Also when reviewers do comparative tests they typically do so on a tripod? Trying to run a comparison while hand held introduces too many variables. I do recall however vaguely some tests of VR that were done handheld at various shutter speeds.
There has to be a scientific way to sort these differences out with objective tests.
ajrmd
Well-known member
Getting back to the premise, while the AF is generally very good there are still many opportunities for improvement. I was reviewing a folder of perhaps a thousand images from a several hour bird shoot in April. The subjects varied from perched passerines in a variety of settings (flight/perched), long necked birds (Sandhills, GBH, Egrets), waterfowl swimming and in flight, and osprey in flight. What was most impressive was the sheer number of in focus images which were ~90-95%. More importantly, it was fairly amazing the number of images where SD worked near perfectly with the AF point clearly located over the eye, particularly for perched subjects (it generally works less well for BIF but we know that).
Although I may be pedantic in my thinking though there are still some head scratchers such as how SD can't seem to identify the eye of a nuthatch on the side of the tree. I'm thinking that it may be a subject recognition issue attributable to rotation, because SD appears to work when the subject is upright (see following two screen captures.
Equally frustrating, are the continued challenges with certain BIF subjects. In the past, I've mentioned and posted many series illustrating the loss of AF capture with osprey/eagle strikes where the apparent AF appears to "wander" away from the subject in spite of accurate/consistent panning and the AF point being clearly located over the subject. I'm not certain whether it's an issue with the predictive AF algorithms or some other factor, though it occurs in every AF mode and setting that I've tried. I find it interesting that the Nikon cameras which seem to require the most user input for AF of the big three do not allow for adjustment of SD "sensitivity" and "stickiness" other than the a3 setting for blocked response and subject behavior. In video modes, both AF speed and AF tracking are adjustable (g6,7).
Although I may be pedantic in my thinking though there are still some head scratchers such as how SD can't seem to identify the eye of a nuthatch on the side of the tree. I'm thinking that it may be a subject recognition issue attributable to rotation, because SD appears to work when the subject is upright (see following two screen captures.
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.
Equally frustrating, are the continued challenges with certain BIF subjects. In the past, I've mentioned and posted many series illustrating the loss of AF capture with osprey/eagle strikes where the apparent AF appears to "wander" away from the subject in spite of accurate/consistent panning and the AF point being clearly located over the subject. I'm not certain whether it's an issue with the predictive AF algorithms or some other factor, though it occurs in every AF mode and setting that I've tried. I find it interesting that the Nikon cameras which seem to require the most user input for AF of the big three do not allow for adjustment of SD "sensitivity" and "stickiness" other than the a3 setting for blocked response and subject behavior. In video modes, both AF speed and AF tracking are adjustable (g6,7).
fcotterill
Well-known member
This example is one where I would definitely toggle/override the AFmode to a tighter Custom Area - keeping it centered on the bird's head if possible.
Usually I find - with my Z9's - that the subject detection picks up the eye easily on birds with a darker eye in lighter plumage. Often the feather tones are more subtle.
Equally the D6 grabs sharp eyes on moving birds - hopping in vegetation - with custom area modes, also 3D, with face and eye detection turned on.
Usually I find - with my Z9's - that the subject detection picks up the eye easily on birds with a darker eye in lighter plumage. Often the feather tones are more subtle.
Equally the D6 grabs sharp eyes on moving birds - hopping in vegetation - with custom area modes, also 3D, with face and eye detection turned on.
TonyF
Active member
I've had both and, having sold my Z9, can only say my hit rate would be slightly higher on a Z9 than Z8 purely due to physical ergonomics and balance of the equipment. Especially when paired with the Z800. I prefer my Z8 however because of how important light weight kit is to me.
I have both a Z9 and Z8. I use a 400 TC 2.8 and a Tamron 150-500 lens. At 400 mm you can easily "feel" the difference in AF speed and subject detection reliability when shooting. Subject detection and 3D tracking seem magical when they work. Sometimes they get confused. Both cameras tend to think the closer reflection in still water is more important that the actual subject. There are a lot of Great Blue Herons and Egrets where I live. Subject detection is not always good on these birds. The brown eyes against drk fur like bison or black bears is another area where subcect detection has limited usefulness. So I have a button programmed to let me turn subject detection off quickly and another button to cycle through to the smallest AF area I can keep on the subject's head. The 400 TC is better at focus aquisition and at holding onth the subject but it doea not make a significant difference which camera body it is attached to. The Tamron lens is slower but again is equally slow on the Z9 or Z8. I also do a lot of runway fashion. A similar problem to the kid on a slide. The models move directly toward you and then away from you. I have used both bodies with a 70-200 f/2,8 lens. This requires the camera to estimate where the subject will be once the shutter lag and rate of movement at known. Both bodies do a pretty good , but not perfect, job of holding focus. Again no noticeable difference in hit rate. My experience with my Z8 is "no concerns with AF using subject detection compared to the Z9,
macwalter
Well-known member
I have only used a z9 once, soon after it came out and it convinced me to go with the z8 when it came out. For me with smaller hands and handholding I didn’t care for the weight penalty of the z9. There may be some minor differences in AF performance but I find the z8 does pretty well for me so long as I recognize its weaknesses. No camera is perfect. the battery life is the greatest difference imop. After trying various options the one I use most often is to set it to go to sleep after 10 seconds and each time I want to shoot, train myself to hit the af button as I lift the camera up to shoot to wake it up. I’m handholding. If I set it for longer it will often go to sleep and if I forget to hit a button to wake it up, I’m looking at a black screen and miss the shot. I tend to think the lenses being used make far more difference in terms of af speed and accuracy.
the z9 eliminates this need and you can leave it on all the time and there are occasions where my method does not allow me to be quick enough But most of the time it works fine.
the z9 eliminates this need and you can leave it on all the time and there are occasions where my method does not allow me to be quick enough But most of the time it works fine.
ajrmd
Well-known member
It was Wide area S in the first shot AA in the second. That wasn't the point of my post, rather I was highlighting how SD is in need of refinement and improvement. As I have published elsewhere even with Wide area S, I've had SD jump wildly to other parts of the bird as illustrated here:
Nikon Z8 Af Area modes Single point vs Custom Area
Is there any difference in behavior and precision between the Single Point AF area and a 1x1 size custom box (configured for C1 or C2) when subject detection is turned off for the custom AF area? Thanks in advance!
bcgforums.com
Cameron T
Well-known member
I used the picture in your link, because I'm lazy (and it's night out here, and I can't guarantee I'll find herons/egrets here at this time of year), and I couldn't make it jump from the eye in any AF area mode (AA, WA large, WA small) to the body. The farthest it got was farther on the face. Putting the wide small box on the body got locks on the body and eye both, the wide large mode stuck to the eye much more than wide small, which was interesting, but I'm not sure if that's a distance from the box thing (putting the box where it wouldn't cover the eye for both of those to confirm). I'm using a z9. So either there's a different in AF machine learning, which is more likely given the z9 was updated more recently, or there's something else going on.It was Wide area S in the first shot AA in the second. That wasn't the point of my post, rather I was highlighting how SD is in need of refinement and improvement. As I have published elsewhere even with Wide area S, I've had SD jump wildly to other parts of the bird as illustrated here:
Nikon Z8 Af Area modes Single point vs Custom Area
Is there any difference in behavior and precision between the Single Point AF area and a 1x1 size custom box (configured for C1 or C2) when subject detection is turned off for the custom AF area? Thanks in advance!
Admittedly, an entirely unscientific test.
I've heard that virtually every firmware update for Z cameras is including improvements to subject detection. That's an ongoing process - not a develop and forget. Nikon continues to train subject detection for difficult subjects and increased reliability.
On the other hand, for small jumpy subjects a success rate of 90-95% is pretty remarkable. Especially when we have tools to use alternative AF modes if there is a problem. Every camera brand has similar variation with specific subjects, light levels, or other factors.
What means the most to me is the correlation of the viewfinder focus box to actual focus. The AF box showing subject detection is picking up the eye needs to match actual focus on that eye. I've seen too many cases where there camera display shows the subject is recognized and in focus, but the resulting images are not quite there. That's especially true with the Z6iii for some subjects, and less often the case with the Z8 and Z9.
On the other hand, for small jumpy subjects a success rate of 90-95% is pretty remarkable. Especially when we have tools to use alternative AF modes if there is a problem. Every camera brand has similar variation with specific subjects, light levels, or other factors.
What means the most to me is the correlation of the viewfinder focus box to actual focus. The AF box showing subject detection is picking up the eye needs to match actual focus on that eye. I've seen too many cases where there camera display shows the subject is recognized and in focus, but the resulting images are not quite there. That's especially true with the Z6iii for some subjects, and less often the case with the Z8 and Z9.
O
Well-known member
Z9 Battery 10.8V 3300 m a/h 36w/h Made in Japan Suits Z9
Z8 Battery 7V 2280 m a/h 16w/h. Made in Japan Finished in CHINA this battery Suits many other consumer cameras.
Influences: lens type, application, technique, difference in battery and camera specification, can they effect outcomes, absolutely in cases, by how much is subjective.
As stated in previous comments from others in this segment, I agree Flagship cameras seem to have more grunt - torque.
My 300 2.8 VR II responds slightly better on a Z9 than a Z8, this is noticible as the glass elements are heavy.
Not so evident on a PF FL or 50mm lens. Or Z lenses.
My 300 2.8 VR II responds slightly different on my D850 with standard single battery versus my D850 with a D850 power Grip and D4s battery. The D4s battery has higher specification, the lens has a slightly better snap to things, similarly with the 600 F4 G.
I far prefer outright the Z9 but need the Z8 as there is a clear difference overall for my current applications.
I sold my Z9 after the 2 year warranty ran out and bought a Z8, also because of my specific need to hike and camp out 3 or 4 days at a time, plus more public street and travel photography.
Is there a difference between the Z8 and Z9 yes, clearly for some, negligible to little or none for others.
Assumption, with many of the newer Z lenses and their different motor drive and lighter elements the circumstances may vary or be less noticeable, using the G, FX series in my experience performance between the Z9 Z8 is noticeable especially on larger F2.8 F4 Glass. If its Pshcosimatic so be it, I feel it's real.
Only an opinion
Last edited:
ajrmd
Well-known member
Spent some time in the woods this afternoon and the Z8's SD was working pretty well on perched birds though was struggling with the turkeys where it seemed to prefer the back feathers even with a Wide S on the head. It wasn't doing so well for passerines in flight, so I simply turned it off and improved the hit rate dramatically. Turning off the SD is usually something I usually reserve for fast and explosive subjects like KF's diving, but I'm relying on it more and more. SD really seems to throttle the AF speed for birds and perhaps it is attributable to the complexity of the subject unlike airplanes where the subject recognition hits almost every time.
I would be curious to hear from folks whether they shut off SD for owls, eagle strikes, etc.
I would be curious to hear from folks whether they shut off SD for owls, eagle strikes, etc.