Using the 180-600 seems to be adding another variable into the mix. The 180-600 probably focuses slower due to the large focal range and design differences. Still, one would hope that once focus is acquired focus would be maintained.
Struggling with Z8 focus tracking
- Thread starter SCoombs
- 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).
JerryF
Member
One feature I would like to see Nikon add to the Z firmware is focus in DX but record in FX mode. It seems that the focus algorithm with SD works better with larger subjects when in DX mode all other things being the same. I understand that you would not be able to confirm composition BUT it might greatly improve keepers in certain situations. It might also allow the user to keep the subject under the focus point better. Anyone else think that would be useful?
Very strange, shooting a lot of sports I can see how frustrating this is and it seems like the camera is not performing as it should, at least not like my Z9 or even my z6iii is actually performing. So a few more random thoughts....I may be reaching here but you never know.
I would stop using BBF and just set the shutter release to focusing. My thought is that maybe there is some issue with the AF-On button or maybe even a conflict with the shutter release and the AF-On button.
I would check and clean all camera and lens contacts, maybe just a poor contact is causing issues.
I would try different batteries, maybe there is just a voltage issue that caused focus motor problems.
I know these are reaching, but stranger things have happened!
I have Reikan FoCal pro version and I would run it through a focus calibration process with the 70-200 and then run a focus consistency test with the 70-200. It would be interesting to see what type of focus graph the camera and lens combination would create.
I have used my 180-600 for outdoor sports a lot and it has performed very well. It does not focus as fast as the 70-100 but for most situations that has not been an issue. I am shooting a softball regional today and I will shoot most of it with the 180-60.
I would stop using BBF and just set the shutter release to focusing. My thought is that maybe there is some issue with the AF-On button or maybe even a conflict with the shutter release and the AF-On button.
I would check and clean all camera and lens contacts, maybe just a poor contact is causing issues.
I would try different batteries, maybe there is just a voltage issue that caused focus motor problems.
I know these are reaching, but stranger things have happened!
I have Reikan FoCal pro version and I would run it through a focus calibration process with the 70-200 and then run a focus consistency test with the 70-200. It would be interesting to see what type of focus graph the camera and lens combination would create.
I have used my 180-600 for outdoor sports a lot and it has performed very well. It does not focus as fast as the 70-100 but for most situations that has not been an issue. I am shooting a softball regional today and I will shoot most of it with the 180-60.
Can you get another experienced Z8 or Z9 Nikon photographer to take similar pictures at a sports event to try to find out if their results indicate your camera is likely to be defective?
htom
New member
I just spent two hours with my Z8 and 70-200S testing the AF system outdoors, chasing birds along the nearby coastline. My experience was similar to what you (OP) initially described. Keep in mind, while I have considerable experience shooting theatre performances in low light conditions, I’m not an expert in wildlife, bird, or fast-paced sports photography.
All test shots were handheld, using BBF, AF-C, Matrix metering, 20 FPS continuous, Auto ISO, and shutter speeds of 1/3200, 1/4000, and 1/5000, with VR set to sport and off. Camera has the latest FW installed.
I tested a variety of AF modes, including handoff: wide small, wide large, custom, 3D, and full auto with SD set to 90% birds and 10% auto. I also used dynamic small, dynamic medium, and single point (obviously, no SD was involved in these). I experimented with short and long bursts, and spent time simply tracking subjects in the viewfinder to observe the AF system’s behaviour.
In a nutshell, the more control you give to the camera's brain, the more mistakes it makes—often losing the subject and wandering off target. The most success I had was with the 1x1 custom AF box with SD (bird) enabled, followed by single point, dynamic small and a custom 5x3 box with SD enabled (in that order) which is almost identical to my theatre performance shooting experience.
Dynamic small tends to wander off target easily if something with stronger contrast and/or closer in distance enters under the outer helper points. Also, the focus point/area is slightly larger than its borders displayed in the viewfinder, which can lead to an unexpected behaviour. For example, outer points can latch onto other objects with higher contrast, even if they barely touch the focus area. In theory, this shouldn't happen since the center point of the dynamic area is supposed to take priority, but real-life experience suggests otherwise. It seems only Nikon knows the exact algorithm that determines how much weight is given to the center point in each scenario.
Custom 5x3 behaves very similarly to Dynamic Small when it comes to latching onto something other than the intended target. While it can help keep the focus area on a moving subject, I found more success using this mode in combination with a handoff to the 1x1 custom area to improve accuracy.
Wide small, wide large, 3D, and auto AF (on its own) are hit and miss. Sometimes they lock on and track the subject well, but other times they struggle to achieve an initial lock, and they often lose the subject between frames (though this can be mitigated to some extent with 20 FPS). The best way to use them is in combination with handoff to other AF modes and longer bursts.
Overall, I believe there’s nothing wrong with your Z8 (or mine). The AF system is far from perfect for sure.
All test shots were handheld, using BBF, AF-C, Matrix metering, 20 FPS continuous, Auto ISO, and shutter speeds of 1/3200, 1/4000, and 1/5000, with VR set to sport and off. Camera has the latest FW installed.
I tested a variety of AF modes, including handoff: wide small, wide large, custom, 3D, and full auto with SD set to 90% birds and 10% auto. I also used dynamic small, dynamic medium, and single point (obviously, no SD was involved in these). I experimented with short and long bursts, and spent time simply tracking subjects in the viewfinder to observe the AF system’s behaviour.
In a nutshell, the more control you give to the camera's brain, the more mistakes it makes—often losing the subject and wandering off target. The most success I had was with the 1x1 custom AF box with SD (bird) enabled, followed by single point, dynamic small and a custom 5x3 box with SD enabled (in that order) which is almost identical to my theatre performance shooting experience.
Dynamic small tends to wander off target easily if something with stronger contrast and/or closer in distance enters under the outer helper points. Also, the focus point/area is slightly larger than its borders displayed in the viewfinder, which can lead to an unexpected behaviour. For example, outer points can latch onto other objects with higher contrast, even if they barely touch the focus area. In theory, this shouldn't happen since the center point of the dynamic area is supposed to take priority, but real-life experience suggests otherwise. It seems only Nikon knows the exact algorithm that determines how much weight is given to the center point in each scenario.
Custom 5x3 behaves very similarly to Dynamic Small when it comes to latching onto something other than the intended target. While it can help keep the focus area on a moving subject, I found more success using this mode in combination with a handoff to the 1x1 custom area to improve accuracy.
Wide small, wide large, 3D, and auto AF (on its own) are hit and miss. Sometimes they lock on and track the subject well, but other times they struggle to achieve an initial lock, and they often lose the subject between frames (though this can be mitigated to some extent with 20 FPS). The best way to use them is in combination with handoff to other AF modes and longer bursts.
Overall, I believe there’s nothing wrong with your Z8 (or mine). The AF system is far from perfect for sure.
htom
New member
Interesting idea, but what are the odds of seeing the same behaviour if Fn 1/2 (or other buttons) are programmed to AF-ON + AF Area? Without this setup, he wouldn’t be able to do the handoff.
Even though I believe there’s nothing wrong with the camera, an old-school hard reset wouldn’t hurt. Step 1: reset the camera to factory settings and remove the battery for several hours or overnight.
In my experience, the 180-600 focal range has little or no bearing. Tracking is not a problem for it, even though the AF motor is a bit slower than the VCM in, say, a 400 f2.8. The f6.3 aperture between 500 and 600 mm doesn't seem to effect tracking much, if at all, but initial focus acquisition on fast birds can be more problematic. This is why I am so desperate for that Z9 firmware update we were expecting.
On dslrs, dynamic 9 was my goto BiF AF mode, but I can't for the life of me get comparable results on the Z9.
The outer points we always better performers when the background had a very low detail frequency ie: sky. So contrast was a big contributor to helping maintain focus distance and tracking acquired with the central AF point.
D9 was the same as AF point surround on Canon, and both functioned very well in pretty much all light scenarios.
But with the Z9, and presumably the Z8, everything has been turned on its head to some degree or other. SD can sometimes help, and be a pain in the bum at other times.
Again, IMO, focal length plays a big part from the PoV of 'how big the subject is in the frame'. The subject really needs to occupy 20-30% of the frame minimum, especially when allowing the camera to have a big choice of AF points. Certain AF modes have their own locked in a3 variations, so if you play with those settings, you might not always be getting what you think!
Reikan is a whole other issue for me right now. When I sign into the app it says I have a free license only and won't let me do sny tests. Yet elsewhere the app itself acknowledges I have a pro license and if I try to buy a license it says I can't because I already have one.
It's been like this for a couple weeks. I've contacted support twice and haven't gotten any reply. I was honestly beginning to wonder if the company went out of business or something.
Now THAT update is something I'd actually pay money for!
ajrmd
Well-known member
A lot of suggestions are flying around and the more that I think about this, particularly in context of my long tenure in photography, the more I am reminded of a similar experience that I used to have with my Canon equipment, namely the 7d and its successor the 7dii. For some reason, I struggled mightily with that camera in terms of af consistency. I recall receiving all kinds of advice (none of which worked), sent the camera back to CPS twice without any changes in performance and ultimately sold the bodies. Interestingly, I had performed some extensive testing with the bodies, namely set up targets in good lighting, and demonstrated the af inconsistencies. I provided this documentation with images and video to CPS, who simply looked at the bodies, information I had provided, and returned them as being "in spec". Perhaps, it is time for you to perform some static testing by setting up a manequin in a well lit, real life setting and perform some experiments. First, shoot it in AFS with SD on the eye. Defocus the lens each time and let it reacquire focus. Look at the images and see if it captures the eye or some other part on the face (mine tends to wander sometimes capturing the lashes, brow, etc.). Next, try the same thing in AFC with the various AF modes, dynamic small, medium, AA, Wide area, SD on/off. Let us know what you find. I may do the same thing with my bodies.
Oh, I've done this extensively. Of the 275,000 shots on this camera, I wouldn't be surprised if 1/10 to 1/6 of them were from doing these kinds of tests trying to figure out what the heck was going on. There were four threads about this on DPReview last April/May about this where I was trying to sort out issues similar to that fashion photographer posting over there right now and one of the more technically inclined users set up a bunch of tests of his own trying to do the same thing. He largely got similar results.
What I found was single point AF in AF-S would be generally fairly consistently accurate - not perfectly, but enough that I would never have complained or noticed a problem if that's all I used. Subject detect in these modes was a downgrade in reliability, but was still pretty good.
In AF-C, subject detect (using ANY of the subject detect modes/box sizes/3D/etc.) would at a relatively high rate (maybe 20%) say it had focus with the green indicator on the eye when it did not. I'm not even counting "eyelash focus" here, which I considered close enough to count as a hit, but focus on literally some other focal plane inches in front or behind the eye. Most of the time, it was actually that it would focus on the other eye than the one it said it was. So, if someone was turned slightly, the focus indicator would be on the front eye but the focus plane would be on the rear eye, making the photo look quite out of focus. Sometimes, though, it wouldn't even be on the rear eye but would be on some other focal plane which didn't correspond to anything in the photo.
As light went down, this problem became more pronounced. At or above EV 7 or 8, I got the ~20% focus on random planes. At EV 5 or 6, it happened much more, and at EV 3 or 4 it was happening most of the time.
This whole ordeal was one reason I started using dynamic area, because in those same tests dynamic area would usually be focused on what it said it was. It wasn't perfect (maybe 85 - 90%) but far, far more reliable than subject detect, especially as light went down. I did a bunch of videos demonstrating it at the time:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRB0boQ5uCQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzNVcI6isvE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tswwqAtQBQ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3YihxCYVvI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYLC2-m6cFk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGaAZXdGZxg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOXsnKFE5SI