Z9 losing focus during BIF sequences

[JWest]

Interesting comment about AF is better in DX mode - I used it once before and found most of the images soft. Will look into it again.

I actually use DX when I can see that I will end up cropping to 20Mp regardless because in DX, the AF seems to work "better" and you can also of course simply see what's going on more clearly like waiting for a head to turn into the light or whatever you're wanting to capture.

I posted a wide panorama shot recently where I was in DX and could not get the whole flock of geese in the frame, having NO time to spare I just shot them front to tail as you might do an off the hip panorama to stitch.. I combined 3 into one image that is wider pixel dimensions than a full FX frame would have been, and got the shot.

 

[avo]

Welcome to bird photography. No camera/lens system gets perfect focus every time. The list of factors contributing to good focus and a quality image is long. We could devote multiple threads to dealing with each in detail. Looking at the sample image you shared - thank you for doing so - I do have a suggestion. Lose the TC, shoot with the lens wide open and don't use DX mode. Wait for photo ops when the bird fills more of the frame. You'll be putting more light from the subject on the sensor, The camera will have an easier time of tracking the subject. There will still be instances of missed focus - for a variety of reasons - but the focused images will be much better than a TC'd lens on a camera in DX mode delivers.

Good luck.

What’s wrong with the af in dx mode? If the subject is small enough in the viewfinder so that you can use dx mode the tracking/ subject recognition works definitely better and it’s logical. You cut yourself the unwanted part of the sensor and make the camera processor search with its algorythms through less pixels.

 

[Bill Ferris]

What’s wrong with the af in dx mode? If the subject is small enough in the viewfinder so that you can use dx mode the tracking/ subject recognition works definitely better and it’s logical. You cut yourself the unwanted part of the sensor and make the camera processor search with its algorythms through less pixels.

Adding a TC and using the camera in DX mode takes a subject that would normally be distant and small in the frame and magnifies it to fill the EVF.

On that context, the composition may look better but it's still a subject that's inherently distant & small. No more light is collected from the subject. It's not seen by you or the camera in any more detail. It creates conditions that are inherently challenging for the camera.

It's not surprising that AF isn't as consistent as when photographing a subject that's closer and naturally fills more of the frame without use of a TC and a deep crop.

 

[Roaring 40s]

If memory serves DSLR CAF used to include a calculation of projected subject position.
If the issue arises typically with a change in subject pace, in bird swooping and diving, maybe this calculation, if it's still in the mix with mirrorless, is getting too much priority.
That said, I just had a day of pelagic panning shooting of fairly easy targets and repeatedly had to re-engage AF to counter softness. If I didn't, the Z8 would continue with multiple shots at the same degree of blurriness. Subject detection seemed to have gone on holiday. If it failed at the start, it didn't recover (unlike my A1). All this was with a Z8,600 PF, 1.4xTC, wide or AA AF, mostly with a busy sea background. My impression is that it happened less with the 100-400mm.

Expectations. I took about 5000 shots, culled down to 400. Conditions were good. There were a pleasing number of wall hangers.

 

[avo]

Adding a TC and using the camera in DX mode takes a subject that would normally be distant and small in the frame and magnifies it to fill the EVF.

On that context, the composition may look better but it's still a subject that's inherently distant & small. No more light is collected from the subject. It's not seen by you or the camera in any more detail. It creates conditions that are inherently challenging for the camera.

It's not surprising that AF isn't as consistent as when photographing a subject that's closer and naturally fills more of the frame without use of a TC and a deep crop.

All that is said is true, of course. My point was in one and the same situation, if you can fit your subject in the dx mode, the af will work better than if it was using the whole sensor in fx. Often the camera recognises the bird as a whole in fx and finds the eye in case dx crop is applied.

 

[Bill Ferris]

All that is said is true, of course. My point was in one and the same situation, if you can fit your subject in the dx mode, the af will work better than if it was using the whole sensor in fx. Often the camera recognises the bird as a whole in fx and finds the eye in case dx crop is applied.

I've only been shooting with the Z9 for about a year but the AF performance I'm getting on moving wildlife and birds in-flight in FX mode has been excellent. I'm skeptical the compromise in image quality would be worth any potential AF improvement by shooting in DX mode. When the subject is too distant and small in the frame for an environmental portrait, the better option, IMO, is to wait for a better photo op. Image quality is inherently compromised on subjects at that distance and sometimes misattributed as a product of poor autofocus performance.

 

[fcotterill]

DX mode crops pixels. A Teleconverter adds Pixels/Duck

Filling the frame improves Autofocus performance, particularly of on-sensor AF in MILC's

Teleconverter versus DX mode for mirrorless camera

Discounting saving file space and camera internal memory writing speed, is there any reason to use Nikon's DX mode over slapping on a teleconverter on current mirrorless cameras? Particularly any autofocus and/or IQ benefits?

bcgforums.com

Ray Hennessy: Are Teleconverters Necessary for Wildlife Photography

Have been considering adding the Nikon 1.4x tele for extended reach on my 400 f/4.5 lens. Came upon interesting video from Ray Hennessy, in his opinion teleconverters on high resolution cameras such as the Nikon Z8/Z9 do not offer much of an advantage vs cropping as far as image quality is...

bcgforums.com

 

[fcotterill]

Detailed discussion with useful insights and shared experiences. This thread is well worth reading

Z8/9 Auto Focus (C) w/Sub Detection 🐦+👁️=🧐

I had exactly the same issue with my Z8 when the reflection pond was still. I switched to spot focus. I assume you mean single point focus or do you mean spot metering?

bcgforums.com

 

[SteveReid]

Z 8 has the same issues, I just use it for stills, but shooting from above I have to manual focus. I love my D850, I just wish I could get 15 images per second. I wish I had dumped Nikon years ago!

 

[Cameron T]

Stuff like this always makes me wonder if somehow different runs has some issues, given how wildly different experiences are.

 

[Roaring 40s]

Stuff like this always makes me wonder if somehow different runs has some issues, given how wildly different experiences are.

Maybe. But there's a bunch of variables involved with a lot of different combinations possible.
How many of us vary them systematically in testing?

 

[Cameron T]

My ideal testing would be someone having issues to hand off their camera/lens combo to someone local (on a day trip or w/e to somewhere to shoot) and they trade gear for a day, if the issues persist, use settings from a 'good' (no issues with af tracking, etc) camera loaded instead, test again, etc.

But you're correct that testing this stuff is never that systemic. I just know I've seen things that I'd swear up and down are user error/bad settings, but people keep claiming it isn't.

 

[Dick Blystone]

Got out and did some more testing yesterday with the eagles. Focus+Release for a1 seemed to give me some sharper shots, so I may keep that setting for a while. No TC. Still have examples of the issue, often for only a frame or two. Definitely will work on my hand-holding panning skills, as I feel it could contribute to the problem. Also experimenting with steady vs erratic for a3 to see if I notice a change in keepers. I also like handing off to 3D - this seems to make AF a little more sticky, though I can't prove it.

Definitely enjoying all the input, and learning more about the system and everyone's take on topics like this. Thanks!

I'm attaching another example from my shots yesterday.

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

 

[Bill Ferris]

Yup, nothing out of the ordinary there.

 

[NorthernFocus]

Stuff like this always makes me wonder if somehow different runs has some issues, given how wildly different experiences are.

I think most of the complaints about Z8/9 AF come from people recently transitioned from DSLR. Based on my own experience figuring out the difference in how D5/850 AF worked vs Z9 is a significant issue to overcome. Best if we could just purge our minds of how we shot DSLR and start over. It's that different.

For example, with the D850 I only used single point(for static subjects) and group focus(for BIF/sports). Both were absolutely reliable. If the subject was under the single focus point or the group it was a sure thing. With Z8/9 different setting work better in different situations. With BIF auto area works great with clean/distant BG while wide area is better with busy BG. And sometimes it's best if subject detection is switched off. The Z8/9 are technically more capable but in some ways are harder to use than their DSLR predecessors.

 

[NorthernFocus]

Got out and did some more testing yesterday with the eagles. Focus+Release for a1 seemed to give me some sharper shots, so I may keep that setting for a while. No TC. Still have examples of the issue, often for only a frame or two. Definitely will work on my hand-holding panning skills, as I feel it could contribute to the problem. Also experimenting with steady vs erratic for a3 to see if I notice a change in keepers. I also like handing off to 3D - this seems to make AF a little more sticky, though I can't prove it.

Definitely enjoying all the input, and learning more about the system and everyone's take on topics like this. Thanks!

I'm attaching another example from my shots yesterday.View attachment 111663

It's a pretty big ask to shoot with a subject this small in the frame even when you're in DX mode.

 

[NorthernFocus]

The camera design teams at Nikon developed the AF of flagship cameras by testing on athletes mostly. A series of articles give some insights into Nikon's relationship with AFP, including about the Z9 R&D process. This article is hazy about the original source(s) of Nikon's statements, but it's clear how performing athletes were the primary subjects for the R&D of the new Z9 autofocus system.

Untold Stories of the Nikon Z9’s Development

Companies rarely reveal this much about a camera's development process.

petapixel.com

One interesting question is how / where does Nikon cover the needs of wildlife photography, when developing a new flagship camera? Presumably, real world testing of the Animal and Bird categories (of the Z9) was carried out in parallel or in follow up R&D leading to Firmware updates...

I didn't read this post until now. This was obvious when the Z9 first came out.

I received my Z9 shortly after release and was hugely disappointed in how it performed shooting BIF. So much so that I really regretted buying it. Then it just so happened that one of our friend's teenage son had a soccer match and I took the Z9 along to try shooting. The AF was like MAGIC. It completely ignored a net in front of the stands and tenaciously locked on to the player's face. Given that performance it was obvious that it was just a matter of Nikon "training" the AF system for wildlife. And that proved out with subsequent firmware releases. That said it's still not magic.

The number of variables in wildlife shooting require a lot of knowledge/experience with the AF system to be consistently successful. For anyone transitioning from DSLR @Steve 's books/videos provide a good head start on the learning curve.

 

[NorthernFocus]

I've only been shooting with the Z9 for about a year but the AF performance I'm getting on moving wildlife and birds in-flight in FX mode has been excellent. I'm skeptical the compromise in image quality would be worth any potential AF improvement by shooting in DX mode. When the subject is too distant and small in the frame for an environmental portrait, the better option, IMO, is to wait for a better photo op. Image quality is inherently compromised on subjects at that distance and sometimes misattributed as a product of poor autofocus performance.

Naturally the best situation is to be shooting in FX mode with a well lit subject that fills the frame. But the real world situation for most people is that they are getting as close to that situation as possible but still need more "reach". And most people are not inclined to stand on a riverbank for hours without tripping the shutter unless they fill the frame. So it becomes a question of what's the best compromise. It is technical fact that for a given subject at a given distance the Z9 AF system performs better in DX mode. That's according to Nikon and consistent with user experience by many folks. Whether TCs improve or degrade AF performance is lens dependent.

Agree that poor IQ at extreme ranges is often blamed on AF rather than other issues. In the case of the examples provided by the OP there is clearly focus variability between frames. But that's not unexpected shooting handheld at the extreme ranges that the example shots were captured.

 

[ajrmd]

Agree that poor IQ at extreme ranges is often blamed on AF rather than other issues. In the case of the examples provided by the OP there is clearly focus variability between frames. But that's not unexpected shooting handheld at the extreme ranges that the example shots were captured.

The OP is asking a lot of the system shooting at extreme distances, however, I have posted numerous examples of similar "wandering AF" at relatively shorter distances with the subject (osprey/eagles) occupying >30-50% of the frame. This does not occur with either Canon or Sony AF systems and as I've illustrated repeatedly is suggestive of issues with the predictive AF system for birds swooping for catches (dive, brake, strike, fly off). It is a real phenomenon with the Z8/Z9.

 

[fcotterill]

Linked thread cited above refers

Post #33

 

[Bill Ferris]

No camera system has perfect autofocus. The Z9 has the best autofocus for action I've used in 30+ years as a photographer. To whatever degree its autofocus "wanders", it's still objectively excellent.

 

[SteveReid]

I did the same thing and found out I was still engaging B B F most of the time instead of releasing and letting A I handle it. By holding down BBF the camera was trying to refocus. A habit from my DSL's.

Got out and did some more testing yesterday with the eagles. Focus+Release for a1 seemed to give me some sharper shots, so I may keep that setting for a while. No TC. Still have examples of the issue, often for only a frame or two. Definitely will work on my hand-holding panning skills, as I feel it could contribute to the problem. Also experimenting with steady vs erratic for a3 to see if I notice a change in keepers. I also like handing off to 3D - this seems to make AF a little more sticky, though I can't prove it.

Definitely enjoying all the input, and learning more about the system and everyone's take on topics like this. Thanks!

I'm attaching another example from my shots yesterday.View attachment 111663

 

[Dick Blystone]

I did the same thing and found out I was still engaging B B F most of the time instead of releasing and letting A I handle it. By holding down BBF the camera was trying to refocus. A habit from my DSL's.

Can you explain this a bit more? I thought you had to keep bbf or equivalent engaged with a button press in order to continuously focus on the subject...

 

[beano]

Can you explain this a bit more? I thought you had to keep bbf or equivalent engaged with a button press in order to continuously focus on the subject...

Depending on your aperture/DOF, you can push BBAF once and let it go, aka AF-S mode, if the subject doesn’t change position in the focal plane. If you have a shallow DOF and/or the subject moves around in the focal plane, then best to use BBAF in AF-C mode.

For BIF, using the AF-S method might help a lot to keep focus if the bird flies across varying backgrounds, but maintain the same distance from you. Of course, the more you stop down, the more leeway you have in terms of DOF /sharp focus. Works wonderfully well at =>F/8. Just click BBAF once, and shoot at hearts content, as long as the subject stays within a defined distance.

But I guess from your question you know this. Just to clarify in any case.

Efit: I was quite sure @Steve uses the same approach, he might have mentioned it in one of his videos. Hopefully he can chime in, as he’s vastly more experienced in this than I am. Sorry for the ping, Steve.

 

[avo]

Depending on your aperture/DOF, you can push BBAF once and let it go, aka AF-S mode, if the subject doesn’t change position in the focal plane. If you have a shallow DOF and/or the subject moves around in the focal plane, then best to use BBAF in AF-C mode.

For BIF, using the AF-S method might help a lot to keep focus if the bird flies across varying backgrounds, but maintain the same distance from you. Of course, the more you stop down, the more leeway you have in terms of DOF /sharp focus. Works wonderfully well at =>F/8. Just click BBAF once, and shoot at hearts content, as long as the subject stays within a defined distance.

But I guess from your question you know this. Just to clarify in any case.

Efit: I was quite sure @Steve uses the same approach, he might have mentioned it in one of his videos. Hopefully he can chime in, as he’s vastly more experienced in this than I am. Sorry for the ping, Steve.

Have you really tried this for BIF or it is just theory? Because I can’t imagine it working at all. With 600mm, the average length for wildlife, even at f8 the dof is such that often the eye and the end of the wing are not both in perfect focus. You talk about focusing once and shooting without refocusing….