I don't think Nikon's share is big enough for Tamron and Sigma to get involved yet tbh. I can understand wanting to not open up their lenses to others as that's where the most profit is.
What I meant is that to get real time tracking eye Af don't you have to be in dynamic wide or something, and therefore are relying on the camera to pick up on the correct set of eyes (if there's more than one person in the frame). What I'd like it to use single point AF to focus on the correct person, and then have it track the eyes across the entire frame. At the moment you can use single point AF with eye AF but it doesn't track across the entire frame. That's how it was on the A7r4 anyway
Absolutely! That could only be beneficial to Nikon. When I first got my Z6 I spoke to the UK distributors of both Tamron and Sigma to pose this question, but the reply was that as far as they knew their Japanese head offices had no intention of doing so. Let’s hope they change their minds. But it’s a vicious circle - if, say, Tamron see lowish sales of the Z they won’t make lenses to fit them. And Nikon sales are lower because 3rd party lenses aren’t available. The only glimmer of light is Samyang.
Ahh cool. We couldn't figure that out on the A7R4, and I've not seen a youtube video where they've used a box to select the subject first but sounds like Sony have sorted it. I wish the A9-II was a grand cheaper
I didn't realise you had the G9 but have just seen your signature with all your kit, just a few cameras then
Ahh cool. We couldn't figure that out on the A7R4, and I've not seen a youtube video where they've used a box to select the subject first but sounds like Sony have sorted it. I wish the A9-II was a grand cheaper
Ahh cool. We couldn't figure that out on the A7R4, and I've not seen a youtube video where they've used a box to select the subject first but sounds like Sony have sorted it. I wish the A9-II was a grand cheaper
I couldn't et it to do it on humans
If I used expanded flexible spot I could AF using that and if the subject near the AF point had eyes then it would AF on the eyes, but as soon as the eyes weren't in that part of the frame anymore it stopped 'tracking' the eyes and just focussed on what was ever on the AF point (which was still in the original position that I set it to).Thanks, although that's not quite what I had in mind. That looks to me that you're just engaging (whole frame) eye AF when in a single point AF mode, rather than using a single AF point to focus on the eyes and saying "now track these", if you get my drift? In that video you don't position the AF point over the cat yourself and if you had two cats positioned the same distance away from the camera how can you be sure that the camera picks up on the correct cat? If you're in single point mode as above but moved the point over the correct cat first and then engaged eye-af would the camera pick up on the cat where the AF point was, or would it pick either?
I couldn't et it to do it on humans
Thanks, although that's not quite what I had in mind. That looks to me that you're just engaging (whole frame) eye AF when in a single point AF mode, rather than using a single AF point to focus on the eyes and saying "now track these", if you get my drift? In that video you don't position the AF point over the cat yourself and if you had two cats positioned the same distance away from the camera how can you be sure that the camera picks up on the correct cat? If you're in single point mode as above but moved the point over the correct cat first and then engaged eye-af would the camera pick up on the cat where the AF point was, or would it pick either?
I couldn't et it to do it on humans
Wow, yes very clever
I'm always derailing threads, they should be used to it by now
Clearing Argos, more likely. They need as much revenue as they can get, at any cost.Clearing Zs already
Probably not, and Nikon will be offering incentives to retailers. But show me a retailer which is not having to increase their turnover at the expense of profits. In any sector.
I don't need one but for that price I'm tempted to buy one anyway
I like the Canon R's, but it's the lenses that put me off, although I like the compact nature of the 70-200mm f2.8.
I (for my needs) think the canon lenses look ace but I’ve no idea about how good their af is compared to Sony. I’m guessing I would have heard if it was good...I don't need one but for that price I'm tempted to buy one anyway
I like the Canon R's, but it's the lenses that put me off, although I like the compact nature of the 70-200mm f2.8.
By all accounts Canon AF looks good. The Canon lenses look great, if you have a big wallet, at least with the Z’s there are some moderate options, such as the 50mm f1.8.
As a matter of interest, what problems are you having with your Z6?
Sounds like you’ve got a faulty one. Mine doesn’t exhibit any of those characteristics. Mind you, I’ve never tried eye af.
Both Z’s show EVF lag when panning etc, refresh rate is only 50hz iirc.
They all do.
Well, I’ve not noticed it on mine. Maybe I’m not panning quickly enough.
If you don’t see it don’t look for it
I was looking at getting a Z6 but that really puts me off. I'm going to pull the trigger on a 2nd camera body shortly, and it looks like either another D750, a D810 or an XH-1. I'd love to go into the mirrorless world, but not keen on Sony.
JSC_8630 by Gilbo B, on Flickr