The most amazing and reliable focus speed

[dkh]

Title is a click-bait admittedly but, since owning a Canon R6, I haven't really felt like auto-focus was one of the priorities when looking for a new camera. Context - I don't photograph gymnasts doing triple summersaults or even BIF. Most of my shots are of people walking or standing.

I currently still have what replaced the R6 for money saving reasons - Sony A7III and do find that this camera has a great habit of missing focus. I just bought and sold the A7RIV to be replaced with the A7IV but the A7RIV was miles ahead of the A7III in terms of focusing ability.

What have you found to be reliable setting when photographing people using the A7III (eye focus is good when it nails it).

Is a native lens more reliable for focusing than third-party? I ask this because maybe I biased the R6 with mostly native Canon lenses.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Yes, native lens helps. The focusing motor helps a lot. The lighting inh the scene, where the starting position, your focusing mode too. You need to put the camera in its best position for it to focus.

There is no one catch all setting, it all depends in the scene.

 

[Royal]

Find it's a combination of lens, to camera body.

Example;

RF 400mm f2.8 - Extremely quick on the R5. R6, it's decent, but a touch slower. R7, I can notice the difference.

RF 100-500. 0 difference between any of the bodies I found.

 

[The Kranki]

Unbeatable focusing, especially on people? Sony RX100 vii. Mind boggling.

 

[ancient_mariner]

A7III is fine with native glass generally, though some is much better than others. I normally use single shot AF with eye detection enabled, and with a 50 f1.2 GM reckon on 80-90% hit rate even in extremely low light. I also find the 24-105 G nearly as good with AF, likewise the 55 f1.8. Don't make the mistake of buying a budget Sony lens - AF on the 50 f1.8 is close to unusable and is certainly unreliable.

I was photographing at a friend's party on Saturday night, and focus was still solid outside in their garden with minimal lighting late into the night.

 

[woof woof]

I currently still have what replaced the R6 for money saving reasons - Sony A7III and do find that this camera has a great habit of missing focus. I just bought and sold the A7RIV to be replaced with the A7IV but the A7RIV was miles ahead of the A7III in terms of focusing ability.

I'm surprised by this unless a duff lens like the Sony 50mm f1.8 Toni mentions is involved. I don't have top end lenses but even so if there's a missed focus there's usually a good reason for it and something I could have done to mitigate the chances. I do get missed focus occasionally with my A7 but that's a creaking old 1st generation camera, my A7III is very much better and in fact I don't remember having any issues with it which were down to the camera but I don't shoot action shots and rarely leave what to focus on to the camera apart from when using eye detect.

What setting are you using when you get failures?

 

[snerkler]

Title is a click-bait admittedly but, since owning a Canon R6, I haven't really felt like auto-focus was one of the priorities when looking for a new camera. Context - I don't photograph gymnasts doing triple summersaults or even BIF. Most of my shots are of people walking or standing.

I currently still have what replaced the R6 for money saving reasons - Sony A7III and do find that this camera has a great habit of missing focus. I just bought and sold the A7RIV to be replaced with the A7IV but the A7RIV was miles ahead of the A7III in terms of focusing ability.

What have you found to be reliable setting when photographing people using the A7III (eye focus is good when it nails it).

Is a native lens more reliable for focusing than third-party? I ask this because maybe I biased the R6 with mostly native Canon lenses.

What were you shooting with the A7III that gave so many missed shots? Whilst AF systems have moved on the A7III is more than capable of nailing most things.

In answer to your question the A1, speed of acquisition and abiilty to track is unbelievable. The only thing is subject recognition has improved since the release. I also have the A7RV and this recognises the eyes of more animals than the A1, however the A1 speed of aquisition and ability to track is still better. I'd love the A1 Mark II as it combines the best of both, ie speed of acquisition and tracking ability with the much improved subject recognition. I can't afford the A1 II, nor do I think I could justify the extra to swap just for the subject recognition as you can cope perfectly well without it.

 

[JohnMcL7]

I mostly used the Sigma 100-400mm with my A9 and I was impressed with how well the AF worked, I wouldn't expect any issues simply because it's a third party lens since Sigma officially licensed the mount unlike some other systems where companies had to reverse engineer the mount to get their lenses working which could cause issues.

 

[snerkler]

I mostly used the Sigma 100-400mm with my A9 and I was impressed with how well the AF worked, I wouldn't expect any issues simply because it's a third party lens since Sigma officially licensed the mount unlike some other systems where companies had to reverse engineer the mount to get their lenses working which could cause issues.

I agree, I don't think any AF issues are caused by a lens being third party or not per se, but as we know different lenses have different motors etc and so you'd expect the better the motors the better the AF