Tracking in Sony alpha 7 and alpha 99

[haach76]

Hi folks,
I was wondering if I can get some ideas on what you think are the weakness in the tracking technology in the Sony alpha 7 and alpha 99 cameras. I am writing an article and I hope to compile a list of the weaknesses of the tracking in these two cameras and compare them with Nikon and Canon. I personally think tracking seems to have a lag in alpha 7, but i hope to hear what people think.
So if you have any thoughts on the weakness/failures of the tracking in Sony alpha 7 (or if you have any opinions about tracking in these two cameras) I would like to hear it.

thank you and appreciate your time,

J

 

[Kolia]

Talk about a biased "journalist" !!!

Aha !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gsgary]

Why not test the colours that come out of the A7 compared to others, much better than my Canon's

 

[Derrel]

Sony Alpha 7 and AF tracking...with what lenses? There are not many native lenses for the A7 yet, so you ought to be able to test them ALL and draw your own conclusions. Right now, as in TODAY, I do not think a lot of people look at the A7 as a camera for killer autofocusing, but instead a vehicle to mount ADAPTED lenses, like the excellent Cosina-made Voigtlanders Gary likes, or Leica lenses, or older Nikkors, and whatnot.

 

[nzmacro]

If I was going to a Sony A7 or A7R I would be getting an LAE-A2 PDAF or the new A4 adaptor and having my pick of fast AF lenses ..........

Sony Lenses: Digital Photography Review

Not to mention the older Minolta lenses as well. Everything up to 600mm F/4 at PDAF rates. That way you can take virtually every mount of Sony, E mount, FE mount, G mount, etc. That's not even to mention the Sigma's and Tamron's

Danny.

 

[haach76]

hi folks,
Thank you for your replies. Surely the lens will make a difference, but the tracking algorithm runs inside the body of the camera and if the general consensus is that Sony isnt a real contender in the AF arena, then the answer lies with the tracking algorithm itself (rather than the lenses). I do have access to one sony camera but i really wouldnt be able to characterize the sony tracker by running a few tests. The answer to this question rests on having had solid experience with non-sony cameras as well which i dont have (since the answer is relative).
That is why i turned to the community to ask real photographers to see what they think.

thanks
J

 

[jfrabat]

hi folks,
Thank you for your replies. Surely the lens will make a difference, but the tracking algorithm runs inside the body of the camera and if the general consensus is that Sony isnt a real contender in the AF arena, then the answer lies with the tracking algorithm itself (rather than the lenses). I do have access to one sony camera but i really wouldnt be able to characterize the sony tracker by running a few tests. The answer to this question rests on having had solid experience with non-sony cameras as well which i dont have (since the answer is relative).
That is why i turned to the community to ask real photographers to see what they think.

thanks
J

I have used the tracking on the A77 plenty of times succesfully for both cars and airplanes. But I have to agree with the rest that this is not the correct way to judge; if you are a journalist, run some tests and draw your own onclusions!

 

[ConradM]

hi folks,
Thank you for your replies. Surely the lens will make a difference, but the tracking algorithm runs inside the body of the camera and if the general consensus is that Sony isnt a real contender in the AF arena, then the answer lies with the tracking algorithm itself (rather than the lenses). I do have access to one sony camera but i really wouldnt be able to characterize the sony tracker by running a few tests. The answer to this question rests on having had solid experience with non-sony cameras as well which i dont have (since the answer is relative).
That is why i turned to the community to ask real photographers to see what they think.


thanks
J

Where is that the general consensus? The A7 isn't meant to be a system for capturing action. That's what the a6000 and a77 m2 are for and I'm pretty sure their AF systems are class-leading.

 

[jfrabat]

Where is that the general consensus? The A7 isn't meant to be a system for capturing action. That's what the a6000 and a77 m2 are for and I'm pretty sure their AF systems are class-leading.

Some journalist, huh?

 

[haach76]

hi ,
Thanks ConradM for your information. I know Alpha 77 M2 has some impressive tracking results, but would you say its on par with Canon 1DX?

Thank you jfrabat for your helpful information. However, I am not a journalist, I am merely writing an article for a photography class on tracking technology. I dont know where the idea of me being a journalist came from? and my article isnt about why sony cameras are bad. Believe me I am not here to slander sony cameras, I myself own an alpha 7.

J

 

[jfrabat]

hi ,
Thanks ConradM for your information. I know Alpha 77 M2 has some impressive tracking results, but would you say its on par with Canon 1DX?

Thank you jfrabat for your helpful information. However, I am not a journalist, I am merely writing an article for a photography class on tracking technology. I dont know where the idea of me being a journalist came from? and my article isnt about why sony cameras are bad. Believe me I am not here to slander sony cameras, I myself own an alpha 7.

J

OK, I apologize; when you said you were writing an article, I thought you were a journalist... Look, in my opinion (and to each his own), Sony's tracking system is quite accurate (I have not tried it on the A7, but I have used it on the A77 and the A99), even when tracking small, fast moving subjects. Of course, the background will play an important role on how accurate it is; the plainer the background, the better it will track... Here are some samples taken with tracking:









Hope this helps... By the way, all are taken with the A77 (MKI)

Felipe

 

[haach76]

hi Felipe,
thank you for your reply. And thats ok about thinking i am a biased journalist, I should have clarified my intentions better in the beginning. And if I was a biased journalist against sony I probably would have asked this question in the Nikon or Canon sub-forum

Those are some pretty nice images. I myself take a lot of nice sports photos with my alpha 7 and I think tracking is great in sony cameras. However, out teacher in my class said that professionals dont like to use Sony because the tracking is not as good as high end Canon and Nikon. And when I asked him why, he said he didnt know and that it seemed to be what a lot of the pros claim! So I decided to find out in my assignment WHY is it that pros have this strange bias against sony tracking. But so far, I have not come up with any such reasons! Could this be just a case of people agreeing to something without any reasons? but then again, I have never touched a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4.

 

[Derrel]

Head over to Thom Hogan's sites (he has two of interest, one for d-slrs and one called sansmirror.com for mirrorless) and you can read extended articles about focusing performance in new mirrorless cameras. FLAT-OUT: d-slr cameras have better, faster, more-capable focusing that can follow action at FULL firing speed. d-slr cameras can recover from lost focus faster and better. He has spent the better part of the last month discussing the limitations and issues with mirrorless cameras under real-world use.

It's simple: ONE-shot focusing acquisition CAN be fast with mirrorless. But, for example the A7 can slooooooooooooow waaaaaaaayyyyyy down on sequences because the native AF lenses are slow and doggy, and the firing rate can drop wayyyyyyy down, whereas something like a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D3 or D4 can blast away at FULL firing rate, and continue to nail focus, and if it loses AF, it can RE-acquire it very,very fast, whereas most other mirrorless systems, once they lose focus, are "done for".


Read about his recent Galapagos trip using three different high-end systems, two mirrorless, and the other the small Nikon D7100. He addresses, in about four articles, all of the performance issues that the other websites have tried to gloss over in fawning reviews that proclaim their new mirrorless "the world's fastest focusing" and so on. The trend today is for a FEW, select web sites to get a brand-new camera, test it for 6-8 hours,and then flood the web and YouTube with videos proclaiming the camera, "Excellent! Superb! Awesome!"--and then those sites EARN MONEY from early buyers who click-through to purchase from affiliated partner retailers like B&H Photo and other retailers. THAT is the way the new world wide web works these days.

The Luminous Landscape and their new affiliation with Canada's The Camera Store is a very good example of what I am talking about, WRT to the Fuji XT-1...RAVE reviews, a fawning video championing the new Fuji, enthusiastic pre-orders for early sales, and then....later, after some heat and some actual user field time... M.R. sort of backing away and recanting some of the fawning with a more nuanced "position" in a "second opinion" piece on the new Fuji. Contrast that with Hogans review ONLY after extended use and thorough testing over a period of time actually shooting the thing. Two wildly different approaches, of varying intellectual honesty.

Same thing with the much-hyped Sony A7....read Thom Hogan's exhaustingly complete review of the A7...then compare his very careful review and analysis to the more widespread all-sis-boom-bah!!! hype the A7 and A7r got before they were actually on the market...from the sites doing PRE-release early "reviews".

 

[haach76]

hi Derrel,
Thank you for your reply.
I dont see what would make a mirrorless worse at auto-focusing. Saying that Sony's mirrorless AF system is worse than Nikon/Canon's does not mean that mirrorless technology is inherently worse for tracking, correct? I mean sony's technology is up and coming and there is no reason why that cant catch up in terms of AF. One thing is for sure, and thats the fact that sony is gaining headway. The A77 M2 is a much better AF system than its predecessors, and i think that's undeniable.
Having said that, I have to say i am an objective observer here (or at least I have to be, for my assignment ). That is why i am interested in the type of reviews that you mentioned, rigorous and technical rather than propaganda and marketing. I found this article at Thom Hogan's site on his Galapagos shooting: Cameras | byThom Sites | Thom Hogan
but I didnt find any relevant info on the tracking/AF problem with Sony. If you could refer me to the specific article I would be very grateful.

thanks
J

 

[Derrel]

Look into contrast detect versus phase detection AF. Look at lens maximum aperture values. Look at the size of AF motors and relative torque. Look at the number of AF points and whether they are cross-type sensors, or not. Look at the price of a top-level Canon or Nikon flagship camera ($6995 or so) versus an $800-$1400 body. And so on and so on. Look at Nikon's almost two decade lead in using color-value, distance-aware, and light reflectance analysis value metering technology (and Canon's newer system that ALSO uses color-aware subject mapping) and you'll see that there is a LOT of behind the scenes technology that the "other" camera makers do not have access to due to intellectual property.

Nikon's 3-D Color Matrix technology is something they invented years ago. It took Canon over 15 years to figure out a way around Nikon's intellectual property on focusing and metering--and Canon did that by developing a FOUR-color system, to increase their AF system's performance and metering reliability. In Japan, the amount of yellow present in greens is a type of "color"; Nikon used red-green-blue only, the 3 in 3-D Color Aware. Canon finally got a patented system that now makes their cameras no longer "color-blind", and it has proven to be a HUGE success in the new 5D Mark III, a camera that earlier in version I and II, had a particularly weak AF system. Now, with this new technology, it utterly kicks ass. Canon has a 20-year lead on Sony at making 35mm-srtyle SLR cameras.

Sony is an electronics maker that happens to make a few cameras. Nikon and Canon have been developing AF cameras for professional-level uses since the mid-1980's. Pick up a camera like a Nikon D3-series or a Canon 1D series, or a 5D Mark III. Those are Maserati's.