Mirrorless Fujifilm, Nikon, Sony.

Ed Cordes wrote:Well, I decided to jump into mirrorless for a lightweight carry around travel camera.  I bought the Sony a6400 with the 10-135 lens.  While it does fit the need I had, I find the colors to be very green biased and the center AF point to be a small area rather than a point.  I can deal with AF as I don't use this camera for anything other than general photography like meetings, and walking around towns, but the green color bias drives me nuts.  I have read other articles regarding Sony's color algorithms not being the same as Canon which is what I am used to.

Definitely learn how to use the many different AF modes.  Don't assume you need to shoot this camera as you would a DSLR, which is what I am gathering from your comment (by the way, you can change the spot size but that often isn't the best AF mode for what you are doing).  DSLR AF systems are really archaic compared to what modern mirrorless cameras are capable of and I find that most DSLR shooters when first transitioning go to what they know, which is usually picking an AF point and then moving it manually to wherever you want to focus.  There are many videos out there on YouTube that walk you through the nuances of all of the different AF modes.

As for colors, it is probably something in how you have set-up the camera.  More information would help to understand what is going on and how to correct it.  There are many ways to modify color to get you the output that you desire.

Ed every camera system/manufactuer has their own color bias. If you are using RAW it doesn't mater as the green bias can easily be corrected. Most RAW conversion softawre allow you to create your own color conversion preference and apply it to all images during import. I've done this often with various cameras.

Karl - this might be something to consider. I'm very interested in the Pro Capture mode.  Light weight and long reach.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/ ... 1-iiiA.HTM

E.J. Peiker wrote:

Ed Cordes wrote:Well, I decided to jump into mirrorless for a lightweight carry around travel camera.  I bought the Sony a6400 with the 10-135 lens.  While it does fit the need I had, I find the colors to be very green biased and the center AF point to be a small area rather than a point.  I can deal with AF as I don't use this camera for anything other than general photography like meetings, and walking around towns, but the green color bias drives me nuts.  I have read other articles regarding Sony's color algorithms not being the same as Canon which is what I am used to.

Definitely learn how to use the many different AF modes.  Don't assume you need to shoot this camera as you would a DSLR, which is what I am gathering from your comment (by the way, you can change the spot size but that often isn't the best AF mode for what you are doing).  DSLR AF systems are really archaic compared to what modern mirrorless cameras are capable of and I find that most DSLR shooters when first transitioning go to what they know, which is usually picking an AF point and then moving it manually to wherever you want to focus.  There are many videos out there on YouTube that walk you through the nuances of all of the different AF modes.

As for colors, it is probably something in how you have set-up the camera.  More information would help to understand what is going on and how to correct it.  There are many ways to modify color to get you the output that you desire.

Agree.  I didn't fully appreciate the Sony AF until I took the time to learn it.

E.J. Peiker wrote:

[snip] I find that most DSLR shooters when first transitioning go to what they know, which is usually picking an AF point and then moving it manually to wherever you want to focus. [snip]

Are you saying my camera will automatically know what I want the lens to focus on?? How?

I mean, even if there is a human face and a car in the scene it does not necessarily mean that I want the human face to be in focus, right?

Currently in Kenya at the Mara with an7r4 and  the a9, with 600 f4 and 200-600 lenses. Incredible AF performance from both cameras. The animal eye AF is a bit hit and miss at times, but what blew my mind is that it even works on birds. Took a picture of a roller on a branch about 40 ft from me, with the a7r4 and the 600. I didn't realize I had the animal eye-AF engaged as I was shooting a lion earlier. The bird turned its head and the camera picked up its eye, with an AF point that is about a quarter  or so of the small central AF point. It lights up as a white square when it has acquired the eye and then you just press the AF button to turn it green and shoot. Very impressive, but hit and miss. You also cannot track with the animal selected as the subject with eye-AF.

Will post more detailed info later, wi-fi is very flaky here.

Pradeep

DChan wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:

[snip] I find that most DSLR shooters when first transitioning go to what they know, which is usually picking an AF point and then moving it manually to wherever you want to focus. [snip]

Are you saying my camera will automatically know what I want the lens to focus on?? How?

I mean, even if there is a human face and a car in the scene it does not necessarily mean that I want the human face to be in focus, right?

Then you don't use a focus mode that does that.

E.J. Peiker wrote:

DChan wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:

[snip] I find that most DSLR shooters when first transitioning go to what they know, which is usually picking an AF point and then moving it manually to wherever you want to focus. [snip]

Are you saying my camera will automatically know what I want the lens to focus on?? How?

I mean, even if there is a human face and a car in the scene it does not necessarily mean that I want the human face to be in focus, right?

Then you don't use a focus mode that does that.

But I still need to move manually the AF point to the car to get a picture of a sharp car. No?

I am not aware of any camera today that can tell without my input how I want my final photo to look like. I am aware of option that the camera will AF as it see fits (even dslr has it and usually on the nearest subject, the one with the most contrast or the one near the center of the viewfinder), but that just the camera guessing which many a time turn out to be wrong Even face detect or eye detect AF could be on the wrong individual. So I still don't think how picking an AF point and moving it manually to wherever you want to is not necessary anymore with a mirrorless camera. Not until when cameras can read my mind

DChan wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:

DChan wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:

[snip] I find that most DSLR shooters when first transitioning go to what they know, which is usually picking an AF point and then moving it manually to wherever you want to focus. [snip]

Are you saying my camera will automatically know what I want the lens to focus on?? How?

I mean, even if there is a human face and a car in the scene it does not necessarily mean that I want the human face to be in focus, right?

Then you don't use a focus mode that does that.

But I still need to move manually the AF point to the car to get a picture of a sharp car. No?

I am not aware of any camera today that can tell without my input how I want my final photo to look like. I am aware of option that the camera will AF as it see fits (even dslr has it and usually on the nearest subject, the one with the most contrast or the one near the center of the viewfinder), but that just the camera guessing which many a time turn out to be wrong Even face detect or eye detect AF could be on the wrong individual. So I still don't think how picking an AF point and moving it manually to wherever you want to is not necessary anymore with a mirrorless camera. Not until when cameras can read my mind

Not to speak for someone else, but I think the point being made is that Mirrorless cameras, by and large, have many more options than DSLR's. Once learned, they are quite helpful and a step above the old DSLR single point selection. Not to say that single point selection is no longer needed.

Well, I have studied the AF on the Sony a6400 since my last post in this thread and come to the following conclusion - for my needs. If I have the set up to start with center point then allow it to track it seems to work fine. I can select my subject and then re position, holding the shutter 1/2 way down with the camera following my selected subject. It seems to stay on my subject pretty well. I have tried it on slowly moving subjects like normal speed autos and squirrels near my bird feeder with good success. I do not find the need to manually move the AF point using this set up.

DChan wrote:
But I still need to move manually the AF point to the car to get a picture of a sharp car. No?

Actually no!  The camera is capable of tracking anything through the entire viewfinder that you initially acquire autofocus on.  If you want focus on the front license plate of a moving car, for example, simply place whatever AF point you have active on the license plate, activate focus and it will track anywhere in the viewfinder, even if the car passes behind something and the license plate is obscured for a second, as soon as it is back in the frame, anywhere in the frame, it will continue to track the license plate. 

E.J. Peiker wrote:

DChan wrote:
But I still need to move manually the AF point to the car to get a picture of a sharp car. No?

Actually no!  The camera is capable of tracking anything through the entire viewfinder that you initially acquire autofocus on. ...[snip]

So I still have to manually move the AF point to acquire the subject first. That's exactly my point and why I was surprised by what you said about photographers still moving the AF point manually - which I believe is still needed - when shooting with mirrorless. As for the tracking you talked about, dslr such as D500 can do that, too. Personally when I use that kind of tracking I still will be moving my camera to keep the composition the way I want it.

When shooting with a long lens and wide open, the DOF is extremely shallow. This is where the eye-AF comes in very handy since typically that's what you want the sharpest part of the image to be. As yet, Sony cameras do not track with animal-eye enabled when the subject is moving. However, when the animal is sitting or standing still but moving its head about (a very common situation), then the eye-AF is very useful. The camera focuses on the eye that is closest to it, even in profile, although it varies depending upon how much of the eye it can see and if it is full profile or partial. Shooting a leopard in a tree with branches moving in front of it, the leopard itself moving its head here and there, focusing with a manually selectable point is tedious and this is where the eye-AF precision comes in very handy. If the light is good or adequate, it is quite accurate and fast.

It is a bit of a pain to change the subject selection from animal to human eye and vice-versa. Wish they would allow a custom key as a toggle between the two. Enabling tracking requires the subject to be human. If the aperture is small enough it works very well in this mode with a moving animal although the focus point is somewhat larger than the smallest manually selectable one. The tracking is smart and I had a car pass in front of the walking lion and the camera re-acquired the focus immediately once the car had passed on.

All in all, a very much better system than what I had in my Canon 1DX-II.

Pradeep

DChan wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:

DChan wrote:
But I still need to move manually the AF point to the car to get a picture of a sharp car. No?

Actually no!  The camera is capable of tracking anything through the entire viewfinder that you initially acquire autofocus on. ...[snip]

So I still have to manually move the AF point to acquire the subject first. That's exactly my point and why I was surprised by what you said about photographers still moving the AF point manually - which I believe is still needed - when shooting with mirrorless. As for the tracking you talked about, dslr such as D500 can do that, too. Personally when I use that kind of tracking I still will be moving my camera to keep the composition the way I want it.

No you do not - as I wrote, you can simply focus with whatever AF point happens to be active and recompose and track and it will track the exact spot throughout the entire frame automatically.  There is no need to first move the AF point.  The D500's 3D tracking does not work in the same way although it is the closest thing to it in the DSLR world, it is nowhere near as reliable and has a tendency to grab the closest thing in the frame.  Perhaps you should test it out yourself...

Primus wrote:When shooting with a long lens and wide open, the DOF is extremely shallow. This is where the eye-AF comes in very handy since typically that's what you want the sharpest part of the image to be. As yet, Sony cameras do not track with animal-eye enabled when the subject is moving. However, when the animal is sitting or standing still but moving its head about (a very common situation), then the eye-AF is very useful. The camera focuses on the eye that is closest to it, even in profile, although it varies depending upon how much of the eye it can see and if it is full profile or partial. Shooting a leopard in a tree with branches moving in front of it, the leopard itself moving its head here and there, focusing with a manually selectable point is tedious and this is where the eye-AF precision comes in very handy. If the light is good or adequate, it is quite accurate and fast.

It is a bit of a pain to change the subject selection from animal to human eye and vice-versa. Wish they would allow a custom key as a toggle between the two. Enabling tracking requires the subject to be human. If the aperture is small enough it works very well in this mode with a moving animal although the focus point is somewhat larger than the smallest manually selectable one. The tracking is smart and I had a car pass in front of the walking lion  and the camera re-acquired the focus immediately once the car had passed on.

All in all, a very much better system than what I had in my Canon 1DX-II.

Pradeep

Yes, there are definitely things that will improve, at least they are working very hard on this and even have stated that they plan on figuring out how to do dynamic eye tracking of birds in the future.  Whether or not existing cameras have enough CPU oomph to do that, given the thousands of different types of eyes in the animal kingdom remains to be seen.

E.J. Peiker wrote:No you do not - as I wrote, you can simply focus with whatever AF point happens to be active and recompose ...[snip]

Perhaps I have not made it clear enough. The point I have been trying to make is we still have to tell the camera what to focus on. You either move the AF point directly using button, joystick or whatever, or you move the camera like you described to put the AF point to the subject you want to keep sharp. The camera itself does not know your intention. We have to tell it where. I and other photographers do it by moving the AF point directly, you do it by moving the camera body. We human being the photographer have to tell the camera where to focus the lens one way or another. You just apparently prefer moving the camera body itself and that's all One more thing: not all trackings are created equal.

DChan wrote:

E.J. Peiker wrote:No you do not - as I wrote, you can simply focus with whatever AF point happens to be active and recompose ...[snip]

Perhaps I have not made it clear enough. The point I have been trying to make is we still have to tell the camera what to focus on. You either move the AF point directly using button, joystick or whatever, or you move the camera like you described to put the AF point to the subject you want to keep sharp. The camera itself does not know your intention. We have to tell it where. I and other photographers do it by moving the AF point directly, you do it by moving the camera body. We human being the photographer have to tell the camera where to focus the lens one way or another. You just apparently prefer moving the camera body itself and that's all One more thing: not all trackings are created equal.

I find the Sony system to be quite helpful with erratically moving subjects. The AF point moves around keeping the subject in focus, and yes not all tracking systems are equal. I find the Sony system works quite well with birds compared to Olympus which was pretty much hopeless for BIF.

E.J. Peiker wrote:

Primus wrote:When shooting with a long lens and wide open, the DOF is extremely shallow. This is where the eye-AF comes in very handy since typically that's what you want the sharpest part of the image to be. As yet, Sony cameras do not track with animal-eye enabled when the subject is moving. However, when the animal is sitting or standing still but moving its head about (a very common situation), then the eye-AF is very useful. The camera focuses on the eye that is closest to it, even in profile, although it varies depending upon how much of the eye it can see and if it is full profile or partial. Shooting a leopard in a tree with branches moving in front of it, the leopard itself moving its head here and there, focusing with a manually selectable point is tedious and this is where the eye-AF precision comes in very handy. If the light is good or adequate, it is quite accurate and fast.

It is a bit of a pain to change the subject selection from animal to human eye and vice-versa. Wish they would allow a custom key as a toggle between the two. Enabling tracking requires the subject to be human. If the aperture is small enough it works very well in this mode with a moving animal although the focus point is somewhat larger than the smallest manually selectable one. The tracking is smart and I had a car pass in front of the walking lion  and the camera re-acquired the focus immediately once the car had passed on.

All in all, a very much better system than what I had in my Canon 1DX-II.

Pradeep

Yes, there are definitely things that will improve, at least they are working very hard on this and even have stated that they plan on figuring out how to do dynamic eye tracking of birds in the future.  Whether or not existing cameras have enough CPU oomph to do that, given the thousands of different types of eyes in the animal kingdom remains to be seen.

Last evening we were with a lion pride photographing cubs jumping around the mother. Amazingly, the eye-AF kept track of the cub as it moved around, although you cannot enable tracking specifically. The AF point refocuses on the cub's eye as soon as it changes position, provided it is visible clearly. 

Definitely not a perfect system yet, but works quite well and better than my old system. 

Pradeep

It is obvious that the future is the mirrorless camera. Most R&D has been put into by the leading companies in these days I assume.
There is one thing I don't like about them, the size.
It might fit for small people with small hands and using small lenses.
They look out of proportion with a 600 f 4.0 lens for example.

Karl Egressy wrote:It is obvious that the future is the mirrorless camera. Most R&D has been put into by the leading companies in these days I assume.
There is one thing I don't like about them, the size.
It might fit for small people with small hands and using small lenses.
They look out of proportion with a 600 f 4.0 lens for example.

Hi Karl,
It's a bit of a double edged sword. The small size is fantastic for travel and carrying around. Don't forget, you can always add a vertical grip which will get the size up to a more comfortable level if you prefer a larger grip. Sometimes it's just a matter of getting used to it too.
I guess I should qualify that, with Sony you can add a grip, Nikon for some strange reason has not made a grip for their Z series(other than the clunky, battery only grip with no functions). 
Scott