Z8 with FW 2.0 > AF performance vs. Sony A7rV (2024)

Interesting, I have not seen that occur on the Z8 or Z9 I have access to, at least with the subjects/lenses I also have access to. I do a quick sharpness check with the EVF and I agree no EVF is ever going to be as good as looking on a monitor at home, but what you can do is tell if one image is sharper than another, even if the difference is extremely minor. That's usually how I do my quick checks.

Your second point makes sense as the camera is using the same image you see in the EVF to run AF algorithms on, so if you starve it of light, after a certain point it won't be able to see the detail it needs to identify certain features. I'm surprised you're seeing issues at roughly -1EV though, I don't use highlight weighted metering but I often have that dialed in (or more) shooting black birds and it does not affect AF in those particular instances anyway - it will find the black eye on the black bird with almost no contrast.

I'll try find time set up a test this weekend and see if I can get to a point where the AF loses accuracy both in terms of ambient light and exposure comp for the EVF.

I have been shooting with Sony A1 since it was first introduced, and got the Z8 in February of this year so take that for what it's worth. The upgrade to the 2.0 firmware on the Z8 has to me made the AF about equal to the A1. the big improvement in the Z8 besides the bird eye AF is the ability to shoot in Auto Area AF almost all of the time rather than switching between other AF area modes. Since I shoot wildlife mostly with appropriate lenses, I have not noticed any issues with the camera focusing on eye lashes. The few occasions I have taken people "portraits" I have not noticed any problems, but I do not have any f/1.2 or f/1.4 lenses which result in very narrow DOF. From my type of shooting if the eye lashes are in focus, so is the eyeball. I have not shot with the A7R5 but have heard many favorable reports on it in the Sony forum. If you shoot mostly landscapes, product or portraits, it seems like you would not go wrong with it. If you are more into sports and wildlife and some landscape and people my choice would be the Z8 or A1. For pro sport shooting the A9III. It's great to have such excellent options compared to a few years ago when mirrorless was first introduced.

CanadaMark wrote:
Interesting, I have not seen that occur on the Z8 or Z9 I have access to, at least with the subjects/lenses I also have access to. I do a quick sharpness check with the EVF and I agree no EVF is ever going to be as good as looking on a monitor at home, but what you can do is tell if one image is sharper than another, even if the difference is extremely minor. That's usually how I do my quick checks.

Your second point makes sense as the camera is using the same image you see in the EVF

Scott, while there are lots of things to complain about using Sony in terms of handling, menus, expensive CFExpress A cards, and being a "soulless" photography computer, I do know that you'll love and appreciate the AF, the EVF and the new gen tilting/flip LCD screen.

I have no intentions (yet) on divesting from Z, but we'll see how things wash out. I never minded Sony ergos or handling, but overall, Nikon seems to "get" photographers better than Sony. In particular, the Z8 and Z9 have SO MANY features that Sony is ignoring that it's starting to seem insane.

There is a critical level of detail missing from the Z cameras that the Sonys and GFX have in spades. If Nikon released a solid A7R5 competitor, I'd be all over it. So far on Z, I'm having to "cheat" in post to mimic the missing detail.

Oh right, I remember you mentioning that in another thread actually. I imagine that would make it more difficult!

For me, it still helps to have a comparison. No matter where you're viewing the image, it's hard to tell with just a single image if it's as sharp as it can be. I am still better at detecting small differences in sharpness as I go through images than I am just looking at a single image and knowing right away if it's 100% critically sharp.

It sounds like we had very similar experiences.

The A7R5 was a great camera still, just not my cup of tea. Obviously it can't keep up with the AF on the stacked sensor bodies like the A1/A9III/Z8/Z9 but that is to be expected as it's hardware related. I had no issues with eyelashes on the A7R5 either, just in case that wasn't clear, in that respect it was the same as the Z8/Z9 and pretty well every other modern mirrorless camera I've tried. I would think eyes on a stationary human subject are about the easiest thing for the AI algorithms to detect and certainly easier than wildlife where there are so many different general shapes rather than just one.

The specific area where I find the Nikon bodies excel is with very busy scenes, partial obstructions in front of the subject, or busy backgrounds directly behind the subject. In these cases I often could not get the A7R5 (or A1) to find the subject at all, no matter how hard I tried - just placing the AF point manually was an easy enough workaround but I couldn't rely on the subject detection in those instances. The Z8/Z9 pick them out right away from the same scene. The situation I find myself in most often is a perched bird inside a tree or bush surrounded by branches/leaves that the camera might also like to focus on, or that may be preventing the AI algorithm from finding a bird shape as often times the bird is a similar color and size to the surroundings. With a 'cleaner' scene, the A7R5 stuck to the subject very reliably as one would expect.

As you say, we're certainly very lucky to have so many options - these days it's more of a lens decision than a camera decision as all the camera bodies have become so good.

Scott, indeed, the a7R5 is not the great sport/wildlife/all around machine that a Z8/9 is, but it has a lot of power for travel, landscape, architecture, portrait, documentary, etc packed into a small package.

Canon's non-negotiable noise reduction in the R5 was a major put-off for me. I'd hope the R5 II did away with that with the new sensor tech. And the Canon stable of lenses is a total non-starter in the big scheme of things. What good is a great birding camera with no good lenses for the job?

I think the Z8 will still be the value steal of 2024 even if the R5 II exists.

Everything mentioned and then some is already available in the Z8 for $3500 USD under current promotions. Biggest downside is the price of those F1.2 lenses

I also wonder if the R5II would have continued on with a non-stacked sensor if not for the Z8 bringing the entry price down so much. Canon really, really dislikes cannibalizing their higher-end products and a stacked sensor R5II will likely steal significant sales from the R3 and R1 once it finally comes to market as long as they don't cripple it in some way to protect the ultra high margin bodies. I suspect it will be an excellent camera, essentially a Canon 'Z8' with a slightly higher price tag (I wouldn't be surprised to see $4500 USD). I agree with you on the lenses, again, I think their business model is all about driving sales of the high margin premium products which is likely why their fastest non-exotic telephoto lens beyond 200mm is F7.1 on the long end.

Once the R5II is announced, every manufacturer will have a compelling ~45MP stacked sensor offering. At that point, any new customers basically just have to pick a lens system and they will be happy.

RoamingScott wrote:
I'm looking for a smaller dedicated landscape setup and Nikon (currently) is falling short of my preferences. This is my 3rd year shooting Nikon, so wouldn't say "recently". The Z stuff is great for action and birding where the A7R5 wouldn't be.
Is the A7cR too ergonomically challenged? My cousin picked one up and it’s a really great small, light weight camera. I think it’s underrated, nobody talks about it.

For me and my hands, probably. The back looks quite cramped. Either way I picked up the A7R5 new in box for less than the A7cR's MSRP, very happy with the deal I got.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sonyalphablog/albums/72177720305885003/with/52677810685

If you look at some of the tighter headshots, that level of sharpness at the eye is something I rarely see on Nikon outside of my 50/1.8.

Example: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sonyalphablog/52677597929/in/album-72177720305885003/

CanadaMark wrote:
Everything mentioned and then some is already available in the Z8 for $3500 USD under current promotions. Biggest downside is the price of those F1.2 lenses

I also wonder if the R5II would have continued on with a non-stacked sensor if not for the Z8 bringing the entry price down so much. Canon really, really dislikes cannibalizing their higher-end products and a stacked sensor R5II will likely steal significant sales from the R3 and R1 once it finally comes to market as long as they don't cripple it in some way to protect the ultra high margin bodies. I

I almost agree, but it is just a matter of taste and preference. To me, the Z8 is a tad too big and 200 gr too heavy. It is great for balancing large glass, but as mostly a prime lens people shooter, I prefer something smaller and lighter. If I had a different shooting envelope, I'd buy rocking a Z8 all day long.

I do still rock my Nikon F100 with a 50 prime on it. Love that machine!

Edited on May 23, 2024 at 07:14 PM · View previous versions

After 18 months with a7RV and a7IV and A1 before that, this is what I am used to and fully expect, at least in the semi-pro & pro levels above $2,500. Importantly, this pupil performance should even achieved in less static subjects and with AF-C.

I have high expectations that Nikon Z6 III will be able to achieve this :-)

Indeed, what's the point of a great camera with a poor lenses line up and not possibility to adapt any other mirrorless lenses?

My Z8 and Z9 already nail focus at f1.2 most of the time as we speak and I am sure that they will keep improving the hit rate through firmware update. Honestly bodies are already a commodity, AF is solved in most cases that matter. The future improvements will be hugely over hyped by marketing teams and by some brand fbs but will make not pratical difference compared to where we are today.

Having a 400mm f2.8 TC is to me 10 times more important than a 5% AF improvement.

It's all about the lenses.

Cheers,
Bernard

RoamingScott wrote:
I have no intentions (yet) on divesting from Z, but we'll see how things wash out. I never minded Sony ergos or handling, but overall, Nikon seems to "get" photographers better than Sony. In particular, the Z8 and Z9 have SO MANY features that Sony is ignoring that it's starting to seem insane.

There is a critical level of detail missing from the Z cameras that the Sonys and GFX have in spades. If Nikon released a solid A7R5 competitor, I'd be all over it. So far on Z, I'm having to "cheat" in post to mimic the missing detail.