Nikon Z Mirrorless Talk Forum

Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
Laqup
Contributing MemberPosts: 662
8
Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

Ahoi girls and guys,

this will not be a popular thread, nevertheless it has to be said:

Now that I have spent some time with the camera, I am actually somewhat disappointed with the much hyped AF system. In practical use I see many of the same issues that the Z6/Z7 were known for and especially in low light the AF is not reliable /fast at all. I am a multi system user and always have the direct comparison with Canon gear and sadly Nikon still has some catching up to do.

Additional disclaimer: Don't get me wrong: You can get fantastic images with the Zf, but overall keeper rate in some situations (!) is too low in direct comparison with the competition.

I used the Zf for some family events, especially shooting my own kids and my newphews and as we have terrible weather most of it was indoors under pretty bad lighting conditions. I am not comfortable with sharing the full images of the kids, therefore I blurred most of the image, but I always try to show the crucial parts. All shown issues were not singular ocurances but happened regularly. I just picked some examples. Furthermore I will not go into all details of the settings, as I know that someone always has "a better idea", just as much: Subject Detection, AF-C and ISOs in the range of 5000-10000 and various lenses were used. Shutter speed was sufficient to prevent motion blur. Lenses were used wide open. Sometimes I used continuous shooting (5pfs) sometimes I dictated the pace with the shutter myself.

I even downloaded Nikon NX studio to show you were the focus points were. Subject detection worked very well and the subject detection / 3d tracking on button press setup is a joy to use. I only show examples were the eye / face has been detected.

Images have not been edited at all, so don't focus on potential noise or other issues present.

Example 1:

Example 1

Image 1: Nailed it
Image 2: Jump to the right eye, but nailed it
Image 3: "Ok" (not critically sharp) (I included the hand for reference, see image 4)
Image 4: Suddenly jumped to the hand, focus point is on the eye
Image 5: Back to the eye

Example 2:

Example 2

Image 1: Nailed it
Image 2: Nailed it
Image 3: Jump to the hand, even if focus point is on the eye

Examples 1 & 2 show the tendency to jump to foreground objects, even if the focus point is correctly placed. Example 3 shows "lack of AF speed".
Example 3, just the 100% crops in this case because this is tedious:

Example 3

Image 1: Nailed it
Image 2: In between eye and ear
Image 3: Ear
Image 4: Ear
Image 5: Back to the eye, but the other one than in image 1

All of this reminds me of the Z6/Z7 that often was not able to keep up with any kind of action and showed the same tendency to jump to foregroud objects:
Example 4 (Z6):

Example 4 (Z6)

Image 1: Focus on hand / wooden pole
Image 2: Nailed it

My conclusion: Don't believe all the hype, Zf overall works better than Z6 / Z7 (II), especially subject detection is great and more static scenes are a joy to shoot, but the actual AF when some motion is present is not that different from the first gen bodies.
I really hope that the Z9 and Z8 can do better than this and "pray" that the Z6 III will finally be able to deliver proper AF in a "small" body.
Currently in somewhat complex scenario where the Zf will achieve something like a 70% keeper the Canon R8/R5 will deliver 90% keepers in the same situation.

That being said: I would no go back to the Z6/Z7 either. Performance wise the Zf is an improvement, allthough it still has some room for tweaks.

allanimal
Regular MemberPosts: 410
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

Out of curiosity, what lens(es) did you use?

Laqup
OP Laqup
Contributing MemberPosts: 662
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

I have seen this behavior with the Z 24-120 f4, Tamron Z 35-150 f2-2.8, Z 50 1.8, Z 85 1.8. Haven't used other lenses with the Zf yet.

orlovsn
Regular MemberPosts: 214
4
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

I noticed same behavior when using small and medium af zones when eye was detected and confirmed “in focus” but was outside the focusing zone - often focus was on nose or leaps (closest to camera texture inside focusing zone)

Switching to largest (custom with maximum frame coverage) zone seems to fix this in my case

Seems like it’s some kind of priority issue when non-tracker af inside focusing zone gets higher score then eye tracker outside focusing zone

Anyway I am very pleased with af speed comparing to z7 gen1 I used to have, hope Nikon will improve accuracy with firmware updates as they did with gen1

Laqup
OP Laqup
Contributing MemberPosts: 662
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

orlovsn wrote:

I noticed same behavior when using small and medium af zones when eye was detected and confirmed “in focus” but was outside the focusing zone - often focus was on nose or leaps (closest to camera texture inside focusing zone)

Switching to largest (custom with maximum frame coverage) zone seems to fix this in my case

Seems like it’s some kind of priority issue when non-tracker af inside focusing zone gets higher score then eye tracker outside focusing zone

Anyway I am very pleased with af speed comparing to z7 gen1 I used to have, hope Nikon will improve accuracy with firmware updates as they did with gen1

Ah yes, forgot to mention: I did not use zones, but my default AF mode is full frame subject detection AF.
I bound the AF-ON button to active 3d tracking of the center point if necessary, but the examples above are all done with full frame subject detection.

MJ_79
New MemberPosts: 13
4
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

I am also using the Zf mostly to take pics of my hyper active 1.5 yo daughter and I can totally relate. I've sold my Z6II for the Zf, had both for a few weeks so I could compare them a little and found the Zf superior mostly in the subject detection department...but as for AF accuracy, there are issues with the Zf, no matter how much hype is spreading online. I dislike most online reviews for this exact reason...they are made and uploaded for clicks, often by inexpert people, and very few reviewers have taken the time to test the AF in challenging conditions with multiple lenses as you did before uploading their "content". On top of that, they don't want to upset Nikon, I guess...the result is that online reviews are mostly unreliable, and what matters ultimately is user hands-on experience.

AshleyMC
Senior MemberPosts: 2,873
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

Zf is my only Nikon Z camera. I use primarily Sony Alpha full-frame cameras and have shot with Canon and Fujifilm mirrorless cameras.

I personal assessment is that AF technology, as embodied in the Nikon Zf is generally behind that in the Sony a7 IV and in the Canon R6 Mark II. (Another area that prevents me from giving full grade to the Zf is Nikon’s menu implementation and arbitrarily-restrictive function-button customizations. I personally feel Nikon menus have not evolved since my D750 time.)

I appreciate your careful documentation of the Zf AF issue you have encountered.

For the last 2.5 months of active Zf use, I always set:

  • Custom Controls (Shooting) > AE-L / AF-L button = AF-ON
  • AF Activation = AF-ON only
  • AF-C Priority Selection = Focus
  • Focus Mode = AF-C
  • AF-Area Mode = 3D Tracking
  • AF/MF subject detection options = off (= Human, as needed)

I leave the “default” AF box in the center of the frame. When a face is detected, the “eye” AF box is shown automatically (and is most likely in a different position within the frame). With either AF box activated, I track and recompose while releasing the shutter as I wish — both subject and camera may be simultaneously in motion while AF is “stickily” maintained.

I use Nikon Z 40mm f/2 and various adapted E-mount lenses.

PS. How can the so-called reviewers “test” anything in-depth when they only fondle the gear for a few hours? Just random opinions.

MJ_79
New MemberPosts: 13
2
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

PS. How can the so-called reviewers “test” anything in-depth when they only fondle the gear for a few hours? Just random opinions.

True, but then they should not spread to the 7 winds that the Zf has the "best AF system ever, on par if not superior to the competition", like they're singing most of the times.

AshleyMC
Senior MemberPosts: 2,873
2
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

MJ_79 wrote:

PS. How can the so-called reviewers “test” anything in-depth when they only fondle the gear for a few hours? Just random opinions.

True, but then they should not spread to the 7 winds that the Zf has the "best AF system ever, on par if not superior to the competition", like they're singing most of the times.

I did not defend for them. In fact, I tend to ignore them because I find them superficial and theatrical. As I said, “just random opinions.”

six34sigma
Senior MemberPosts: 2,328
12
Re: Nikon Zf AF not state of the art
1 day ago

Not the same as your experience but nobody if claiming Z9 or Z8 performance. The z9 and z8 are stacked sensors and are blackout free. The Zf sensor is the same sensor in a Z6ii, it’s BSI and does not process information as quickly.

If you read Thom Hogans review he says the same thing. Look under focusing, the first paragraph or two.

https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-cameras/nikon-z-camera-reviews/nikon-zf-camera-review.html

Everybody’s experience is different. Mine has not been perfect with occasional misses, but the difference is that I am okay with that for $2,000. Would not have been okay with that with the Z9.

--
Regards,
Sanjay

Page 1 of 5 (posts 1-10 of 46 in thread) Next