p.7 #1 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
gyoung143 wrote:
Did you consider xh2s? Designed for the job.
Yes, but have heard mixed reactions from the YTers on it. If I was going to spend the money to upgrade, I would like to know that the AF is that much better and definite. But from the videos I saw and the online information, it did not appear that it was any better, but maybe it was their comparison with the other brands like Sony that made it worse in my eye.
p.7 #2 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
What brand loyalty? If you search my history you can find me complaining about the stuff...even in this very thread. I just get tired of hearing about peoples incessant whining about it. I have used both my X and GFX stuff for work and it works well enough to do my job. I also swap around with Nikon stuff. I can use both for the most part. I just try not to use X mount for very demanding things. Jase1125 wrote:
Not hyperbole but just facts. I never said it is impossible for someone to get wildlife or birds in flight. I have quite a catalog of them with Fuji myself. However, as a tool compared to the same tool made by other manufacturers it is substandard. When you strip away the brand loyalty and look at the technical benchmarks for high-speed tracking and wildlife photography, Fuji just cannot compete with the others. Both the X-T5 and X-H2s can struggle to maintain focus during erratic movement compared to the dedicated AI processing units in competitors. This is well documented by reviewers and users. ...Show more →
p.7 #3 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
Ultimate22 wrote:
Manual focus does not work for something like BIF or fast-moving sports; that's with 100% certainty. Fuji silver cameras definitely have naturally coolness factor and most of their cameras are fun to shoot, but they're not made for everything, that's for sure.
BIF I'll give you, as they are so erratic, But are you seriously suggesting sport wasn't done before AF, nonsense. It's a lot easier so anyone can do it without good knowledge of the particular sport, relying on the technology to make up for lack of skill and knowledge. I've done it, published in national newspapers and magazines, motor racing, athletics and football, with manual focus.
If you want to use af-c then sure it's got to be good, but even then Xh2s can do it, plenty of stuff to see, even if it wouldn't be the ideal choice.
p.7 #4 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
I've had no trouble nailing focus tracking water skiers with Fuji AF-C with both the X-T4 and X-T5 and XF 70-300mm. Could Fuji AF be better? I suppose so, but AF these days is so good I have trouble understanding why so many people think it's an issue.
p.7 #5 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
JadedWriter wrote:
What brand loyalty? If you search my history you can find me complaining about the stuff...even in this very thread. I just get tired of hearing about peoples incessant whining about it. I have used both my X and GFX stuff for work and it works well enough to do my job. I also swap around with Nikon stuff. I can use both for the most part. I just try not to use X mount for very demanding things.
And search my posts and you will see this is probably the first time I have raised this issue. I will dispute people saying there is nothing wrong and it works well. So my use is like yours - I don’t use X mount for demanding things. How come when some of us bring this up now it is whining and you bring it up in the past isn’t whining? Seems like if you agree with the content and tired of discussing it you would just ignore the post and move on.
p.7 #6 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
Because when I bring it up I bring it up like maybe once in the thread relating to it and then just move on to something else and not take up an entire thread beating a dead horse. Also my tone isn't that aggressive and condescending and disrespectful to the company when I do it. Jase1125 wrote:
And search my posts and you will see this is probably the first time I have raised this issue. I will dispute people saying there is nothing wrong and it works well. So my use is like yours - I don’t use X mount for demanding things. How come when some of us bring this up now it is whining and you bring it up in the past isn’t whining? Seems like if you agree with the content and tired of discussing it you would just ignore the post and move on.
p.7 #7 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
Geoff D F wrote:
I've had no trouble nailing focus tracking water skiers with Fuji AF-C with both the X-T4 and X-T5 and XF 70-300mm. Could Fuji AF be better? I suppose so, but AF these days is so good I have trouble understanding why so many people think it's an issue.
While I've never photographed water skiers, I definitely have photographed Ultimate Frisbee players and the amount of time a shot directly taken in front of the players or a shot with background of the image being sharper but the subjects being out of focus and blurred has infuriated me a bit. I've missed on some good shots for sure. Could I have gotten a better lens? Maybe. Though I don't know if it would have made a drastic difference. Fuji caters to different audience nowadays.
I have couple photos here as example, there is maybe 1 out of 4 images that are spot on perfect.
p.7 #8 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
So I just took the time to go through some photos I took a couple of days ago. 751 images from a U14 boys rep soccer game. Pretty similar backgrounds to what you showed. Trees and chain link fenses. Shot using a variety of setting and I did not in anyway track which settings were used when. A variety of electronic/mechanical shutter. Burst rates between 10 and 20. Some with the 1.25 crop others without. Mainly with either single point or the 3 x 3 box. A few with face detection (I have the fn button set to toggle it on and off and a front button to toggle switching between faces). When electronic was used it was set to preshot.
Out of 751 images. All were tack sharp except 22. All shot on an X-T3 with the 100-400 and all were using Morris' custom settings. Very similar to the second option to avoid obstacles. Of the 22 a couple jumped to a different player. Most jumped to the chain link fence when the player was close to the fence. The soccer netting also took focus a couple of times. 97% is a pretty good hit rate for a 7 year old camera. These kids aren't pros but they move pretty fast and some they were filling the frame at 100mm and moving towards the camera. It tracked fine.
Now I will admit...one of the sequences that got missed...would have been really nice with an attempted header in front of the net. The rest were pretty meh.
That's one of the things though with Fuji you really have to work the AF. When players are getting closer to fenses it sometimes makes sense to switch to face detect because that will pull it back (and sometimes if will find a face in the trees). Overall I would say that was an above average result...I've had worse outings for sure. ...but 97%, while not on Sony/Canon/Nikon level isn't bad...at least how I would define bad.
And lastly...most of the negativity I saw about Fuji came from their video AF. Which would pulse and fail to track smoothly. Stills I always heard it was good...but not big 3 good.
Edit...I will add, the lighting during this outing was really good.
p.7 #11 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
RoamingScott wrote:
1 poster says 25% critical focus hit rate.
1 poster says 97% critical focus hit rate.
Makes you wonder.
Well the camera is obviously capable of it, not the only ones who are happy.
Makes you wonder? About some people's lack of technique perhaps? And readiness to blame the tools?
And I don't count Morris's settings as a 'workaround', but intelligent application to get the best out of the equipment.
p.7 #12 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
RoamingScott wrote:
1 poster says 25% critical focus hit rate.
1 poster says 97% critical focus hit rate.
Makes you wonder.
While I'm willing to admit my definition of sharp could be different from someone else...you could double or triple the amount of out of in focus images...and the results would still be in the 90% range for shooting relatively fast moving subjects...with a lens that people often crap on. It's not bad. It doesn't suck. It can be frustrating when it misses those amazing photos for sure though. If I was a pro sports/wildlife shooter I would probably want the extra. No doubt. Crappy colors are fixable...missed focus isn't. But for a camera I can put the 23mm pancake or 35 1.4 on and stick in a bag and travel with...or put on the 56/90 and get nice portraits with top of class skin tones ...or throw on the battery grip and 100-400 and shoot sports or birds and get a very good keeper rate...and have lots of money left over to go and do things worth photographing...not a bad option. But if critical continuous autofocus is all you care about...there's ugly cameras that will give you clinical images with meh colors more consistently...and aren't as fun to shoot with. The existence of several subforums here definitely indicate there's a market for either and everything in between.
p.7 #13 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
gyoung143 wrote:
Well the camera is obviously capable of it, not the only ones who are happy.
Makes you wonder? About some people's lack of technique perhaps? And readiness to blame the tools?
And I don't count Morris's settings as a 'workaround', but intelligent application to get the best out of the equipment.
So then why don't pros use Fuji more to do BIF or sports or whatever? Why do they go for Sony, Canon and Nikon with the first 2 being interchangeable and Fuji not being in the conversation?
Just becasue there's a good hit ratio of a soccer game, how is that even comparable to other sports lol. Not to mention, soccer isn't always a fast sport either, there's not 90 minutes of sprinting all the time.
p.7 #14 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
A lot of pros do not touch Fuji mostly because they're sorely lacking in the long glass game. Ultimate22 wrote:
So then why don't pros use Fuji more to do BIF or sports or whatever? Why do they go for Sony, Canon and Nikon with the first 2 being interchangeable and Fuji not being in the conversation?
Just becasue there's a good hit ratio of a soccer game, how is that even comparable to other sports lol. Not to mention, soccer isn't always a fast sport either, there's not 90 minutes of sprinting all the time.
p.7 #15 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
Ultimate22 wrote:
So then why don't pros use Fuji more to do BIF or sports or whatever? Why do they go for Sony, Canon and Nikon with the first 2 being interchangeable and Fuji not being in the conversation?
Just becasue there's a good hit ratio of a soccer game, how is that even comparable to other sports lol. Not to mention, soccer isn't always a fast sport either, there's not 90 minutes of sprinting all the time.
See the post above yours, I couldn't sum it up better. If I were a pro sports or wildlife photographer wouldn't be using Fuji.
But I'm not, but I choose Fuji for other reasons, and it isn't that bad either at the fast moving stuff if you get a chance occasionally to do some.
When I was a pro I used Leica M for most of my personal stuff, and sometimes the Nikons which were the 35mm camera I used for pro work. The Fujis have much more of a crossover for normal users. Choose the right tool for the majority of your interests. And keep a sense of proportion
p.7 #16 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
That makes a lot more sense than people always saying "It'S tHe SkIlLs Of ThE sHoOtEr" not the tool itself... Like ya, that totally helps me missing a cool shot with picture perfect everything, but the camera chose to focus on a fence post or a tree or a bird flying 500 feet in the air instead of the people directly in front of my lens.
p.7 #17 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
Ultimate22 wrote:
That makes a lot more sense than people always saying "It'S tHe SkIlLs Of ThE sHoOtEr" not the tool itself... Like ya, that totally helps me missing a cool shot with picture perfect everything, but the camera chose to focus on a fence post or a tree or a bird flying 500 feet in the air instead of the people directly in front of my lens.
If you ever look at Morris' BIF settings threads, the amount of hula hoops he's keeping in the air at all times with wonky convoluted settings is crazy, all to achieve results that are, to my eye, still below the minimum bar of more capable FF cameras.
Horses for courses and all that, and Fuji isn't the horse for this one.
p.7 #18 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
If you do at-c tracking its not just as simple as turning it on and it works. I know, I've tried, not only with Fuji but mainly with Nikon DSLR. You need to find the settings from many that works for your subject, you need to learn how to get it to lock on to the item you want to track, and how to keep it tracking. I don't think Morris is jumping through hoops, why should he, he's used Nikon too I'm pretty sure, he's used Nikon PF primes on Fringer too.
I'm happy to believe Nikon is better (b, even that it's easier, and it's the choice if money is no obje t and you are doing little else with the kit. But that's not the market Fuji is in, least of all with the Xt line.
Just got an announcement, Sony A7rVI, almost £5k, three times the price of Xt5, why is that seen as thr 9bjective at Xt price point even, never mind the other advantages of the Fuji system. What's their aps-c compact like at tracking? I had a Nex 6 once, and an A7, wouldn't try it with either.
p.7 #19 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
gyoung143 wrote:
If you do at-c tracking its not just as simple as turning it on and it works. I know, I've tried, not only with Fuji but mainly with Nikon DSLR. You need to find the settings from many that works for your subject, you need to learn how to get it to lock on to the item you want to track, and how to keep it tracking. I don't think Morris is jumping through hoops, why should he, he's used Nikon too I'm pretty sure, he's used Nikon PF primes on Fringer too.
I'm happy to believe Nikon is better (b, even that it's easier, and it's the choice if money is no obje t and you are doing little else with the kit. But that's not the market Fuji is in, least of all with the Xt line.
Just got an announcement, Sony A7rVI, almost £5k, three times the price of Xt5, why is that seen as thr 9bjective at Xt price point even, never mind the other advantages of the Fuji system. What's their aps-c compact like at tracking? I had a Nex 6 once, and an A7, wouldn't try it with either....Show more →
You are honestly are not experienced or informed enough to have this conversation.
I'm not here to argue FOR Nikon, but yes, it IS that easy...AF-C, wide area mode, subject tracking, hold shutter down, get keepers. That's the world the full frame shooters are living in and have been for some time now.
When you get get that experience for $2800 on our Buy/Sell forum here, why would you want to spend even 2/3rds that much for a far subpar APS-C camera?
p.7 #20 · Will XT6 finally catch up to Sony, Canon and Nikon with AF.
JadedWriter wrote:
Because when I bring it up I bring it up like maybe once in the thread relating to it and then just move on to something else and not take up an entire thread beating a dead horse. Also my tone isn't that aggressive and condescending and disrespectful to the company when I do it.
I have not been disrespectful, aggressive, or condescending. I haven’t taken up this thread anymore than you have arguing that my opinion is invalid. I mean this post is literally about Fuji AF. I am participating in a post about Fuji AF sharing my perspective and I feel fairly balanced. No one is forcing you to engage with me if you dislike me or my posts for some reason. When I criticize Fuji AF, it is always in comparison with the other major players. There has to be a standard it is compared against. That it works great for some people for their style of photography is great and I am happy for them. It works fine for me for portraits (mostly with some misses) and landscape. For more demanding AF scenarios, like songbirds in flight with a smaller depth of field, it doesn’t work well at all. So that is where I am coming from when I say it sucks because the others do all of those scenarios quite well.
While I agree people should choose the right tool for the job, Fuji markets itself as a tool capable for the very thing I criticize it for. Year after year what Fuji delivers is less than their promise WRT AF. People often don’t have the money to have multiple systems. The fact there is a suggestion that a person should be using a different system for birds in flight suggests one actually agrees with my primary criticism. I cannot imagine telling someone with Sony A1 they should not use it to take portraits because it isn’t the correct tool for portraits if their AF-S had problems. Sony would be destroyed in forums for such a failure.
