Sony officially launched those two new videos to explain the 4D AF technique. Expect this to be available on all future new E-mount cameras!
found via Image Sensor World.
Sony officially launched those two new videos to explain the 4D AF technique. Expect this to be available on all future new E-mount cameras!
found via Image Sensor World.
*Please also check your spam folder if you don't get the confirmation mail. And mark the mail as "non-spam" to see the future newsletter.
0 Responses
awesome
obviously it is time for a new a7…
My thoughts exactly. As a Nikon user looking to downsize and Nikon as a sleeping giant obviously won’t accommodate. Sony has met one requirement with the 16-35, and I don’t mind f4 zooms. Primes for faster glass. Wife’s a6000 really impresses me. Now they need to port the a6000 focusing to ‘version II’ of the A7 series and use the opportunity to address other secondary issues, like the A7R shutter. Hoping for “version II” after first of year as a new tax year (business deductions) is when will pull the trigger.
The “competitor” looks a lot like the A99 🙂
Too bad the A99 II didn’t get this. Don’t need 36mp, cleaner 24 would do. And fix the AF D.
Wow you have the A99II? You must be special!
A99 ii ?
Are you sure Sony will still make the A99 ii ?
;-P
looks impressive. now bring out the 6100, sony! 🙂
That’s why we need more native AF lens. No more room for manual focus lens!
Doesn’t look like they are talking about future cameras. These are adds for A6000 and A5100
That second video shows an A77ll. Is it going to be getting it too? Would seem strange to me. Can that be just a firmware update? If that is the case I’d like it for my A99:)
A77 ii has this from day 0 and the AF system on A77 ii is way better than A99 or so Sony marketing says
So the A77ll has the predictive focusing? I thought that part was new.
Yes it has it (according to Sony).
The a77ii has anything like that in the video mode they show in the second clip. It’s crippled five ways from Sunday.
The video showed a6000 kit lens. I believe a77ii like other SLT cameras focuses in this way only on wide open aperture.
E mount has continuous focus on any aperture
Yes, I agree the A77 ii AF is much better than the A77.
But as in the 2nd video, if the background is clean, pure white, blue sky,etc.
the AF lock on to the subject very well.
However if the background are more complex, with trees or many audiences .
The AF tends to jump and lock on to the non-moving object in the background.
I have tried many times that, I lock on the subject correctly on the first frame,
but on the next frame the AF jump & keep locking on to the background subject.
A77II has it already
I tried a6000 with the 70-200/4 and it I is indeed unbelievably fast. Problem is it is just not as accurate as the video claims. While tracking on coming moto cross bikes my miss rate was around 50%. I also tried a6000 with ea4 and old minolta lens – this was disaster, hardly any frames in focus. With ea4 a7 is many times better.
I did not try a7 with 70-200/4 and feel a bit sorry as it seems a7 is actually more accurate in tracking.
So may be Sony go on the right path but need an update or two to prediction logic before we call it a success
Kiril, try the a77II with the 70-200GII. Then you’ll know the true meaning of “unbelievably fast” and you’ll forget about the a6000’s “speed”
I am sure A77 ii is much more camera than a6000. I shoot a7 mostly as I prefer the smaller footprint and rarely shoot sports. I still have my a700 and love it
they forgot to put the disclaimer “the presented video is an artist’s vision, not the actual AF performance showcase”
Actually a6000 tracking works well on objects going at an angle like the airplane. I got about 100% hit rate when tracking jumping motorbikes on my side. Problem I found was with bikes coming straight at me. Also tracking horses running towards me was a bit of issue. If the thing move sideways no issue at all. So a firmware update or two should bring them
I have a6000. Yeah, the green boxes on screen appear in the right place while tracking, but with fast moving subjects focus slightly mises the point most of the time. Probably that’s the reason Sony is so reluctant to release wide aperture lenses for E-mount, as the focus inaccuracy would become even more apparent.
It’s all about size, not focus. Keeping the lenses small.
Primarily it’s about marketing strategy to sell the same thing twice: first, sell some crippled slow underdesigned lens to people who are more than happy that at last they did release something and a year later release a fast upgrade. If Sony did release FE 35/1.4 in the first place, nobody would even consider buying 35/2.8. The same goes with other lenses, as soon as the “selling plan” for f/4 zooms is realized f/2.8 will follow. As soon as f/2.8 primes are sold, f/1.4 will start to appear. And the focusing is another part of the equation: they would not be able to claim “fastest AF” in the world if this was not for the slow lens which allowed to hide how inaccurate this system is.
I owned a Sony Alpha 99 and sold it, because the AF was just too slow for me. The AF points were all cluttered in the center of the frame. And AF-D did not work with the Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 and Zeiss 135 f/1.8 lenses (they are very old, slow, loud but optically amazing). However, I am still very interested in Sony cameras. I think they offer great image quality and very innovative ideas. I would love to see such an AF system in an upcoming Sony Alpha 7 model.
I don’t think it is new per se…It seems they have found a name for their hybrid AF system…Or am I missing something?
Sorry, but the video doesn’t ‘explain’ anything. It is merely marketing and you can claim whatever you want.
If it was an explanation we would know how they predict the movement, but I think that is just pie in the sky. If they have fast AF in good light then it can appear to work as they say. However, on an overcast day it all goes pear shaped…
Exactly my thoughts. Just marketing nonsense.
…and when in the future can we expect Sony to reveal its E-mount IBIS? Whatever happened to that leaked document describing Sony’s IBIS? I’m guessing they would probably try it out first on the APS-C E mounts, eventually migrating to the full frame bodies.
It turned out to be a mistake by the intern who did the website.
I think the mistake was the release of the promotional material too early, not the fact that it doesn’t exist.
Nope, that dude apparently thought that all alpha cameras have IBIS.
Yep definitely. Just called Kaz. No IBIS in APS-C E. He said they are moving to 50MP stacked and curved sensors anyways. It’s confirmed.
Nikon has this long time ago. Even though Nikon calls it 3D focus tracking, it also do the predictive calculation as described in the video as the 4th dimension of time. Sony is better with the on sensor PDAF that has a much wider coverage. The focus tracking is the thing I always complaint on my A850, it is even worse than my 5D MKI. The A6000 is greatly improved. I am glad that Sony finally bring the gap closer to Nikon and Canon, but I have mixed feeling. It almost seem it is a bit too late. How many moments I missed in the past two years. I looked back my pics, I have a lot more sharp pics from 5D than A850, and I have been very struggling with AF on my A850 for the past two years. I move to Sony because of the CZ lenses, but I don’t expect the AF on the A850 is so bad. Actually, it can miss focus even on still shots. I now set the AF drive speed to slow and it is somewhat better, but still not 100%.
Don’t blame sony entirely. .. you’re the one who bought one 🙂
This was also on the A6000 but not marketed..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZGmLf6o6Bc
fast, wide, steadfast… more engrish from sony, but with photos of white children.
Pathetic Sony. Panasonic’s DFD proved to be generally superior approach without hurting IQ as OSPDAF does.
Hmm, is that a fact, actually? I’ve heard good things about Panasonic’s approach.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up8K_xd_iwU
Pure software, but it depends on the processor speed and sensor speed reading, so minimal upgrades can be done without hurting something or slowing it down, but it can’t go too far on that. the GH4 processor is really impressive by the way.
processors are getting better and better, aren’t they? 🙂
Yeah, but firmware depends on it GH4 maybe hasn`t much room to evolve with firmware update, only to fix bug and add minor functions…
Algorithms may change. There are methods to determine defocus sign and value from the single shot, exploring effects of CA: they differs for different defocus signs and value of difference expresses defocus value.
Yeah, but is not easy as you are exposing. For real i’don’t know what happens inside of GH4 or if it has one or many diferent processors, multi task or single task optimized. But its not cost effective to produce something that will not use 100% of what it means to be used. Beeter algoritihm can be something but any other camera could do it. Do you understand what i mean?
And they want to sell more in less time, updates to improve something to another level is a bad choice in most of the time. But who knows? Canon 7D had a great “buffer” upgrade in many years after launch…
panasonic uses a smaller sensor, so deeper dof, meaning that the focusing system doesnt have to be as good to get the same result
This excuse works for Nikon 1 vs Sony A6000 with their PDAFs, but not for GH4 vs A6000. Because DFD does not care about the whole image, it only works at some neighbourhood of a chosen focus point. And since the pixel pitch of GH4’s 16Mp sensor and A6000’s 24Mp is the same, the absolute DOF will be the same for the same physical focal length and aperture. You know, A6000 needs longer focal lengths for the same FOV though. But this is lame attempt of excuse as well: DFD works better on longer lengths becase the DOF is more pronounced and thus easier to classify. You can take Panasonic FZ1000 (1 inch sensor) as an example: its tracking capabilities are worse than of GH4.
Well done Sony, for a moment you guys had me thinking you invented an entirely new AF system again, but then I read I have the exact same one on my A6000.
this will upgraded via firmware, and right now are the starting point from what we had in a6000
Sony’s mishmash with lenses and sensors lead to a road map that just reeks of confusion.
They are hampered by having to support another line of cameras, the A-MOUNT. This is unlike the clear and logical progression we’ve been seeing from Fuji, Olympus and now Samsung.
So by the way – Fuji has also developed this object tracking technology and it works quite well in their X-T1. They’ll probably perfect it in their follow-up X-PRo model.
Speaking of the A-mount —
If I were in Sony’s executives boots I would be looking seriously at licensing or copying [if it doesn’t infringe patent rights] the Fuji non-bayer sensor layout and use it exclusively on the FF sensors and the one APS-C for enthusiasts.
Then they can remove those AA filters and have amazing image clarity,even at 24MPx.
In addition, I’d be investigating the use of BSI for really high pixel count sensors, e.g. 36MP and up.
Lens-wise I had already suggested they simplify their approach – start with a clean slate and have three very clearly defined groups of users: Low-end, Enthusiast and Professional.
In this case it would translate to the usual 18-55 and 55-200 lenses.
Then have a line of prime lenses all at f/2 – 18 or 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and 100mm and 300 f/4, 400mm f/5.6 for enthusiasts.
For zooms – 10-24 f/4, 24-112 f/4, 70-200 f/4 and 70-400mm f/4-/5.6
For the well-heeled enthusiast or professionals – 24mm f/1.4, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.4, 135mm f/1.8, 200mm f/2, 300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4, 600mm f/4
With the usual zoom lenses 16-35mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8.
What can be so difficult about this?
Fuji’s ISO is about 2/3 stop exaggerated and X-Trans has proven a failure at high resolution due to the noise reduction in RAW files. Look at comparison images of X-Trans cameras vs 16MP NEX cameras, there is no resolution advantage in the Fuji, just a lot of marketing fluff. Fact is, X-Trans looks better on paper than it does in practice. And nothing I’ve ever seen indicates that Fuji’s autofocus tracking is better than the one in the a6000, like the Camera Store review said, Fuji’s latest and greatest did the worst out of four cameras (a6000, EM1, GH4 all beat it).
Also, A-mount has a mostly mature core of lenses already, adding some
new bodies and lenses in a while isn’t that big of a “distraction.”
If you love Fuji’s ISO lying and b.s. about X-Trans go buy a Fuji, good riddance. That mount is going nowhere, ISO cheating, X-Trans not living up to the hype, crappy flash system, weak distribution, no Pro services anywhere in sight (at least Sony is building up in Asia and just expanded to Germany). Single digit market share. Weak distribution. There is an imminent shakeout in photography as the entire sector collapses in sales, and Fuji won’t survive it, they will bail on their mirrorless users just like they bailed on their SLR users.
I agree about Xtrans sensor; I used to own a XE1, it’s totally overrated. Cheat on ISO value (a little cloud in the sky –> iso 400 ^^), a lot of noise reduction at high iso, difficulties to recover details at base iso due to the non bayer sensor. I had to buy Photoninja to get acceptable results.
I can often read on the net about “the best APS-C sensor on the market” or bullshit like that, but it’s just a proof that marketing works very well. Fuji has proved with the XA1 that they could do at least as good or even better than the X-trans.
It’s not difficult, everybody can dl raw (for example from dpreview) to note that
1) ISO are overrated (Fuji camera never used the same aperture and shutter speed, or if they does, it’s darker)
2) Details at base iso are far less impressive than a Bayer without AA filter
3) At high iso, noise is very welle handled, but details are gone…
However, despite this lie, Fuji has a coherent line up of prime and zoom lenses, miles away better than what Sony did for APS-C e-mount.
Well, thats very strange, all of you guy talking about fuji raws, the best thing about fuji are their jpegs, fuji raws on Lightroom is underdeveloped, but there are other and better programs out there that makes it much easier.
Sorry guys but my fuji x100s for a 16mp sensor beats anyother sensor in sharpness, colors and noise. i mostly do jpeg as its my go-everywhere camera. Ah and for real, much better manual control than any other camera on the market. But i hope sony to make a real decision and stop marketing 4D Af, because its bad as DSLRs already have motion tracking with predictive AF for a long time, and we buyers know it.
1) I don’t trust any JPG engine.
2) Fuji’s ergonomics is bad (no grip)
3) Show me comparison of your X100s and “any other sensor” that is better in “sharpness, colors and noise”
4) I don’t care about manual control, I have a fast hand
5) Are you a camera specialist, do you even know how 4D AF will perform. If not, please shut up.
1)Why you don’t “trust” in JPG engine?
2)Bad is very subjective argument…
3)Even if i show you, you will not see any diference. And really i was talking about apsc sensor, sorry for that omission.
4) Some people care.
5) A6000 as you probably watched in the video has all of the features presented. So is safe to say that A6000 has AF4D…
Please stay calm.
It’s not quite that bad. ISO is just a number and indeed is 1/2-2/3 of a stop off compared to other manufacturers. I compared my Xt1 to OMD EM1 with Voigtländer lenses and D610. Using CO Pro 7 the difference in sharpness is very small, hardly visible even at 100% if developed correctly. Using random CFAs can have big advantages as you can influence crominance noise and pictures appear less noisy. This is due to the fact that it is less visible (different pattern) for the human eye (I can point you to scientific publications showing that). At higher ISO you loose detail, but that is often not a big deal, as noise reduction often takes away detail. I would not rate it better than a usual Bayer sensor (files larger, post processing needs more work), but not much worse, too. I like the lens range, that’s why I bought into the system. But for critical work, I still use my FF DSLR.
When I used photoninja with my raf files, I agree, it was “not worse” and “not better” than the other APS-C sensors on the market…
So, why did they created a strange sensor with no real advantages (other than small marketing tricks), which totally breaks the workflow? They have proven themselves with the X-A1 that they don’t need it to reach the same image quality…
I may buy a Fuji again when they’ll come on the market with a classic Bayer sensor, or why not with a new tech with REAL advantages. Because they have a very coherent lens line up, great bodies to. I don’t say that they are bad photographic tools. It would be stupid.
But for now I feel like they make us overpay (see X-A1 vs X-M1 prices) for a not better sensor that slow down all the post processing (I could mention the huge files too…)
The big files are my biggest complaint, too. Scientifically, random CFA can have large benefits. Unfortunately, one needs to use special algorithms (e.g. in spectral space) to really make use of it. I don’t think many companies want to invest in this. Here I would have hoped that Fuji would give information to Adobe, for example. A smart move would then have been similar to that of Sony, which made Capture One Express available for free with Sony cameras.
“They are hampered by having to support another line of cameras, the A-MOUNT. ”
Sony elected to purchase it from Minolta. It has been and continues to be profitable. So I doubt they feel hampered by revenue. Additionally, the purchase of Minolta’s IP aided Sony in the development of their cameras with e mount.
Just as there continues to be a market for aps-c bodies & lenses, there is a market for 30 years of legacy a-mount users. Once it stops making financial sense, Sony will move more aggressively to merge the lines.
This should mean the A-mount is done. Mirrorless full frame is the future. Especially when it gets into the sub $1000 territory.
A-mount could go mirrorless.
If E-mount cameras have comparable autofocus speeds, it would not make sense to design and manufacture future A-mount cameras when a simple adapter makes for a mirrorless A-mount.
Firstly those simple adapters work like junk. Even the laea4. Unless they manufacture one that allows for just changing themount, but the onethey have the laea3, works far worse then the laea4.. So hopes are not high.
Additionally mirrorless cameras have one major Achilles heel – they will not use the low light IR focus assist off flashes which is integral for low light fast autofocusing like at weddings.
Adapters are fine. You’re just finding excuses to whine and stay at home.
There are still good reasons: IBIS, SLR form factor, ruggedness, space for heat dissipation for internal 4k, larger batteries, screw drive & some customers fear/ distrust adapters (see Sony’s MIS to iISO adapter).
so 4D is: 1. just a marketing stunt 2. not the future but present – A5100 & A6000 and many other cameras of other manufacturers already have it 🙂
other manufactures?
unless they are mirrorless, ovf canikon always distracted by object infront, no matter what type AF your using, they dont have the glue AF, their AF system can’t remember what object we want, they cant remember face, cant triggered by big smile, cant find and lock on eye.
although its not perfect, but at least we are going there.
AFAIK the ovf AF system are the same over century, the nikons 3d are the real marketing stunt, its just a regular predictive focus point, they can make thousand of AF type but they works the same “what you hit first, are your af lock point”
happy chimping,… we are chimp-anzee legacy after all
“can’t be triggered by huge smile”
It is the inclusion of just this kind of AF gimmick/stupidity that makes true photographers roll over in their graves and bypass Sony’s “Pro camera’s
“Face detection”
Sony does an excellent job at detecting faces and this could be a very useful AF assist except it rarely focuses right on the eyes which makes it basically almost useless at shallow DOF. It is a problem because Cameras like a6000 which have whiz-bang dancing dragon AF wizardy at play are nigh impossible to control without using things like face recognition. SOyou get cams with great sensors and AF but that are focusing on noses and waiting for idiotic grin instead of flowing with the photographer’s desired focus point and timing.
It is basically nothing special. I work in numerical fluid dynamics. When you do fluid-structure interaction or simulate moving bodies in a fluid you do exactly this: use algorithms to estimate the new position based on average speed of a cell (here change of pixel contrast). Known for quite some time. Nevertheless its a smart way of improving AF. What is the difference to Fuji’s predictive AF or Nikons 3D tracking?
Will 4D AF work with A mount without LAEA4, Canon, and Nikon lenses.
And can Sony put IBIS in these new cameras.