Eye AF comparison between Canon R5 , Sony A7RIV and Nikon Z7 by Fro

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,383
1,064
Davidson, NC
Since I've never had eye autofocus, I've never missed it. I can't think of a situation that I would be shooting that having the face in focus would not be adequate. So would some of you for whom this is an important feature explain why you need it, or at least find it helpful? I assume that there are folks for whom this is not just a spec-sheet checkoff item. And whatever you say, I'm unlikely to run out and buy something with the feature. I'm just curious.
 
Upvote 0

AlanF

Desperately seeking birds
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
12,352
22,524
Since I've never had eye autofocus, I've never missed it. I can't think of a situation that I would be shooting that having the face in focus would not be adequate. So would some of you for whom this is an important feature explain why you need it, or at least find it helpful? I assume that there are folks for whom this is not just a spec-sheet checkoff item. And whatever you say, I'm unlikely to run out and buy something with the feature. I'm just curious.
I've managed without it for bird photography but I can see some advantages. It's usual to try and get the bird's eye in focus. So, I focus on that for sitting birds. But, with eyeAF, you can compose the and place the bird and the eyeAF takes care of the focus. For birds in flight with a wing stretched out towards you, the eyeAF will focus on the eye, not the wing. It's nice, not a game changer for me, but I think it would be useful
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
Since I've never had eye autofocus, I've never missed it. I can't think of a situation that I would be shooting that having the face in focus would not be adequate. So would some of you for whom this is an important feature explain why you need it, or at least find it helpful? I assume that there are folks for whom this is not just a spec-sheet checkoff item. And whatever you say, I'm unlikely to run out and buy something with the feature. I'm just curious.
Especially with a moving subject, eye-AF is a Godsend. I also find that a subject's iris is, more often than not, in focus. The frustrating thing with my 5D Mark III was putting the focus point right on an eye and the iris comes out not quite focused, or chasing my subject's movements with the single point focus box... trying to keep it on the eye. Eye-AF has mostly solved those problems for me. Note: I am using an R, not an R5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

kirbic

CR Pro
Jun 20, 2016
19
33
Sure is light years ahead of what was possible only a few years ago. Would have really liked it if Jared had just given comparisons of the overall hit rates between cameras on specific series.
I was surprised he didn't seem to understand that the AF was happening wide open, so of course the 85/1.2 blurred the background more in the viewfinder!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,383
1,064
Davidson, NC
I've managed without it for bird photography but I can see some advantages. It's usual to try and get the bird's eye in focus. So, I focus on that for sitting birds. But, with eyeAF, you can compose the and place the bird and the eyeAF takes care of the focus. For birds in flight with a wing stretched out towards you, the eyeAF will focus on the eye, not the wing. It's nice, not a game changer for me, but I think it would be useful
I don't shoot BIF, and really wonder about its appeal beyond the challenge of following the bird in the viewfinder. I wonder why you would want part of the bird in focus and other parts out of focus. I can see using a shutter speed low enough that it looks like a BIF rather than just coasting, so maybe wings being out of focus helps give that effect. I do shoot birds at the feeders next door, just because they are cooperative subjects when I'm trying out a telephoto, unlike the deer, who hide when you point something at them. I don't use anything longer than 400mm, and birds are small enough that the whole bird is in focus if any of it is. I would be interested in hearing of non-bird applications for this, though I know this site skews toward BIF, certainly in comparison to the general population.
 
Upvote 0

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
1,072
2,335
60
I've managed without it for bird photography but I can see some advantages. It's usual to try and get the bird's eye in focus. So, I focus on that for sitting birds. But, with eyeAF, you can compose the and place the bird and the eyeAF takes care of the focus. For birds in flight with a wing stretched out towards you, the eyeAF will focus on the eye, not the wing. It's nice, not a game changer for me, but I think it would be useful


Excellent post.
 
Upvote 0

Bdbtoys

R5
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2020
467
331
Can someone give me a TL DR so I DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN TO POLIN SCREAMING AT ME?

:LOL::ROFLMAO::LOL:

All 3 are good (and have come a long way since initial showing). Canon/Sony are better than the Nikon (not to say Nikon is terrible). They also tie at the 'first glance test' (however I think Canon won). He provided jpgs so people could check out the hit rate (which I think was really missing from his video... couldn't he just tell us which one had the better hit rate?).

It's worth watching just to see the tracking in action.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Aussie shooter

https://brettguyphotography.picfair.com/
Dec 6, 2016
1,183
1,817
brettguyphotography.picfair.com
I've managed without it for bird photography but I can see some advantages. It's usual to try and get the bird's eye in focus. So, I focus on that for sitting birds. But, with eyeAF, you can compose the and place the bird and the eyeAF takes care of the focus. For birds in flight with a wing stretched out towards you, the eyeAF will focus on the eye, not the wing. It's nice, not a game changer for me, but I think it would be useful
100%. I tend to shoot a series and ditch the shots if the focus is not right on the eye. That is often over half the images on a fast moving animal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

koenkooi

CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
3,574
4,110
The Netherlands
Since I've never had eye autofocus, I've never missed it. I can't think of a situation that I would be shooting that having the face in focus would not be adequate. So would some of you for whom this is an important feature explain why you need it, or at least find it helpful? I assume that there are folks for whom this is not just a spec-sheet checkoff item. And whatever you say, I'm unlikely to run out and buy something with the feature. I'm just curious.

For me, it's for keeping my kids in focus while I concentrate on not tripping over things while walking backwards :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

AaronT

CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
272
608
Since I've never had eye autofocus, I've never missed it. I can't think of a situation that I would be shooting that having the face in focus would not be adequate. So would some of you for whom this is an important feature explain why you need it, or at least find it helpful? I assume that there are folks for whom this is not just a spec-sheet checkoff item. And whatever you say, I'm unlikely to run out and buy something with the feature. I'm just curious.
Here is just one example. Doing head shots with a 85mm F1.2 at 1.2. Depth of field about 1/2 inch. You move a bit, model moves a bit or changes pose and the camera keeps the closest eye in perfect focus all the time. You can just concentrate on when to press the shutter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,383
1,064
Davidson, NC
Here is just one example. Doing head shots with a 85mm F1.2 at 1.2. Depth of field about 1/2 inch. You move a bit, model moves a bit or changes pose and the camera keeps the closest eye in perfect focus all the time. You can just concentrate on when to press the shutter.
I understand the example. Thanks.

But I don't understand why someone would want a picture of someone with one eye in focus and not much else.
 
Upvote 0

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,980
2,602
Alberta, Canada
I understand the example. Thanks.

But I don't understand why someone would want a picture of someone with one eye in focus and not much else.
Steve, I think it's usually not that cut and dry since focus disappears gradually but you still want the eye to be the sharpest.

Jack
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0