Birds Sony Focus tracking worked pretty well with these shots!

[Slug]

The Blackbird passed behind two trees and the focus was still locked onto the eye in the gap between them.

• ILCE-1
• FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/5.6
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 3200

• ILCE-1
• FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/5.6
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 3200

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Yeah right!!!

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

As far as i can tell on your posted picture of the eye/head emerging from behind the tree seems to be
much sharper than the eye of the full image between the trees........

Did you have focus sensitivity set on its highest focus lock setting and given the difference in eye sharpness,
if the head shot was your first shot, it seems the focus system lost eye a degree of focus on the secondary image.......?

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Clever in camera processing to keep up there.

 

[Jeff A]

The Blackbird passed behind two trees and the focus was still locked onto the eye in the gap between them.

View attachment 46159View attachment 46160

That is what it was designed to do. A good example of seeing it work in the real world.

 

[spudhead]

Is that eye focus?

 

[Slug]

As far as i can tell on your posted picture of the eye/head emerging from behind the tree seems to be
much sharper than the eye of the full image between the trees........

Did you have focus sensitivity set on its highest focus lock setting and given the difference in eye sharpness,
if the head shot was your first shot, it seems the focus system lost eye a degree of focus on the secondary image.......?

It was set on 1 "Locked on" and the softness of the full bird was more to do with my hand held panning than anything else. I included that shot instead of one of the others in the sequence as it showed the tree. This one might have been better.

• ILCE-1
• FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/5.6
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 3200

 

[Slug]

Is that eye focus?

It started out that way.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

It was set on 1 "Locked on" and the softness of the full bird was more to do with my hand held panning than anything else. I included that shot instead of one of the others in the sequence as it showed the tree. This one might have been better.
View attachment 46191View attachment 46191

Better send in the forensics, we need to get to the bottom of this..!

 

[spudhead]

It started out that way.

well sorry to say this but it sort of proves the point I always make it not needed, why focus on the smallest part of the bird, the rest of the bird is out of focus, and in the first shot nothing is in focus, the a9 mk1 can manage both in focus easy really

 

[Slug]

With your expertise maybe. I owned the A9 mk 1 and got a similar amount of keepers but certainly not all perfect. Small fast birds are not as easy as large slower ones. My mistake was to post the shot which was probably the softest in the sequence. What I mainly wanted to illustrate was the bird behind the tree.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

It was set on 1 "Locked on" and the softness of the full bird was more to do with my hand held panning than anything else. I included that shot instead of one of the others in the sequence as it showed the tree. This one might have been better.
View attachment 46193

Yes this has a sharper eye......

 

[spudhead]

With your expertise maybe. I owned the A9 mk 1 and got a similar amount of keepers but certainly not all perfect. Small fast birds are not as easy as large slower ones. My mistake was to post the shot which was probably the softest in the sequence. What I mainly wanted to illustrate was the bird behind the tree.

For sure the eye of the bird from behind the tree is some what sharper, I was just saying that I really dont think eye focus is a big factor in bird in flight images, sorry if I was harsh

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

On the subject of bird eye sharpness in general and whilst it is not always possible to achieve this I
always draw on the comparison of birds with dark plumage along with darkeyes and eye sockets wherein
It is often not possible to get any definition of the eye due to lack of colour contrast and or shadow depth
primarily.

In shooting such birds where eye detail is not there or unrecoverable I am very hesitant to publish such pictures
For that very reason......I guess I am somewhat of a traditionalist in that respect.

Different people have different views, and whilst we all strive to achive completely sharp BIFs, for me personally
a shot with sharp eye(s) and lower plumage quality or slightly out of focus body, for whatever reason, is preferable
to a shot with good quality/sharp body and little or no eye detail/sharpness.