Is mirrorless AF & tracking up to speed for sports?? Equal to Pro DSLR yet?

[mugget]

A bit of background - I used to have a 1DMkII and 100-400mm L, but got sick of the small viewfinder and viewfinder blacking out so I sold it and got a Leica M8 for general type walkabout photos, effectively giving up on sports photography.

Fast forward 7-8 years and I’m keen to get back into it!!

It seems like mirrorless has come a long, long way and I really like the idea of no blackout EVF and all the other EVF features like auto-adjusting brightness etc. But I wonder how it compares against the old 1DMkII AF & tracking performance? Does anyone know? Anyone here use mirrorless for sports, and what do you think about it? Any regrets?

Cheer for any info!

[Filter]

I have given local AFL a go with my Olly EM1ii. I found the EVF dificult to use while panning, the refresh rate is a big concern when taking shots. The subject appears jittery & at times I lose the subject out of the AF point. In burst I notice one or two shots hit the mark but have three misses. I was told that Olympus was trying to get into the AFL as a pro camera with the big boys but havn't seen any evidence of that. For these reasons I will stick to the 7Dii 100-400L combo.

Al.

[Tannin]

Sadly, it's not even close.

For action work, the $3300 EOS R - said to be amongst the best of all mirrorless cameras so far as AF performance goes - is somewhere around about the same standard as the cheap little 400D I owned briefly more than ten years ago, which is to say around about on a par with the poorest DSLR focus systems I've ever used. (400D, 5D II.)

The R has lovely fast, smooth AF ... when it works. But quite often it doesn't. And your ability to put the focus point exactly where you want it, theoretically unlimited and very precise, is in practice so slow and cumbersome as to rule it out for anything time-critical (such as sport or wildlife.

Also, the viewfinder lag makes action work into guesswork.

Save the mirrorless for landscapes, where the AF system works, in the main, quickly and accurately. For anything involving action, SLRs are vastly superior.

I like my EOS R a lot - but for birds and action, I would use my 1D IV, 7D II, or 5D IV first. Not sure about 5D II or EOS R, they are about equally badly suited to the task. If you are looking to replace a 1D II, and don't want to shell out on a new pro model, look at the superb 5D IV (frame rate the only drawback) or a 7D II.

[mugget]

Cheers for the replies. I knew it sounded too good to be true - all those YouTube reviews I’ve seen make it seem like mirrorless is the greatest. I’m sure it will get there.

Does full frame AF not make any difference? Is the A7III or A9 not even come close to fulfilling the requirements?

Anyway I need to get my hands on some gear to see for myself, hopefully checking out Camera House tonight and will be able to demo some gear.

No problem if mirrorless isn’t up to it, honestly I would be happy enough with another 1DMkII, maybe even MkIII or MkIV as they’re relatively “cheap” now.

[William Gordon]

Edited per site rules to remove promotion.

[ricktas]

I'm sorry, but why was William's post before mine deleted for "promotion"? He simply stated the Sony A9 is a fantastic bit of kit if you can afford it. The OP in the very thread above his asked "Is the A7III or A9 not even come close to fulfilling the requirements?" to which William's post seemed an appropriate reply.

Are we not allowed to post opinion anymore?

it was removed as the poster does not meet the 50 posts rule regarding promotion of products or services. (site rule 3). Once he reaches 50 posts he will be able to say what he likes/dislikes about products.

The OP had met both the 30/50 rules when he posted, so thus it was allowed.

[Tannin]

^ Only if you have less than a certain number of posts, Richard. It's just to prevent spammers joining up to push stuff. William will be able to post that as soon as he has ... er .. I think it's 20 posts.

On your focus comments, I'd make two observations.

1: Canon have updated the firmware of the EOS R significantly. It is now much better than it was. It is still inferior to a good SLR, particularly insofar as it still lacks both the ability to set an exact focus point ("point", not "small area") and a practicable mechanism for selecting it, but it's usable.

2: In my remarks, I laid overmuch emphasis on the AF issue, and not nearly enough on the viewfinder lag problem, which (certainly since the AF firmware updates) is far more serious. Whether that applies to other brands I cannot say.


Since this thread was last alive, it is notable that the two primary professional camera manufacturers have both introduced new models at the top of their ranges. In both cases, they went with SLRs.

[Toddyh]

I use a Sony A7rii and this is the one thing lacking. It's a little slow and tracking is not great. I believe the A9 series is better and the updated A7r series is better too. Mirrorless are improving in this aspect from what I can tell. How long until they catch DLSR? Who knows, but my bet is not very.

[Tannin]

2: In my remarks, I laid overmuch emphasis on the AF issue, and not nearly enough on the viewfinder lag problem, which (certainly since the AF firmware updates) is far more serious.

Doh! I didn't mean to imply that the firmware updates to fix some of the AF problems had made the lag problem worse, simply that with the AF much improved now (though admittedly still not up to par), the viewfinder lag problem is now the more noticeable and annoying of the two.

- - - Updated - - -


Mirrorless are improving in this aspect from what I can tell. How long until they catch DLSR? Who knows, but my bet is not very.

If you mean focus tracking, sure. But if you mean viewfinder lag, the answer is never. Possibly EVFs will get so fast that we humans do not notice the difference, but it is impossible (I don't mean "difficult", I mean physically impossible) to make an EVF as fast as an all-optical system because the signal has to go further and be processed and transformed in various ways and there is no such thing as faster than light. Especially not when the light takes the shortest route and the electronics doesn't.

[Toddyh]

If you mean focus tracking, sure. But if you mean viewfinder lag, the answer is never. Possibly EVFs will get so fast that we humans do not notice the difference, but it is impossible (I don't mean "difficult", I mean physically impossible) to make an EVF as fast as an all-optical system because the signal has to go further and be processed and transformed in various ways and there is no such thing as faster than light. Especially not when the light takes the shortest route and the electronics doesn't.

I mean tracking and focusing on moving subjects. Auto-focus is slow, only uses a small area rather than point and doesn't track particularly well.

Doesn't worry me a lot because 99% of my photography is landscape. It would stop me recommending my camera to a sports or wildlife photographer though.

[Tannin]

Ahh, similar to the Canon EOS R then, Toddy. There seems to be no reason why mirrorless tracking and AF shouldn't be every bit as good as it is on SLRs, given a little more development time. I understand that the new Canon 1DX III has quite outstanding tracking and AF in live view mode (focusing off the main sensor, that is, even though it's an SLR). Presumably, there is no reason this same technology can't be employed in the next generation of mirrorless bodies. In fact, you'd be a fool to bet that it won't be.

While my mirrorless experience has made me quite certain that SLRs will remain the tool of choice for sport and wildlife until further notice, I'm not averse to the notion of using a mirrorless system for landscapes. (Well, I already do, that's what my EOS R does, but I mean use one out of choice, not because it's not much good for anything else.) There are certainly drawbacks to having to use an EVF, but as the technology matures I can see advantages emerging too. I think I'll skip the EOS R5 though. And truth be told, wildlife is my #1 and I really have no good reason to use anything other than a retired birding camera for my landscapes. But I do like new toys. :)

[rexboggs5]

I have recently purchased the Canon R5 and have been using it to photography flying birds. It tracks them very well and maintains the autofocus throughout. It also has human eye-detect and animal eye-detect and does a great job of finding the eye and then staying locked on to it.

I haven't used it in a sports setting yet, but I think it will do what you are asking. And up to 12 frames per second with the mechanical shutter and up to 20 frames per second with the electronic shutter. Note that the overheating issues apply to video only, not to still photos.