• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / Nikon Z6/7 / Low light AF accuracy: Nikon Z7, Sigma 85/1.4 and FTZ

Low light AF accuracy: Nikon Z7, Sigma 85/1.4 and FTZ

November 16, 2018 JimK Leave a Comment

This is one in a series of posts on the Nikon Z7. You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just look for “Nikon Z6/7”.

A few days ago I looked at the Z7’s autofocus accuracy in moderately-bright light with the Nikon 105 mm f/1.4 lens. Today I’m going to see how the AF accuracy drops off as the light dims. I mounted a Sigma 85 mm f/1.4 F-mount ART lens to the FTZ adapter, and attached the adapter to the Z7. I opened the lens up all the way and threaded a variable neutral-density filter on the front. I turned the filter to minimum, set the ISO to 64, and made a series of 16 exposures. Then I added a stop more density to the filter, doubled the exposure, and made another set of exposures. I kept doing that until the camera failed to focus.

Using a moderate-to-low-contrast target (see below), I made a series of exposures for AF-S mode, Pinpoint spot size, with the priority set to focus. I brought the captures into a Matlab program I’ve written, and analyzed the focusing errors, converting them to the equivalent circles of confusion created by the measured degree of misfocus. Circles of confusion diameters cannot ever be negative, but I used the convention that I’ve used previously: positive diameters are due to back-focusing, and negative ones are due to front-focusing. I computed the mean and standard deviation of the each of sets of 16.  Here’s how it came out:

The shutter speeds are in seconds. The first set of data is for 1/15 second, and the mean of that series is used as the reference. There is a slight amount of back focus at 1/8, and the standard deviation starts to climb. By 1 second, the CoC of the mean error is about that of a standard depth of field table. By 2 seconds, the scatter, as evidenced by the standard deviation is quite high. At 4 seconds, the camera won’t focus at all most of the time.

These were done at base ISO. To get an idea of what exposures with that much light would be at higher ISO’s I made a couple of tables. the first one corresponds to the case where the light is beginning to very seriously affect the accuracy, and the second to the point where the autofocusing is approaching uselessness.

 

I next set the camera up for AF-C  with release priority and Single spot size.

The scale is different since the standard deviation goes through the roof at 2 and 4 seconds. Removing them from the data set:

The scatter is quite high at 1/2 second and one second, though the mean is good.

Here is a sample capture processed with the default settings in Adobe Camera Raw.

The image is somewhat underexposed in the focusing target area so that the ramp would be correctly exposed for automatic processing, so you might consider the above numbers to be slightly optimistic for more conventional exposures.

Nikon Z6/7

← 27-70/4 Nikkor S distortion on Nikon Z7 More low light AF accuracy: Nikon Z7, Sigma 85/1.4 and FTZ →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.