The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

Most likely you won't notice the different in final output between the Sony and a D750 or similar but it's everything else that's the justification surely?

The final output was going to be partly my justification because but as you said, output looks similar so I can’t really justify a costly move!
 
The final output was going to be partly my justification because but as you said, output looks similar so I can’t really justify a costly move!

I'm looking forward to giving it a good test but so far at small resolutions I doubt I'd be able to tell my Nikon and Sony apart but that's fine, image quality's pretty good these days. :)
 
I'm looking forward to giving it a good test but so far at small resolutions I doubt I'd be able to tell my Nikon and Sony apart but that's fine, image quality's pretty good these days. :)

I think it was major GAS and wanting a new toy. It’s good though as it’s given me new settings to try when I next go to that venue.
 
So here we have 2 sets of photos taken from the A9 and D750 @snerkler

Key differences having looked at the data is the A9 was shooting at 1/250 giving a lower ISO. I was meat to shoot at 1/250 after advise on here but went ahead at 1/500 as forgot!

Also A9 exposure was pushed up a bit. Something I didn’t do but should have done.

Also the A9 had the better light and position. I wished I had the D750 at 1/250 to really give a better comparison as think that would have made a big difference.

You can't really tell how bad the light was as both cameras do a good job of making it look lighter than it was!

So first up the A9:

Brendan A9 by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

Brendan A9 by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

D750:

Brendan D750 by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

Brendan D750 by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

The landscape shots are both iso4000. I’m not convinced the A9 is actually any cleaner, especially as the D750 image is already cropped.

iso 12800

JDR06979.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr
 
Prefer the 750 look.
But is autofocus quicker/better on A9?
(In response to JJ)
 
So here we have 2 sets of photos taken from the A9 and D750 @snerkler

Key differences having looked at the data is the A9 was shooting at 1/250 giving a lower ISO. I was meat to shoot at 1/250 after advise on here but went ahead at 1/500 as forgot!

Also A9 exposure was pushed up a bit. Something I didn’t do but should have done.

Also the A9 had the better light and position. I wished I had the D750 at 1/250 to really give a better comparison as think that would have made a big difference.

You can't really tell how bad the light was as both cameras do a good job of making it look lighter than it was!

So first up the A9:

Brendan A9 by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

Brendan A9 by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

D750:

Brendan D750 by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

Brendan D750 by Justin Akehurst, on Flickr

The landscape shots are both iso4000. I’m not convinced the A9 is actually any cleaner, especially as the D750 image is already cropped.
What landscape shots? Scrub that.i sse now.you meant orientation
 
Last edited:
Prefer the 750 look.
But is autofocus quicker/better on A9?
(In response to JJ)

No idea on that one as was not me using the A9. But I was looking at the A7iii so this wasn’t really a true like for like test, especially when these cameras differ in price so drastically too, but it’s hopefully given me some idea how the A7iii would perform in these situations.
 
I really want to love the a9, today was an interesting day for me shooting with a mate who just got his, as much as the a9 is an incredible camera his struggled today with BIF against the snow, my 1DX2 on the other hand seemed to be doing well, also and here is the big shocker is his a9 seemed to be missing focus, focus seemed to prioritise on larger areas of the bird (I put faith in his ability to use the focus system), I use single point servo on the canon and it tracks well, I try to keep focus on the head of the bird, other surprising problem was Moire!, The a9 seems to suffer with fine feather detail! Tbh we are both a little confused, he is going to send the a9 back to be checked as surely this can not be right, sadly I don't know enough about the Sony to be able to advise him to what to do.. only other thing we found is the Canon seemed to have richer/deeper colours, we both know this is easy corrected in post, once the Camera is checked over I hope to have a good session with it, perhaps get my meter setup to the a9 and have some studio time.. I'd like to add one to my gear but for now I am waiting to see what the results are once he gets it back.

Surprised it struggled especially given it had a snowy background.
I assume both the Sony A9 and lens were running the latest firmware versions, was it the FE 70-200mm f2.8 GM?
I think its good hes sent it back for a checkup but this is the first report of a potentially faulty Sony A9 on here :D (not that we have many A9 owners, lol).
 
So looking at all the reviews so far, the A7iii is a superb wedding/portrait camera and it seems nearly all reviews focus on the eye AF.

It does seem to track amazingly well even from some distance!
 
So looking at all the reviews so far, the A7iii is a superb wedding/portrait camera and it seems nearly all reviews focus on the eye AF.

It does seem to track amazingly well even from some distance!
Yes, I think Sony are onto a real winner with this body....... can't fault the price either.
 
Surprised it struggled especially given it had a snowy background.
I assume both the Sony A9 and lens were running the latest firmware versions, was it the FE 70-200mm f2.8 GM?
I think its good hes sent it back for a checkup but this is the first report of a potentially faulty Sony A9 on here :D (not that we have many A9 owners, lol).
First fault in the whole internet..

Did he update the lenses firmware as it did have focus issues when you af while zooming
 
Back
Top