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

snerkler said:
Just watched this, and whilst interesting am I missing something here as it was clear to me which was which? The enlarged A9 file clearly shows artefacting to my eyes. I don’t know if it works better with raw as he’s upscaling jpeg here.

View: https://youtu.be/TyNdi8y619o
Click to expand...

Gigapixel AI is great if your files are of good quality and sharpness, otherwise it doesn't do much.

here just as an experiment in gigapixel, my original picture on right upscaled twice and zoomed in 100% in both windows (you can see the res on both):
Screenshot 2020-11-11 at 14.30.02.jpg

Posting on here destroys the sharpness! lol
but basically its very sharp and has done a great job at preserving the details after upscaling. I wouldn't use it for anything and everything but when used sparingly in the correct fashion its nice.
 
Last edited:
I want a new 70-200 (that doesn't exist) now :D Fro Knows!

Hopefully there's some people out there looking to buy Hasselblad right now :) I'm making a Sony shopping list
 
Last edited:
Just a simple candid street style Snapograph taken at London UK of a couple of guys deep in conversation.

RX10M4, 1/900th @ F5.6, ISO-100, Handheld.
This Size-03499 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

:ty: for looking., (y):sony:

George.
 
dancook said:
I want a new 70-200 (that doesn't exist) now :D Fro Knows!

Hopefully there's some people out there looking to buy Hasselblad right now :) I'm making a Sony shopping list
Click to expand...
I’ve been wanting Sony to redo their 70-200mm ever since Canon brought out their RF version, this along with the Tamron 70-180mm prove that they don’t have to be so heavy (y)
 
I find all of these reviews fascinating. The A9 came out and it was lorded over on how good it's AF system was, how it nails everything and "never misses a shot". Then the A9-II comes out and somehow this is significantly better, and I don't doubt that when the A1 is properly tested this will be significantly better again.

Now I don't doubt progress, and I get that newer tech seems to be better, but if the A9 "never misses a shot" and has "uncanny" AF then I struggle to see how you can get "significantly better" than this?

Are we being blinded by specs and propaganda or is there real justification for such claims?
 
nandbytes said:
But but A1 can show you ambient "exposure" at click of a button.
Click to expand...
TBH I haven't watched the video and have no idea what that is :LOL: We've coped for long enough without it though so I'm sure it's not worth £3.5k ;)
 
snerkler said:
TBH I haven't watched the video and have no idea what that is :LOL:
Click to expand...

You should he goes on about it for half the video like it's the best thing since sliced bread. There are other "game changing" features he could have picked but no he picked this.
 
nandbytes said:
You should he goes on about it for half the video like it's the best thing since sliced bread. There are other "game changing" features he could have picked but no he picked this.
Click to expand...
TBH I think I now realise what it is, and if so Olympus have had this for donkey's years :lol:
 
snerkler said:
I find all of these reviews fascinating. The A9 came out and it was lorded over on how good it's AF system was, how it nails everything and "never misses a shot". Then the A9-II comes out and somehow this is significantly better, and I don't doubt that when the A1 is properly tested this will be significantly better again.

Now I don't doubt progress, and I get that newer tech seems to be better, but if the A9 "never misses a shot" and has "uncanny" AF then I struggle to see how you can get "significantly better" than this?

Are we being blinded by specs and propaganda or is there real justification for such claims?
Click to expand...

For me it's more about being able to nail birds and animals with eyeAF like you can do with humans.
Subject tracking and human eyeAF is great already.
The other thing is being able to do all that with a high Res body with high frame rates.
 
nandbytes said:
For me it's more about being able to nail birds and animals with eyeAF like you can do with humans.
Subject tracking and human eyeAF is great already.
The other thing is being able to do all that with a high Res body with high frame rates.
Click to expand...
Yep, I get all that and I too would love animal/bird eye af as good as humans, but you watch these reviews following sports people etc and these new cameras are said to be significantly better than the previous despite the previous nailing every shot.

But back to the A1, I am interested to see real world bird eye AF. I wonder if it's firmware that they can filter down to other existing bodies?
 
snerkler said:
But back to the A1, I am interested to see real world bird eye AF. I wonder if it's firmware that they can filter down to other existing bodies?
Click to expand...

something tells me it won't come to this gen of bodies all with old processors. A7RIV doesn't even have animal real time tracking yet.

Think the next gen i.e. A7IV and A7RV will have it.
 
snerkler said:
Didn't see any bird eye AF on that but it tracked the cat pretty well imo.
Click to expand...
she has like 5 seconds of it lol. can't really make out based on that of course. but that's the best one I have seen so far for animals or birds in terms of actually showing the performance.
slightly disappointing in that when R5 came out they made sure there were videos out showing off its performance. On sony there literally nothing!
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
she has like 5 seconds of it lol. can't really make out based on that of course. but that's the best one I have seen so far for animals or birds in terms of actually showing the performance.
Click to expand...
This one has birds, looks good but not as good as Canon from this.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLkfBtkowZo&ab_channel=fototrainer.com


I've noticed that most people just have AF on wide with eye AF and rely on that, I always assumed I'd use real time AF tracking with eye AF so that you tell the camera where to pick up on first, but it appears you don't need to, ..... as long as there's only one subject in the frame of course.
 
snerkler said:
This one has birds, looks good but not as good as Canon from this.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLkfBtkowZo&ab_channel=fototrainer.com


I've noticed that most people just have AF on wide with eye AF and rely on that, I always assumed I'd use real time AF tracking with eye AF so that you tell the camera where to pick up on first, but it appears you don't need to, ..... as long as there's only one subject in the frame of course.
Click to expand...
snerkler said:
Another with bird eye af, around 8.30

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaEIstGlWrw&ab_channel=JasonVong
Click to expand...

seems better than what Northrup made it out to be but still disappointing based on those two videos. At least for birds anyway.
 
snerkler said:
I find all of these reviews fascinating. The A9 came out and it was lorded over on how good it's AF system was, how it nails everything and "never misses a shot". Then the A9-II comes out and somehow this is significantly better, and I don't doubt that when the A1 is properly tested this will be significantly better again.

Now I don't doubt progress, and I get that newer tech seems to be better, but if the A9 "never misses a shot" and has "uncanny" AF then I struggle to see how you can get "significantly better" than this?

Are we being blinded by specs and propaganda or is there real justification for such claims?
Click to expand...

Think you might be confused can’t ever remember anyone saying that the A9II was better than the A9 for a.f they are exactly the same.
 
f/2.8 said:
Think you might be confused can’t ever remember anyone saying that the A9II was better than the A9 for a.f they are exactly the same.
Click to expand...
Well that explains why phrases like significant improvement were used, they were talking out their ar** :lol:

If I find it again I’ll post it on here (y)
 
f/2.8 said:
Think you might be confused can’t ever remember anyone saying that the A9II was better than the A9 for a.f they are exactly the same.
Click to expand...
They are, apart from a9ii having video real time eye af.
The other differences are 10fps mechanical shutter rather than 5 fps, anti flicker mode and some additional connectivity.
I was talking to a guy who had both and he says the differences for stills use were barely noticeable apart from the larger buttons....
 
To be honest, the size/placement of buttons wasn't an issue for me, coming from an A7ii....
I did like the fact that I could change af modes and drive modes electronically with my A7ii without taking my eye away from the vf, whereas I now need to use a dial...
 
Last edited:
Bobsyeruncle said:
They are, apart from a9ii having video real time eye af.
The other differences are 10fps mechanical shutter rather than 5 fps, anti flicker mode and some additional connectivity.
I was talking to a guy who had both and he says the differences for stills use were barely noticeable apart from the larger buttons....
Click to expand...

I have both.
 
snerkler said:
...
I've noticed that most people just have AF on wide with eye AF and rely on that, I always assumed I'd use real time AF tracking with eye AF so that you tell the camera where to pick up on first, but it appears you don't need to, ..... as long as there's only one subject in the frame of course.
Click to expand...

That's how I've setup my A9 so that if it's something like a car or other object then I can tell it what to track. I'm sure that if if it just so happens to be a human or animal then the eye-af will automatically take priority.

I still feel like I know only 20% of this camera.
 
gman said:
That's how I've setup my A9 so that if it's something like a car or other object then I can tell it what to track. I'm sure that if if it just so happens to be a human or animal then the eye-af will automatically take priority.

I still feel like I know only 20% of this camera.
Click to expand...
Me too
 
gman said:
I still feel like I know only 20% of this camera.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day it's only a light-tight box with a way of recording light focussed onto a sensor. I don't see a need to 'learn' the camera inside out, so much as just using it for the stuff you need and ignoring the rest. Like this weird idea that a camera is better than the togger - on it's own the camera can't do anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top