The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!
- Thread starter woof woof
- Start date
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't mean just the A9 series. if you look at how many bodies they are releasing and have in production, the total its quite a lot in comparison to others i think.
Currently I think they have like 18 bodies in production!
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I imagine you will be able to choose so surely better. 120fps in 14 bit Raw with pre capture is miles above the competition. The ability to ramp up the fps with a single button press is also a huge benefit especially as it is a new button.
If I am honest I was waiting to be disappointed but I'm blown away with what they have achieved, assuming image quality is as good as the A9ii I will be buying one. Flash sync is massive as is the end of banding. Every frame in stills with the same colour with the anti flicker. The dedicated AI chip also adds the feature I most wanted and I dare say that has a bit of development still to come. That AF is the fastest they have produced so far and in darker conditions. Among all that speed is 8 stops of stability which is crazy if it works. Also they have at last put the multi angle back screen with a better panel and a better EVF.
If the specs turn out to be as good as they sound then £6.5K is actually a good deal when up against the R3 at £900 less. It would be nice if it was cheaper but for those that will use the features all the time I suspect it will be a no brainer.
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
That's disappointing, that being said I don't actually need or want anything else from my A1
Not the wow update many were hoping for.
People will always find something to complain about. The fact they've managed to put a global shutter in a 'mainstream' camera is pretty impressive to say the least. The A9III was never going to be high res anyway. For most applications I've always found 24mp the sweet spot.
I understand why they want to milk it, doesn't stop it from being crazy though
I don't undestand these frame rates, or why people would want them. I've got 30fps and I think I've used it twice at that speed and found it too much. I turn it down to 20fps or 15fps and still end up with too many frames all looking the same.
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I'd imagine shooting 120fps in 24mp raw would cause some significant heat from the processor, but it'll only be in short bursts so can't see it being an issue. How it affects video though I wouldn't like to say.
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I was unsure about the 300mm F2.8 as I think there would be more use for a zoom like Canon. However Sony have went with weight to make it desirable. It may be less versatile than teh Canon but it is a kilo lighter. That means it will be roughly the same as an older 70-200 to handhold. That is another type of versatility that may means sales are good for that lens too. I can't see me ever buying it though as the 400 is more important and there are other lenses I would probably prefer. I think my partial move to Nikon may have been a bit premature as the A9iii with my current lenses will be more valuable to me than the Z9 will be. I think I will end up with 2 x A9iii and an A1 in time but will get one at launch and another one imported down the line.
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If I am shooting football or rugby I would find it really useful to be shooting at 20fps all game and when there is a try about to happen I can single press a button and shoot at 120fps. I am hoping that can be combined with pre-capture too so you would only take the shots if you needed too. In time sports photographers could train their brains to shoot what they saw instead of what they think is about to happen. Even at 120fps we may take less shots then and if the fps is customisable so that you can speed boost say from 20fps to 40fps then it could be even more useful. It is a sports camera so you have to view it through that lens
- Messages
- 10,503
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
Imagine a Premier League match, you only need like 1 second before you press and 2 seconds after. You bursts your shots. 120fps you are shooting in Slow-mo, and will never miss anything.
This feature isn't for Landscape togs or dare I say it, wedding togs. Everything else is great but don't need 120fps, hence I said I would turn it down to like 24fps, or even 12fps even, in return for a longer buffer. 10 second buffer with 12fps is more useful than 1second buffer in 120fps for me.
Last edited:
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Another spec that I never noticed was a native iso of iso250. That suggests they may have got round the noise issues by upping the native iso. I also hope it has dual base iso and the second range is pushed in a similar fashion up to around iso1600. That will be huge for sports photographers.
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
But that's my point, you don't miss anything at 30fps, it's already like shooting video. Obviously some will use it and feel the need for it, I just see as a bit excessive. YMMV of course.
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Interesting, from my experience having a higher native ISO means more noise at base. Not great for landscapes but clearly this is not aimed at that.
- Messages
- 10,503
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
people who use this will shoot at like 1/800th and higher and probably used to 3200 ISO so I doubt they will use the base often.
- Messages
- 18,695
- Name
- LongLensPhotography
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm definitely not a sports photographer. I do however shoot a fast dog action out in a field and basically 20fps gives you a decent coverage of the sprint, but it still is a little jumpy, so like 40 would be somewhat better, but not by that much. The question is mostly how many sequences you want to capture to definitely have enough.
For most normal things 20 is an absolute overkill and waste of card space.
You need 120 maybe in Olympics where missing that one off moment will basically get you fired. That's about it, or in other words sensor is capable of it, so it is provided
- Messages
- 18,695
- Name
- LongLensPhotography
- Edit My Images
- No
I definitely don't see any reasons to specifically pick this body for landscape work, at least for now. None. Better alternatives are available. If you have one out with you then it will do just fine for that.
It will be great sports, portrait and event all-rounder.
Basically this. I would say 1/200+
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You are likely correct but I have very little need for low iso and can always add an ND if I need. There is very little mention of noise so I suspect there is no advance and teh part about composite RAW images to reduce noise may give a hint to the high iso performance. As long as it is as good as the A9ii then that will be fine for the vast majority of circumstances
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I imagine over 95% of the frames I shoot are at 1/1250 or faster. At this time of year I will often be shooting above iso 3200 and to be honest I never really think about noise these days as the jpegs as still more than useable at iso25600 and the RAW software is so good if you get a frame you really like and want to work further on.
- Messages
- 10,503
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
In short, sports togs will be salivating, professional sports togs’ dream just landed.
Everyone else…get it if you have the money, but it won’t make your photos better besides bragging rights.
There are those who will buy it and shoot their dogs running in the park no doubt but it’s their money.
Everyone else…get it if you have the money, but it won’t make your photos better besides bragging rights.
There are those who will buy it and shoot their dogs running in the park no doubt but it’s their money.
Mr Perceptive
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,347
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
JohnMcL7
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,098
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
I think you could potentially miss photos shooting at 120fps as it's going to take the buffer some time to clear even with a fast card and that could potentially mean missing shots coming after. 30fps is already incredibly fast and for the speed most subjects are moving at I can't genuinely see how many sports photographers are going to benefit from that. It's also going to make editing an absolute nightmare unless it's used extremely sparingly at which point the benefit diminishes further. What does amuse me is I'm told on a fairly regular basis that 'machine gunning' photos is the sign I'm an amateur photographer and talented photographers don't need to do that to the same degree. It feels like a nice headline feature to show off the camera and although I'm certainly not a sports photographer, by far the biggest limit in action photos is shutter speed and not having good enough high iso to get the speeds that are needed.
I did like the super high framerates the original 1in stacked sensors could do (1000fps at 720p-ish for two seconds) but from what I can see, the A9III does nothing like that even though its sensor is much faster.
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's basically like shooting 6k 120fps raw video isn't it?
ThePrettyDamned
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 258
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Does this mean insane flash sync speeds again?
Nice! I remember shooting with my nikon d70 which similarly had a global shutter. So while it seems overkill, I can actually see this tech 5 years from now trickling down and making on-location flash portraits much easier through speedlights instead of portable strobes.
Nice! I remember shooting with my nikon d70 which similarly had a global shutter. So while it seems overkill, I can actually see this tech 5 years from now trickling down and making on-location flash portraits much easier through speedlights instead of portable strobes.
Icee
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,299
- Name
- Iain
- Edit My Images
- No
I for one won't . 30FPS is fast enough and if you can't get the shot at that you need to look at another type of photography. At 30fps a 3sec burst gives you 90 shots at 120fps gives you 360 shots and most sports togs don't have time to go through 360 shots to find the one to wire out. Its bad enough at 90.
My A1 is set at 15fps more than enough.
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I personally don’t think you need 120fps to prevent missing that one moment, sports togs have been coping for years getting that moment with much less frame rate, they even used to manage it with film cameras at 1fps. It’s about knowing the sport, predicting when and where the shot will come. Sure with 120fps you could get lucky, but if you know what you’re doing you can get the shot without it.
When I’ve shot with or spoken to pro sports togs the fewer shots they can take the better. Many say they shoot in 3-5 shot bursts. TBH I’ve had a number of wildlife togs say the same.
Obviously everyone’s experiences will be different but I’d hate to shoot at 120fps. I’ve got carried away at some events coming back with over 4000 photos and it’s a royal pita going through them all. At 120fps that’s less than 40s of shooting
Since when did the D70 have a global shutter?
- Messages
- 10,503
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
I suspect you would just keep the next frame button held down and play it like a movie, let go and stop at the frame that you like.
imattersuk
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,006
- Edit My Images
- No
Absolute scenes at LCE Guildford, man seen camping outside, people have been buying him food and drink, asking what his story is and wishing him well.@trevorbray likes new shiny things - I can see this already in his hands
trevorbray
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,141
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Yep. Great for action shots of my dogs.@trevorbray likes new shiny things - I can see this already in his hands
trevorbray
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,141
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Sounds familiar…
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It will play the burst as a movie and then you pause where you see peak action. It sounds like a far more rounded version that other brands and it should be as they are last to the party. No dual gain sensor which is a wee bit of a blow and may mean iso performance may be slightly compromised.
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think it's the dynamic range that'll be compromised. They'll most likely manage to keep the ISO performance on par
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It is incredibly unusual for me to shoot a burst for a second. While sports photographers have nailed the shot for decades they have simply chosen the best one from teh burst since fast frame rates came in half a century ago. Even at 30fps I will often wish there was a frame in between two that are really good. When you have multiple elements moving in different directions and changing foregrounds and background positions relative to teh subject a tiny amount of time can and does matter. Saying all that there is the practicality of choosing that shot quickly particularly if you are sending immediately from an event. I'd far rather have the ability to slow my frame rate than not have the ability to speed it up for a special moment. One thing I saw was that you will have the choice to shoot at different rates so 10, 15, 20, 30, 60 and 120 fps. If you are able to say mix 20fps with a speed boost to 60 then that may be really useful.I personally don’t think you need 120fps to prevent missing that one moment, sports togs have been coping for years getting that moment with much less frame rate, they even used to manage it with film cameras at 1fps. It’s about knowing the sport, predicting when and where the shot will come. Sure with 120fps you could get lucky, but if you know what you’re doing you can get the shot without it.
When I’ve shot with or spoken to pro sports togs the fewer shots they can take the better. Many say they shoot in 3-5 shot bursts. TBH I’ve had a number of wildlife togs say the same.
Obviously everyone’s experiences will be different but I’d hate to shoot at 120fps. I’ve got carried away at some events coming back with over 4000 photos and it’s a royal pita going through them all. At 120fps that’s less than 40s of shooting
Since when did the D70 have a global shutter?
4000 images for me would be less than normal and on a pc I'd be disappointed if I spent and hour going through them and doing crops. A burst of 20 shots doesn't take long to sort as you will very quickly get down to choosing between 1 or 2.
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Obviously it won’t play as a movie in Lightroom etc
Probably, but DR isn’t a priority with sports.
Each to their own
The more things move on the more we demand. When we were getting 5fps people were saying if only I could have 10fps I’d be able to choose the exact frame I want. When we got 10fps people were saying if only we got 15fps we could choose the exact frame we want. I personally can’t believe we’re at 30fps and we’re still wanting more, maybe I need to move with the times more
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I wouldn't want more all the time. But nice to have when you know there was a chance of something important happening. Striker about to score, cricketer getting his hundred or a run out about to happen, runners dipping for the finish in the final of the 100m etc etc. I doubt anyone will use it all the time. The pre-capture, particularly if it is well implemented and easy to turn on and off may be more usefulI personally can’t believe we’re at 30fps and we’re still wanting more, maybe I need to move with the times more
Last edited:
- Messages
- 10,503
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
It just level the playing field for sports a bit more, i mean you still need to do your framing and know where to point the camera at, but now you can be slightly late and not worry about not having the right timing.
wookie6262
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,706
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You still need to nail focus and be tracking the right bit of action. If I was young with great reactions it may mean I choose to shoot what I see knowing it was worthy of frames rather than shoot what I hope will be worthwhile.
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I guess it does, but then it opens the door to those less skilful perhaps and therefore watering down the market?
Not that that worries me of course as I have no intention of going pro (unless I got the chance to shoot F1 or Moto GP of course
)
- Messages
- 10,503
- Name
- Raymond
- Edit My Images
- No
Well, the focus race part has been advanced enough in the past 5 years too that part has got really dumb down, Eye-AF, 600, 700 focus points, full sensor phase detect tracking with smart object follow etc etc etc.
It's not like shooting sports with a 5D2, with only 1 cross point focus point in the center of the frame with 5fps lol
Last edited:
snerkler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 26,078
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
I've not seen anything, do manufacturers release these details or is it usually down to people like DXO to provide that info?
I can only speak from my experience obviously but when togs are shooting mainstream sports they are uploading to the internet imediately after a race, or even during a game, they don't have time to sift through hundreds and hundreds of photos and so keeping shots to a minumum is a big advantage for them.
I appreciate if you're not having to provide photos immediately some will like having more shots to choose from to get that absolute perfect frame. As I said, it's not for me as I find 30fps too much and I don't feel like I'm missing anything, but I'm also open minded enough to appreciate that others will have differing opinions. Where does it stop though, when 250fps comes out will 120fps all of a sudden not be enough?
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes I agree.
It's a very specialist sports body I think.
The flash sync of 1/80000 is crazy. It would unlock a lot of creative photography with flashes etc.
So I can see this being really great for flash users too (Of course DR is less of an issue for them also)