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

Looking at the mft the 300mm f2.8 looks crazy sharp. Probably the sharpest telephoto?

Will be interesting to see reviews with TCs also.
 
snerkler said:
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? ;)
Click to expand...

No 360fps will be where its at so that you can also do 120fps HDR in camera (to make up for the DR loss) :)
 
They always release (or brag) about their DR, especially Sony since it was one thing it had over Canon for a while.
 
f/2.8 said:
Sony always have previously which means its bad, really bad!
Click to expand...
I've just gone through all the spec and features, no mention of DR.

The new AF AI sounds interesting, especially the ability to recognise helmets for open top race cars and motorbikes. That being said, it's not something I've ever needed or thought about.

I wonder if the new animal eye AF can finally track Betty properly :lol:
 
Raymond Lin said:
They always release (or brag) about their DR, especially Sony since it was one thing it had over Canon for a while.
Click to expand...
They are still about half stop better than canon. Just that the gap is lot less than it used to be.

For me the benefit of Sony sensor is more than just the DR boost. You got ISO invariance which you still don't fully get with canon. But that's harder to market than just mentioning a larger number than canon.
 
petapixel.com

Sony a9 III First Impressions: The Global Shutter Era Has Arrived

There is a lot to go over!
petapixel.com petapixel.com

"Sony also didn’t discuss image quality or dynamic range. Based on limited hands-on time, and no ability yet to download and peruse any images captured with the camera, it appears that high ISO performance is quite impressive. In general, image quality seems good. Although, there is a massive asterisk here because image quality is very tough to evaluate on the back of a camera, and the move to a brand-new sensor technology brings with it some level of skepticism. The fact that Sony did not bring up image quality during its presentation also gives pause."

Later...

"There is also a slight caveat concerning high-speed shooting that was not fully divulged during Sony’s announcement. While the company did mention that the camera cannot shoot faster than 1/16,000 second during continuous shooting — which is still exceptionally quick, by the way — it turns out that the camera also can’t shoot faster than that limit when using an aperture faster than f/1.8. Initial expectations are that this cap is related to bokeh, but Sony dismissed that assertion and said that it cannot disclose more information at this time."
 
snerkler said:
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 :eek:



Since when did the D70 have a global shutter?
Click to expand...
I don't think I'm making it up, it had a hybrid mechanical/electronic global shutter and was known for its ability to flahs sync up to 1/4000 of a second (if you had a fast enough strobe) without high speed sync.

I used to use it at 1/1000 or so with a vintage speedlight at lower power as it wasn't quick enough to get a respectable amount of light at higher speeds, but dedicated high speed strobes could be used.
 
woof woof said:
petapixel.com

Sony a9 III First Impressions: The Global Shutter Era Has Arrived

There is a lot to go over!
petapixel.com petapixel.com

"Sony also didn’t discuss image quality or dynamic range. Based on limited hands-on time, and no ability yet to download and peruse any images captured with the camera, it appears that high ISO performance is quite impressive. In general, image quality seems good. Although, there is a massive asterisk here because image quality is very tough to evaluate on the back of a camera, and the move to a brand-new sensor technology brings with it some level of skepticism. The fact that Sony did not bring up image quality during its presentation also gives pause."

Later...

"There is also a slight caveat concerning high-speed shooting that was not fully divulged during Sony’s announcement. While the company did mention that the camera cannot shoot faster than 1/16,000 second during continuous shooting — which is still exceptionally quick, by the way — it turns out that the camera also can’t shoot faster than that limit when using an aperture faster than f/1.8. Initial expectations are that this cap is related to bokeh, but Sony dismissed that assertion and said that it cannot disclose more information at this time."
Click to expand...
That's odd, I'm pretty sure you can shoot continuous shooting on the A1 at 1/32000 shutter with fast lenses. I'll have to check if we ever get any sun.
 
snerkler said:
That's odd, I'm pretty sure you can shoot continuous shooting on the A1 at 1/32000 shutter with fast lenses. I'll have to check if we ever get any sun.
Click to expand...
Even shooting at f1.2 I haven't felt the need for anything higher than 1/8000s on a nice sunny day.
I really wonder if someone actually needs more then 1/16000s
 
Anyhow, I think it’s a huge step in the right direction, seeing how far photography went from 1900 to 2000 vs 2000 to 2023 is huge.

Kids these days, no idea how hard it is to get a good, in the moment, sharp photo even 10 years ago lol.
 
ThePrettyDamned said:
I don't think I'm making it up, it had a hybrid mechanical/electronic global shutter and was known for its ability to flahs sync up to 1/4000 of a second (if you had a fast enough strobe) without high speed sync.

I used to use it at 1/1000 or so with a vintage speedlight at lower power as it wasn't quick enough to get a respectable amount of light at higher speeds, but dedicated high speed strobes could be used.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I've just looked into it and the info online seems to me very conflicting with most of it suggesting the CCD sensors in stills cameras were different to those of video cameras and still read line by line creating "smearing" as they described it. However if you were able to use HSS with it then it would suggest that it was global :thinking:
 
nandbytes said:
Even shooting at f1.2 I haven't felt the need for anything higher than 1/8000s on a nice sunny day.
I really wonder if someone actually needs more then 1/16000s
Click to expand...
I'm quite often at 1/16000, and just having a quick look on Flickr I have several shots at 1/20000 and 1/26000 (y)


A1_05396 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Interesting. I've just looked into it and the info online seems to me very conflicting with most of it suggesting the CCD sensors in stills cameras were different to those of video cameras and still read line by line creating "smearing" as they described it. However if you were able to use HSS with it then it would suggest that it was global :thinking:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I remember being annoyed when I lost that ability as I wasn't technical enough to understand! https://strobist.blogspot.com/2008/01/control-your-world-with-ultra-high-sync.html?m=1

I could never afford a "real" nikon speedlight so used an old Philips one. Obviously no ttl ever, so when my d70 just worked, I assumed all digital cameras did. When I upgraded to a nikon D200 it just wouldn't sync above 1/250th without curtains! So I've been waiting a long time to get that back.

Of course, it's not *that* big a deal for some, but being able to boost a speedlight power by a full stop or two is significant enough to some that they could retire a godox ad200 or similar. The trick will be making speedlights that can produce a full power pop quick enough - perhaps Sony will look into that, if it's boasting insane flash sync speeds!
 
nandbytes said:
Even shooting at f1.2 I haven't felt the need for anything higher than 1/8000s on a nice sunny day.
I really wonder if someone actually needs more then 1/16000s
Click to expand...
I think I've seen that the A9iii base ISO is 250 - so if you were reaching 1/8000 at ISO 100, you would need > 1/16000 on the A9iii if you stayed at ISO 250 (I had the same issue with my A900, bright sunny day, my 85 @ f/1.4 and 1/8000 could still lead to some blown highlights)
 
snerkler said:
I'm quite often at 1/16000, and just having a quick look on Flickr I have several shots at 1/20000 and 1/26000 (y)


A1_05396 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Faldrax said:
I think I've seen that the A9iii base ISO is 250 - so if you were reaching 1/8000 at ISO 100, you would need > 1/16000 on the A9iii if you stayed at ISO 250 (I had the same issue with my A900, bright sunny day, my 85 @ f/1.4 and 1/8000 could still lead to some blown highlights)
Click to expand...

Fair enough, can't argue with real pictures :)
 
nandbytes said:
Even shooting at f1.2 I haven't felt the need for anything higher than 1/8000s on a nice sunny day.
I really wonder if someone actually needs more then 1/16000s
Click to expand...

It may be down to T stops and light gathering. The Sammy 50 f1.4 has a bigger front element than the Sony f1.2, and I often found that 1/8000 not enough to control highlights with that lens wide open.
 
snerkler said:
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? ;)
Click to expand...
I started with film a 108 frames per match even now in a match I only take about 350 shots and think that’s too much. I spoke to a young lad from a local paper at the end of a match and he said he had taken just over 1400 shots. He was going back to the local office to sort them out. I asked what’s your dead line, the said 6pm it was then 5.10pm, I thought good luck.
I wonder how he would have got on at 120 fps!
 
Has anyone seen any info about whether they’ve improved EVF lag during slow shutter panning on the A9III? I don’t know if the global shutter has any impact on this or not?
 
Since the beginning of SLR's and then DSLR's and mirrorless the problem has always been the shutter system.

That has now all gone.

This Sony makes all the above obsolete and in a nutshel a defective camera.

Why buy a camera that cannot sync at any speed and has banding and rolling shutter when you don't have to.
 
nandbytes said:
£5.8K for the 300GM....
if it performs well with 2x TC I might be tempted
Click to expand...
I wonder why the camera is 300 more than the lens but both were $5999. Presumably different taxes. Grim that we are nowing paying more in pounds than the Americans are getting the camera in dollars. It wouldn't be so bad if the taxes weren't paid to the like of Baroness Mone and all teh others in the queue
 
Has Sony mention battery life? I would guess since the camera is constantly reading, and dumping files, it is just continuously recording, the battery life can't be as good as a camera that doesn't do this?
 
Raymond Lin said:
Has Sony mention battery life? I would guess since the camera is constantly reading, and dumping files, it is just continuously recording, the battery life can't be as good as a camera that doesn't do this?
Click to expand...
I have heard two reports. One said it would use more and the other that said they would squeeze 15% more battery life by seeing the two batteries as a single battery in a grip. The A1 etc is pretty good with batteries until you start using the wireless to send images. Given how hard the processors will be working I can only imagine it will use more batteries.
 
wookie6262 said:
I have heard two reports. One said it would use more and the other that said they would squeeze 15% more battery life by seeing the two batteries as a single battery in a grip. The A1 etc is pretty good with batteries until you start using the wireless to send images. Given how hard the processors will be working I can only imagine it will use more batteries.
Click to expand...
The A1 absolutely isn’t very good with batteries in comparison to other recent Sony bodies.
 
wookie6262 said:
Pre-orders now open on A9iii and 300mm F2.8. I have went for a single A9 iii and if they are as good as they sound I will wait a while and import another one.
Click to expand...
Nice (y)
nandbytes said:
£5.8K for the 300GM....
if it performs well with 2x TC I might be tempted
Click to expand...
Bit too steep for me that one, will be intesting to see what it's like with the 2x TC though as you say, a 1700g 600mm f5.6 sounds great. I'm sure I read something a while back about new Sony TC's but not heard anything since, it owuld be nice if we could finally get a 2x TC that's useable.
gman said:
That's some AF tracking, did it even miss focus for a single frame?
Click to expand...
No, not a one. Here's another, all razor sharp barring one which was sharp but not quite razor sharp.

View: https://youtu.be/a9G6KH22Ei4
 
f/1.4 said:
The A1 absolutely isn’t very good with batteries in comparison to other recent Sony bodies.
Click to expand...
I find the A1 pretty good, if shooting motorsports I get through about 1.5 batteries in a day, about 4000 shots (bursts) and some chimping.
 
f/1.4 said:
The A1 absolutely isn’t very good with batteries in comparison to other recent Sony bodies.
Click to expand...
I look at it terms of shooting sport with a gripped body. If I am shooting for myself and not sending from pitch side battery life is no issue at all. If I am shooting with the wifi etc on then I would often do all teh pre match stuff, replace one battery and then another at half time just to make sure I always had power when the action was happening. I wouldn't expect a camera with more pixels on sensor, higher resolution evf and faster frame rate to use the same power. However having used teh Z9 battery life is outstanding in comparison
 
wookie6262 said:
Pre-orders now open on A9iii and 300mm F2.8. I have went for a single A9 iii and if they are as good as they sound I will wait a while and import another one.
Click to expand...
You pre-ordered even though Sony are currently withholding some of the specs including D.R.

Brave man
 
ancient_mariner said:
I'm still going through the 500 shots I took at a friend's wedding (darn it, silent shutter makes it so hard to track number of shots).
Click to expand...
I've found it alarmingly easy to take way more shots than I realised as without the usual clack-clack-clack you don't realise how many you're taking. I've always wanted higher shutter speeds but I use the 20fps mode on the A9 with a lot of caution and tend to use the slower speeds most of the time.
 
f/2.8 said:
You pre-ordered even though Sony are currently withholding some of the specs including D.R.

Brave man
Click to expand...
Dynamic range isn't a huge issue with sport imo and I thought they said it had teh same noise and DR in the launch. It will likely have less DR as the iso base is 250 but I usually shoot above that anyway
 
JohnMcL7 said:
I've found it alarmingly easy to take way more shots than I realised as without the usual clack-clack-clack you don't realise how many you're taking. I've always wanted higher shutter speeds but I use the 20fps mode on the A9 with a lot of caution and tend to use the slower speeds most of the time.
Click to expand...
You can have a shutter sound with the electronic shutter, that might help keep your shots down ;)

I need to start taking less shots.
 
JohnMcL7 said:
I've found it alarmingly easy to take way more shots than I realised as without the usual clack-clack-clack you don't realise how many you're taking. I've always wanted higher shutter speeds but I use the 20fps mode on the A9 with a lot of caution and tend to use the slower speeds most of the time.
Click to expand...

Just to say, this was in single shot mode - goodness knows what it would have been like in drive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top