Sony's new camera A9

[jdphoto]

No mention of better weather sealing.

 

[Vivek]

Jorgen, The price is a moot point.

Yes, they need to make more tele lenses.

Not all sports need long tele lenses though!

 

[ptomsu]

Price is ok for me when thinking what is in the bag

Fully weather sealed would have been a plus, might be that a A9Pro would have that?

WRT lenses - I am fully happy with 100-400 for all my telephoto needs and for the rest the 16-35 and maybe 85G and 70-200G could complete that setup. Plus I could use all my Leica M glass fully stabilized and with that great EVF

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Jorgen, The price is a moot point.

Yes, they need to make more tele lenses.

Not all sports need long tele lenses though!

The price is never a moot point. To be completely honest, if I was going to shoot sports extensively again, my setup would be a D500 and a D810, or even two D500 bodies, with a combined price in the area of one A9 body. I don't do indoor sports, so don't need a low-res, high ISO full frame sensor, and my best selling sports images are from drifting night competitions taken with a D700. ISO 1600-3200 is more than good enough for that, but then those kind of photos are mostly taken at slow shutter speeds.

From the videos that I've now watched, it seems clear that those Nikons have better build quality and much better weather sealing than the Sony, or at least that's my impressions after hearing comments on the videos that are out so far. The Sony still has to prove its durability for this kind of use.

That's right, not all sports need long lenses, but many sports photographers shoot a variety of sports and very few want to have two complete systems.

Here's a video that is quite informative:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AREGOD7jf2s

Watch from around 2 minutes how his fingers crash with the 100-400mm lens when holding the camera. That would be a deal breaker for me. For some reason, they have omitted the LOG profiles for video shooting. It's difficult to understand why. That means there will probably be an S version later.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Fully weather sealed would have been a plus, might be that a A9Pro would have that?

I thought the A9 was supposed to be the "pro" camera :wtf:

If it isn't properly weather sealed, it's an absolute no go for outdoor sports.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I forgot one lens: The $13,000 Sony 500mm f/4 is an obvious long alternative, but will the camera keep its fps and AF-C with A-mount lenses?

 

[Vivek]

They are going to sell a lot of these cameras.

Check out what jduncan says in the nikon D7500 thread.

 

[iiiNelson]

Now to the two elephants in the room: price and lenses.

With the specs of the a9, I must assume that one of the target groups for this camera is sports photographers. Since I have some experience from that field (mostly motor sports), I asked myself: Would I buy this for sports photography?

From a functional viewpoint, if the camera really is as good as Sony claims, yes, it would be a strong candidate.

From a price point of view it looks more tricky. I would need two bodies costing $9,000. That's slightly more than a D5/D500 combo, but the Nikon combo gives me the advantage of two sensor sizes with different reach. Also, in spite of the improved battery for the Sony, the Nikons would give me vastly longer battery life. The D5 battery would give me 3-5,000 shots and can be used with both cameras.

Compared to the two other mirrorless alternatives, the E-M1 and the X-T2, there's no price competition whatsoever. They are both less than half the price, and the Fuji is even a very decent low light camera. The Sony is probably or hopefully the better camera, but I have to say that 20fps and 1/32000s are just paper values to me. For motor sports, I rarely use fast shutter speeds, and I have have yet to see the action that can't be captured at 8-10fps. Others may have different needs though, like those shooting gymnastics. The viewfinder would be the critical advantage to look for. I do btw. see the shallow grip of the Fuji as a disadvantage. I don't see myself shooting with it continuously for 8-10 hours, but I may be wrong. The Sony grip seems nice.

Then there's lenses. While I'm sure the new 100-400mm is a nice lens, it is what it is, a 100-400mm lens. For motor sports on international arenas, that's not nearly long enough, and I suspect the situation will be the same for many other kinds of sports.

Nikon of course, and Canon, produce more telephoto lens varieties than anybody will ever need. Although many of those lenses are expensive, even the excellent and very cheap Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 will give 500mm of reach on a D5 and 750mm on a D500. Want to go lightweight? With the excellent, little 300mm f/4, a lens that works very well with a 1.4x TC, even the D5 weighs in at the same as an A9 with 100-400mm.

With the Sony, one can of course use Canon lenses with a third party adapter, but I would like to meet a sports photographer who volunteers to work with that kind of solutions in critical, fast paced situations at a sports event. Missing one shot may destroy the day, and from what I've read about the "smart" adapters, they're not anywhere near 100% reliability.

As for the two other mirrorless cameras, reach is no problem, low light photography sometimes is, particularly with the Olympus. Olympus does however have the 300mm f/4 with dual stabilisation. That's 600mm ultrasharp reach in a small package and very hard to beat, and it takes away all or most of Sony's full frame advantage. Both Fuji and Olympus offer 100-400mm lenses with 600 and 800mm reach respectively, and particularly the Fuji is a very fine lens.

Conclusion: While the A9 may work very well for sports photography and in some cases even better than a D5, it's useless for some kinds of sports until Sony comes up with at least one lens with longer reach. I assume that the 300mm f/2.8 in A-mount will work fine on this camera, and in combination with the 70-200mm f/2.8 indoor sports should be well covered. It's important to be aware though, that when we start talking about lenses that weigh more than 2 kilograms, the weight and size of the camera body becomes a rather academic question. No advantage for Sony there. My racing setup used to be 7-10 kilograms, and a 500 gram lighter body wouldn't have mattered much. It's with functionality and a great viewfinder Sony has to win this... and lenses. Sony needs to make more lenses.

I haven't used a E-M1mk2 so I can't comment on it from experience but the X-T2 is nowhere near as accurate as the A7R2. Despite what Fuji claims (and maybe the newest firmware improved it beyond where it was in late December) it's not quite on the same level as the A7R2 and the ISO manipulation dispels the myth that X-Trans gives the Fuji the same ISO performance of FF cameras. That being said the Fuji is still an amazing camera but it may not measure up to all of the hype in raw sensor performance that was touted.''

No doubt about it, the D5/D500 will give you more battery life and Nikon currently offers a larger lens selection. For some that will be a better choice. For others, the A9 offers those already in the FE system a professional level action oriented camera. The 100-400GM, like the 70-200 GM, is compatible with the 1.4x and 2x extenders so that can give a bit more reach if needed.

 

[iiiNelson]

The price is never a moot point. To be completely honest, if I was going to shoot sports extensively again, my setup would be a D500 and a D810, or even two D500 bodies, with a combined price in the area of one A9 body. I don't do indoor sports, so don't need a low-res, high ISO full frame sensor, and my best selling sports images are from drifting night competitions taken with a D700. ISO 1600-3200 is more than good enough for that, but then those kind of photos are mostly taken at slow shutter speeds.

From the videos that I've now watched, it seems clear that those Nikons have better build quality and much better weather sealing than the Sony, or at least that's my impressions after hearing comments on the videos that are out so far. The Sony still has to prove its durability for this kind of use.

That's right, not all sports need long lenses, but many sports photographers shoot a variety of sports and very few want to have two complete systems.

Here's a video that is quite informative:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AREGOD7jf2s

Watch from around 2 minutes how his fingers crash with the 100-400mm lens when holding the camera. That would be a deal breaker for me. For some reason, they have omitted the LOG profiles for video shooting. It's difficult to understand why. That means there will probably be an S version later.

I have no issue worrying about the durability or the level of weather sealing personally. I've taken my cameras all over North America, Central America, The Carribean, Europe, and Africa with no issues. One of the Artisans used it for underwater photography, another for wartime photography, and others for sports/photojournalism.

It could be that this just isn't the camera for you due to pricing, ongoing system development, and your needs/desires. For the photojournalist, wedding/event photographer, sports photographer, etc. I believe this may be one of the best cameras on the market with the promise that more is coming down the line. Look at how much of a jump the A7RII was over the A7II.

Now all that said I would've preferred a body with an integrated grip for the A9 series... but that's just me. I rarely use any FE camera without a grip.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Looks pretty nice but a lot of it is going to come down to the quality of the EVF, and even more to actual AF performance. Prosumer Nikons still beat pro Sonys. I'd love to see that change.

The two most important aspects of a Pro Sports camera are as stated above . (1) Quality of the viewfinder experience in all types of lighting (my experience is that EVF lack sufficient dynamic range to handle high contrast situations ) and (2) the ability to accurately establish focus (target acquisition ) and to maintain that focus thru an entire capture burst. (focus tracking ). Frames per second are not relevant unless you can maintain focus .

The reference standard is the Nikon D5 ..unless you have tried one ...its hard to evaluate a “competitive” situation .

 

[msadat]

this is going to be a fine camera, now the 1dxii and d5 have a new competition with a different point of view, i would be interested to see how this camera compares to a7s series. i do need a camera with high iso performance. lenses for this camera will come and its probably the most open platform now for third party lenses.


now we will see sigma starting to make lenses for the e mount

canon is probably working on completing the global shutter for the new rev of 1d (most likely the first to roll out)

nikon might be in a bit of trouble since they source from sony, on the other hand sony loves to sell anything. we will see what nikon will do

meanwhile leica raised their prices 5% effective may

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I have no issue worrying about the durability or the level of weather sealing personally. I've taken my cameras all over North America, Central America, The Carribean, Europe, and Africa with no issues. One of the Artisans used it for underwater photography, another for wartime photography, and others for sports/photojournalism.

It could be that this just isn't the camera for you due to pricing, ongoing system development, and your needs/desires. For the photojournalist, wedding/event photographer, sports photographer, etc. I believe this may be one of the best cameras on the market with the promise that more is coming down the line. Look at how much of a jump the A7RII was over the A7II.

Now all that said I would've preferred a body with an integrated grip for the A9 series... but that's just me. I rarely use any FE camera without a grip.

My comments are solely aimed at the use of the camera for outdoor sports photography, since that is my area of experience. I'm sure it will be great for many other uses, and I mentioned indoor sports specifically. Outdoor sports, particularly those who don't take place at a confined area like a football stadium, demand a lot of the gear. It can rain for hours, you sometimes have to run with a couple of cameras in hand or dangling from straps, you drop them because you have only two hands, and sometimes the only place to place a camera is on the ground in the rain. I've done all that and the cameras that I've used (except the Nikon D80) haven't skipped a beat. The day Sony shows the A9 soaking wet in the rain and actually say that it's weather proof not "dust and splash proof", fine, but if I were going to invest this kind of money in two bodies now, no way.

For the top sports photographers, the price doesn't matter much, but the big market is among the second and third tier photographers, those sports photographers who shoot with D500, 7D II or second hand Nikon and Canon top models. They have to count their pennies for every piece of gear that they purchase. They are often professional enough, but they work for publications that don't pay enough for them to afford two $4,500 bodies plus some rather expensive lenses. I have no problems with that, or that Sony launches a good but expensive camera, and in a way, by launching a very high spec camera, Sony kind of protects Canon and Nikon rather than attacking them. Until there's a cheaper and more rugged Sony available, the D500 and the 7D II will continue to sell well.

The A9 is an impressive camera, but as I've said before: I think it's the viewfinder that will sell it, not so much 22fps and 1/32,000s. It's not even very sensational. The failed Nikon V3 that was launched 3 years ago did 20fps with AF-C and up to 60fps with locked focus. It could only do 1/16,000s, but most photographers can live with that. If I remember correctly, it also featured on-sensor phase detect AF that worked great. Maybe I should buy one of those, just to show that I can shoot fast too. It's a rather competent camera in sufficient light, and with some luck, they can be bought for about the tenth of what the A9 costs. With a lens :ROTFL:.

 

[Vivek]

Jorgen, The Nikon V1 is still a good 4 years away for you to purchase, considering your "latest" D2X. :ROTFL:

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Interestingly, Sony doesn't mention sports photography a single time in their press release, unlike when the original A99 and the original A7 were launched. So maybe it isn't aimed at sports photographers at all. I'm sure it will work well for BIF. Just be sure to be close to the bird

 

[Vivek]

Going back to the A9.. the LAN port is quite understandable but a flash sync port?

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Jorgen, The Nikon V1 is still a good 4 years away for you to purchase, considering your "latest" D2X. :ROTFL:

It's far to hi-tech for me anyway, Vivek. I should probably aim for the Leica M-D again, and that APO Summicron 50

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Going back to the A9.. the LAN port is quite understandable but a flash sync port?

Didn't you read my post about the A9 not being a sports camera? It's the ultrafastest studio camera ever

Fortunately for you all, I have to work now :banghead:

 

[Vivek]

My guess is that they had some space next to the LAN port and felt compelled to put something there. They could have left that (flash sync) out and reduced the price by a couple of hundred.

 

[iiiNelson]

Going back to the A9.. the LAN port is quite understandable but a flash sync port?

Because some people need and use them.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

My guess is that they had some space next to the LAN port and felt compelled to put something there. They could have left that (flash sync) out and reduced the price by a couple of hundred.

A full size HDMI port would probably have been more useful, but then again, they omitted the LOG profiles, so it isn't a video device for professionals anyway. It's also a bit strange that they installed USB-2 instead of 3. A camera that shoots 24MP files at 22fps needs all the transfer capacity that can be bought for money. Compare that to the GH5, which has full size HDMI, USB-C and a flash sync port.

If matched to another recent hi-end device, the new MacBook, transfer of photos will have to be with an external card reader, which is fair enough and fast, but if you forget the reader, slow USB is the only option. This is not really meant as critisism of Sony, but it shows that some technology companies aren't very interested in cooperating on standards. For Sony it would have been as simple as seeing what computer suppliers are doing, and install the future, already available standard, which Panasonic has done in a much cheaper camera that is also aimed at professional users.