V
Vivek
Guest
I clicked on the link posted by K-H and I find Jorgen spinning the same in that FM thread as well.
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Where would we be today without alternative facts...:ROTFL: :facesmack:
I know we are not supposed to use terms like 'game changer' but for me this may really be it.
I don't do sports at all, but my main interests are wildlife and landscapes and the two don't mix as far as gear is concerned. I used to carry an MF and a Canon system and then switched to Sony A7RII and Canon.
Last year on my trip to Botswana I took the 1DX plus 100-400 lens, the 7D2 plus 400mm DO MkII lens, the A7R2 with a couple of lenses and of course a few more Canon lenses. In the past I used to carry the Canon 600 MkII but gave it up as being just too heavy, not so much in the field as you have vehicles to shoot from, but for carrying around on long walks through airports and fitting in the overhead bins etc.
I found that my main shooting rig was the 1DX + 100-400 and not the 7D2+400 DO even though the latter gave me greater reach of almost 640mm. I also used the Sony setup quite a bit for scenics, animals in habitat and so on.
IF, and it's a big IF, the A9 can deliver on the AF and come close to the 1DX2 (which I now have), I would drop all my Canon gear in a heartbeat because it covers everything else - frame rate, shutter speeds, silent shutter and low-light IQ which is very important with wildlife. The 7D2 sucks in that regard.
I can (probably) live without the extra reach of the 7D2+400 combo.
I can see myself having two A9 bodies, one with the 100-400 GM lens, the other with the superb 24-70 GM, throw in the A7R2 with the excellent 18mm Batis and I have a complete system for wildlife and landscapes (can switch bodies as needed). If I sell my Canon setup, I will come out ahead and may even be left with some money in the end.
The weight savings with the above combo would be phenomenal, not to mention having to carry different memory cards and readers, batteries and chargers, sensor sticks for cleaning etc.
I now need to figure out how good the AF is and decide if I can live with a limited reach of 400mm. I may consider getting an A6500 for that, it's another possibility.
These are exciting times.
I don't do sports at all, but my main interests are wildlife and landscapes and the two don't mix as far as gear is concerned. I used to carry an MF and a Canon system and then switched to Sony A7RII and Canon.
Last year on my trip to Botswana I took the 1DX plus 100-400 lens, the 7D2 plus 400mm DO MkII lens, the A7R2 with a couple of lenses and of course a few more Canon lenses. In the past I used to carry the Canon 600 MkII but gave it up as being just too heavy, not so much in the field as you have vehicles to shoot from, but for carrying around on long walks through airports and fitting in the overhead bins etc.
I found that my main shooting rig was the 1DX + 100-400 and not the 7D2+400 DO even though the latter gave me greater reach of almost 640mm. I also used the Sony setup quite a bit for scenics, animals in habitat and so on.
IF, and it's a big IF, the A9 can deliver on the AF and come close to the 1DX2 (which I now have), I would drop all my Canon gear in a heartbeat because it covers everything else - frame rate, shutter speeds, silent shutter and low-light IQ which is very important with wildlife. The 7D2 sucks in that regard.
I can (probably) live without the extra reach of the 7D2+400 combo.
I can see myself having two A9 bodies, one with the 100-400 GM lens, the other with the superb 24-70 GM, throw in the A7R2 with the excellent 18mm Batis and I have a complete system for wildlife and landscapes (can switch bodies as needed). If I sell my Canon setup, I will come out ahead and may even be left with some money in the end.
The weight savings with the above combo would be phenomenal, not to mention having to carry different memory cards and readers, batteries and chargers, sensor sticks for cleaning etc.
I now need to figure out how good the AF is and decide if I can live with a limited reach of 400mm. I may consider getting an A6500 for that, it's another possibility.
These are exciting times.
ecsh
New member
Yes, it seems to be obvious to everyone but Jorgen that he does not like Sony.:salute:
Kind of making a fool out of himself with his persistence. YMMV
Kolor-Pikker
Member
For a long while, digital cameras were largely broken up into discreet components, sometimes made by different companies; the sensor, analog-to-digital converter, data buffer, processor, and other bits and bobs like the CFA which can also be customized by the client company.
Sony revolutionized things with the sensor in the Nikon D800 by putting their EXMOR technology into a full-frame CMOS sensor, which puts the ADCs right next to the pixels, so rather than having a separate circuit, each sensor element could immediately convert and send data digitally. Since the analog element has been basically eliminated past the photon capture stage, the result was an increase in dynamic range that rivaled the best digital backs of the time.
This is essentially an evolution of that process where now the data buffer is just another layer stacked onto the back of the sensor, meaning everything is closer to happening "on-sensor" now, allowing Sony to more tightly control exactly what happens at any point, and improving feedback between components. The result is, according to Sony, a 20x decrease in the latency between the time the sensor reads data and updates the processor. This presumes a significant increase in the capacity to adjust focus on the fly and forward the visuals to the viewfinder, a reduction in readout speed, faster frame rates, and preventing distortion from using an electronic shutter - essentially your subject would have to be moving 20x faster now to get the same level of "jello" as previous cameras.
With the problem of latency alleviated, Sony's system is now bound mainly by bandwidth and cooling capacity, so as CPUs get faster and more efficient, they can translate that directly to faster operation on all fronts and/or higher resolutions. Based on the A99II and A9's numbers, it seems that currently Sony's chips can handle a throughput of about 510mp per second, whether this distribution goes to higher resolution or faster frame rates.
V
Vivek
Guest
Yup! Good points!
FWIW, the price difference between the Canon and the Nikon and the Sony cams in Europe is marginal while it is substantial in the US.
Sony have to drop the EU prices.
pegelli
Well-known member
Thanks, interesting read.
What I conclude from this one it's not so much the lens IS that determines 5 or 3 axis stabilization, but that it has to fall back to 3 axis for lenses that do not report the focal distance to the camera, because for correcting the pitch/yaw axis you need this information.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
I gather you're correct and inputting focal length for lenses that don't communicate data will make the IS more accurate.
So essentially for adapted lenses that don't pass lens information i.e. anything that isn't attached to a Sony, Sigma MC-11, or Metabones IV (or newer) adapter you only get 3 axis stabilization. For everything else you get 5 axis.
seb
Member
Current preorder price here is 5700CHF (1CHF=1$). This is a 25% higher price... But normally it comes down to 10% around release date.
V
Vivek
Guest
I was talking about the EU, to be more specific. 
The price never comes down here for atleast a few years after the launch.
One big exception is the price of RX1R II (a thread on that was sabotaged) it actually went up substantially!
The price never comes down here for atleast a few years after the launch.
One big exception is the price of RX1R II (a thread on that was sabotaged) it actually went up substantially!
While the absolute AF speed is still unknown, but probably a bit behind the 1DX and D5 still, for sports shooters, the zero blackout could make a big difference in this regard, because it will be easier to keep the subject in the same place in the frame. And without blackout it's easier to keep an eye on what's happening, which could lead to better compositions and less need to spray as much or as long. And shooting fewer frames will save a lot of time chimping and in post.
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
It doesn't come down to having a cutting edge body, and it doesn't come down to apples to apples. It comes down to having a system that works. The D810 is meaningless for sports photography. I tried, thinking that the crop mode would be useful, but it wasn't really. 15 megapixels and all the action happening in a small part of the viewfinder. This is one of the reasons why many sports shooters use the D5/D500 combination. The two bodies have the same resolution and the same AF system. The D500 isn't as good in low light, but gives 50% more reach. The fact that it's a crop sensor is an advantage in this case. I've been shooting sports with one or two APS bodies and one full frame body for years. It's my preferred solution. I've even seen a sports photographer with a Canon 1D III and a cheap Digital Rebel for backup and extra reach. That works too, but there are more limitations.
Sony doesn't offer a crop sensor body that is suitable for this, so two A9 bodies would be the answer. It's more expensive and less flexible, but that is what you get.
Photographers with a big budget, but you don't find many of those on a national level in most countries, mostly have the best of everything. They shoot with two or three or four D5 and an 800mm for extra reach. They, or their employers, could certainly afford a number of A9 bodies, but they would require that 800mm lens as well. Sony doesn't offer that.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
The A6500 may possibly be a cropped option for some but again instandby that cropped sensor doesn't apply in an apples to apples comparison. It's just isn't the same look.
In the end. They're just cameras. Buy what you like... or don't. It makes no difference to me as I have absolutely no interest in other 35mm based systems outside maybe a Leica M10 if the QC issues over there get figured out.
Last edited:
V
Vivek
Guest
In the 21st century cameras offered by Sony, switching to APS-C makes the action happen in the whole of the view finder.
Forget the mirror slap and dumb OVFs.
Also, there is a revolutionary no black out view finder unlike the dslrs.
Forget the mirror slap and dumb OVFs.
Also, there is a revolutionary no black out view finder unlike the dslrs.
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
What Olympus and Sony did five or more years ago is still totally irrelevant. The fact as per 21 April 2017 is that Sony has launched a new camera. Every single sample photo on their website and most on their presentation videos are sports photos. One must assume then that sports shooters is their main target group. What I don't get is why serious sports shooters would ditch their Canon and Nikon cameras and buy into a system where the longest lens is 400mm at a maximum aperture of 5.6. This is not even critisism of the camera, but of Sony's marketing which I suspect tries to convince well heeled amateurs that this is the new state of the art sports shooter system. The top Canon and Nikon models have always been popular among this particular group, and those cameras probably wouldn't be renewed at the current rate without them.
As soon as this camera is released, we'll see countless youtube videos with computer engineers (Why are they always computer engineers? Is that the 21st century equivalent of the Leica dentist?) holding down the shutter release on their newly arrived A9 for 15 minutes to show that it can shoot 20fps like forever. Nothing wrong with that either of course. I bought my 5,000 click D2Xs from such a guy, 90% under the original price
So Sony will sell the cameras they need and make profit. They've already made a statement, and will make a new one when the 400mm f/1.4 is released. But until then, I doubt that many sports shooters will dump their Canikon gear and go for Sony. Read their comments at assorted forums. Some of them will buy it for indoor sports, and if the quality holds up, they're ready for the next step when it happens.
Sony A9 - announcement live stream - Page 4 - EOSHD - EOSHD Forum
V
Vivek
Guest
Also with Sony cams, there is not just one way to trigger the shutter. You can use your favorite smartphone to trip the shutter without touching the shutter release on the camera. :ROTFL:
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Yeah... I don't care what other people are doing really. I wouldn't expect everyone to switch if heavily invested into a Canon/Nikon system if they're happy. If they aren't or if this camera fills a niche they don't currently feel 100% comfortable with then I can see some dipping their feet in the water.
Lets be honest though. You're here to troll every Sony release and offer a rationale as to why you can't/won't/don't buy it. It's either the batteries, the lenses, the price, etc. Whether or not you think the proper lens selection is available or the body is capable you are intent in choosing to deny, even in the midst of photographic evidence of cameras functioning in environments that you say they can't excel in, the advancements in mirrorless cameras from non-traditional camera brands -- except in cases where you seemingly want to just be a contrarian like Samsung.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
I agree and this is telling/relevant review to firsthand accounts of using the A9 for actual action based work.
Hey, Vivek, completely forgot that option. So the second A9 body in my case could be set on APS-C mode and give me longer reach - at the expense of some loss in pixels, but can live with that. Some of my best images are from the humble Canon 40D with only 10MPx on the sensor, way back in 2007!
ptomsu
Workshop Member
I myself am kind of split soul since that A9 announcement.
While I was not paying much attention to Sony for their A7 line because of either too less resolution (12MP) or too high resolution (42MP) for my type of shooting and all the issues with not so great EVF and very poor battery life, the A9 has changed that completely for me.
It just meets a few requirements that are important for my work, like 24MP (and NOT MORE), very fast (finally electronic shutter fully useable), high res EVF with improved brightness and NO more blackout and much longer battery life, great IBIS and finally the lens I was always asking for (100-400) I am very intrigued to get one. My problem is I would need to get rid of all my trusted Fuji and very likely also Olympus gear to finance a complete A9 setup including some lenses I need.
This hit me completely unexpected as I was no longer expecting such a great match for what I want and need. Finally that switch would also allow me to work again fully FF and also start using my Leica M glass again on a body that allows also to connect the most modern Zeiss and G-Master EF mount lenses. I am pretty confident that most of my M lenses will work sufficiently nice on the A9, as they already did so on the A72.
This is becoming a tough time for me
While I was not paying much attention to Sony for their A7 line because of either too less resolution (12MP) or too high resolution (42MP) for my type of shooting and all the issues with not so great EVF and very poor battery life, the A9 has changed that completely for me.
It just meets a few requirements that are important for my work, like 24MP (and NOT MORE), very fast (finally electronic shutter fully useable), high res EVF with improved brightness and NO more blackout and much longer battery life, great IBIS and finally the lens I was always asking for (100-400) I am very intrigued to get one. My problem is I would need to get rid of all my trusted Fuji and very likely also Olympus gear to finance a complete A9 setup including some lenses I need.
This hit me completely unexpected as I was no longer expecting such a great match for what I want and need. Finally that switch would also allow me to work again fully FF and also start using my Leica M glass again on a body that allows also to connect the most modern Zeiss and G-Master EF mount lenses. I am pretty confident that most of my M lenses will work sufficiently nice on the A9, as they already did so on the A72.
This is becoming a tough time for me