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

According to the Sony site it's 10fps in Hi+ and 8fps in Hi, that means 10fps will be slideshow. These are the same stats as the A7RIV which is a bit disappointing when the A7RIV has to process almost double the pixels.
 
wookie6262 said:
You inspired me to have a go setting up an FTP transfer with my A9 and android. Apart from clumsily hitting something I never wanted to on the touchscreen for the server app it was very easy. It has failed a few transfers for some reason but I will keep trying and it is a mile easier than using the Sony App. The images also show up first in the Lightroom app so another few clicks saved. I actually managed some tweets during my last Rugby game but it was hard to do and follow the action. The FTP should mean I can have the images on the phone when I there is a stoppage which should make it much easier. Cheers for the nudge I needed. Hoping the imminent arrival of an A9 ii will make it even quicker to transfer
Click to expand...
Glad you got it working. Definitely try different settings.
With FTP it amazes me why so many people insist on dual card slots. I could almost manage with no card at all if it would work.
 
snerkler said:
So the A9-II has the old processor too? Does that mean it's only the A1 and A74 with the newer one?
Click to expand...
yes A9II is basically the same as A9 with minor improvements mostly all to get sports photographer (and media houses) using it.
A7SIII has the new processor too. but yes only 3 bodies so far.
snerkler said:
What about colour science, they've improved that with each generation imo.
Click to expand...
Its looks to be improved on A7IV too, looks to be the same as A1 I think.
ancient_mariner said:
You don't think that might eat into A9 sales?
Click to expand...
If you don't cannibalise your own sales all that will happen is other brands/companies will just steal the customers. So in the end you haven't sold someone either A9 or A7IV or the lenses for the system that go on those bodies.
That's what happened to Canon and Nikon.
 
I was going to get a A7R4 for personal travel, but this now has 33mp is interesting. It’s not perfect but certainly a more rounded and complete camera than A73. It’s more an evolution. Still, it’s more a step up between 5D3 to 5D4 in some ways. I still can’t believe I paid £3k each for 2 5D4. And the A74 is better than the 5D4 in pretty much every way now.

I saw one YT vid where it has some unedited photos on screen and the colours are much nicer. I would get it for that, not many people talk about this but I think it’s very important.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
I was going to get a A7R4 for personally travel, but this now has 33mp is interesting. It’s not perfect but certainly a more rounded and complete camera than A73. It’s more an evolution. Still, it’s more a step up between 5D3 to 5D4 in some ways. I still can’t believe I paid £3k each for 2 5D4. And the A74 is better than the 5D4 in pretty much every way now.

I saw one YT vid where it has some unedited photos on screen and the colours are much nicer. I would get it for that, not many people talk about this but I think it’s very important.
Click to expand...
I don't think it was particularly bad from 3rd generation onwards. I don't know if I'd class my A1 as better than A7RIV or A7C, its just different.
 
nandbytes said:
I don't think it was particularly bad from 3rd generation onwards. I don't know if I'd class my A1 as better than A7RIV or A7C, its just different.
Click to expand...
How does it cope with the greens? This is a hard test of a camera.

33mp looks OK-good jump from 24mp. But I'd rather have the A1 or a7R4 from the Sony family.
 
I assume the A74 has the better/newer ergonomics and grip like the A7R4, A9-II etc?
 
robj20 said:
Glad you got it working. Definitely try different settings.
With FTP it amazes me why so many people insist on dual card slots. I could almost manage with no card at all if it would work.
Click to expand...
Had a play and I think I will use the protect function and them fire the images marked to the phone. I had been trying to work out how to send just rated images to my phone but I'll just protect instead. Looks very useful for in game tweets etc and I am trying to get myself to a level where I could do some paid Agency work. Fairly comfortable taking the images, still some work to do on making sure I take images of celebrations and stock shots too, but wanted to play with transferring to an Agency. This is a great step on the way
 
nandbytes said:
they are fine. Prefer Canon's greens in general even to the A1 or A7R4.
Click to expand...
Using the colour fidelity profiles greens are very authentic for me now. Comparing a photo of my back garden with loads of different trees I couldn’t tell any difference than looking at the real thing in terms of colour. One area that I’ve found all my cameras struggle with (including Nikon) is the brown of our garden fence. The A9-II is this best so far.
 
snerkler said:
Using the colour fidelity profiles greens are very authentic for me now. Comparing a photo of my back garden with loads of different trees I couldn’t tell any difference than looking at the real thing in terms of colour. One area that I’ve found all my cameras struggle with (including Nikon) is the brown of our garden fence. The A9-II is this best so far.
Click to expand...
I think I have said it before I don't think I have found a camera or brand whose colours I like for everything.
They all have good parts and their annoyance. Just need to learn to work with them.
 
Malfis said:
I believe Chris Nicholl mentioned it in the DPR video
Click to expand...
I’ve not had chance to watch any of them yet.

From what I can tell it looks a decent update to me. Sure it’s not groundbreaking but it was never going to be, it’s just an improvement on an already great camera.
 
snerkler said:
I assume the A74 has the better/newer ergonomics and grip like the A7R4, A9-II etc?
Click to expand...
When switching between my a7iii and a7riv in the field, it's the ergonomics of the a7riv that is one of the most enjoyable aspects over the 7iii. It makes you notice how the a7iii is too small, grip especially. So this is a good change on the a7iv. It's like the jump from the original a7 to the a7iii in handling improvements.
 
nandbytes said:
If you don't cannibalise your own sales all that will happen is other brands/companies will just steal the customers. So in the end you haven't sold someone either A9 or A7IV or the lenses for the system that go on those bodies.
That's what happened to Canon and Nikon.
Click to expand...

I suspect that's exactly what will now happen.
 
That vlogger screen is annoying. I regularly flip out the back screen on my a7iii when shooting low. It’ll p*** me off not being able to do that.

I’d also hoped for slightly better silent shooting and a better evf. I know, that’s where the a1 comes in, but if you don’t cannibalise your own sales, someone else will.

A decent evolution, but I think I’ll stick with the mk3 for now.
 
Rather than avoiding cannibalising their sales I'd have thought the more likely reasoning for the lack of a stacked sensor is the price, looking at RRPs (I know some A9's were cheaper end of line) so far all the full frame stacked sensor cameras I can think of have been at much higher price points than the A7.
 
My feeling is that the A7 is now the enthusiast camera in the Sony lineup, and so feature development is being held back hard, rather than it being the excellent all-rounder camera in the lineup with class-leading features. The problem is the price, which is now no longer in ordinary enthusiast territory, will almost certainly lose new users to Canikon, who aren't behind in performance any more. I've had my A7III 2.5 years, and at the time it was an obvious choice, but were I in the same situation again that would not be the case at all.
 
Maybe they'll keep the A7iii as an entry level camera. Always keep the latest two models going.
I do think they could merge a few of them and have less models.
 
Seems like a A7ii move to me side ways not forward
Fix the few small issues(body, evf,screen) and improve the AF but pretty much leave or cripple everything else.
This could really hurt them in the battle with canon, as it definitely makes the R6 look like a far better choice at the same price.
 
decigallen said:
That vlogger screen is annoying. I regularly flip out the back screen on my a7iii when shooting low. It’ll p*** me off not being able to do that.

I’d also hoped for slightly better silent shooting and a better evf. I know, that’s where the a1 comes in, but if you don’t cannibalise your own sales, someone else will.

A decent evolution, but I think I’ll stick with the mk3 for now.
Click to expand...
Well the EVF has improved over the 3, but I don't think it was ever going to get the top of the range one seen in the A1 and A7SIII. I agree with the articulating screen, I don't like them either.
 
I have both screens i.e. articulating screen (A7C) and flip out screen (A1).
They are both rubbish in one way or the other. The correct and best solution is the one Sony implemented on A77/99 which for some reason they don't implement on e-mount bodies.
 
Last edited:
pmac said:
Seems like a A7ii move to me side ways not forward
Fix the few small issues(body, evf,screen) and improve the AF but pretty much leave or cripple everything else.
This could really hurt them in the battle with canon, as it definitely makes the R6 look like a far better choice at the same price.
Click to expand...
Interesting, in what way are they crippling it? I've just looked into the R6, and other than the frame rate I'm struggling to see where the R6 is better, both specs look to be more or less the same except the A7IV is higher mp? The A73 has been very highly regarded, they've now brought out an improved version but this one's seen as not being good :thinking: I understand that you can improve the EVF, improve frame rate, make it blackout free etc etc but these all come at a cost, i.e the A1.

For the record I'm not pro any make, I'm just trying to understand and hopefully add a bit of perspective too (y). I could have easily migrated to Canon if their lenses were so expensive.
 
snerkler said:
Interesting, in what way are they crippling it? I've just looked into the R6, and other than the frame rate I'm struggling to see where the R6 is better, both specs look to be more or less the same except the A7IV is higher mp? The A73 has been very highly regarded, they've now brought out an improved version but this one's seen as not being good :thinking: I understand that you can improve the EVF, improve frame rate, make it blackout free etc etc but these all come at a cost, i.e the A1.

For the record I'm not pro any make, I'm just trying to understand and hopefully add a bit of perspective too (y). I could have easily migrated to Canon if their lenses were so expensive.
Click to expand...
R6 can also do blackout free shooting. The shutter scan speed on R5/6 is 1/60s. So it makes the electronic shutter actually usable in many situations.

I'd have also switched to canon if it weren't for the lenses. Though I'm still considering it actually. Let's see what happens....
 
nandbytes said:
R6 can also do blackout free shooting. The shutter scan speed on R5/6 is 1/60s. So it makes the electronic shutter actually usable in many situations.

I'd have also switched to canon if it weren't for the lenses. Though I'm still considering it actually. Let's see what happens....
Click to expand...
I'm too invested in Sony now, I'm not switching again. Plus with the newly announced 70-200mm f2.8 which appears as though it's going to be better than the RF version that's a reason for me to stay. Out of the box I do prefer Canon's tendency towards a slight magenta hue vs Sony's green one, but I've fixed that with the Color Fidelity profile so on the whole I'm happy with Sony colours now. Once in a blue moon there's a shot that's not as pleasing as I'd like, but it's rare.
 
It's disappointing that Sony haven't produced a camera with a clear lead over Canon and indeed the Canon seems superior in some ways with a higher frame rate and blackout free shooting but perhaps the limiter for Sony is the sensor tech along with the higher MP count? Perhaps manufacturers are hitting the limit of what is possible with this sensor tech at this price point?

The price is a killer for me and I just can't see myself paying £2.5k for a camera. If my A7 dies tomorrow I may feel differently but the market does seem to be on an upward price trend and I'd imagine that that could put people off either because they can't afford it or like me have a mental block on paying so much for a camera.
 
snerkler said:
I'm too invested in Sony now, I'm not switching again. Plus with the newly announced 70-200mm f2.8 which appears as though it's going to be better than the RF version that's a reason for me to stay. Out of the box I do prefer Canon's tendency towards a slight magenta hue vs Sony's green one, but I've fixed that with the Color Fidelity profile so on the whole I'm happy with Sony colours now. Once in a blue moon there's a shot that's not as pleasing as I'd like, but it's rare.
Click to expand...
While I have a fair bit of investment in Sony too swapping for me is a matter of being able to have the lenses I want.
canon 15-35mm and 70-200mm don't look all that great in terms of IQ. Not sure how good their new 14-35mm f4 is but its certainly very enticing.
their 24-105mm f4 is good.
My most used prime is 85mm and the RF85mm f1.2 is crazy expensive and huge. Would have to make do with Samyang 85mm f1.4 which I am not too keen on.
They don't have a wide angle prime yet.... could make do with the 35mm f1.8 I guess. Not sure how good it will be for astro though.

then there is 200-600mm.... but this I'd replace with EF 400mm f4 DOii+1.4x TC.

A lot of lenses I'd have to "make do" with on Canon as supposed on Sony the only area I am "making do" with is UWA lens.
 
snerkler said:
Interesting, in what way are they crippling it? I've just looked into the R6, and other than the frame rate I'm struggling to see where the R6 is better, both specs look to be more or less the same except the A7IV is higher mp? The A73 has been very highly regarded, they've now brought out an improved version but this one's seen as not being good :thinking: I understand that you can improve the EVF, improve frame rate, make it blackout free etc etc but these all come at a cost, i.e the A1.

For the record I'm not pro any make, I'm just trying to understand and hopefully add a bit of perspective too (y). I could have easily migrated to Canon if their lenses were so expensive.
Click to expand...
When I say crippled it I meant against there own camera’s, I’m sure they could have improved the FPS and black out maybe not the 20 FPS of the R6 due to the mp but it not improving on the a7iii after so long is abit shocking.
similarly I’m sure 4k60 would have been a non issue, they seem to have done just enough to make it slightly better than the a7iii but not excel in its group like the a7iii did.

them not improving it hugely won’t bring them new users or those that maybe canon/nikon and still looking to move from dslr like the a7iii did, why move brands when the canon is the same price and as good if not better in some respects.

Im sure most in here moved from nikon/canon due to the better specs and cheaper price than alternatives, which as I said above isn’t the case now.
Keeping a good lead in specs entices new users, being average doesn’t.
 
pmac said:
When I say crippled it I meant against there own camera’s, I’m sure they could have improved the FPS and black out maybe not the 20 FPS of the R6 due to the mp but it not improving on the a7iii after so long is abit shocking.
similarly I’m sure 4k60 would have been a non issue, they seem to have done just enough to make it slightly better than the a7iii but not excel in its group like the a7iii did.

them not improving it hugely won’t bring them new users or those that maybe canon/nikon and still looking to move from dslr like the a7iii did, why move brands when the canon is the same price and as good if not better in some respects.

Im sure most in here moved from nikon/canon due to the better specs and cheaper price than alternatives, which as I said above isn’t the case now.
Keeping a good lead in specs entices new users, being average doesn’t.
Click to expand...

4k60 in full frame mode is to do with the ISO performance of using all 33mp partially. And also so as not to cripple A7SIII sales.
 
My A7iiis are 3 years old and have done a lot of weddings. So looking at upgrades.

Not sure what route to go as I'm now starting to do more video.

2 x A1 is just too expensive to justify.

A7 IV looks fantastic for the most part, the apart from 4k60 only being in crop, and HD being 120fps max.

A9ii doesn't have picture profiles, so useless for video.

So do I bite the bullet and get a single A1, or get a combination of cameras. Could get 2 x A7 IV plus an A7SIII and still have a few grand left over the upgrade to two A1s
 
pmac said:
When I say crippled it I meant against there own camera’s, I’m sure they could have improved the FPS and black out maybe not the 20 FPS of the R6 due to the mp but it not improving on the a7iii after so long is abit shocking.
similarly I’m sure 4k60 would have been a non issue, they seem to have done just enough to make it slightly better than the a7iii but not excel in its group like the a7iii did.

them not improving it hugely won’t bring them new users or those that maybe canon/nikon and still looking to move from dslr like the a7iii did, why move brands when the canon is the same price and as good if not better in some respects.

Im sure most in here moved from nikon/canon due to the better specs and cheaper price than alternatives, which as I said above isn’t the case now.
Keeping a good lead in specs entices new users, being average doesn’t.
Click to expand...
R5 can do 20fps too. So I don't think MP is really a concern here.
And its not just 20fps electronic shutter that's my issue, mechanical shutter on R5/6 can do 12fps. Sony's been stuck at 10fps forever (and its really 8fps not 10fps if you don't want the slideshow effect)
 
nandbytes said:
R5 can do 20fps too. So I don't think MP is really a concern here.
And its not just 20fps electronic shutter that's my issue, mechanical shutter on R5/6 can do 12fps. Sony's been stuck at 10fps forever (and its really 8fps not 10fps if you don't want the slideshow effect)
Click to expand...

Do these things matter or are they just stats oneupmanship?

Asking as someone who one takes one shot at a time and more than likely with a manual lens :D
 
I don’t think anyone is saying it’s a bad camera. It’s just not anything revolutionary, yet the price has gone up significantly.

It’s “improved” in areas where I didn’t need improvement and not improved in areas I wanted. Can’t please everyone, of course, but the a7iii got so much spot on.

I have to buy 4 bodies so it’s a significant outlay and I want to get it right. Think I’ll stick with a7iii for the next year.
 
woof woof said:
Do these things matter or are they just stats oneupmanship?

Asking as someone who one takes one shot at a time and more than likely with a manual lens :D
Click to expand...
They do indeed for shooting action and sports :)
They matter to me anyway. I'd pick R6 over A7IV (just going by bodies alone, add in lenses and it'd swing towards Sony again).
And I'd pick R5 over A7RIV (though R5 is a fair bit more expensive).
 
nandbytes said:
They do indeed for shooting action and sports :)
They matter to me anyway. I'd pick R6 over A7IV (just going by bodies alone, add in lenses and it'd swing towards Sony again).
And I'd pick R5 over A7RIV (though R5 is a fair bit more expensive).
Click to expand...

R5 is too close to the A1 price, in which case the A1 blows it away. (I know the A1 is still a grand more expensive, but at that price it's only about a 20% difference)
 
KitsuneAndy said:
R5 is too close to the A1 price, in which case the A1 blows it away. (I know the A1 is still a grand more expensive, but at that price it's only about a 20% difference)
Click to expand...
well its £2K more actually.
I have the A1 and lenses that I actually like and really great.

The only lens on canon I wish I had access to was the EF 400mm DOii. I can adapt it to A1 too but works way better on R5.
 
My point was that any ability that a Canon has over a Sony or indeed any ability a Sony has over a Canon or anything else is perhaps arguably become increasingly niche or at least that's how it tends to look to me.

At the moment the lack of lenses with other systems arguably makes the Sony universe the most attractive.

I suppose if my A7 died the A7III would be the obvious way to go if buying new.
 
nandbytes said:
well its £2K more actually.
I have the A1 and lenses that I actually like and really great.

The only lens on canon I wish I had access to was the EF 400mm DOii. I can adapt it to A1 too but works way better on R5.
Click to expand...

Ah I must have compared retail price to grey then, that is a bigger difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top