EDIT also, was undecided but thought the saving was to huge to ignore and the A9 value dropping massively made me even less keen to buy one. From 4500k to 2500 used in hardly any time is terrible.
Got mine used for not a lot more than a new a7iii
EDIT also, was undecided but thought the saving was to huge to ignore and the A9 value dropping massively made me even less keen to buy one. From 4500k to 2500 used in hardly any time is terrible.
On camera I did TTL and in the studio manual
Most of what I read have compared them directly and say there not a lot in it at all. I was undecided but thought the saving was to huge to ignore and the A9 value dropping massively made me even less keen to buy one.
The A9's Dynamic range is also superior in the high ISO ranges.A9 is definitely a step better than M3 versions for AF. The M3 bodies provide lot more base ISO dynamic range.
They are intended for different use cases.
DPreview...
One of our criticisms with Sony's a9 was that, upon initiating tracking, the AF points would jump off to another subject most of the way across the frame. Impressively, we encountered this behavior more rarely on the a7 III; when we did, it was usually in social situations where Eye AF was the better option anyway.
We also noticed that burst images from the a7 III were more consistently tack sharp compared to its more expensive sports-oriented sibling. With the a9, images in the middle of 20fps bursts could sometimes float in and out of critical focus, but at 10fps on the a7 III, images throughout the burst were almost universally accurately focused.
A lab review, totally opposite to users running both cameras for their job day to day. I know which I prefer, you're different and that's fine.
where is it done?Lab results? The AF testing isn't done in a lab.
Lab results? The AF testing isn't done in a lab.
The A9's Dynamic range is also superior in the high ISO ranges.
Basically better for low light
You can believe what you want, I really don't care. It will have zero impact on my opinions on the cameras. I won't ever own an A7III, and you likely won't ever own an A9. That's fine, enjoy.
First go with the A7III on native glass as hired the 70-200.
Big learning curve over both the Canon and Fuji cameras i have used with a few things i love and a few things i hate.
Really need to get my hands on an A9 for a play as although i love the dynamic range of this one the A/F struggles still with bikes and the slight lag on the EVF in use and turning on is a pain.
Still trying to work out if its worth selling up all the Canon gear for a move over as although i am stopping covering BSB i will still attend a few meetings to take images but love the weight saving the new 400 f2.8 would give over my 300 and 500 primes and pair of 1DX MKII's.
You seem to be getting quite upset though. I likely will own an A9, if I choose to.
lol, you're the one upset enough to decry an owner of both cameras experience as being incorrect and go off trawling the internet to post links to backup your opinion, which incidentally isn't based off actually using both cameras...
I only posted to state that I have read the same from many other owners who have also had the same experience as the poster here. Simples, no drama.
The whole A9 vs A7 III debate will always rage on, the A9 is better but for so many different reasons apart from its AF performance.... anybody who thought the A7 III had the identical AF performance like the A9 for £1999 was a little optimistic.
- EVF
- 20 fps
- Deep buffer
- 100% silent shutter (no distortion)
- Drive Mode Dial
- Blackout free EVF
- FTP / RJ45
- 6K -> 4K Recording
- CMOS RS with high response rate
You could argue that for the additional £1800-2000 premium, the Sony A9 isn’t worth it over the A7 III.
It comes down to your requirements, others just want the best of the best regardless of the outlay
also: i think once you use the a9, its a simpy stunning camera to use. in all honestly all of the latest camera's and lenses released from many manufacturers are great.
For me it was always a dream that i can finally afford and buy a sports high end camera.
dont forget i nearly bought the 1dx2 instead
You're the one dismissing DPreview by saying the tests they conducted on the AF system are lab tests because you dont like their comments. You have the opinion yet you dont offer any proof and dont own both cameras either.
You have read the difference is night and day, I have read it isnt.
You could argue that for the additional £1800-2000 premium, the Sony A9 isn’t worth it over the A7 III.
It comes down to your requirements, others just want the best of the best regardless of the outlay
The whole A9 vs A7 III debate will always rage on, the A9 is better but for so many different reasons apart from its AF performance.... anybody who thought the A7 III had the identical AF performance like the A9 for £1999 was a little optimistic.
- EVF
- 20 fps
- Deep buffer
- 100% silent shutter (no distortion)
- Drive Mode Dial
- Blackout free EVF
- FTP / RJ45
- 6K -> 4K Recording
- CMOS RS with high response rate
You could argue that for the additional £1800-2000 premium, the Sony A9 isn’t worth it over the A7 III.
It comes down to your requirements, others just want the best of the best regardless of the outlay
relax bro. i dont think @twist trying to diss a9 users.Please do carry on arguing with yourself, inventing your own facts as you wish. No, I don't care at all about DP. I've already said I prefer the testimony of those actually using the camera. I have never said the difference is night and day, that is just an outright lie you have invented to continue your troll argument.
Please do carry on arguing with yourself, inventing your own facts as you wish. No, I don't care at all about DP. I've already said I prefer the testimony of those actually using the camera. I have never said the difference is night and day, that is just an outright lie you have invented to continue your troll argument.
relax bro. i dont think @twist trying to diss a9 users.
He actually admires the a9 camera but for his needs, the A7mk3 offers more for him then the A9.
It doesnt mean to him the A9 is a s*** overpriced camera, it just means for his needs, the A9 is not for him.
Anyways yea the A9 is superb. i cant compare with the mk3 though, just the Rmk3 which i have
Im not arguing with myself because Im replying to your responses . DP are very good at testing cameras and you said they were lab tests when they weren't.
relax bro. i dont think @twist trying to diss a9 users.
He actually admires the a9 camera but for his needs, the A7mk3 offers more for him then the A9.
It doesnt mean to him the A9 is a s*** overpriced camera, it just means for his needs, the A9 is not for him.
Anyways yea the A9 is superb. i cant compare with the mk3 though, just the Rmk3 which i have
You are arguing with yourself, you created a response/lie to argue with.
But then if you had used the 24 G master you would of dropped the mic and changed the game
But on a more serious note what was it that made you change your pre order from the sigma to the g master, debating the sigma but no where near the budget for the g master
I don’t agree with the AF in low light comments thought. The A73 for me seems to focus in almost pitch black conditions and continues to fire at 8fps where as my D750 just couldn’t keep up.
I’m getting used to the EVF and the small niggles I have with the camera I am working around.
I agree the A7III is better than the D750 in low light although it was no slouch either. The A9 is better again but not by much.
The whole A9 vs A7 III debate will always rage on, the A9 is better but for so many different reasons apart from its AF performance.... anybody who thought the A7 III had the identical AF performance like the A9 for £1999 was a little optimistic.
- EVF
- 20 fps
- Deep buffer
- 100% silent shutter (no distortion)
- Drive Mode Dial
- Blackout free EVF
- FTP / RJ45
- 6K -> 4K Recording
- CMOS RS with high response rate
You could argue that for the additional £1800-2000 premium, the Sony A9 isn’t worth it over the A7 III.
It comes down to your requirements, others just want the best of the best regardless of the outlay
Please do carry on arguing with yourself, inventing your own facts as you wish. No, I don't care at all about DP. I've already said I prefer the testimony of those actually using the camera. I have never said the difference is night and day, that is just an outright lie you have invented to continue your troll argument.