The new Sony A9 - What are your thoughts

HoppyUK said:
The Sony test included a lot of artificial light and in the Northrups second video linked earlier they report no problems. It's mentioned at 4.45mins, plus a Sony rep's comment that there could be problems in some conditions. The only way to avoid flicker issues is with a global shutter or fast rolling shutter (which is effectively how a mechanical focal plane shutter works) and a camera that has flicker detection (some Canons) that senses the flicker and can adjust exact timing of the shutter to miss it.
Click to expand...
That's my point though ... unless I'm missing some, the "reviews" in so called real world conditions are actually reviews from using the cameras under Sony's supervision. Seeing how as they chose the venues for the demonstrations, presumably they chose venues where there wasn't conditions which caused problems. So until we get a truely representative "real world" testing across a wide range of situations, we can't know how effective Sony's "anti-flicker" processing is.

That's how I see it anyway!

(Some, maybe most, Nikons have anti-flicker too)
 
Last edited:
lindsayperezphotography said:
So the new Sony A9 has been announced for release jn may and the specs on this thing are crazy.

20fps no black out
Internal 4K
600+ af points
1/32000 shutter speed
5 stop Sensor stabilisation
Dual card slots
Stacked cmos sensors

Just to name a few key specs.

What do you guys think of this, rekom this could be what makes everyone jump ship to their system base. I know nikon need to up their game. Priced at around $4500.

Thoughts? I'd you want to see a full overview and more specs click here



http://lindsayperezphoto.squarespace.com/blog/2017/4/20/sonya9releasedthoughtsandimpressions
Click to expand...

No thoughts whatsoever - Sony simply do not make quality lenses at the focal lengths that I use, so it is of no interest.

I am glad to see that Sony cameras are advancing but they already have some nice cameras. They need a FAR better and wider lens range to compete and some top notch long (500mm +) lenses before they will interest me.

Pity but that is just the way it is.............
 
Eloise said:
That's my point though ... unless I'm missing some, the "reviews" in so called real world conditions are actually reviews from using the cameras under Sony's supervision. Seeing how as they chose the venues for the demonstrations, presumably they chose venues where there wasn't conditions which caused problems. So until we get a truely representative "real world" testing across a wide range of situations, we can't know how effective Sony's "anti-flicker" processing is.

That's how I see it anyway!

(Some, maybe most, Nikons have anti-flicker too)
Click to expand...

One thing I've noticed with my Panny G7 and GX80 is that when shooting under artificial lighting with the camera set to auto select electronic or mechanical shutter flicker is sometimes visible in the EVF and although I can't prove it they seem switch between electronic and mechanical shutter when taking very similar shots so I wonder if they have some software to recognise flicker and switch to the mechanical shutter to avoid it. Is this anti flicker? If that's the case it's a good idea and it'd be nice if Sony did something similar.
 
jonneymendoza said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=59&v=fBo3pn_IsS8

impressive

Also some HIGH ISO samples

ISO 12,800 i could use with confidence

http://www.spencerpablophotography.com/Things/Sony-a9-High-ISO-Examples/
Click to expand...

I watched the very same video earlier today.... very impressive but you have to consider that there is a very wide contrast between the black card and white background.
All these tests are pointless, its in the real world where this beast needs to shine.
I could get one and trust me its been hard containing my GAS :D lol

The images don't look that impressive to my eyes!
 
StewartR said:
Sorry if I'm being a bit dense, but what do we learn about noise from images which are only 1600 pixels across?
Click to expand...

There are plenty of full sized pictures available now and maybe there are some high ISO ones if that's what you're interested in. As for 1600 wide pictures, it doesn't matter what the full sized image looks like unless you need the full sized image, what matters is what the final image you want to use looks like and I suppose it is possible that there's someone somewhere who might just want to end up with a 1600 wide image :D
 
woof woof said:
There are plenty of full sized pictures available now and maybe there are some high ISO ones if that's what you're interested in. As for 1600 wide pictures, it doesn't matter what the full sized image looks like unless you need the full sized image, what matters is what the final image you want to use looks like and I suppose it is possible that there's someone somewhere who might just want to end up with a 1600 wide image :D
Click to expand...

I guess it's because someone might want to see images larger than 1600 wide before spending £4500 on a body?
 
stevelmx5 said:
I guess it's because someone might want to see images larger than 1600 wide before spending £4500 on a body?
Click to expand...

Oh dear God Steve.

The bit about full sized pictures being available and the final image being what matters I meant but the bit about 1600 images was rather tongue in cheek and I shouldn't but I keep forgetting I'm posting on line where people who can't wipe their own you know what's can post on forums... So I'll drop the too subtle humour and say it straight.

Full sized pictures are out there for those interested and if they can't be found... wait... there'll be an avalanche of reviews and pictures soon.
 
woof woof said:
Full sized pictures are out there for those interested...
Click to expand...
So the question is, why is a Sony Ambassador posting photos which are intended to demonstrate the camera's high ISO capabilities, but they're only 1600 pixels?
 
woof woof said:
Oh dear God Steve.

The bit about full sized pictures being available and the final image being what matters I meant but the bit about 1600 images was rather tongue in cheek and I shouldn't but I keep forgetting I'm posting on line where people who can't wipe their own you know what's can post on forums... So I'll drop the too subtle humour and say it straight.

Full sized pictures are out there for those interested and if they can't be found... wait... there'll be an avalanche of reviews and pictures soon.
Click to expand...

I get that forums are a difficult place to frequent sometimes and have even fallen foul of sarcasm in my own posts being missed but your post is, dare I say it, a little bit fanboy. Stewart asked a genuine question about a page that was linked specifically due to it having high ISO examples from the A9 yet for some unknown reason they are compressed to 1600 wide?

If you struggle to understand why that is an issue for someone who may want to buy a pro body to shoot pro work rather than flowers or cats (for example) then I'm not sure I can add any explanation. I agree that there will be lots of real world reviews soon enough but for now, Stewart was specifically commenting about the specific page that was linked, as was I.
 
StewartR said:
Sorry if I'm being a bit dense, but what do we learn about noise from images which are only 1600 pixels across?
Click to expand...
If you click on the image an icon appears in the bottom right corner that allows you to select image size, including the original (y) It helps highlight the missed focus at 1600, and slightly missed focus at 3200 and 6400 ISO ;)
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
If you click on the image an icon appears in the bottom right corner that allows you to select image size, including the original (y) It helps highlight the missed focus at 1600, and slightly missed focus at 3200 and 6400 ISO ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'd missed that icon so hold my hands up to that. Having seen the full size images I've got to say that I'm not blown away by the quality? Obviously there is missed focus on some but the colour noise even in the 1600 image seems a bit extreme, even though jpg NR is off? Maybe I'm just being overly critical but I've seen better results from the A7 range?
 
Last edited:
stevelmx5 said:
Thanks, I'd missed that icon so hold my hands up to that. Having seen the full size images I've got to say that I'm not blown away by the quality? Obviously there is missed focus on some but the colour noise even in the 1600 image seems a bit extreme, even though jpg NR is off? Maybe I'm just being overly critical but I've seen better results from the A7 range?
Click to expand...
Agreed, certainly nothing wow about them. However, that's just one series of shots and I'll wait to see what the SOOC RAWs are like.
 
Fuguru said:
It should do hopefully but are professionals complaining about the output from the 1DX II or D5 bodies?
Click to expand...
That's my point lol.

Basically only Sony haters would moan about the iq not being as good as a A7RII yet, if its better than the 1dx2 etc which it should be compared to, Why complain?

If the iq falls short of those bodies plus the af being not as good and also any banding issues when using electronic shutter then those are valid things to moan about
 
The Luminous Landscape Website has a review on the A9 by Kevin Raber.
There are real world examples with some highish ISO shots, they look good.
I don't know if the link will make the review available for everyone, I subscribe to the site ($12 per year) so have visibility of all content.
 
jonneymendoza said:
That's my point lol.

Basically only Sony haters would moan about the iq not being as good as a A7RII yet, if its better than the 1dx2 etc which it should be compared to, Why complain?

If the iq falls short of those bodies plus the af being not as good and also any banding issues when using electronic shutter then those are valid things to moan about
Click to expand...
TBH I can't see IQ being an issue, most cameras today can produce images that are more than good enough for most things.
 
jonneymendoza said:
That's my point lol.

Basically only Sony haters would moan about the iq not being as good as a A7RII yet, if its better than the 1dx2 etc which it should be compared to, Why complain?

If the iq falls short of those bodies plus the af being not as good and also any banding issues when using electronic shutter then those are valid things to moan about
Click to expand...
that's from you after saying one of the reasons you were thinking about cancelling your pre-order was because the iq was lower than your "7" :confused:
 
jonneymendoza said:
I may cancel my pre order. the buffer rate seems like an issue(cant access the menu) no PlayMemory App, no S Log. Not as sharp as my a7r2 when pixel peeping.

There 3s tracking is buggy or not as good as nikons?
Click to expand...
there is the bit i was thinking of (see my last post)
 
So it could be that the Sony A9 potentially suffers from slow-AF in poor light which haunts all mirrorless bodies......
 
Last edited:
Fuguru said:
So it could be that the Sony A9 potentially suffer the slow-AF issues in poor light which haunts all mirrorless bodies......
Click to expand...
Possibly. The problem is this.

Since the latest update on the A7R2. It has crippled the af system on af-c when you shoot beyond f5.6

It now doesn't do what dslr does and what the camera use to do ie open up the lens to its max to gather as much light and close down to the appature you set and take the shot.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Possibly. The problem is this.

Since the latest update on the A7R2. It has crippled the af system on af-c when you shoot beyond f5.6

It now doesn't do what dslr does and what the camera use to do ie open up the lens to its max to gather as much light and close down to the appature you set and take the shot.
Click to expand...

Sony needs to stop fixing problems via new body releases, when they could quite easily be resolved via firmware upgrades for the current customers.
Does the A9 address the whole AF above f5.6 issue?
I really enjoyed Sony gear and lenses from a technical perspective but the whole thing didn't have the vibe for me.
Sony are trying so hard to beat the competition and be number one that they are possibly missing key issues which might prevent better adoption.
 
Fuguru said:
Sony needs to stop fixing problems via new body releases, when they could quite easily be resolved via firmware upgrades for the current customers.
Does the A9 address the whole AF above f5.6 issue?
I really enjoyed Sony gear and lenses from a technical perspective but the whole thing didn't have the vibe for me.
Sony are trying so hard to beat the competition and be number one that they are possibly missing key issues which might prevent better adoption.
Click to expand...
The problem is that they seem to make one step forward and then two steps back when they release firmware. When the A7R2 first came out. It could af perfectly fine but they botched it on the latest firmware.!
 
jonneymendoza said:
The problem is that they seem to make one step forward and then two steps back when they release firmware. When the A7R2 first came out. It could af perfectly fine but they botched it on the latest firmware.!
Click to expand...
cant you just roll back the firmware? i presume you save a copy of each, before updating
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top