The new Sony A9 - What are your thoughts

chris malcolm said:
That's what I thought when I moved up to a 24MP APS-C sensor, which has smaller more densely packed pixels than a full frame 44MP sensor, so is even less forgiving of lens defects, more likely to hit the much discussed problem of the sensor "outresolving" the lenses and showing up unpleasant crap that 14MP simply hadn't been able to pick up.
Click to expand...

Yes.

My two worst lenses from a detail resolution point of view were my 18-250mm general purpose zoom and my ancient but usefully tiny film era 35-70mm f4 zoom. The first surprise was that contrary to much of what I'd read in photography forums they didn't look any worse. Of course at a pixel level their lack of detail resolution was more obvious, but at any particular size of print or screen magnification they didn't actually look any worse than they had on a 14MP sensor.
Click to expand...

Yes. It's quite wrong to suggest that more pixels will somehow make lenses look worse. In fact, they will always looks slightly better, at least in theory - see below.

The second surprise was that despite the fact that at 14MP both lenses were quite definitely soft and lacking in the detail resolution that good primes could produce, at 24MP they actually managed to show a little more detail resolution. The improvement was much less obvious than the improvement I got from my sharpest lenses, but it was still an improvement.
Click to expand...

And in practise too :)
 
StewartR said:
I agree totally. Yet the powers that be at Sigma don't. I can't see how it would make commercial sense to develop completely new designs of lenses just for the Sony FE mount.
Click to expand...

It makes sense to look at individual lenses, to see how the various pros and cons balance out in each case, but making individual lenses for particular cameras is going to add a lot of extra cost. That will change when more manufacturers move to full-frame mirrorless, but lens manufacturers can't do anything about the sensor that is at the heart of the problem.

I suspect that there will be some compromise over the next few years, with sensors that are less prone to off-axis problems with pixel-well and filter-stack issues, and combined with lenses that have some back-focus distance adjustments to claim at least some of the lens size benefits.
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
DR not as good

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7...=social&utm_source=BANNED&utm_campaign=buffer
Click to expand...
Not great, but it will be interesting to see the DR curve. The initial DR results of the D5 were disappointing, but these were at base and at ISO above 1000 it actually surpasses the D750 and D810. As it's primarily a sports cam rather than landscape cam you're going to be up at slightly higher ISO's so you could argue that the DR of the D5 is class leading, for the range it's going to be working at primarily.

The Sony's DR might follow a similar trend.
 
snerkler said:
Not great, but it will be interesting to see the DR curve. The initial DR results of the D5 were disappointing, but these were at base and at ISO above 1000 it actually surpasses the D750 and D810. As it's primarily a sports cam rather than landscape cam you're going to be up at slightly higher ISO's so you could argue that the DR of the D5 is class leading, for the range it's going to be working at primarily.

The Sony's DR might follow a similar trend.
Click to expand...
Reading the article it does say when going past iso 160 it is a match for the a7r2 if not slightly better
 
jonneymendoza said:
Reading the article it does say when going past iso 160 it is a match for the a7r2 if not slightly better
Click to expand...
I'll wait and see when it's been properly tested, but you have to remember it's being billed as a sports cam, not a landscape cam. Shame it's not ISO invariant, but then again you shouldn't really need it to be as you should get exposure spot on every time with the EVF ;) Of course, there are times with high DR scenes where ISO invariances still helps even with the 'correct' exposure.
 
I've skimmed a lot of this thread so I'm not sure if it's already been mentioned but my issue with the Sony lenses since getting the A6000 is their claims about the camera's focusing speeds but complete lack of lenses being able to keep up. The 70-200mm seemed like the only one that stood a chance with its dual motors but the rest wouldn't be able to keep up especially at 11fps or if the subject is coming towards you quickly.

Finally some ultrasonic pro lenses have come out but the prices are far too high for me to consider and there's no decent used market for them yet. Even the 70-200mm is pretty much the same price used now than it was brand new a while back.

I miss my D3 and 80-200mm AFS which was an awesome combination for capturing my dog in full flight. It's far more challenging now using the A6000 that often I won't even bother. The frustration is too much! My current solution is to manually focus on a point I know he'll run into and hope that one of the 11fps shots will nail the focus lol
 
gman said:
I've skimmed a lot of this thread so I'm not sure if it's already been mentioned but my issue with the Sony lenses since getting the A6000 is their claims about the camera's focusing speeds but complete lack of lenses being able to keep up. The 70-200mm seemed like the only one that stood a chance with its dual motors but the rest wouldn't be able to keep up especially at 11fps or if the subject is coming towards you quickly.

Finally some ultrasonic pro lenses have come out but the prices are far too high for me to consider and there's no decent used market for them yet. Even the 70-200mm is pretty much the same price used now than it was brand new a while back.

I miss my D3 and 80-200mm AFS which was an awesome combination for capturing my dog in full flight. It's far more challenging now using the A6000 that often I won't even bother. The frustration is too much! My current solution is to manually focus on a point I know he'll run into and hope that one of the 11fps shots will nail the focus lol
Click to expand...
A6000 is quite old.
 
gman said:
And yet there are only now a very small number of very expensive lenses which can handle its focusing abilities.

It's only three years old, hardly ancient lol
Click to expand...
Na many of the G series lenses focus really fast and are around 500/600 quid for 50mm etc.
 
Sooooo, I had a go today.

jhUXW2e.jpg


It is amazing.

The no black out is almost the best thing since sliced bread..so to speak, I am not sure if it is necessary but it is certainly nice.

The AF tracking with native lenses are really fast, one thing I didn't look into is if I can use a single focus point because you can move the little box with the thumb stick to focus, it still comes up with a cluster that darts around when you press the button and a couple of times that focus point cluster popped up on the other side of the EVF!!! totally assumed wrong what I wanted to focus on. It has very very good AI servo though.

Also tried it with the Sigma adaptor with my Sigma 50A 1.4. The focus speed is definitely slower compared to the 24-70 GM or the 85 GM.

The shutter, as in FPS is insane, was instantly taken back how quick it is. With the 5D I could have it on Highest speed and I am able or used to press the trigger and have 2 or 3 photo bursts, which I am used to, in order to eliminate blinking, same process with the A9 and I think about 6-7 photos went off. I would go through SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much memory if I am shooting that thing.

Overall, from a quick play I like it a lot, it does a LOT right, with native lenses it works brilliantly, size wise with the primes and adaptor is a bit big so I won't go into the size is smaller than a DSLR argument as it is moot.

£4500 though.....if a 5D4 is £3500, is this worth an extra £1000 ??? I think it could be....Personally though, I rather wait for A7R3 if they could just lower the FPS to 10 (plenty) and leave the rest of the tech in.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Na many of the G series lenses focus really fast and are around 500/600 quid for 50mm etc.
Click to expand...

Are they not still stepped motors though? I'm sure it's just the master lenses which are ultrasonic?
 
Last edited:
Oh the EVF, it's awesome! It's huge, it's bright and although it's no optical, the lag is just only noticible. There is noise creeping in if I am in low light as expected. This is one EVF I think live with as it almost fooled me it wasn't a EVF.
 
Raymond Lin said:
Oh the EVF, it's awesome! It's huge, it's bright and although it's no optical, the lag is just only noticible. There is noise creeping in if I am in low light as expected. This is one EVF I think live with as it almost fooled me it wasn't a EVF.
Click to expand...

I have, yet, to try the A9 but your observation that "the lag is just only noticeable." immediately makes it useless for the vast majority of my photography..

I was planning to head down to Carmarthen Cameras (an excellent high street retailer) to give the A9 a go, but given that there is ANY perceptible viewfinder lag, + the lack of any suitable compatible long lenses? Err - I will save some petrol.

If the viewfinder lag is only "just" noticeable I will be trying to focus on where my subject was, not where it is, and I will be trying to do it with a lens that is 400mm/600mm + too short! So it is really a no-go for me.

Glad you were happy with it for your needs though.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Na many of the G series lenses focus really fast and are around 500/600 quid for 50mm etc.
Click to expand...

What about a 500, 600, 800 mm lens? How fast do they focus - or even exist?

"Huston we have a problem"....................
 
johnf3f said:
I have, yet, to try the A9 but your observation that "the lag is just only noticeable." immediately makes it useless for the vast majority of my photography..

I was planning to head down to Carmarthen Cameras (an excellent high street retailer) to give the A9 a go, but given that there is ANY perceptible viewfinder lag, + the lack of any suitable compatible long lenses? Err - I will save some petrol.

If the viewfinder lag is only "just" noticeable I will be trying to focus on where my subject was, not where it is, and I will be trying to do it with a lens that is 400mm/600mm + too short! So it is really a no-go for me.

Glad you were happy with it for your needs though.
Click to expand...

The body might be good but their lenses are not there for me ( I don't they it ever will, there is no lenses like the 85L except Canon and that is my 2nd most used lens), if in 5 year's or so when its like £1500 then I might get one. It's not a body that I need though, I don't need the FPS, but I was curious to try it out in person. Was totally accident when I went into Clifton Cameras today to get a strobe and saw a Sony rep there with the A9 and a couple of new GM lenses (including the new 100-400), so I tried it out.
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
Do you shoot with those kind of lenses?
Click to expand...


At a guess about 80 to 90% of the time.

Though I did take my Canon 100-400 Mk2 out today - it's 4/5th outing - but I have only had it for about 6 months! Yes the Canon 800 F5.6 L IS accounts for the vast majority of my photography.

Much of the time I could make do with a shorter lens, say a good 500 or 600 mm F4, but Sony just don't make them!
 
johnf3f said:
At a guess about 80 to 90% of the time.

Though I did take my Canon 100-400 Mk2 out today - it's 4/5th outing - but I have only had it for about 6 months! Yes the Canon 800 F5.6 L IS accounts for the vast majority of my photography.

Much of the time I could make do with a shorter lens, say a good 500 or 600 mm F4, but Sony just don't make them!
Click to expand...
Stick with canon! Wait till Sony offer some of the lenses you need
 
Raymond Lin said:
The body might be good but their lenses are not there for me ( I don't they it ever will, there is no lenses like the 85L except Canon and that is my 2nd most used lens), if in 5 year's or so when its like £1500 then I might get one. It's not a body that I need though, I don't need the FPS, but I was curious to try it out in person. Was totally accident when I went into Clifton Cameras today to get a strobe and saw a Sony rep there with the A9 and a couple of new GM lenses (including the new 100-400), so I tried it out.
Click to expand...
Not even nikon have a 85L. And Canon looks to replace the 85l with a 1.4!
 
jonneymendoza said:
Not even nikon have a 85L. And Canon looks to replace the 85l with a 1.4!
Click to expand...

The 85L is not a fast focusing lens anyway, adding an adaptor will just make it worse, of course.....If I ever take up portraiture more then speed won't matter but then again, 20FPS is not needed either, nor does no black out since the model isn't running. The 85L is probably the holy grail of portraiture, it might not be optically perfect but I just love it.
 
Raymond Lin said:
The body might be good but their lenses are not there for me ( I don't they it ever will, there is no lenses like the 85L except Canon and that is my 2nd most used lens), if in 5 year's or so when its like £1500 then I might get one. It's not a body that I need though, I don't need the FPS, but I was curious to try it out in person. Was totally accident when I went into Clifton Cameras today to get a strobe and saw a Sony rep there with the A9 and a couple of new GM lenses (including the new 100-400), so I tried it out.
Click to expand...

Of course you "Tried it Out" exactly as I would have done! When all is said and done it looks, in many ways, to be a superb camera so you (or I) would just have to have a play!

Unfortunately, for me, the lack of an OVF and no good long lenses makes it useless. That certainly does NOT make the A9 useless for everybody - just me!

I can't help thinking that, for landscape/portrait photographers, that the Sony A7r2 is a better option? Yes the frame rate is low (who cares?), the AF is not the best - but it is accurate and the IQ is top notch! After all models and waterfalls don't fly off very often. When you are taking your time and getting the composition just the way you want it then a small delay on the viewfinder is simply irrelevant. Added to this the A7 series will work with a very wide variety of lenses from different manufacturers.. In my opinion a batter camera with better IQ - and cheaper!

The A9 shows the GREAT potential of Sony R&D and their ability to make what people want - they just haven't got it quite right yet. BUT they will! That is guaranteed.........................
 
johnf3f said:
Of course you "Tried it Out" exactly as I would have done! When all is said and done it looks, in many ways, to be a superb camera so you (or I) would just have to have a play!

Unfortunately, for me, the lack of an OVF and no good long lenses makes it useless. That certainly does NOT make the A9 useless for everybody - just me!

I can't help thinking that, for landscape/portrait photographers, that the Sony A7r2 is a better option? Yes the frame rate is low (who cares?), the AF is not the best - but it is accurate and the IQ is top notch! After all models and waterfalls don't fly off very often. When you are taking your time and getting the composition just the way you want it then a small delay on the viewfinder is simply irrelevant. Added to this the A7 series will work with a very wide variety of lenses from different manufacturers.. In my opinion a batter camera with better IQ - and cheaper!

The A9 shows the GREAT potential of Sony R&D and their ability to make what people want - they just haven't got it quite right yet. BUT they will! That is guaranteed.........................
Click to expand...

The A7R2 will produce technically nicer images, sharper too obviously, The Sony Rep claims the A9 has 25% faster AF than the A7R2, but for the price, the A7R2 is half the price online of the A9 which when you consider that, it is a bit of a bargain.

I was so distracted by the A9 today...I went to get a strobe, in 1 minute I was talking to a sales guy about my strobe purchase and testing which one I can use with my Speedlite and next second I found myself looking at the A9, I was like a kid in candy store. I tried it with a 85GM, my own Sigma 50A with a MC-11 adaptor, which made the camera enormous, it felt like i had a telephoto attached.
 
Raymond Lin said:
The body might be good but their lenses are not there for me ( I don't they it ever will, there is no lenses like the 85L except Canon and that is my 2nd most used lens), if in 5 year's or so when its like £1500 then I might get one. It's not a body that I need though, I don't need the FPS, but I was curious to try it out in person. Was totally accident when I went into Clifton Cameras today to get a strobe and saw a Sony rep there with the A9 and a couple of new GM lenses (including the new 100-400), so I tried it out.
Click to expand...
TBH I'd choose the Sigma 85mm art over the Canon f1.2, but not sure if they're going to do an emount?
 
Raymond Lin said:
The 85L is not a fast focusing lens anyway, adding an adaptor will just make it worse, of course.....If I ever take up portraiture more then speed won't matter but then again, 20FPS is not needed either, nor does no black out since the model isn't running. The 85L is probably the holy grail of portraiture, it might not be optically perfect but I just love it.
Click to expand...

I have tried the 85L and, frankly, it is just "Lens Porn!" It is just a beautiful piece of kit! I just love what it does and the way it does it.
I do not have a use for one - but that certainly does not mean that I don't want one!

We all have that one thing that gives us a little "Fizz", to me it was the 800 F5.6! Yes I am a completely hopeless case - but who cares? These things improve or photography and make us happy!
 
johnf3f said:
I have tried the 85L and, frankly, it is just "Lens Porn!" It is just a beautiful piece of kit! I just love what it does and the way it does it.
I do not have a use for one - but that certainly does not mean that I don't want one!

We all have that one thing that gives us a little "Fizz", to me it was the 800 F5.6! Yes I am a completely hopeless case - but who cares? These things improve or photography and make us happy!
Click to expand...

There are 2 sides of gear, the optically perfect and the X-factor.

It's like guitars, not sure if you are into guitars but PRS arguably makes the most consistent and "perfect" guitar that is flawless, but there is a big section of guitarist claims they have no mojo because its too perfect. They prefer a Gibson that is a little rough round the edges.

Mojo. I think we can or I can use the same term here too with the 85L. One 1 hand it is an incredible piece of engineering, it is the spiritual successor to the 50/1.0 L, the rear element is flush to the lena mount with the contacts sticking out, it literally pushes the engineering to the extreme. That aside, because of this, the contact point actually is what cause that little flat bit in the bokeh balls! A weird characteristic, a unique characteristic. The lens optics itself is not amazing by today's standard. It has quite a lot of CA in the wrong situation, focus is slow due to it moves the front element as opposed to the rear like some other lenses.

But the photos it create just have mojo.
 
Don't forget you can use the 85L on the a7r2 and because it's a slow af lens. You don't benefit from the native speed from the 5d4 vs using it on a sony
 
jonneymendoza said:
No it won't. I've had first hand experience with that combo and it focuses as fast (well as slow) as with the 5d4
Click to expand...

I have a real dislike using adaptors unless i absolutely have to though, if i buy a Sony, i will get mainly native lenses on it, I would never get it so I can use all my Canon lenses.
 
Raymond Lin said:
I have a real dislike using adaptors unless i absolutely have to though, if i buy a Sony, i will get mainly native lenses on it, I would never get it so I can use all my Canon lenses.
Click to expand...

That's fine if you have a valid reason but if not and it's just an emotional or oddball thing... get over it.

I use manual lenses via adapters and the handling is just fine and in some cases more comfortable than shorter non adapted lenses so that leaves the handling of the camera + adapted lenses you have and of course the AF performance.
 
woof woof said:
That's fine if you have a valid reason but if not and it's just an emotional or oddball thing... get over it.

I use manual lenses via adapters and the handling is just fine and in some cases more comfortable than shorter non adapted lenses so that leaves the handling of the camera + adapted lenses you have and of course the AF performance.
Click to expand...

Valid reasons

1 - it makes the lens larger
2 - it unbalance the camera on a already smaller body
3 - it's slower AF (and I've tried it)

And I am an emotional oddball.

And I'm talking about AF lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top