LBJ2 wrote:
Not happy with any of my results from this last birding trip. Operator error. I decided to remove the images from the thread. I can do better.
Just to be clear, I wasn't criticizing; I was just curious about the flexibility of the files.
I often photograph eagles. With my Canon bodies, I have to underexpose on bright days when shooting adults because of the specular highlights off the white feathers. This generally opens up a lot of noise in the dark feathers. With my A7R2, I expose normally or expose up and it can handle the manipulation in post beautifully. I am curious to know how the A9 handles under the same conditions. Photographing birds in sunny conditions is a perfect torture test.
scrappydog wrote:
Just to be clear, I wasn't criticizing; I was just curious about the flexibility of the files.
I often photograph eagles. With my Canon bodies, I have to underexpose on bright days when shooting adults because of the specular highlights off the white feathers. This generally opens up a lot of noise in the dark feathers. With my A7R2, I expose normally or expose up and it can handle the manipulation in post beautifully. I am curious to know how the A9 handles under the same conditions. Photographing birds in sunny conditions is a perfect torture test.
No worries Those two were not my best photos and I shouldn't have posted. I spent a couple hours in the morning with bad light position and went back in the eve to see if I could get better light. The result was a lot of mediocre images We've plenty of birds arround here, so I'll be back out again soon.
To answer your question, So far I have been able to push the A9 images sufficently in post. Not at the level of what I can do with A7rII but am happy. The Motorcross image I posted ealier in this thread is a good example. That image was back light and I was able to push the shadow slider out to +94 and still retain a pretty good result.
LBJ2 wrote:
No worries Those two were not my best photos and I shouldn't have posted. I spent a couple hours in the morning with bad light position and went back in the eve to see if I could get better light. The result was a lot of mediocre images We've plenty of birds arround here, so I'll be back out again soon.
To answer your question, So far I have been able to push the A9 images sufficently in post. Not at the level of what I can do with A7rII but am happy. The Motorcross image I posted ealier in this thread is a good example. That image was back light and I was able to push the shadow slider out to +94 and still retain a pretty good result. ...Show more →
Meh... It's a learning process for all of us when we get a new camera. The meter on the A9 isn't friendly at all. My second day of shooting with it, and it's turning out to be the biggest issue I have (though I still haven't done proper night AF testing).
BTW as a side note, please refrain from talking about the 35/1.4 ZA, I left mine in Singapore this trip and I've regretted it. Also while on the topic, please refrain from bringing up the 50/1.4 ZA, I also left that lens in Singapore this trip.
adamdewilde wrote:
Meh... It's a learning process for all of us when we get a new camera. The meter on the A9 isn't friendly at all. My second day of shooting with it, and it's turning out to be the biggest issue I have (though I still haven't done proper night AF testing).
BTW as a side note, please refrain from talking about the 35/1.4 ZA, I left mine in Singapore this trip and I've regretted it. Also while on the topic, please refrain from bringing up the 50/1.4 ZA, I also left that lens in Singapore this trip.
Two of my favorite FE lenses! But I will not mention that
No doubt I need to get used to the A9 and it's speed. Two days into it, I think I did better with it the second day on the motorcross track ( large targets for sure ) I used the 24-70GM on the second day and it seems to handle very well on the A9. Got me thinking maybe I need to replace the FE 70-200/4 with the 2.8 GM version. When Birding with the Sony A77II I typically use the 8FPS mode instead of the 12FPS as I tend get higher BIF hit rates at the slower FPS with that camera. Need to experiment with the same on the A9. For motorcross the 20 FPS was a great experince.
What are you finding with the meter on the A9? Compared to the A7rII ?
LBJ2 wrote:
Two of my favorite FE lenses! But I will not mention that
No doubt I need to get used to the A9 and it's speed. Two days into it, I think I did better with it the second day on the motorcross track ( large targets for sure ) I used the 24-70GM on the second day and it seems to handle very well on the A9. Got me thinking maybe I need to replace the FE 70-200/4 with the 2.8 GM version. When Birding with the Sony A77II I typically use the 8FPS mode instead of the 12FPS as I tend get higher BIF hit rates at the slower FPS with that camera. Need to experiment with the same on the A9. For motorcross the 20 FPS was a great experince.
What are you finding with the meter on the A9? Compared to the A7rII ?...Show more →
Edit: Catching up on the other threads now. I see the metering discussion. Something else for me to check out.
Larger pixels always make a difference when it comes to lens rendering. I've noticed this again and again. So it's no surprise that I prefer the look of the A9 files over those of the A7RII. It's too expensive for me though. I'm looking forward to the A7III with hopefully again a 24MP sensor.
adamdewilde wrote:
Completely agree with you on all fronts. And agree with you about in camera corrections. So I'm guessing the A9 doesn't have the same sort of built in corrections that the A7rII has with current firmware.
I was just bringing up another instance where sensor stack, and reflective light off the sensor covering causes weird "lens like" issues including but not limited to making CA more prevalent. Like my example with the Noctilux (that is also well documented around the net).
That's very interesting. It would be great to test this side-by-side with a A9 and A7RII.
LBJ2 wrote:
I've kept mine since day one. Just seems to have that something special. It's also one of my fastest focusing lenses on the A7rII. Haven't tried it on the A9 yet. But I did notice in Sony ref material it's not one of the lenses that will acheive up to 20 FPS on the A9. Either way up to 15 FPS is plenty fast.
It's not only fast focusing, it's quiet as well (compared to the other f/1.4 lenses)
adamdewilde wrote:
Meh... It's a learning process for all of us when we get a new camera. The meter on the A9 isn't friendly at all. My second day of shooting with it, and it's turning out to be the biggest issue I have (though I still haven't done proper night AF testing).
BTW as a side note, please refrain from talking about the 35/1.4 ZA, I left mine in Singapore this trip and I've regretted it. Also while on the topic, please refrain from bringing up the 50/1.4 ZA, I also left that lens in Singapore this trip.
I had the choice to bring my 35/2.8 ZA or 35/1.4 ZA to a family trip throughout Europe. I'm so glad I brought the f/1.4!
IMO, the only lens with similar rendering to the RX1 Sonnar.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I had the choice to bring my 35/2.8 ZA or 35/1.4 ZA to a family trip throughout Europe. I'm so glad I brought the f/1.4!
IMO, the only lens with similar rendering to the RX1 Sonnar.
To keep it a little smaller, I'm using this metal hood. Works perfectly and I didn't see any flare on my images: http://www.ebay.com/itm/182214910529
It it weren't so nasty out here today, I'd trek out with the A9 and A7Rii to try some not scientific enough comparisons. Sadly it's nasty out and I'm not to keen to test the waterproofness as well as the bodies.
That said, I don't think I've yet captured any pictures with my A9 that I couldn't have captured with the A7rii. The frame rates are truly insane and being able to chimp immediately brings me back to my old days with pro bodies (even with a slow card as all the speedy ones seem to be on backorder).
Actually, I take it back. Here's a shot I don't think I could have gotten with my A7Rii, except if I were very lucky. This was taken by my 5 (and a half!) year old who wanted to experience the "machine" gun. My eldest son had traveled a good bit towards us between the shot before this and this shot, and as you can see, he's in the very edge of the image and it sure seems to have tracked him perfectly.
LBJ2 wrote:
Two of my favorite FE lenses! But I will not mention that
No doubt I need to get used to the A9 and it's speed. Two days into it, I think I did better with it the second day on the motorcross track ( large targets for sure ) I used the 24-70GM on the second day and it seems to handle very well on the A9. Got me thinking maybe I need to replace the FE 70-200/4 with the 2.8 GM version. When Birding with the Sony A77II I typically use the 8FPS mode instead of the 12FPS as I tend get higher BIF hit rates at the slower FPS with that camera. Need to experiment with the same on the A9. For motorcross the 20 FPS was a great experince.
What are you finding with the meter on the A9? Compared to the A7rII ?...Show more →
I think the A7rII meter is far more predictable. I usually know before hand if I'm going to have to dial in EV or if I should switch to full manual (most of the time I leave the ISO floating and I use manual, but sometimes full manual is required).
With the A9, not only can I not predict what it's going to do, but it's not consistent. I seem to get exposure variations of a few stops within the same scene, on a similar angle. I'll need to do more testing to try and determine the problem I'm having.
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's very interesting. It would be great to test this side-by-side with a A9 and A7RII.
I'll see if I can do it.. I hate doing side by sides without two of the same lens.
"Larger pixels always make a difference when it comes to lens rendering. I've noticed this again and again. So it's no surprise that I prefer the look of the A9 files over those of the A7RII. It's too expensive for me though. I'm looking forward to the A7III with hopefully again a 24MP sensor." - Jochenb
Also what he said, I feel similar especially when I consider all the cameras/systems I've used over the years..
adamdewilde wrote:
I think the A7rII meter is far more predictable. I usually know before hand if I'm going to have to dial in EV or if I should switch to full manual (most of the time I leave the ISO floating and I use manual, but sometimes full manual is required).
With the A9, not only can I not predict what it's going to do, but it's not consistent. I seem to get exposure variations of a few stops within the same scene, on a similar angle. I'll need to do more testing to try and determine the problem I'm having.
Been doing some indoor portrait tests with off camera flash. Definetly a different ball game compared to the A7rII. TTL is a mixed bag. Like you, I need more time to figure this out. If I had to figure this out quickly , Manual flash for sure. For now I am actually reading the manual!
Those two were not my best photos and I shouldn't have posted. I spent a couple hours in the morning with bad light position and went back in the eve to see if I could get better light. The result was a lot of mediocre images 
We've plenty of birds arround here, so I'll be back out again soon. 
) I used the 24-70GM on the second day and it seems to handle very well on the A9. Got me thinking maybe I need to replace the FE 70-200/4 with the 2.8 GM version. When Birding with the Sony A77II I typically use the 8FPS mode instead of the 12FPS as I tend get higher BIF hit rates at the slower FPS with that camera. Need to experiment with the same on the A9. For motorcross the 20 FPS was a great experince. 
