Please do! I’m torn between the A7riii and the A9... extremely tempted by the silent shooting but have a mental block going from 36/42/45 megapixels down to 24...
[if I still shot paid work it would be a no brainer and I’d own both...]
**My A7riii arrives Tuesday bradlys wrote:
Am going to be this person - just waiting on my lens to arrive! Bought a used A9 recently.
I don't see many photos in this thread that aren't birding or nature. Heh...
I shoot sports mostly, but really like the eye AF from the a9 for my portrait work. Just a couple from my most recent shoots. EDIT: And while my processing for the site here apparently is not great and these don't appear to be all that sharp, you'll have to trust me that these are tack sharp.
Mitesh I have the time but when at home there is little to shoot. Currently in NL and other than Gannets and Puffins little more of interest with the a9. Besides we've had a few blizzards to deal with.
Geoff, love your colors of red.
Eric simply a beautiful turtle and welcome to the a9 family.
Itsed you have become Osprey master.
Trying my hands on 2x teleconverter on 100-400 GM, initial impression sharpness doesn't seem to be that great on fast moving subject even though is tracking (tested @ shutter speed >1/2000s).
Overall feels like 1.4x has more keepers than 2x when tracking moving subjects. What are other people experience like?
Trying my hands on 2x teleconverter on 100-400 GM, initial impression sharpness doesn't seem to be that great on fast moving subject even though is tracking (tested @ shutter speed >1/2000s).
Overall feels like 1.4x has more keepers than 2x when tracking moving subjects. What are other people experience like?
Nice shots. Those are my findings also. It looks like it is locked and green dots tracking the bird (if using Wide or Zone) but the actual number of sharp shots is less than expected back on the computer with the 2xTC. But I've also had sequences with larger birds like an Osprey against blue sky where it nailed every one with the 2x so it seems to depend on subject and background probably. But for perched birds, floating birds I find a very high success rate just like the 1.4 and bare lens.
webmstrk9 wrote:
First time out with the a9, yeah, I need to understand the AF system, but here are a few shots with the 16-35/4
Nice, maybe you should post these in that TooManyShots' thread where he doesn't think any mirrorless can shoot cycling races
But on second thought, don't bother as the guy won't listen to reason and seems to be trolling. The thread is over in the General Gear Talk section if you care to read (don't say I didn't warn you though ) https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1544592
Thanx for your feedback Arbitrage, just wanna to know if my experiences aligned with general consensus
I also agreed with your observation with larger birds against less busy background.
iamso78 wrote:
Trying my hands on 2x teleconverter on 100-400 GM, initial impression sharpness doesn't seem to be that great on fast moving subject even though is tracking (tested @ shutter speed >1/2000s).
Overall feels like 1.4x has more keepers than 2x when tracking moving subjects. What are other people experience like?
If you view images at 100% then for sure the 1.4x has more keepers. If you crop down the 1.4x image down to get the same FOV as with a 2x I am not so sure however. My gut feeling has then been that the 2x works better for me so that is what I have preferred lately. Perhaps my biggest issue with the 2x has been motion blur, fast shutter definitely seems more important.
Bought a used A9 recently.
)