arbitrage wrote:
I don't need/want more than 20. I mostly shoot mine at 10. I do make use of 20 sometimes like for swallow IF shooting.
What I'd much rather see is an option to choose the exact FPS you want like 6, 8, 14 or 16 etc as you can on most other cameras (DSLRs, Z6/7 etc). I don't like the restriction of 1, 5, 10, 20.
I think there are technical reasons why you can't, image capture most likely can't work independent of autofocus detection. You can only shoot at integer fractions of 60FPS (which is the the AF calculation frequency), ie 1/3rd = 20fps (High), 1/4th = 15fps (High with some older lenses) 1/5th = 12fps (High with uncompressed raw) 1/6th = 10fps (med) and 1/12th = 5fps (low).
randomguy wrote:
I think there are technical reasons why you can't, image capture most likely can't work independent of autofocus detection. You can only shoot at integer fractions of 60FPS (which is the the AF calculation frequency), ie 1/3rd = 20fps (High), 1/4th = 15fps (High with some older lenses) 1/5th = 12fps (High with uncompressed raw) 1/6th = 10fps (med) and 1/12th = 5fps (low).
If that is true then I'd be happy to just have the 15 and 12 options in addition to the current ones.
randomguy wrote:
I would like the option to shoot up to 100FPS, preferably with a pre shot option. Having the option is better than not having it and I don't have to use it all the time. It would be perfect when I am waiting for something that happens extremely fast, and with pre capture I could capture it even if I am not fast enough to press the shutter in time.
Pre-capture would be the bigger game changer as it would make up for the EVF delay.
arbitrage wrote:
Besides the MP increase, I will be looking forward to A7RIV ergonomic changes including larger AF-ON button and taller/deeper/rounder grip, red/white focus points and dual UHS-II slots.
I hope to get my hands on an A7RIV in a local store soon to see how much of an improvement the ergonomic changes have made.
Yes! I purchased an A9 when they first came and could never get used to its ergonomics. At the end of a 90 minute soccer game, it felt so uncomfortable that I ended up hating it and returned to the 1DXM2.
I'd be happy with a A9 II that *only* had ergonomic changes! (and better weather proofing). The A7r IV looks like an improvement - the back AF button looks bigger, more example - but I still suspect it won't solve how little space there is between your fingers and a larger lens. There's a picture on dpreview that shows that issue:
timgangloff wrote:
Me and I think, lots of sports guys. It's not about the "20", but it is about the 10 in 1/2 second or 5 in 1/4 second. I don't know any sports guys, or really anyone shooting anything moving in an unknown direction with unknown obstacles coming into and out of the frame can accurately pick the exact moment to press the shutter button. So, I'd prefer to have 5 shots from the 1/4 second burst than 2 or 3 if I am shooting at 10 fps or 1 or 2 if shooting at 5fps.
Clearly there are times when I shoot through the play, looking for peak action and peak jubilation after the action and end up with way too many shots, but a quick cull can usually whittle that number down to 1 or 2 images worth keeping.
I'd probably like to see 30fps or so. So, in that 1/2 second burst,I have 15 and not 10 to review and select from or in that 1/4 second burst I have 7 or 8. Usually, a quick review and I can pick the one or two keepers. Often times sports guys will do that on the back of the camera during down times and then rate those images in camera and only ingest the rated images.
I'd much rather see the a9II have a faster time between reviewing images and ready to shoot. The Canon's and Nikons have almost zero lag whereas the a9 can seem like an eternity getting ready to shoot after reviewing images. (See note above about rating images in camera between plays - with the a9 you need to be careful doing this or you can miss action).
As for filling a card, even shooting at 20fps, with a 64gb card and shooting jpeg, I don't fill a card shooting a full day of football, from pre-game activities to post game stuff. Loads of images, but still room on the card. I love the automatic roll over now just in case (wish the review image was the same as the card you are recording to by default) and also wish we had faster card types (loved my cfast in the 1dx2).
Exactly. It's all about having more options to choose from per moment. I rarely hold down the shutter button for more than a couple of seconds at most when shooting bursts, but I will do plenty of quick bursts at 20 fps and I also wouldn't mind 30 fps, although I'm not sure the lenses can support it.
fhammond wrote:
I'd be happy with a A9 II that *only* had ergonomic changes! (and better weather proofing). The A7r IV looks like an improvement - the back AF button looks bigger, more example - but I still suspect it won't solve how little space there is between your fingers and a larger lens. There's a picture on dpreview that shows that issue:
ggreene wrote:
Yeah, that photo is disappointing as I have a feeling the A9II will be the same body.
Yeah, probably 99% certainty it will have identical A7RIV body (other than the top left dial). My fingers don't touch any of my lenses with the current A9 so I'm not worried about that aspect of things.
I think the biggest improvement will be the height of the grip. Then add the battery grip and there will be lots of room to spread out the hands.
RobertHolloway wrote:
As a very happy owner of the A7R2, the rumored A92 is very exciting. Based upon rumored features (especially 36 mpxls) I'll be there if it's under $5k
If the A9II has 36MP, the new A7R4 will have 30% higher linear resolution. It's a perfect distinction for those how prioritize AF or resolution.
If you are happy with the A7R2's resolution, going down to 36MP should not make much difference. (only 8%)
arbitrage wrote:
Yeah, probably 99% certainty it will have identical A7RIV body (other than the top left dial). My fingers don't touch any of my lenses with the current A9 so I'm not worried about that aspect of things.
I think the biggest improvement will be the height of the grip. Then add the battery grip and there will be lots of room to spread out the hands.
I have not seen that image that is very interesting
Also the release for the SD cards is gone. Looks like just a slide out, which I like better and less chance of screwing up the release. Good move
Sony is not on the list of exhibitors for PhotoPlus in October (24-26). Sony Alpha Rumors has updated the latest rumor for the A9II as an update (originally they reported that the camera would be displayed at PhotoPlus) that "It will NOT be displayed at the PhotoPlus show but on a separate event because Sony decided to NOT be present at the show this year."
Sounds like the a9ii if all holds true is the ultimate end game camera. Fast enough for all the animal lovers and has enough MPs for everyone else. It should be amazing for everything else like portraits and landscape.
Fred Miranda wrote:
If the A9II has 36MP, the new A7R4 will have 30% higher linear resolution. It's a perfect distinction for those how prioritize AF or resolution.
If you are happy with the A7R2's resolution, going down to 36MP should not make much difference. (only 8%)
The AF system on my A7R2 is fine for every day use. For birds and running dogs, with my 200-600, not so great. Two different roles, two different bodies.
I always skip a generation so straight choice this time between A9, A92 and A7R4.
Vancouver47 wrote:
Has there been any mention of lossless compressed RAW? 50mb is a bit much on the A9 RAW files.
Given the fact they didn't even add that to the 61MP A7RIV I doubt they will be adding it to a 36MP camera. Anything is possible though. Maybe they've upgraded the processor in the flagship and it will be able to do this fast.
