Pius Sullivan wrote:
The conclusions is, those f/11 lenses suck wind....
I finally made it home to be able to download those three files...yeah those aren't great for frame filling head shots in a controlled setting. Those could be okay if they were crops of a bird shot at a distance but considering the conditions they are hardly worth the $800.
Another question about lag. I have read statements here from Sony A9 II owners that there is no way they would go backwards on that. Viewing the info about the Sony A9 II
Blackout-Free Shooting3
Electronic shutter eliminates blackout typical of SLR mirror cameras. Subject is visible during shutter release, with 60fps live-view and minimal display lag in continuous shooting.
(A) Blackout-free Shooting (B) Shooting with blackouts
So they are taking about no blackout using electronic shutter. We have already seen several live videos and people saying that with the R5 & 6 all you see is the white box flickering when using electronic shutter.
If so then the concern is EVF blackout when using mechanical shutter?
I'm getting heck on another site when I talk about readout speed. For example I said readout is 19ms. Another person said to say "19ms rolling shutter" so we know what you are talking about.
I understand what rolling shutter is and distortions are impacted by readout speed. I'm just to understand the EVF part of this equation. My understanding is readout speed also effects EVF blackout or am I incorrect?
Zenon Char wrote:
Another question about lag. I have read statements here from Sony A9 II owners that there is no way they would go backwards on that. Viewing the info about the Sony A9 II
Blackout-Free Shooting3
Electronic shutter eliminates blackout typical of SLR mirror cameras. Subject is visible during shutter release, with 60fps live-view and minimal display lag in continuous shooting.
(A) Blackout-free Shooting (B) Shooting with blackouts
So they are taking about no blackout using electronic shutter. We have already seen several live videos and people saying that with the R5 & 6 all you see is the white box flickering when using electronic shutter.
If so then the concern is EVF blackout when using mechanical shutter? ...Show more →
There will always be blackout with a mechanical shutter...there is on the A9II with mechanical shutter.
What we don't know is if the camera can process and read the sensor fast enough to provide a real-time feed into the EVF in mechanical or electronic.
Yes the 1DXIII LV and the R5/R6 in ES don't show any blackout but I'm still fairly certain they aren't providing a true live-feed like the A9 does. I may be wrong but I can still see some stutter when they let off the shutter which tells me it isn't a live feed or else it should just continue on without any stutter whether shooting or not.
In mechanical shutter at full 12FPS (or at whatever FPS) we don't know if it is a live feed other than the shutter blackout. As I've mentioned before on the A7RIV there is a live feed up to H frame rate (8FPS) but at H+ (10FPS) there isn't a live feed and instead the frame insertion (slideshow). The RIV does it really well though and I have shot swallows in flight in mechanical at H+ (10FPS) and been able to handle that if I keep my burst fairly short (where as on the A9 I could burst and pan around wildly as needed for longer). If you do too long of a burst and panning with a camera that has frame insertion you eventually get behind...some cameras are way worse at this than others. I find the A7RIV fairly good.
Zenon Char wrote:
I'm getting heck on another site when I talk about readout speed. For example I said readout is 19ms. Another person said to say "19ms rolling shutter" so we know what you are talking about.
I understand what rolling shutter is and distortions are impacted by readout speed. I'm just to understand the EVF part of this equation. My understanding is readout speed also effects EVF blackout or am I incorrect?
To be clear maybe just call it sensor scan readout speed. And yes it is related to whether the camera can read off the sensor fast enough to feed a live feed to the EVF or not. It probably has affect on blackout also but there will always be mechanical shutter blackout regardless (even on the A9II).
arbitrage wrote:
To be clear maybe just call it sensor scan readout speed. And yes it is related to whether the camera can read off the sensor fast enough to feed a live feed to the EVF or not. It probably has affect on blackout also but there will always be mechanical shutter blackout regardless (even on the A9II).
Yes I can call it that. The mechanical blackout I’m aware of. If has to happen unless there is a live feed of some type. As you increase the shutter speed it becomes less noticeable like an OVF.
arbitrage wrote:
There will always be blackout with a mechanical shutter...there is on the A9II with mechanical shutter.
What we don't know is if the camera can process and read the sensor fast enough to provide a real-time feed into the EVF in mechanical or electronic.
Yes the 1DXIII LV and the R5/R6 in ES don't show any blackout but I'm still fairly certain they aren't providing a true live-feed like the A9 does. I may be wrong but I can still see some stutter when they let off the shutter which tells me it isn't a live feed or else it should just continue on without any stutter whether shooting or not.
In mechanical shutter at full 12FPS (or at whatever FPS) we don't know if it is a live feed other than the shutter blackout. As I've mentioned before on the A7RIV there is a live feed up to H frame rate (8FPS) but at H+ (10FPS) there isn't a live feed and instead the frame insertion (slideshow). The RIV does it really well though and I have shot swallows in flight in mechanical at H+ (10FPS) and been able to handle that if I keep my burst fairly short (where as on the A9 I could burst and pan around wildly as needed for longer). If you do too long of a burst and panning with a camera that has frame insertion you eventually get behind...some cameras are way worse at this than others. I find the A7RIV fairly good....Show more →
That was very informative. I can see how eventually you start to fall behind with frame insertion and each body would be is different. With the R you fall behind right away. You have mentioned the stutter before so this is all becoming more clear. Sometimes in other conversations rolling shutter gets mixed in. Both it and sensor scan depend on the readout speed but are separate items. 45mp is a lot of data to push. We will see if Canon pulled off a miracle with this newly designed sensor but they already said there will be some rolling shutter distortion.
The A7RIV does not play nicely with 200-600 so it will have to be the A9 II for me, if I go down that path
I called my local photo store and he said I could try the R5 before deciding to buy it. I'll bring my RF 24-105 and try it on moving traffic but I'm usually not that comfortable with that. I'm not obliged to take it and like you said I can wait a bit to make sure.
Zenon Char wrote:
I'm getting heck on another site when I talk about readout speed. For example I said readout is 19ms. Another person said to say "19ms rolling shutter" so we know what you are talking about.
I understand what rolling shutter is and distortions are impacted by readout speed. I'm just to understand the EVF part of this equation. My understanding is readout speed also effects EVF blackout or am I incorrect?
John always comes up with different terminology than the rest of us speak. I wouldn't worry about using the rolling shutter term, that is terrible. Sensor readout is fine.
Either we will get to a global shutter where the entire sensor is read at once, and then freed up to see the world again, or the sensor readout and EVF will be so fast that as soon as a line is read from the sensor, that line is toggled back to seeing the world and relaying to the EVF. Right now things aren't fast enough and you might end up with a strange scrolling view in the EVF. Tech constantly gets better though and my bets are on the global shutter design.
TeamSpeed wrote:
John always comes up with different terminology than the rest of us speak. I wouldn't worry about using the rolling shutter term, that is terrible. Sensor readout is fine.
Either we will get to a global shutter where the entire sensor is read at once, and then freed up to see the world again, or the sensor readout and EVF will be so fast that as soon as a line is read from the sensor, that line is toggled back to seeing the world and relaying to the EVF. Right now things aren't fast enough and you might end up with a strange scrolling view in the EVF. Tech constantly gets better though and my bets are on the global shutter design.
arbitrage wrote:
To be clear maybe just call it sensor scan readout speed. And yes it is related to whether the camera can read off the sensor fast enough to feed a live feed to the EVF or not. It probably has affect on blackout also but there will always be mechanical shutter blackout regardless (even on the A9II).
Based on the last few posts. Does the A9 II use a live feed or the sensor readout is fast enough to provide the EVF real time information?
Zenon Char wrote:
Based on the last few posts. Does the A9 II use a live feed or the sensor readout is fast enough to provide the EVF real time information?
With the A9/A9II, as I understand it, the sensor is being read fast enough and compromises are being made to the data (compressed, lower bit rate, lower res in the EVF) in order to provide a live feed (or as close as one could ever get...there always has to be some minute electronic signal delay unlike an OVF). So what you are asking is basically the same thing, the sensor can be read fast enough and data compressed enough that it is supplying a live feed into the EVF while firing the shutter.
All of these are providing a live feed when we are just looking through the EVF doing nothing. Pius recently noticed that if he aimed his 1DXIII in LV ES at a ceiling fan and engaged AF (but didn't fire the shutter) that the image on the LCD slowed down so even there with AF engaged it is doing something different than the normal feed with no AF.
The benefit of the A9 is you keep that live feed as you AF and as you fire away and that is the best thing I've used to keep a moving bird in frame while panning and firing at the same time. DSLRs are second best and ones with minimal blackout like D5, 1D series are probably almost as easy to pan and shoot as an A9. Sometimes I still prefer shooting with an OVF but I've had the most success with erratic moving BIF with the A9.
arbitrage wrote:
With the A9/A9II, as I understand it, the sensor is being read fast enough and compromises are being made to the data (compressed, lower bit rate, lower res in the EVF) in order to provide a live feed (or as close as one could ever get...there always has to be some minute electronic signal delay unlike an OVF). So what you are asking is basically the same thing, the sensor can be read fast enough and data compressed enough that it is supplying a live feed into the EVF while firing the shutter.
All of these are providing a live feed when we are just looking through the EVF doing nothing. Pius recently noticed that if he aimed his 1DXIII in LV ES at a ceiling fan and engaged AF (but didn't fire the shutter) that the image on the LCD slowed down so even there with AF engaged it is doing something different than the normal feed with no AF.
The benefit of the A9 is you keep that live feed as you AF and as you fire away and that is the best thing I've used to keep a moving bird in frame while panning and firing at the same time. DSLRs are second best and ones with minimal blackout like D5, 1D series are probably almost as easy to pan and shoot as an A9. Sometimes I still prefer shooting with an OVF but I've had the most success with erratic moving BIF with the A9....Show more →
arbitrage wrote:
I finally made it home to be able to download those three files...yeah those aren't great for frame filling head shots in a controlled setting. Those could be okay if they were crops of a bird shot at a distance but considering the conditions they are hardly worth the $800.
Yea, think will get a 2x for my 100 400 to use on my R5 rather than spend $ 800 or $900 on a 800.
Don
I'm getting the 100-500 and RF 1.4. Not quite 800 but fairly comfortable. That is what I'm interested in the R5 so I can crop more to make up for the other 100mm. I'll see what people say about the 2X but I think that will be pushing it too far.
