Jordan uploaded his Calgary images from his test of the A1. Of note is a series of ISO tests from 1600 to 40000. You can download the RAW files and open in Sony software to get an idea of what they look like.
not sure if it's been mentioned already, but the official sony japan a1 page may have more detailed info than what we have seen so far??
"The heat dissipation effect of Sony's original internal structure is about 5 times that of the conventional model (α7R IV).
Graphite material with excellent thermal conductivity, which is also used for smartphones, is processed into Sony's original "Σ (sigma) shape" and incorporated into the camera shake correction unit. Due to this epoch-making structure, the heat generation from the image sensor, which is the main factor of the temperature rise inside the main body, is about (α7R IV) compared to the conventional one without hindering the smooth operation of the image sensor unit during camera shake correction. We have succeeded in obtaining a heat dissipation effect of 5 times (*).
* Sony internal measurement conditions. When the automatic power off temperature is [high]"
Lol. I watched it. My wife finally told me to shut up pointing out which camera view was likely the A1. I’m curious what lens they used since it seemed they had a very narrow depth of field. The target was very clear but other players and the fans were all out of focus. This is unlike what is normally used for pro sports.
buffalowolff wrote:
Anyone else watching the Superbowl wishing they would show the autofocus points?
Daran wrote:
Another german review with some BEAF action (on a 600GM). I was impressed by how it seemed to follow the jumping siskin(?) around the 5:11 mark
arbitrage wrote:
Intriguing....I find the 2-6/2xTC to be no better than cropping the 1.4TC image even on the lower pixel density A9. I rarely used that combo after the first few weeks testing it in controlled tests in the backyard.
On a 50MP sensor it will be even more rare that I would be tempted to go there. I will do 1200mm via the 600GM but even then with the 50MPs I probably won't do that much either. I find that once you are at 1200mm and then still trying to chase reach by utilizing heavy crops with high MP sensors that there is too much air in the way anyways 9 times out of 10 and results suck. If you can use a lot of the sensor at 1200mm then it is often okay.
I do wonder why with the A1 pushing the AF-C bar to f/22 over f/16 on the A9 that it is taking a step back with this particular combo??
I think the 100-400GM will become a much more useful lens on the A1 than it was for me on the A9. I may have to reacquire one if I sell my R5/100-500....Show more →
Also from the Japanese site:
"AF tracking during continuous shooting of F22 (*)
Until now, the upper limit of AF tracking during continuous shooting was the aperture value F16, but it is now compatible with tracking up to F22. Furthermore, by setting [Aperture drive during AF] to [Focus priority], it is possible to continue focusing even with a value larger than F22 (*). It can be used for shooting at a reduced shutter speed or for panning shots.
* If [Aperture Drive during AF] is set to [Focus Priority], the focus will follow the subject even if the setting is larger than F22. Compatible lenses are FE 12-24mm F2.8 GM, FE 135mm F1.8 GM, E 16-55mm F2.8 G, FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS, FE 20mm F1.8 G, FE 24mm F1.4 GM (* 2), FE 28-60mm F4-5.6, FE 35mm F1.8, FE 400mm F2.8 GM OSS, FE 600mm F4 GM OSS, E 70-350mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS (As of January 2021)
* For FE 135mm F1.8 GM, please update the main software to the latest version."
Two things here. The 200-600 is one of the lenses that can "continue focusing (AF-C?) at apertures smaller than f/22. So I wonder why the limitations with the 2x TC? Secondly, I didn't know Aperture Drive in AF set to Focus Priority could affect this. Does Focus Priority open up the aperture during AF and then close it down for the shot?
somersettr wrote:
The 200-600 is one of the lenses that can "continue focusing (AF-C?) at apertures smaller than f/22.
That is CDAF, though, so near useless for anything non-static.
So I wonder why the limitations with the 2x TC?
The TC2.0 has low-is IQ (aka low micro-contrast). Not exactly optimal for CDAF. So maybe the decided to drop it, maybe it really wouldn't work.
Secondly, I didn't know Aperture Drive in AF set to Focus Priority could affect this. Does Focus Priority open up the aperture during AF and then close it down for the shot?
Yes, but only for slow apertures and it does not fully open.
The article I read when they started using the a7R IV to do this initially said the 24-70 f/2.8 GM.
JayPhoto1 wrote:
Lol. I watched it. My wife finally told me to shut up pointing out which camera view was likely the A1. I’m curious what lens they used since it seemed they had a very narrow depth of field. The target was very clear but other players and the fans were all out of focus. This is unlike what is normally used for pro sports.
James Gan comments on his first experience with BEAF:
"In terms of the #sonybirdeyetracking, I would say I am impressed with this A1 hybrid system, the combination of the mirrorless A9/A9ii and A7riv. This my ultimate machine gun and the speed of "Porsche Taycan" of cameras!
The eye tracking works for #BIF of owls and small birds like waterhen and bee-eaters 15-25m and 6-15m away from the camera respectively. It also works for medium-sized birds such as the peregrine falcon 57m away. When I was taking the peregrine falcon, it was partially hidden behind the wall but once the AF was pressed, it started to track the left eye. Amazing! Just make sure you turn it on! (Perhaps someone who say it doesn't work forgot to turn it on.) In my opinion, this is definitely way ahead of the C (forgot how to spell)."
Jemini wrote:
I know it's not a great idea to judge the IQ based on jpgs. But honestly the noise on this shot at ISO 1250 is not that encouraging.
Yeah it looks pretty bad for 1250 with a 50% crop and in full sun. You can download a number of RAW files from the two different DPReview galleries to get a little better idea. They open in Sony's free View/Edit software.
arbitrage wrote:
Yeah it looks pretty bad for 1250 with a 50% crop and in full sun. You can download a number of RAW files from the two different DPReview galleries to get a little better idea. They open in Sony's free View/Edit software.
How do your R5 files look at the same ISO? As someone who shoots in low light, noise at higher ISO is something I'm relatively intolerant of. With my Q2 and SL2 I had to keep things under 3200. My SL2-S can go to 25k+ without issue - it just can't focus on moving subjects, so...
I still vacillate between the R5 and the a1 as an all-in-one solution. I'll be using the camera as an all arounder - event, portrait, fashion, wildlife, architecture, etc. I won't need the 8K capability although I will do some video. I do like the lens choices I have a bit more with Sony, though.
..I think we should not expect too much on ISO performance - if you compare images taken with the A7R4 (JPGs) - for me it is the same level, the A1 is not better. But we will see closer in a few weeks...
JayPhoto1 wrote:
Lol. I watched it. My wife finally told me to shut up pointing out which camera view was likely the A1. I’m curious what lens they used since it seemed they had a very narrow depth of field. The target was very clear but other players and the fans were all out of focus. This is unlike what is normally used for pro sports.
It appears that they were using the Sigma 28/1.4 for the shots based on Sigma's Facebook post sharing Redrock Micro's post about their gear being used
