AJay wrote:
One tid-bit I just learned about the A1... The embedded jpg in raw files is now full-size! This is great for those like myself who use Photo Mechanic to quickly go through raw files to determine critical sharpness.
Can you tell me where you read that because I have A1 RAWs and they are not full size jpegs inside.
RobAmy wrote:
Being in a similar situation with the R5 I have put it in crop mode and it seemed to find the eye better then go back out to full frame and it stayed with the eye better. I would assume the A1 will do the same. Looking at a few of the videos I think the A1 and with using the R5 they are not perfect but they are fun to use. Congrats Sony users.
Yes I've also found that with the R5. Going into crop mode sort of gets it to "see" the eye but once it has "seen" it you can back out and it will hold onto it where as it may not have found it in FF if the subject was too small or a little confusion.
My guess is the A1 will act similarly. On the A9II when it does work on birds it is usually only if the bird fills almost all of the frame so I think the A1 will work better with a magnified view.
AJay wrote:
It appears at least a few here have the R5 but are considering the A1. I'm curious as to why one would want to have both systems or possibly switch to using the A1. What is it about the R5 that leaves you craving for something else? No camera is perfect but it would seem the R5 checks most of the boxes.
I can only tell you my reasoning. I bought the R5 in order to try it out. I was intrigued with the BEAF and with getting high MPs at fast FPS with great AF.
But, my main lens investment is now in Sony with the 600 f/4. And I prefer the 200-600 to the 100-500 and in some ways I prefer the 200-600 to the 400DOII.
However, if my lens investment was still in Canon I would be sticking with the R5 even though there are a number of features the A1 has that I prefer over the R5.
But because I have the better lens investment in Sony and now the A1 basically does all the things that I bought the R5 to do AND because there are things it does better IMO (things like true live feed EVF, variable FPS in ES, absolutely no rolling shutter issues in ES, Eye-AF activated out of any AF mode etc) then it has basically made the R5 redundant for me and that is why I'm fairly certain I'll sell off the the R5/100-500 and repurchase a Sony 100-400GM to do my occasional semi-macro stuff.
arbitrage wrote:
I can only tell you my reasoning. I bought the R5 in order to try it out. I was intrigued with the BEAF and with getting high MPs at fast FPS with great AF.
But, my main lens investment is now in Sony with the 600 f/4. And I prefer the 200-600 to the 100-500 and in some ways I prefer the 200-600 to the 400DOII.
However, if my lens investment was still in Canon I would be sticking with the R5 even though there are a number of features the A1 has that I prefer over the R5.
But because I have the better lens investment in Sony and now the A1 basically does all the things that I bought the R5 to do AND because there are things it does better IMO (things like true live feed EVF, variable FPS in ES, absolutely no rolling shutter issues in ES, Eye-AF activated out of any AF mode etc) then it has basically made the R5 redundant for me and that is why I'm fairly certain I'll sell off the the R5/100-500 and repurchase a Sony 100-400GM to do my occasional semi-macro stuff....Show more →
Thanks for your insight. I'm mostly with Sony at this point and primarily use the A9 with the 200-600 lens but I still have a Canon 600mm f/4 II lens that's been collecting dust. I have an A1 on order but keep thinking about my Canon 600mm gathering dust as it would seem it would work quite well with the R5. I love the Sony 200-600 lens and don't really miss the 600 prime but occasionally it would be nice to have. I'm curious also as to how the Canon 600 will work with the MC-11 on the A1. It works acceptably well with the A9 although the initial focus is a bit slow.
arbitrage wrote:
I'm about 99.9% sure it does although the online help guide does not spell it out exactly. It says you can zoom with touch feature but doesn't specifically say pinch to zoom. I did see pinch to zoom referenced in regards to the A7SIII so that should be the same on the A1.
AJay wrote:
One tid-bit I just learned about the A1... The embedded jpg in raw files is now full-size! This is great for those like myself who use Photo Mechanic to quickly go through raw files to determine critical sharpness.
for real!!!! this was my biggest complaint when coming over from nikon. I was like whyyyyy!!!!! i thought something was wrong with my card when i hit 1:1 in Photomechanic the image got smaller!!! It wasnt until i spoke to a sony rep that i found out the sony's embedded an ittybitty jpg preview in their raws. i almost switched back, but they mentioned the a1 will have this "feature".
turbodude wrote:
for real!!!! this was my biggest complaint when coming over from nikon. I was like whyyyyy!!!!! i thought something was wrong with my card when i hit 1:1 in Photomechanic the image got smaller!!! It wasnt until i spoke to a sony rep that i found out the sony's embedded an ittybitty jpg preview in their raws. i almost switched back, but they mentioned the a1 will have this "feature".
I've been hammering the Sony reps about that ever since I switched.
I just took a look at some of the A1's raw images and they do in fact have full-sized jpgs embedded in the raw file. What I can't confirm however is if the lossless compressed raw and compressed raw have full-sized jpg's or not. Maybe they reduce the file sizes with those by reducing the resolution of the embedded jpg's? Does someone have samples of compressed lossless and compressed raws to check on this?
AJay wrote:
It appears at least a few here have the R5 but are considering the A1. I'm curious as to why one would want to have both systems or possibly switch to using the A1. What is it about the R5 that leaves you craving for something else? No camera is perfect but it would seem the R5 checks most of the boxes.
For me R5 was the first ever Canon camera and having owned pretty much all Sony cameras before I am just curious to try it out even though I can neither justify the cost or need the features that it brings. R5 is already is an overkill for my usage but it still feels foreign to me.
AJay wrote:
I just took a look at some of the A1's raw images and they do in fact have full-sized jpgs embedded in the raw file. What I can't confirm however is if the lossless compressed raw and compressed raw have full-sized jpg's or not. Maybe they reduce the file sizes with those by reducing the resolution of the embedded jpg's? Does someone have samples of compressed lossless and compressed raws to check on this?
Can you please point me to an A1 raw image with full-size jpg embedded. All the ones I have examined appear to have 1616x1000px jpg embedded.
Hillrg` wrote:
Can you please point me to an A1 raw image with full-size jpg embedded. All the ones I have examined appear to have 1616x1000px jpg embedded.
Thanks.
You need to look at "JpgFromRaw" atttribute in EXIF:
Jpg From Raw : (Binary data 4911471 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Preview Image : (Binary data 416378 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Thumbnail Image : (Binary data 12286 bytes, use -b option to extract)
j4nu wrote:
You need to look at "JpgFromRaw" atttribute in EXIF:
4.9 megabytes of a Sony A1 RAW file is wasted space for the new embedded full size JPEG while the old preview JPEG is still in the same ARW? What a colossal waste of space, especially knowing that Canon RAW files are already much smaller than Sony RAW files with the same kind of compression or no compression. Hope there is an option to disable the full size embedded JPEGs inside a Sony ARW but I doubt it since it's not mentioned in the manual.
For everyone using Photo Mechanic, etc.. to cull the photos, of course you won't see the full size JPEG yet because virtually no software have been updated with full support for the A1 ARW format.
TopPixel wrote:
4.9 megabytes of a Sony A1 RAW file is wasted space for the new embedded full size JPEG while the old preview JPEG is still in the same ARW? What a colossal waste of space, especially knowing that Canon RAW files are already much smaller than Sony RAW files with the same kind of compression or no compression. ...
Why don't you simply complain about something before you even know whether it's true? Oh, wait...
Same here. I’ve been pursuing the ideal hybrid camera for sometime. I’ve tried the X-T4, R5, and have the A7S3. All are great but each with some shortfall that the A1 appears to fix (on paper so far). My R5 has the updated firmware but I still get this anxious feeling when switching between stills and 4K HQ that my video allowance will run out due to overheating. The R5 comes close and I don’t NEED the A1 but like the idea of having just one system that checks all the boxes. ajamils wrote:
For me R5 was the first ever Canon camera and having owned pretty much all Sony cameras before I am just curious to try it out even though I can neither justify the cost or need the features that it brings. R5 is already is an overkill for my usage but it still feels foreign to me.
Thanks to everyone for digging deeper into the embedded jpeg stuff. Glad to here that there is a big one in there. Hopefully it will be in the compressed RAW files also.
I can finally stop shooting RAW+Jpeg which I've been doing just to be able to cull off the side jpeg for programs that use embedded or side jpegs to cull fast.
FWIW, the LR Prerelease that I have is not showing the larger Jpeg file when in Embedded preview mode. It is showing that smaller one that Rory was digging out with his Winnow program.
i thought something was wrong with my card when i hit 1:1 in Photomechanic the image got smaller!!! It wasnt until i spoke to a sony rep that i found out the sony's embedded an ittybitty jpg preview in their raws. i almost switched back, but they mentioned the a1 will have this "feature". 