ShootPDX wrote:
I guess because most people don’t really care that much. The origin of the whole debate is pointless and the fact he felt the need to even say anything kind of points out the absurdity of TP’s relentless criticisms.
If that’s your cup of tea, more power to you I guess!
So correcting what are clearly incorrect claims or at the very least is a complete misunderstanding is considered relentless criticism ?
However making incorrect claims or perpetuating misunderstandings (as long as they are perceived as positive claims about the Sony gear) is no problem and you don't feel any need to correct those incorrect claims or misunderstandings - 'because people don't really care that much'.
Now that seems completely at odds with your perception of "relentless criticisms" - which clearly implies care of some sort.
And you are right I am not TP - I know it is hard to believe there could be more than one - however I suspect most wanting objective facts have long since departed this forum to look elsewhere.
duncang wrote:
So correcting what are clearly incorrect claims or at the very least is a complete misunderstanding is considered relentless criticism ?
However making incorrect claims or perpetuating misunderstandings (as long as they are perceived as positive claims about the Sony gear) is no problem and you don't feel any need to correct those incorrect claims or misunderstandings - 'because people don't really care that much'.
Now that seems completely at odds with your perception of "relentless criticisms" - which clearly implies care of some sort.
And you are right I am not TP - I know it is hard to believe there could be more than one - however I suspect most wanting objective facts have long since departed this forum to look elsewhere.
Relentless criticism = TP’s routine critical posts (some of which were removed)
Relentless criticism = your posts here and on DPR (where you’ve been called out by just about everyone in the thread)
I like objective facts, but what’s the point in crying over every small detail? If you feel “most wanting subjective facts have long left this forum” why are you still here?
Relentless criticism = TP’s routine critical posts (some of which were removed)
Relentless criticism = your posts here and on DPR (where you’ve been called out by just about everyone in the thread)
I like objective facts, but what’s the point in crying over every small detail? If you feel “most wanting subjective facts have long left this forum” why are you still here?
Anywho, best of luck being unhappy.
FredMiranda Sony forum - the happy place for 'subjective facts' and Anywhos.
duncang wrote:
And you are right I am not TP - I know it is hard to believe there could be more than one - however I suspect most wanting objective facts have long since departed this forum to look elsewhere.
Do you also deny knowing TP prior to coming here to FM?
If you did know him previously did you join FM with the intent to support him?
ShootPDX wrote:
You're wrong. You’re making a sweeping assumption based on how you might use the camera.
I’m beginning to see why you don’t want to associate your real name with the nonsense you post here. I wouldn’t either. Then again, I don’t post drivel.
He doesn't know what he is talking about.
I am in flex spot 99% of my time without using RTT at weddings even in difficult light. Works great. RTT is not needed most of the time. Of course we could argue about his meaning of "useful", but people like him use vague expressions in order to change the goal posts later.
Same with his
"only do 26.6 fps with a tracking AF" - where now it is obviously clear that many have different opinions/definitions of what "a" tracking AF is. And it is not even clear that this is the maximum. It is a data point and many more will come to get us a clearer picture.
ketang wrote:
Bill Claff has posted the full Sony A1 dynamic range and read noise charts at Photons to Photos. I immediately took a look at the A1 vs. A7R3 as can be seen here:
I think most shooters will be satisfied, at base ISO there nearly a half stop advantage over the A9II and only 1/3 stop deficit vs. the A7R3. As the ISO rises to 640 and above the cameras all equal out.
Interestingly, Bill notes that the dual gain conversion happens at ISO 500 for the A1 vs. ISO 640 for the A7R3/A7III/A9II.
For read noise, there isn't a consistent trend, but generally the A7R3 is better at the lower ISOs and the A9II is better at the high end. However, I don't know about about read noise ratings to say if any of the differences will be significant or visible in most shots....Show more →
Great performance given the stacked sensor, when looking how things improved from A9, A9ii to A1 (even without NR at low iso ;-)).
ketang wrote:
Bill Claff has posted the full Sony A1 dynamic range and read noise charts at Photons to Photos. I immediately took a look at the A1 vs. A7R3 as can be seen here:
I think most shooters will be satisfied, at base ISO there nearly a half stop advantage over the A9II and only 1/3 stop deficit vs. the A7R3. As the ISO rises to 640 and above the cameras all equal out.
Interestingly, Bill notes that the dual gain conversion happens at ISO 500 for the A1 vs. ISO 640 for the A7R3/A7III/A9II.
For read noise, there isn't a consistent trend, but generally the A7R3 is better at the lower ISOs and the A9II is better at the high end. However, I don't know about about read noise ratings to say if any of the differences will be significant or visible in most shots....Show more →
I'm very pleased with that performance. Interestingly it also aligns with what my eye test sees on the dpreview sample shots at ISO 100 (using a beta RAW converter). The A7r III is ever so slightly better when pushes 5-6 stops, but we are really splitting hair. You need to know when good enough is good enough and the A1 is.
The dual gain conversion point is interesting, there is quite a difference between ISO 400 to ISO 500. Maybe a good idea to set min ISO to 500 when you need fast shutter speeds.
Bill just confirmed that these values was done with mechanical shutter and that he will try and get electronic shutter added later on. If you look at A9 II there should be no material difference, but we don't know for sure yet.
Holger wrote:
He doesn't know what he is talking about.
I am in flex spot 99% of my time without using RTT at weddings even in difficult light. Works great. RTT is not needed most of the time. Of course we could argue about his meaning of "useful", but people like him use vague expressions in order to change the goal posts later.
Same with his
"only do 26.6 fps with a tracking AF" - where now it is obviously clear that many have different opinions/definitions of what "a" tracking AF is. And it is not even clear that this is the maximum. It is a data point and many more will come to get us a clearer picture....Show more →
Should we all ignore the trolls? If nobody replies they will probably lose interest and leave us in peace 😉
First impressions
Feels very solid with a satisfying heft - a bit like a lump hammer I'm sure you could knock nails in with it
Just exploring menus now. Viewfinder has zoom out feature -not sure of use case for that yet
BEAF -amazing It can focus on a magpies eye (black eye in black head) from 20m and will focus on a blue tit eyes from about 18m -even when I can't see bird's eye myself
Colours are richer and of course more fine detail compared to A9
Very impressed so far and lots to learn to get the most out of it
UKBob wrote:
First impressions
Feels very solid with a satisfying heft - a bit like a lump hammer I'm sure you could knock nails in with it
Just exploring menus now. Viewfinder has zoom out feature -not sure of use case for that yet
BEAF -amazing It can focus on a magpies eye (black eye in black head) from 20m and will focus on a blue tit eyes from about 18m -even when I can't see bird's eye myself
Colours are richer and of course more fine detail compared to A9
Very impressed so far and lots to learn to get the most out of it ...Show more →
We don't believe you without pictures . Kidding
Congrats!
Pictures please. Birds with BEAF, Animals with AEAF.... High ISO RAW files from outdoor, daylight would be really appreciated.
Do you have comparison to A9 show colors (colours ).
UKBob wrote:
First impressions
Feels very solid with a satisfying heft - a bit like a lump hammer I'm sure you could knock nails in with it
Just exploring menus now. Viewfinder has zoom out feature -not sure of use case for that yet
BEAF -amazing It can focus on a magpies eye (black eye in black head) from 20m and will focus on a blue tit eyes from about 18m -even when I can't see bird's eye myself
Colours are richer and of course more fine detail compared to A9
Very impressed so far and lots to learn to get the most out of it ...Show more →
Could you tell us with what lenses have you tested it so far?
We are also desperate to know the keeper rate of a long burst on a moving subject! And how would you compare this with a9 on a similar scenario.
UKBob wrote:
First impressions
Feels very solid with a satisfying heft - a bit like a lump hammer I'm sure you could knock nails in with it
Just exploring menus now. Viewfinder has zoom out feature -not sure of use case for that yet
BEAF -amazing It can focus on a magpies eye (black eye in black head) from 20m and will focus on a blue tit eyes from about 18m -even when I can't see bird's eye myself
Colours are richer and of course more fine detail compared to A9
Very impressed so far and lots to learn to get the most out of it ...Show more →
Can't wait to hear more of your impressions. I do a little bit of everything (product & food photography, fashion, portrait, wildlife/BIF) and preordered right away. I'm still wondering if I would be better off with the GFX 100S for everything other than wildlife/BIF. The color science and overall look of the files will ultimately make that decision for me. I had the Leica SL2/SL2-S and loved the images but hated the autofocus. I know the Fuji will be better than the Leica but still nowhere near the a1 (or any other alpha).
UKBob wrote:
First impressions
Feels very solid with a satisfying heft - a bit like a lump hammer I'm sure you could knock nails in with it
Just exploring menus now. Viewfinder has zoom out feature -not sure of use case for that yet
BEAF -amazing It can focus on a magpies eye (black eye in black head) from 20m and will focus on a blue tit eyes from about 18m -even when I can't see bird's eye myself
Colours are richer and of course more fine detail compared to A9
Very impressed so far and lots to learn to get the most out of it ...Show more →
Zoom-Out is for eye glass wearers so they can see the whole screen while still wearing their glasses.
. Kidding