mkaplan wrote:
I ordered from a local dealer in KW area but he is not a top tier Sony dealer. He is getting them from a Toronto dealer but I do not know which one.
I ordered from a smaller dealer in Toronto. Hopefully he has enough units to meet my position on the pre-order list, I was third on the list.
mkaplan wrote:
I ordered from a local dealer in KW area but he is not a top tier Sony dealer. He is getting them from a Toronto dealer but I do not know which one.
I ordered from a smaller dealer in Toronto. Hopefully he has enough units to meet my position on the pre-order list, I was third on the list.
TopPixel wrote:
PetaPixel says the Alpha 1 has dramatically improved battery life over previous Alpha cameras for photos. For 8K video, PetaPixel says 15 minutes of filming dropped the battery down to 70% so a lot more power used there:
The 3rd and 4th generation cameras also well outperforms the spec sheet. So does the a9...
I’d regularly get 1k+ photos per battery on the a9, a9ii and A7riv. So, not sure how it’s an improvement, but I’d welcome it.
Thanks for posting that video. I have not seen too many people talk about the color science of the A1. I know I know that its such a subjective topic but I am happy to hear that they are improving the science. I shoot the A9 and don't have too many issues but I appreciate new and better tweaking to the Sony Color science sauce.
These are things I've noticed so far for wildlife photography point of view. Of course my perspective
Pros
1) No doubt about AF. The best so far may be including pro DSLR
2) Sensor has great DR close to A7R IV
3) AF works great even with 2X TC on 200-600. I'm not a 2X user. With 50MP sensor I don't even need 1.4X
4) BEAF works 60% of the time (percentage is my conservative guess)
5) Battery life is better than previous cameras. Will last 2.5 hours. This is typical one morning or evening session for wildlife
6) Amazing View Finder experience. same as OVF or better
7) PSST can be set to OFF. So camera never sleeps and won't miss a shot
8) Can wait to buy CFExpress card as there's enough buffer and you can change settings while images are being written.
Cons
1) Wake up time didn't improve from A9II. Need set PSST=Off
2) Noise level is not much better than A7RIV. I know some people won't agree with me
Comparing DPR samples I think it sit comfortably between A7RIII/D850/R5 and A7RIV.
Not a surprise as the resolution is same way. I think IQ maxed out for a given resolution few years ago
3) AF is not reliable for birds in VIDEO (Not a deal breaker for me)
Leonberger wrote:
Thanks for posting that video. I have not seen too many people talk about the color science of the A1. I know I know that its such a subjective topic but I am happy to hear that they are improving the science. I shoot the A9 and don't have too many issues but I appreciate new and better tweaking to the Sony Color science sauce.
I have A9 too. I had lots of images with magenta cast. This is very noticeable in skin tone. The bad thing about it's, it's very hard to fix. Hope A1 doesn't have this issue.
Bummed out by Ryan Menses review of the A1 for birds. It appears it is stellar on the stills side of things but is still lacking on the video side of things. (Ryans attempt to focus on Goldeneyes appeared to be a lesson in futility.) For those who shoot video of birds, here are the things that are a bummer:
1. No way to assign a button to enable tracking. Tracking can only be enabled by touching the back display/touchpad. This is a problem especially when using the viewfinder and have to reach down to tap the display. If you are wearing gloves or housed in a case for underwater filming, just forget about it.
2. No animal or bird eye detect. Only tracking if you can enable it.
3. Tracking appears to be unreliable.
I have the A7SIII and use it extensively for recording wildlife/birds. It works "ok" and have learned to work with its so-so tracking. I assume I'll have to do the same with the A1.
My complaint here is that if I am forking out $6,500 on a camera, I would expect it to perform just as well in video as with stills.
Has anyone here used an R5 for bird video? From what I can see, bird/eye detect seems to work quite well. Hmmm....
Jemini wrote:
I have A9 too. I had lots of images with magenta cast. This is very noticeable in skin tone. The bad thing about it's, it's very hard to fix. Hope A1 doesn't have this issue.
This has always been my issue with editing Sony files. No problems with my Leica or Canon files. Luis did a review of the Cobalt profiles (in a thread and a video) and it seems like a good work around. I'm hoping the skin tones look better on the a1. For the things I shoot I think this will be the ultimate camera.
Leonberger wrote:
Thanks for posting that video. I have not seen too many people talk about the color science of the A1. I know I know that its such a subjective topic but I am happy to hear that they are improving the science. I shoot the A9 and don't have too many issues but I appreciate new and better tweaking to the Sony Color science sauce.
I am always very suspicious about things like "color science" and "improving the science".
As you say, it is more subjective than science. Being a scientist, I have problems with calling it color science (don't understand me wrong, this is not against you at all).
I like the Sony colors and don't have issues with it but for sure there are people feeling different. But whatever Sony does, you can't please both groups.
DPreview image analysis - Almost no penalty in DR or IQ with ES vs. MS. Fantastic
A1:
- JPEGs retain very high levels of detail at both low and high ISOs
- Noise reduction strikes a slightly different balance compared to the a7R IV, opting to reduce more luminance noise at the slight cost of fine detail as light levels drop
- Colors are improved: richer yellows, less magenta-tainted blues, warmer greens
- Class-leading Raw dynamic range compared to professional action / sports cameras
- Almost class-leading dynamic range compared to high-resolution full-frame peers
- ISO invariant over two ranges: 100-400, 500-102,400
Holger wrote:
DPreview image analysis - Almost no penalty in DR or IQ with ES vs. MS. Fantastic
A1:
- JPEGs retain very high levels of detail at both low and high ISOs
- Noise reduction strikes a slightly different balance compared to the a7R IV, opting to reduce more luminance noise at the slight cost of fine detail as light levels drop
- Colors are improved: richer yellows, less magenta-tainted blues, warmer greens
- Class-leading Raw dynamic range compared to professional action / sports cameras
- Almost class-leading dynamic range compared to high-resolution full-frame peers
- ISO invariant over two ranges: 100-400, 500-102,400
"Despite being built to have absolutely insane readout speed, which often comes at a noise cost, the Sony a1 performs similarly well to the Canon EOS R5 at higher ISO values, and comes in a bit behind the Nikon Z7 II and a little ahead of Panasonic's Lumix DC-S1R."
I said earlier in the thread that it looks slightly worse than D850/D500. People didn't agree with me that broke my heart
Based on the thread about Cobalt profiles it would appear that much of the issue with 'Sony Color Science' that comes up here is in fact Adobe Lightroom. IMHO the Capture One files and skin tones look excellent without adjustment.
To the note on ISO invariance, that in effect means we should just shoot at ISO 500 and push in post? Or is it better to trust the gain push on the camera? Maybe a topic for me to do my own research on :-)
Holger wrote:
DPreview image analysis - Almost no penalty in DR or IQ with ES vs. MS. Fantastic
A1:
- JPEGs retain very high levels of detail at both low and high ISOs
- Noise reduction strikes a slightly different balance compared to the a7R IV, opting to reduce more luminance noise at the slight cost of fine detail as light levels drop
- Colors are improved: richer yellows, less magenta-tainted blues, warmer greens
- Class-leading Raw dynamic range compared to professional action / sports cameras
- Almost class-leading dynamic range compared to high-resolution full-frame peers
- ISO invariant over two ranges: 100-400, 500-102,400
"This means that in dim conditions, you can use the shutter speed and aperture settings of a high ISO exposure, but keep the camera set to ISO 500. By the time you brighten up the shot in post, the image won't be noticeably noisier than it would be if you had shot natively at a higher ISO, but you'll have saved many stops of highlight information."
buffalowolff wrote:
To the note on ISO invariance, that in effect means we should just shoot at ISO 500 and push in post? Or is it better to trust the gain push on the camera? Maybe a topic for me to do my own research on :-)
mattmackenzie4 wrote:
Based on the thread about Cobalt profiles it would appear that much of the issue with 'Sony Color Science' that comes up here is in fact Adobe Lightroom. IMHO the Capture One files and skin tones look excellent without adjustment.
Yes, I've been hearing that Capture One is better for Sony colors for years. I just find LR more intuitive. With the Cobalt profiles I can still use lightroom and get color like Capture One.
"Despite being built to have absolutely insane readout speed, which often comes at a noise cost, the Sony a1 performs similarly well to the Canon EOS R5 at higher ISO values, and comes in a bit behind the Nikon Z7 II and a little ahead of Panasonic's Lumix DC-S1R."
I said earlier in the thread that it looks slightly worse than D850/D500. People didn't agree with me that broke my heart
I still don't agree. The D850 looks worse than Z7ii on Dpreviews Studio Scene at higher iso (see link below). Then, if you compare A1 to D850 PDR, the A1 is measurably better than D850 and on par to the D500 (at high iso) in APSC mode:
buffalowolff wrote:
To the note on ISO invariance, that in effect means we should just shoot at ISO 500 and push in post? Or is it better to trust the gain push on the camera? Maybe a topic for me to do my own research on :-)
You can do that to protect highlights. But that is the case for almost every Sony sensor since introducing dual gain.
