Nikon guy here who is really interested in what this Sony A1 can do. I am really losing faith that Nikon will catch up or even produce a quality mirrorless after how crappy the Z7ii is that I bought and returned. I watched almost all of the videos and I am honestly just shocked at the low quality photos and work from the bird shooters. Sorry, just here to vent about how the hell do people get sent cutting edge tech and make videos of tiny birds far away that you could shoot with a 15 year old camera. Not a single one of these videos showed anything close to what that camera has the potential to produce. I mean going to the local duck pond at noon and shooting tame birds completely off the sun angle is proof of what exactly? Same with distant birds that are tiny in the frame. Chickadees shot at steep angles with garbage composition prove what How does this show us anything? And how do these companies pick these people to send their gear to. I just do not get it. Sorry to vent but I am really looking to see what people produce and say when they get it in their hands. I mean you have a camera for a week and could not produce a single quality photo. Hard to believe.
aboutthelight wrote:
Nikon guy here who is really interested in what this Sony A1 can do. I am really losing faith that Nikon will catch up or even produce a quality mirrorless after how crappy the Z7ii is that I bought and returned. I watched almost all of the videos and I am honestly just shocked at the low quality photos and work from the bird shooters. Sorry, just here to vent about how the hell do people get sent cutting edge tech and make videos of tiny birds far away that you could shoot with a 15 year old camera. Not a single one of these videos showed anything close to what that camera has the potential to produce. I mean going to the local duck pond at noon and shooting tame birds completely off the sun angle is proof of what exactly? Same with distant birds that are tiny in the frame. Chickadees shot at steep angles with garbage composition prove what How does this show us anything? And how do these companies pick these people to send their gear to. I just do not get it. Sorry to vent but I am really looking to see what people produce and say when they get it in their hands. I mean you have a camera for a week and could not produce a single quality photo. Hard to believe....Show more →
I don't care about birds and wish Sony would have done something more useful like SunglassAF or HalloweenMaskAF
aboutthelight wrote:
Nikon guy here who is really interested in what this Sony A1 can do. I am really losing faith that Nikon will catch up or even produce a quality mirrorless after how crappy the Z7ii is that I bought and returned. I watched almost all of the videos and I am honestly just shocked at the low quality photos and work from the bird shooters. Sorry, just here to vent about how the hell do people get sent cutting edge tech and make videos of tiny birds far away that you could shoot with a 15 year old camera. Not a single one of these videos showed anything close to what that camera has the potential to produce. I mean going to the local duck pond at noon and shooting tame birds completely off the sun angle is proof of what exactly? Same with distant birds that are tiny in the frame. Chickadees shot at steep angles with garbage composition prove what How does this show us anything? And how do these companies pick these people to send their gear to. I just do not get it. Sorry to vent but I am really looking to see what people produce and say when they get it in their hands. I mean you have a camera for a week and could not produce a single quality photo. Hard to believe....Show more →
I guess the wilds of NY City are pretty unforgiving.
mogul wrote:
I guess the wilds of NY City are pretty unforgiving.
We have some fantastic places in and around New York CIty to produce really high quality photos. Reality is that you can produce killer photos almost anywhere. Ever see the photos that people like Alan Murphy produce at their set ups? And then what a zoomed out shot of the set up looked like? But I would think if you got your hands on an A1 and wanted to show what it was capable of you would not show a photo of a distant shrike, or nuthatch through a tree or whatever other crappy shots I have seen. They are nothing more than run of the mill average grab shots at best that any DSLR made in the last 10 years could easily capture.
aboutthelight wrote:
Nikon guy here who is really interested in what this Sony A1 can do. I am really losing faith that Nikon will catch up or even produce a quality mirrorless after how crappy the Z7ii is that I bought and returned. I watched almost all of the videos and I am honestly just shocked at the low quality photos and work from the bird shooters. Sorry, just here to vent about how the hell do people get sent cutting edge tech and make videos of tiny birds far away that you could shoot with a 15 year old camera. Not a single one of these videos showed anything close to what that camera has the potential to produce. I mean going to the local duck pond at noon and shooting tame birds completely off the sun angle is proof of what exactly? Same with distant birds that are tiny in the frame. Chickadees shot at steep angles with garbage composition prove what How does this show us anything? And how do these companies pick these people to send their gear to. I just do not get it. Sorry to vent but I am really looking to see what people produce and say when they get it in their hands. I mean you have a camera for a week and could not produce a single quality photo. Hard to believe....Show more →
..most of that is true ;-)
I`m hobbyist and have the A9II and the R4 - that is more that I can ever justify with the quality of my photos. But I have ordered the camera - waiting impatiently.
So Mark Galer has shown that the camera can do..
By the way I`m not a birder, but thought the same as you as I saw the bird video (the link I have posted)..
Holger wrote:
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:
I'm not sure what dpr is doing. I will use the tool to get the best for the camera. I downloaded RAW files from DPR. A1 file was converted in Edit with Neutral picture style, NR set to off. I also made sure all settings are off. Nikon file was converted in capture NX. Again neutral pic style and NR turned off. Resized A1 crop to match 850. This is what I'm getting. When ACR support Sony file I will get a better comparison. I'm not saying I'm doing everything right. I will be happy to be wrong and get better result from A1.
..in general I must say, that since the A7 III and the A7R III - there is no really improvement in dynamic range and ISO performance...
I was also disappointed of the ISO performance of the A7S III... (RAW )
Exactly my point. As of now, for a given MP we know how good/bad the noise is going to be. 50mp will be worse than 42 and 45mp. 60mp will be even worse.
abase21 wrote:
..in general I must say, that since the A7 III and the A7R III - there is no really improvement in dynamic range and ISO performance...
I was also disappointed of the ISO performance of the A7S III... (RAW )
abase21 wrote:
..in general I must say, that since the A7 III and the A7R III - there is no really improvement in dynamic range and ISO performance...
I was also disappointed of the ISO performance of the A7S III... (RAW )
How should that happen?
If you are photon shot noise limited, there is not so much you can do. There won't be big jumps in QE.
Read noise is already very low and no huge gains are to be expected using this kind of technology. Maybe organic sensors will lead to minor improvements, who knows.
Possibly computational photography will likely be a way out. With even faster readout multiple exposures can be generated in the background automatically to stack images and increase S/N ratio, different parts of the sensor read out differently, etc.
Here, however, we have a clear improvement in DR and ISO performance, as Sony managed to clearly improve stacked sensor technology.
It is amazing to now have a sensor which allows super fast readout, 30 fps, flicker reduction and flash in E-shutter, silent shooting etc. and you have hardly any penalty when using the E-shutter vs. the mechanical shutter. Isn't that enough for you?
Jemini wrote:
Exactly my point. As of now, for a given MP we know how good/bad the noise is going to be. 50mp will be worse than 42 and 45mp. 60mp will be even worse.
Worse in what way? At pixel level (hardly surprising)? Normalized? What about different sensor technologies? 50mp stacked vs. 42 BSI or else?
Holger wrote:
It is amazing to now have a sensor which allows super fast readout, 30 fps, flicker reduction and flash in E-shutter, silent shooting etc. and you have hardly any penalty when using the E-shutter vs. the mechanical shutter. Isn't that enough for you?
I wager smartphone type HDR stacking live in camera would be much more useful day to day to give a much bigger improvement in dynamic range. Even if it would only work for slower shutter speeds.
aboutthelight wrote:
Nikon guy here who is really interested in what this Sony A1 can do. I am really losing faith that Nikon will catch up or even produce a quality mirrorless after how crappy the Z7ii is that I bought and returned. I watched almost all of the videos and I am honestly just shocked at the low quality photos and work from the bird shooters. Sorry, just here to vent about how the hell do people get sent cutting edge tech and make videos of tiny birds far away that you could shoot with a 15 year old camera. Not a single one of these videos showed anything close to what that camera has the potential to produce. I mean going to the local duck pond at noon and shooting tame birds completely off the sun angle is proof of what exactly? Same with distant birds that are tiny in the frame. Chickadees shot at steep angles with garbage composition prove what How does this show us anything? And how do these companies pick these people to send their gear to. I just do not get it. Sorry to vent but I am really looking to see what people produce and say when they get it in their hands. I mean you have a camera for a week and could not produce a single quality photo. Hard to believe....Show more →
Hmm...I am quite passable as a BIF shooter and I agree that most of the birding videos I've seen so far doesn't seem to reflect the expected capability of the A1. I am waiting for the master posters here in SONY forum to really dissect that A1 to its fullest birding capability. I can't afford it now but it doesn't mean I won't enjoy good birding results from it.
Venting is ok based from what you have stated but to justify that, I assumed you have taken much better results from your current and past gears. To gain some insight or learn something from what you were saying, I am interested to view some of your sample works if possible.
Jemini wrote:
I'm not sure what dpr is doing. I will use the tool to get the best for the camera. I downloaded RAW files from DPR. A1 file was converted in Edit with Neutral picture style, NR set to off. I also made sure all settings are off. Nikon file was converted in capture NX. Again neutral pic style and NR turned off. Resized A1 crop to match 850. This is what I'm getting. When ACR support Sony file I will get a better comparison. I'm not saying I'm doing everything right. I will be happy to be wrong and get better result from A1.
Disagree. Define better.
You clearly see a difference in acuity and detail in the A1 file compared to the D850 files, which looks softer, less contrasty. So you have additional leeway to process the A1 files (in case the raw converter supports the raw format appropriately), by add. NR.
Bill Claff measurments are objective and show a small but measurable advantage of the A1 (surprisingly given the stacked sensor architecture), too.
Additionally, looking at the measurements, I don't see the big difference to the A7siii or A7sii either in PDR https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony%20ILCE-1,Sony%20ILCE-7SM2,Sony%20ILCE-7SM3
The A7siiii will probably be better at super high isos, nobody will use in realty anyway (but then again, downsizing and accounting for the AA filter you can get both very close).
rdcny wrote:
Yes I shoot the A9 at 640 and the A74 at 320 all the time - no matter the lighting...and do my own adjustments in post.
So it seems reasonable that the new A1 has an optimum ISO for high ISO shooting...500 = no need to shoot at 64000 or some crazy ISO and let the camera do processing for you. You will do better (the image will look better) by shooting an the native (optimum) high ISO and doing the post processing yourself (and not in-camera by Sony)
Unfortunately that workflow won't cut it for sports shooters on the clock where exposure is important at capture time. Many shoot jpg for a reason. Others might use raw but don't do much except for maybe automated presets and then convert to jpg.
You need to use the same raw converter on both images for a valid comparison.
Jemini wrote:
I'm not sure what dpr is doing. I will use the tool to get the best for the camera. I downloaded RAW files from DPR. A1 file was converted in Edit with Neutral picture style, NR set to off. I also made sure all settings are off. Nikon file was converted in capture NX. Again neutral pic style and NR turned off. Resized A1 crop to match 850. This is what I'm getting. When ACR support Sony file I will get a better comparison. I'm not saying I'm doing everything right. I will be happy to be wrong and get better result from A1.
aboutthelight wrote:
We have some fantastic places in and around New York CIty to produce really high quality photos. Reality is that you can produce killer photos almost anywhere. Ever see the photos that people like Alan Murphy produce at their set ups? And then what a zoomed out shot of the set up looked like? But I would think if you got your hands on an A1 and wanted to show what it was capable of you would not show a photo of a distant shrike, or nuthatch through a tree or whatever other crappy shots I have seen. They are nothing more than run of the mill average grab shots at best that any DSLR made in the last 10 years could easily capture. ...Show more →
You have to realize that all the other reviewers aren't dedicated bird photographers and are just shooting some birds because they know it is one of the new features and they know this camera is a bird photographer's dream.
Thank you Geoff. Appreciate the link. Yes at least those are nice shots. Of course the owls looks baited which means it is a big slow owl right in front of you but at least the photos are beautiful and it shows that care and thought went into the shots. Very unlike what the others post. Geoff I very much look forward to your review when you get the camera.
How does this show us anything? And how do these companies pick these people to send their gear to. I just do not get it. Sorry to vent but I am really looking to see what people produce and say when they get it in their hands. I mean you have a camera for a week and could not produce a single quality photo. Hard to believe.
