This topic is in the 2021 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2021A1 Reviews/Video thread
p.10 #1A1 Reviews/Video thread
The only thing in my head that makes sense is that there are more focus points than don't chooses to use in FF mode but I don't understand why they would do that. Unless like you said it continues to track outside the cropped image but then that won't provide any real advantage for eye af other than having to calculate the eye from less image pixels.
Daran wrote:
https://youtu.be/gej2TB7ND-U
Super happy about that but..... I'll probably use crop a whole lot less now that we can get high shutter speeds in FF. For me at least cropping was a way to work around the terrible buffering on the RIV.
I still like the magnified view that APS-C mode brings and very likely the Bird Eye-AF will activate easier/more often when in APS-C mode like it does on the R5. I even noted that in Alex's video that as he cropped in the eye-af grabbed his figure's eye where it didn't in FF. Also since I'm planning to just run V90 SD at first, the APS-C option will make that easier. Of course for my very first A1 test on the swallows in flight it will be FF all the way for the extra FOV.I also think I read (but could be mistaken) that unlike the past Sony bodies when you are in APS-C mode and using Wide or Zone that the dancing AF points stay close together instead of having the extra spacing between them? I think there are just as many AF points working in APS-C vs FF which would mean that for a given subject at a given distance with a given lens that there would be more AF data going in for a given area that the subject takes up on the sensor. So maybe it is processing the same amount of data but now a higher % of that data is coming from your subject??
Not sure if that is correct or not??Sounds plausible, at least I can see how that might work. What I have a harder time wrapping my head around is why that would break simply because a lens isn't a true FF lens that happens to be cropped vs an APSC lens that must be cropped. My current hypotheses is that this uses light from the outer edge of the image circle, which would be completely dark for an APSC lens. Nah, doesn't work either.
Daran wrote:
arbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
That's a good point regarding eye af. I assume that's a function of having to proceed less dataarbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
Your link didn't work for me but here:https://youtu.be/gej2TB7ND-U
Super happy about that but..... I'll probably use crop a whole lot less now that we can get high shutter speeds in FF. For me at least cropping was a way to work around the terrible buffering on the RIV.
Holger wrote
Video from Alex Phan about switching from FF to APSC mode while buffer is clearing.Not sure if that is correct or not??
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:14 AM
p.10 #2A1 Reviews/Video thread
Daran wrote:
https://youtu.be/gej2TB7ND-U
Super happy about that but..... I'll probably use crop a whole lot less now that we can get high shutter speeds in FF. For me at least cropping was a way to work around the terrible buffering on the RIV.
I still like the magnified view that APS-C mode brings and very likely the Bird Eye-AF will activate easier/more often when in APS-C mode like it does on the R5. I even noted that in Alex's video that as he cropped in the eye-af grabbed his figure's eye where it didn't in FF. Also since I'm planning to just run V90 SD at first, the APS-C option will make that easier. Of course for my very first A1 test on the swallows in flight it will be FF all the way for the extra FOV.I also think I read (but could be mistaken) that unlike the past Sony bodies when you are in APS-C mode and using Wide or Zone that the dancing AF points stay close together instead of having the extra spacing between them? I think there are just as many AF points working in APS-C vs FF which would mean that for a given subject at a given distance with a given lens that there would be more AF data going in for a given area that the subject takes up on the sensor. So maybe it is processing the same amount of data but now a higher % of that data is coming from your subject??
Not sure if that is correct or not??Sounds plausible, at least I can see how that might work. What I have a harder time wrapping my head around is why that would break simply because a lens isn't a true FF lens that happens to be cropped vs an APSC lens that must be cropped. My current hypotheses is that this uses light from the outer edge of the image circle, which would be completely dark for an APSC lens. Nah, doesn't work either.
Yeah I don't understand why it isn't the same for an APS-C lens.
arbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
That's a good point regarding eye af. I assume that's a function of having to proceed less dataarbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
Your link didn't work for me but here:https://youtu.be/gej2TB7ND-U
Super happy about that but..... I'll probably use crop a whole lot less now that we can get high shutter speeds in FF. For me at least cropping was a way to work around the terrible buffering on the RIV.
Holger wrote
Video from Alex Phan about switching from FF to APSC mode while buffer is clearing.Not sure if that is correct or not??
Yeah I don't understand why it isn't the same for an APS-C lens.
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:15 AM
p.10 #3A1 Reviews/Video thread
buffalowolff wrote:
The only thing in my head that makes sense is that there are more focus points than don't chooses to use in FF mode but I don't understand why they would do that. Unless like you said it continues to track outside the cropped image but then that won't provide any real advantage for eye af other than having to calculate the eye from less image pixels.
https://youtu.be/gej2TB7ND-U
Super happy about that but..... I'll probably use crop a whole lot less now that we can get high shutter speeds in FF. For me at least cropping was a way to work around the terrible buffering on the RIV.I still like the magnified view that APS-C mode brings and very likely the Bird Eye-AF will activate easier/more often when in APS-C mode like it does on the R5. I even noted that in Alex's video that as he cropped in the eye-af grabbed his figure's eye where it didn't in FF. Also since I'm planning to just run V90 SD at first, the APS-C option will make that easier. Of course for my very first A1 test on the swallows in flight it will be FF all the way for the extra FOV.I also think I read (but could be mistaken) that unlike the past Sony bodies when you are in APS-C mode and using Wide or Zone that the dancing AF points stay close together instead of having the extra spacing between them? I think there are just as many AF points working in APS-C vs FF which would mean that for a given subject at a given distance with a given lens that there would be more AF data going in for a given area that the subject takes up on the sensor. So maybe it is processing the same amount of data but now a higher % of that data is coming from your subject??
Not sure if that is correct or not??Sounds plausible, at least I can see how that might work. What I have a harder time wrapping my head around is why that would break simply because a lens isn't a true FF lens that happens to be cropped vs an APSC lens that must be cropped. My current hypotheses is that this uses light from the outer edge of the image circle, which would be completely dark for an APSC lens. Nah, doesn't work either.
That is a thought I had...is it just meaning that it is still doing AF calculations over the entire FF sensor even though it is just showing you the APS-C view in the EVF? I don't get what the advantage of that would be....seems it would just waste processing power. Maybe it could be beneficial if you are rapidly panning with a bird in APS-C mode and you loose the bird off the frame edge, but then you correct yourself (ie catch up on your panning) and the camera was still tracking the bird over the FF sensor and therefore you are back on it faster?? I don't think that is what they are doing but who knows??
The only thing in my head that makes sense is that there are more focus points than don't chooses to use in FF mode but I don't understand why they would do that. Unless like you said it continues to track outside the cropped image but then that won't provide any real advantage for eye af other than having to calculate the eye from less image pixels.
Daran wrote
arbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
That's a good point regarding eye af. I assume that's a function of having to proceed less dataarbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
Your link didn't work for me but here:https://youtu.be/gej2TB7ND-U
Super happy about that but..... I'll probably use crop a whole lot less now that we can get high shutter speeds in FF. For me at least cropping was a way to work around the terrible buffering on the RIV.
Not sure if that is correct or not??
That is a thought I had...is it just meaning that it is still doing AF calculations over the entire FF sensor even though it is just showing you the APS-C view in the EVF? I don't get what the advantage of that would be....seems it would just waste processing power. Maybe it could be beneficial if you are rapidly panning with a bird in APS-C mode and you loose the bird off the frame edge, but then you correct yourself (ie catch up on your panning) and the camera was still tracking the bird over the FF sensor and therefore you are back on it faster?? I don't think that is what they are doing but who knows??
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:18 AM
p.10 #4A1 Reviews/Video thread
Daran wrote:
https://youtu.be/gej2TB7ND-U
Super happy about that but..... I'll probably use crop a whole lot less now that we can get high shutter speeds in FF. For me at least cropping was a way to work around the terrible buffering on the RIV.
I still like the magnified view that APS-C mode brings and very likely the Bird Eye-AF will activate easier/more often when in APS-C mode like it does on the R5. I even noted that in Alex's video that as he cropped in the eye-af grabbed his figure's eye where it didn't in FF. Also since I'm planning to just run V90 SD at first, the APS-C option will make that easier. Of course for my very first A1 test on the swallows in flight it will be FF all the way for the extra FOV.I also think I read (but could be mistaken) that unlike the past Sony bodies when you are in APS-C mode and using Wide or Zone that the dancing AF points stay close together instead of having the extra spacing between them? I think there are just as many AF points working in APS-C vs FF which would mean that for a given subject at a given distance with a given lens that there would be more AF data going in for a given area that the subject takes up on the sensor. So maybe it is processing the same amount of data but now a higher % of that data is coming from your subject??
Not sure if that is correct or not??Sounds plausible, at least I can see how that might work. What I have a harder time wrapping my head around is why that would break simply because a lens isn't a true FF lens that happens to be cropped vs an APSC lens that must be cropped. My current hypotheses is that this uses light from the outer edge of the image circle, which would be completely dark for an APSC lens. Nah, doesn't work either.
I knew I'd seen someone talk/show that the focus points stay close together in APS-C mode....here it is at the 1:30 mark. If my auto English subs are correct in what he is saying. I'm sure you can confirm!
So it seems that it is just using more PDAF points for a given area of sensor when in APS-C mode and using an FE lens (still no idea why not with a crop lens?).
Edited on Feb 06, 2021 at 09:27 AM · View previous versions
arbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
That's a good point regarding eye af. I assume that's a function of having to proceed less dataarbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
Your link didn't work for me but here:https://youtu.be/gej2TB7ND-U
Super happy about that but..... I'll probably use crop a whole lot less now that we can get high shutter speeds in FF. For me at least cropping was a way to work around the terrible buffering on the RIV.
Holger wrote
Video from Alex Phan about switching from FF to APSC mode while buffer is clearing.Not sure if that is correct or not??
I knew I'd seen someone talk/show that the focus points stay close together in APS-C mode....here it is at the 1:30 mark. If my auto English subs are correct in what he is saying. I'm sure you can confirm!
So it seems that it is just using more PDAF points for a given area of sensor when in APS-C mode and using an FE lens (still no idea why not with a crop lens?).
Edited on Feb 06, 2021 at 09:27 AM · View previous versions
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:24 AM
p.10 #6A1 Reviews/Video thread
Back to our German friends, I borrowed some frames (BTW, auto-translate to English now shows up for me on that video so I'm re-watching it)
They switch from FF to APS-C on that cool little robin, notice the focus square enlarges in APS-C mode which leads me to believe there is no super secret hidden AF density. So either the AF goes farther than you can see, or the specs are a typo.
arbitrage wrote:
I also think I read (but could be mistaken) that unlike the past Sony bodies when you are in APS-C mode and using Wide or Zone that the dancing AF points stay close together instead of having the extra spacing between them? I think there are just as many AF points working in APS-C vs FF which would mean that for a given subject at a given distance with a given lens that there would be more AF data going in for a given area that the subject takes up on the sensor. So maybe it is processing the same amount of data but now a higher % of that data is coming from your subject??
Not sure if that is correct or not??Sounds plausible, at least I can see how that might work. What I have a harder time wrapping my head around is why that would break simply because a lens isn't a true FF lens that happens to be cropped vs an APSC lens that must be cropped. My current hypotheses is that this uses light from the outer edge of the image circle, which would be completely dark for an APSC lens. Nah, doesn't work either.That is a thought I had...is it just meaning that it is still doing AF calculations over the entire FF sensor even though it is just showing you the APS-C view in the EVF? I don't get what the advantage of that would be....seems it would just waste processing power. Maybe it could be beneficial if you are rapidly panning with a bird in APS-C mode and you loose the bird off the frame edge, but then you correct yourself (ie catch up on your panning) and the camera was still tracking the bird over the FF sensor and therefore...Show more →
They switch from FF to APS-C on that cool little robin, notice the focus square enlarges in APS-C mode which leads me to believe there is no super secret hidden AF density. So either the AF goes farther than you can see, or the specs are a typo.
arbitrage wrote:
buffalowolff wrote
The only thing in my head that makes sense is that there are more focus points than don't chooses to use in FF mode but I don't understand why they would do that. Unless like you said it continues to track outside the cropped image but then that won't provide any real advantage for eye af other than having to calculate the eye from less image pixels.Daran wrote
arbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
That's a good point regarding eye af. I assume that's a function of having to proceed less dataarbitrage wrote
I still like the magnified view that APS-C mode brings and very likely the Bird Eye-AF will activate easier/more often when in APS-C mode like it does on the R5. I even noted that in Alex's video that as he cropped in the eye-af grabbed his figure's eye where it didn't in FF. Also since I'm planning to just run V90 SD at first, the APS-C option will make that easier. Of course for my very first A1 test on the swallows in flight it will be FF all the way for the extra FOV.Not sure if that is correct or not??
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:29 AM
p.10 #7A1 Reviews/Video thread
The simplest explanation is the preferred explanation.
The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.
The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:29 AM
p.10 #8A1 Reviews/Video thread
nobody23 wrote:
Added.... Key takeaway "the DR is better than the a9 and a9II
Added.... Key takeaway "the DR is better than the a9 and a9II
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:35 AM
p.10 #9A1 Reviews/Video thread
buffalowolff wrote:
Back to our German friends, I borrowed some frames (BTW, auto-translate to English now shows up for me on that video so I'm re-watching it)
They switch from FF to APS-C on that cool little robin, notice the focus square enlarges in APS-C mode which leads me to believe there is no super secret hidden AF density. So either the AF goes farther than you can see, or the specs are a typo.
I also think I read (but could be mistaken) that unlike the past Sony bodies when you are in APS-C mode and using Wide or Zone that the dancing AF points stay close together instead of having the extra spacing between them? I think there are just as many AF points working in APS-C vs FF which would mean that for a given subject at a given distance with a given lens that there would be more AF data going in for a given area that the subject takes up on the sensor. So maybe it is processing the same amount of data but now a higher % of that data is coming from your subject??
Not sure if that is correct or not??Sounds plausible, at least I can see how that might work. What I have a harder time wrapping my head around is why that would break simply because a lens isn't a true FF lens that happens to be cropped vs an APSC lens that must be cropped. My current hypotheses is that this uses light from the outer edge of the image circle, which would be completely dark for an APSC lens. Nah, doesn't work either.That is a thought I had...is it just meaning that it is still doing AF calculations over the entire FF sensor even though it is just showing you the APS-C view in the EVF? I don't get what the advantage of that would be....seems it would just waste processing power. Maybe it could be beneficial if you are rapidly panning with a bird in APS-C mode and you loose the bird off the frame edge, but then you correct yourself (ie catch up on your panning) and the camera was still tracking the bird over the FF sensor and therefore you are back on it faster?? I don't think that is what they are doing but who knows??
I see what you are saying....but if you watch a lot of the BEAF stuff you will see that box change sizes at random depending on how well the system is detecting the eye. In that Robin example the box perfectly outlines the eye so maybe Sony would never draw a smaller box once it gets down to the accuracy of drawing a box tight around the black eye? Also the eye-AF box doesn't correspond to the size of a standard green dot on the Wide/Zone AF view. It seems to be able to draw the box at varying sizes as needed.
At the 1:30 mark in that video he goes into APS-C mode for the mallard. You get to see the dancing dots...on previous Sony cameras those dancing dots in APS-C mode get spaced out (in fact that is actually my quick method to see if I'm in FF or APS-C mode on my Sony cameras...guess that won't work in for the A1 anymore
). On the A1 they stay close together like they do in FF. That means if you could light up all the dots possible you'd have the same number (759 according to the specs) for both FF and APS-C. This is again, not how it works on the A7RIV, A9II etc...
This is not how APS-C mode green boxes look on previous Sony cameras...
Back to our German friends, I borrowed some frames (BTW, auto-translate to English now shows up for me on that video so I'm re-watching it)
They switch from FF to APS-C on that cool little robin, notice the focus square enlarges in APS-C mode which leads me to believe there is no super secret hidden AF density. So either the AF goes farther than you can see, or the specs are a typo.
arbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
The only thing in my head that makes sense is that there are more focus points than don't chooses to use in FF mode but I don't understand why they would do that. Unless like you said it continues to track outside the cropped image but then that won't provide any real advantage for eye af other than having to calculate the eye from less image pixels.Daran wrote
arbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
That's a good point regarding eye af. I assume that's a function of having to proceed less dataNot sure if that is correct or not??
I see what you are saying....but if you watch a lot of the BEAF stuff you will see that box change sizes at random depending on how well the system is detecting the eye. In that Robin example the box perfectly outlines the eye so maybe Sony would never draw a smaller box once it gets down to the accuracy of drawing a box tight around the black eye? Also the eye-AF box doesn't correspond to the size of a standard green dot on the Wide/Zone AF view. It seems to be able to draw the box at varying sizes as needed.
At the 1:30 mark in that video he goes into APS-C mode for the mallard. You get to see the dancing dots...on previous Sony cameras those dancing dots in APS-C mode get spaced out (in fact that is actually my quick method to see if I'm in FF or APS-C mode on my Sony cameras...guess that won't work in for the A1 anymore
). On the A1 they stay close together like they do in FF. That means if you could light up all the dots possible you'd have the same number (759 according to the specs) for both FF and APS-C. This is again, not how it works on the A7RIV, A9II etc...This is not how APS-C mode green boxes look on previous Sony cameras...
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:45 AM
p.10 #10A1 Reviews/Video thread
dclark wrote:
The simplest explanation is the preferred explanation.
The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.
But as I've pointed out in these videos, it is actually able to show 759 green squares in both APS-C mode and FF mode in the FOV of the EVF. Previous Sony cameras didn't do this. APS-C mode spaced out the green squares so that you would have less of them over the APS-C FOV.
So it is using more PDAF points per area of sensor in APS-C vs FF. Why it can't do that with APS-C lenses makes no sense.
The simplest explanation is the preferred explanation.
The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.
But as I've pointed out in these videos, it is actually able to show 759 green squares in both APS-C mode and FF mode in the FOV of the EVF. Previous Sony cameras didn't do this. APS-C mode spaced out the green squares so that you would have less of them over the APS-C FOV.
So it is using more PDAF points per area of sensor in APS-C vs FF. Why it can't do that with APS-C lenses makes no sense.
Feb 06, 2021 at 09:53 AM
p.10 #11A1 Reviews/Video thread
In 26 days give or take we can all wide focus on a flat wall and count the dots :-)
arbitrage wrote:
The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.But as I've pointed out in these videos, it is actually able to show 759 green squares in both APS-C mode and FF mode in the FOV of the EVF. Previous Sony cameras didn't do this. APS-C mode spaced out the green squares so that you would have less of them over the APS-C FOV.
So it is using more PDAF points per area of sensor in APS-C vs FF. Why it can't do that with APS-C lenses makes no sense.
arbitrage wrote:
dclark wrote
The simplest explanation is the preferred explanation.The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.
So it is using more PDAF points per area of sensor in APS-C vs FF. Why it can't do that with APS-C lenses makes no sense.
Feb 06, 2021 at 10:04 AM
p.10 #12A1 Reviews/Video thread
nobody23 wrote:
This review is the best I have seen so far.
Some good data on file sizes and write speeds to CFE and SD cards.
Also they report that there is one lock-out while the buffer is clearing. Can't start a video recording until the buffer clears. I wonder if that is still true if you write stills to one card slot and video to the other.
Dave
Edited on Feb 06, 2021 at 10:26 AM · View previous versions
This review is the best I have seen so far.
Some good data on file sizes and write speeds to CFE and SD cards.
Also they report that there is one lock-out while the buffer is clearing. Can't start a video recording until the buffer clears. I wonder if that is still true if you write stills to one card slot and video to the other.
Dave
Edited on Feb 06, 2021 at 10:26 AM · View previous versions
Feb 06, 2021 at 10:11 AM
p.10 #13A1 Reviews/Video thread
arbitrage wrote:
The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.But as I've pointed out in these videos, it is actually able to show 759 green squares in both APS-C mode and FF mode in the FOV of the EVF. Previous Sony cameras didn't do this. APS-C mode spaced out the green squares so that you would have less of them over the APS-C FOV.
So it is using more PDAF points per area of sensor in APS-C vs FF. Why it can't do that with APS-C lenses makes no sense.
I missed where you were able to see 759 green squares in APS mode. Can you give me directions?
I am only spending 7 hours a day on this site so I have not read all the posts, not even all the posts in this thread.
dclark wrote
The simplest explanation is the preferred explanation.The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.
So it is using more PDAF points per area of sensor in APS-C vs FF. Why it can't do that with APS-C lenses makes no sense.
I missed where you were able to see 759 green squares in APS mode. Can you give me directions?
I am only spending 7 hours a day on this site so I have not read all the posts, not even all the posts in this thread.
Feb 06, 2021 at 10:24 AM
p.10 #14A1 Reviews/Video thread
baltmin wrote:
I wouldn't pay too much attention on that comparison. Dpreview equalizes brightness and white balance before they post the results. So what you see is not ACR default settings and the comparisons are more or less unreliable unless the file curves are similar. Try it with canon R5 and sony A7RIV. I downloaded the raw files and opened them on ACR. The grey tones are far from similar. Dpreview has equalised them and this means a lot when you compare noise. The file having had reduced brightness benefits from underexposure in terms of noise. The one with increased brightness shows...Show more →
I get your point, and it is a good one to keep in mind, but I mainly interested on checking the noise and detail levels for various ISO levels on a subject that I more familiar with that I care to admit. It also make it doable to compare to the A7r III, A9 II and A7r IV to get a bearing on where we are at.
Stoffer wrote
Right now I need two things to happen: Adobe to come out with a beta DNG converter with support for A1 and dpreview to do their ISO sweep in the Studio shoots. Then I will open a bottle of good Italian Barolo, download the RAW files and inspect the noise characteristics at different ISO values and give the base ISO 100 some torture tests to get some feeling for the DR.I get your point, and it is a good one to keep in mind, but I mainly interested on checking the noise and detail levels for various ISO levels on a subject that I more familiar with that I care to admit.
It also make it doable to compare to the A7r III, A9 II and A7r IV to get a bearing on where we are at. Feb 06, 2021 at 10:34 AM
p.10 #15A1 Reviews/Video thread
photonoclast wrote:
The noise characteristics for this new sensor is probably the thing I’m most interested in before moving on to the next big step, talking to the wife!Is she withholding her approval until you get her real solid noise data ??
Well, it needs to get my approval before I'm even going that far! I hope that the sensor will be able to match the A7r III in terms of both DR at base ISO and noise at mid-high ISO range. I want better DR at base ISO than the A9 II and a bit better noise performance at mid-high ISO range compared to the A7rIV. Whether this stacked sensor can provide just that remains to be seen.
Stoffer wrote
Also looking forward to the DR measurements from Bill Claff.The noise characteristics for this new sensor is probably the thing I’m most interested in before moving on to the next big step, talking to the wife!
Well, it needs to get my approval before I'm even going that far! I hope that the sensor will be able to match the A7r III in terms of both DR at base ISO and noise at mid-high ISO range. I want better DR at base ISO than the A9 II and a bit better noise performance at mid-high ISO range compared to the A7rIV. Whether this stacked sensor can provide just that remains to be seen.
Feb 06, 2021 at 10:39 AM
p.10 #16A1 Reviews/Video thread
dclark wrote:
arbitrage wrote
dclark wrote
The simplest explanation is the preferred explanation.The camera continues to track the subject outside the APS fov.
Won't work with APS lens because image formation is limited to the central part of the sensor.
Anything else would be extremely complex.
So it is using more PDAF points per area of sensor in APS-C vs FF. Why it can't do that with APS-C lenses makes no sense.
I am only spending 7 hours a day on this site so I have not read all the posts, not even all the posts in this thread.
No video shows them all, I’m just saying that when we do see them they are the same size and spacing in APS-C as FF. On previous Sony cameras they are the same size in both format but spaced further apart in APS-C mode. So I’m interpolating that if it can display 759 green squares in FF and they are the same size and spacing in APS-C then it can display 759 in APS-C (as Sony specs say).
Feb 06, 2021 at 10:39 AM
p.10 #17A1 Reviews/Video thread
dclark wrote:
This review is the best I have seen so far.
Some good data on file sizes and write speeds to CFE and SD cards.
Also they report that there is one lock-out while the buffer is clearing. Can't start a video recording until the buffer clears. I wonder if that is still true if you write stills to one card slot and video to the other.
Dave
SD card writing is slow, but it looks pretty comparable to the A9/A9ii despite the file size difference.
nobody23 wrote
Some good data on file sizes and write speeds to CFE and SD cards.
Also they report that there is one lock-out while the buffer is clearing. Can't start a video recording until the buffer clears. I wonder if that is still true if you write stills to one card slot and video to the other.
Dave
SD card writing is slow, but it looks pretty comparable to the A9/A9ii despite the file size difference.
Feb 06, 2021 at 10:52 AM
p.10 #18A1 Reviews/Video thread
Lossless comp = ~57MB
You should be fine with V90 SDXC cards....
I guess that will result in 3 pics written per second.
See DPReviewTV.
You should be fine with V90 SDXC cards....
I guess that will result in 3 pics written per second.
See DPReviewTV.
Feb 06, 2021 at 11:01 AM
p.10 #19A1 Reviews/Video thread
nobody23 wrote:
Lossless comp = ~57MB
You should be fine with V90 SDXC cards....
I guess that will result in 3 pics written per second.
See DPReviewTV.
I shoot compressed RAW on my A9ii with 24~ megabyte files and it probably writes 5 or 6 files per second to my UHS-II SDXC cards (Sony brand, advertised write speed of 299 MB/s), so it seems pretty comparable.
I will probably shoot normal compressed RAW on the A1 most of the time, too, unless I find there is a dramatic difference in dynamic range between it and lossless compressed.
Lossless comp = ~57MB
You should be fine with V90 SDXC cards....
I guess that will result in 3 pics written per second.
See DPReviewTV.
I shoot compressed RAW on my A9ii with 24~ megabyte files and it probably writes 5 or 6 files per second to my UHS-II SDXC cards (Sony brand, advertised write speed of 299 MB/s), so it seems pretty comparable.
I will probably shoot normal compressed RAW on the A1 most of the time, too, unless I find there is a dramatic difference in dynamic range between it and lossless compressed.
Feb 06, 2021 at 11:28 AM
p.10 #20A1 Reviews/Video thread
arbitrage wrote:
I also think I read (but could be mistaken) that unlike the past Sony bodies when you are in APS-C mode and using Wide or Zone that the dancing AF points stay close together instead of having the extra spacing between them? I think there are just as many AF points working in APS-C vs FF which would mean that for a given subject at a given distance with a given lens that there would be more AF data going in for a given area that the subject takes up on the sensor. So maybe it is processing the same amount of data but now a higher % of that data is coming from your subject??
Not sure if that is correct or not??Sounds plausible, at least I can see how that might work. What I have a harder time wrapping my head around is why that would break simply because a lens isn't a true FF lens that happens to be cropped vs an APSC lens that must be cropped. My current hypotheses is that this uses light from the outer edge of the image circle, which would be completely dark for an APSC lens. Nah, doesn't work either.That is a thought I had...is it just meaning that it is still doing AF calculations over the entire FF sensor even though it is just showing you the APS-C view in the EVF? I don't get what the advantage of that would be....seems it would just waste processing power. Maybe it could be beneficial if you are rapidly panning with a bird in APS-C mode and you loose the bird off the frame edge, but then you correct yourself (ie catch up on your panning) and the camera was still tracking the bird over the FF sensor and therefore...Show more →
The AF calculations don’t seem to take up so much time, and the resulting tracking should potentially be more accurate.
The camera also does 120 AF corrections every second, regardless of what speed you chose to shoot at. This results in less situations where it loses track.
Herein might also lie the answer over why so many lenses are in the 30fps focus speed category. The lineair motor lenses can do 120 corrections per second, potentially less prone to errors (with very fast moving subjects). In the table they all are in the 30fps performance category because the A1 can not shoot faster currently. (I bet it could for APS-C for instance)
buffalowolff wrote
The only thing in my head that makes sense is that there are more focus points than don't chooses to use in FF mode but I don't understand why they would do that. Unless like you said it continues to track outside the cropped image but then that won't provide any real advantage for eye af other than having to calculate the eye from less image pixels.Daran wrote
arbitrage wrote
buffalowolff wrote
That's a good point regarding eye af. I assume that's a function of having to proceed less dataarbitrage wrote
I still like the magnified view that APS-C mode brings and very likely the Bird Eye-AF will activate easier/more often when in APS-C mode like it does on the R5. I even noted that in Alex's video that as he cropped in the eye-af grabbed his figure's eye where it didn't in FF. Also since I'm planning to just run V90 SD at first, the APS-C option will make that easier. Of course for my very first A1 test on the swallows in flight it will be FF all the way for the extra FOV.Not sure if that is correct or not??
The AF calculations don’t seem to take up so much time, and the resulting tracking should potentially be more accurate.
The camera also does 120 AF corrections every second, regardless of what speed you chose to shoot at. This results in less situations where it loses track.
Herein might also lie the answer over why so many lenses are in the 30fps focus speed category. The lineair motor lenses can do 120 corrections per second, potentially less prone to errors (with very fast moving subjects). In the table they all are in the 30fps performance category because the A1 can not shoot faster currently. (I bet it could for APS-C for instance)
Feb 06, 2021 at 11:52 AM