arbitrage wrote:
No I don't need the A1 to get those shots. I have gotten shots like that with many different cameras over the years. I do think that most of the other cameras other than the A9/A9II and maybe R5 would have a few missed frames in that sequence and of course most would give you 1/3-1/2 the number of frames to choose from in the 1.5s that sequence took.
To have a camera that can give you 50MPs with 30FPS and near perfect AF in a sequence like that is what the A1 does.
With an A9II I'd have half the resolution and 1/3 less files to pick wing/head positions.
With the R5 I'd have 1/3 less files but good resolution. The R5 would be the closest competitor.
With the D500/D850 I'd have the resolution but 2/3 less images to pick from but I'd be deaf from the stupid mechanical shutter
With the 1DXII every few images would be OOF for no apparent reason and again I'd probably be deaf. ...Show more →
Yep, the additional frames and resolution are couple of reasons to get A1. I'm curious to hear ur experience from stuff like swallow shoot (erratically moving small birds). Does A1 give more in focus shots compared to A9II? This will be my major justification for me to get it
Jemini wrote:
That bird flying towards you is amazing. Is it flying through grass or something? What bird is this? Don't think it's seen in North America..
That is a (European) Jay. Quite a fast flyer. The bird starts out sitting on a post behind a hedge that has some long, thin young growth sticking out of the top. So I used small flexible spot to focus on him while he was sitting on the post. When he took off, he is iniatially still behind the braches which is what you can see blurred in the foreground. As he got closer he rose over the hedge and in image three, he spotted me and decided to do a very sharp left turn. I got image four before he left the frame. For the flight shots, I was using Tracking Zone AF area. BEAF was active all the time but I don't know if it helped.
arbitrage wrote:
45 images in a row at 30FPS for a total of 1.5s blastoff...every one tack sharp...here are two fully processed and the .gif of the sequence....
Someone over at dpreview asked me to take some images with the 200-600 as they were doubtful that it had sufficent resolution to work well with the A1 (or A7rIV). Below is one of the images I took for him and a 100% crop from that file. He concluded that he was right and the 200-600 wasn't good enough!
somersettr wrote:
Someone over at dpreview asked me to take some images with the 200-600 as they were doubtful that it had sufficent resolution to work well with the A1 (or A7rIV). Below is one of the images I took for him and a 100% crop from that file. He concluded that he was right and the 200-600 wasn't good enough!
scott f wrote:
There's nothing wrong with that combo, even with the 1.4x, the images are perfectly publishable, and that's all I care about at the end of the day.
Ah good! I should have mentioned that I had the 1.4x TC attached. Well spotted!
totally different lens and camera, but just to say you're not going crazy -you should expect better sharpness at 100% from lenses which can give it you.
I assume you did notice that you are comparing a small eye across some distance at ISO1000 in soft light with a close up of a big eye in good light at ISO100?
These little birds caught me off guard and I didn't quite have as high of a shutter speed as I would have liked, but still happy with the results even after extreme cropping.
Nice captures indeed. As a matter of curiosity, how many FPS do you get with the 70-200 GM? How is AF? Some youtubers have reported mediocre performance with this combo and there were some rumours about firmware update which never came.
davidnumrich wrote:
These little birds caught me off guard and I didn't quite have as high of a shutter speed as I would have liked, but still happy with the results even after extreme cropping.
