@arbitrage@ The A7RV has those same priority of body parts controls as the A9III, and I just went outside after adjusting the "Subject Recognition" to the max, and I have to say, it did FAR better than any previous Sony camera I've shot with, at least in subject recognition in a visually busy environment. It was already better than the Sony cameras I've used before, but it actually surprised me at just how good it did. Here is a small gallery of shots I just got after adjusting the recognition sensitivity. Not exactly keepers, but these are my best examples of how well it got past the obstructions to grab the subject.
I am delighted, and this has me really excited to see an A1mk2 with the AI processing that's been added to the A7RV and A9III....Show more →
See what? I don't think he's proving your point apart from his opinion on the R3's subject recognition vs. the A1. One opinion on that. I don't put a ton of weight in subjective opinions of things like that especially when it could be objectively tested (although I don't know anyone who's tried; that would be an interesting experiment).
The rest of your post simply serves to prove my point: The AI AF in the newer cameras is immensely flexible and configurable and if you learn how to tweak it for you how you shoot it can be amazingly good.
It goes back to what I've been repeating: Sony's philosophy with their cameras has been to make them insanely configurable. It can even be a bit overwhelming at first. I switched from Canon to Sony. I spent a year using an A7RIV side by side with my Canons until I felt really *comfortable* with it. I had to force myself to learn it. When I did, I was 100% won over by what was possible, and so far nothing that has come since then from Canon, Nikon or Sony has served to change my mind on it. I've done plenty of system switches in the past, but it's always been when it's both compelling that the other system was superior and that the other vendor had a better roadmap. For me that was Nikon to Canon in 2004--and I'm glad I did because it took Nikon years to get their stuff together and get the D800 out--and then Canon to Sony in 2018 when it was clear that Canon was going to be very slow to the game on MILC technology and that's where the future lay. Nikon I passed on in 2018 for the same reasons as 2004--they seem to always be playing catchup or there's a struggle to actually get lenses. On top of that I know they have to rely on Sony for sensors (for now at least).
Nothing Sony has done so far has made me question that. I view the aggressive firmware updates by Nikon and Canon in recent years an anomaly. That's not their long-term history. They're forced to do it right now as they play catch up to Sony because both of them have hemorrhaged users to Sony. That won't last as they eventually mature their MILC offerings. It's just not profitable for any company that's in the business of making hardware to keep giving away free software updates. The resources required to do that are more profitably deployed elsewhere. It's done now to staunch the bleeding.
Don't get me wrong, I want to see Canon and Nikon up their games a lot. I'm really happy to see Nikon succeeding recently and they seem to have stopped some of their customer losses. The market needs the healthy competition to keep all of these companies innovating. I'm not a brand loyalist; I'm pragmatic about what works. Sony has been delivering on that in spades for the last decade. Could they toss us a few more bones in the FW upgrades? Sure. But that's not their style, and before the recent MILC race it wasn't what Nikon or Canon did either. Don't expect that to last.
arbitrage wrote:
One last thing...I found a big improvement on the A9III was the ability to decide if you wanted body/head/eye or just head/eye or just eye. This was a huge benefit to shoot large BIF like GBH close up if you set it to head/eye or just eye it really ignored the near wing which all the other cameras like to grab instead of the head/eye. That was a great improvement.
This was one of the things I loved in the A7RV and it's hugely helpful on that camera and the A9III as well. I mostly shoot small birds and try to get close to them; even on a small bird when shooting a long lens wide open the DOF can be shallow enough that you miss the eye being razor sharp. With the head/eye priority setting on the A9III (and A7RV) that problem is almost 100% eliminated.
I really wish that Sony had announced/released an A1II back with the A9III and just rolled all of the updates into it. It would have eliminated some good percentage of the whining about the the A1 firmware update and what it lacks, and I think they would have sold a ton of them, without too much of a hit to the A9III sales.
My hope is that means they have something "new" they want to roll in the A1II release. That fits a pattern with Sony so far in other releases of their top of the line cameras like the original A1 surprise, the A9/A9II as the first ever stacked sensor cameras, and now the A9III as the first global shutter and 120fps camera. Of course they could just dump the same A1II I was hoping for last fall this fall and that would still be a great camera but a bit of a letdown.
arbitrage wrote:
I'm lucky to have full time DMF on my two main lenses 400GM and 600GM because it is built into the lens with the dedicated switch. But I do sorely miss it when using my 100-400 and was so happy to have it with the A9III (and A7RV). Sony should easily be able to give the A1 that feature now that it is on the same base FW as the newer bodies...but they probably won't...because they need me to buy an A1II.
haha exactly. Love using it on the 70-200 GM2 and the 600GM. It's not exactly some camera-defining feature. I really don't understand how it hasn't been added to their "flagship". Sony firmware updates (rolls eyes).
jhapeman wrote:
See what? I don't think he's proving your point apart from his opinion on the R3's subject recognition vs. the A1. One opinion on that. I don't put a ton of weight in subjective opinions of things like that especially when it could be objectively tested (although I don't know anyone who's tried; that would be an interesting experiment).
See that I'm not the only one that's noticed it. You say you don't value people's opinion, and that's exactly why you haven't heard anything about how Canon has more than caught up, much less tried their system for yourself to see that. I am not a fanboy. At the end of the day, these are all corporations selling us devices, and if one fits my needs better than another, then I would like to know about it. My head isn't buried in the Sony sand. lol
Will I be switching to Canon? No, probably not. But, I'd still like to see what others think about the competition, as well as their subjective experiences with them.
trippalhealick wrote:
See that I'm not the only one that's noticed it. You say you don't value people's opinion, and that's exactly why you haven't heard anything about how Canon has more than caught up, much less tried their system for yourself to see that. I am not a fanboy. At the end of the day, these are all corporations selling us devices, and if one fits my needs better than another, then I would like to know about it. My head isn't buried in the Sony sand. lol
Will I be switching to Canon? No, probably not. But, I'd still like to see what others think about the competition, as well as their subjective experiences with them.
You keep putting words in my mouth. I have never said I don't value people's opinions, but an opinion alone carries less weight than objective testing. Opinions are too easily influenced by the person's experiences--what do they shoot, how long have they used the system they have an opinion on, etc. When I can't test it myself, then I will rely on the broader collective reviews of experts rather than individual opinions. That's just a logical and rational approach.
Your head may not be "buried in the Sony sand" but perhaps you should spend a little more time watching YouTube videos on the gear you already have. Had you done so you would have already known about the sub-settings for AF that I pointed you towards here.
I can't get the consistency of results for BIF that some here can, but I don't blame the camera. I could easily conclude the A1 isn't good at BIF or any better than some of the other cameras I've used but I know that's not the case. It's my own lack of interest in learning how do so that's to blame. I simply prefer another style of shooting. Hence my opinion on how "good" the A1 would be for BIF wouldn't really be a valid one to draw many conclusions from.
jhapeman wrote:
You keep putting words in my mouth. I have never said I don't value people's opinions, but an opinion alone carries less weight than objective testing. Opinions are too easily influenced by the person's experiences--what do they shoot, how long have they used the system they have an opinion on, etc. When I can't test it myself, then I will rely on the broader collective reviews of experts rather than individual opinions. That's just a logical and rational approach.
Your head may not be "buried in the Sony sand" but perhaps you should spend a little more time watching YouTube videos on the gear you already have. Had you done so you would have already known about the sub-settings for AF that I pointed you towards here.
I can't get the consistency of results for BIF that some here can, but I don't blame the camera. I could easily conclude the A1 isn't good at BIF or any better than some of the other cameras I've used but I know that's not the case. It's my own lack of interest in learning how do so that's to blame. I simply prefer another style of shooting. Hence my opinion on how "good" the A1 would be for BIF wouldn't really be a valid one to draw many conclusions from. ...Show more →
K. Plenty of people have tested all these cameras side-by-side, "objectively" (I guess?), although i'm sure you'd say otherwise. As far as watching youtube videos on the gear I already own, I don't usually use the A7RV for my bird photography, which is why I never looked into it. That, and the fact it already worked better than my A1, without even touching the settings. Now that I've adjusted the recognition sensitivity setting, it's FAR better. That being said, I will thank you for reminding me that the setting was available, although it doesn't fix the fact Sony's flagship has been mostly ignored since launch as far as any improvement goes, aside from bug fixes.
