DGettisNC
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.42 #15 · New Z9 Specs (NR) Aug 10th, 2021 | |
speedmaster20d wrote:
I have to disagree with every point .
I shoot 30 fps RAW all the time, 50% faster is a big deal for what I shoot (I never shoot JPEG in my life and don't care if it does 1000 fps in small jpegs).
it seems to me you have some of the specs backwards.
EVF:
Nikon has only a 60Hz finder which isn't adequate for panning rapidly at very long focal lengths like 800mm+ which I shoot 90% of the time. image will be choppy when panning at those focal lengths. 60 Hz isn't even enough to display wing beats of many birds fluidly. Sony's EVF is 240Hz, 4X the speed and much higher resolution even in the highest refresh rate mode. Z9 has a low res finder equivalent to what Sony had 5 years ago. no comparison here.
AF :
I doubt if the Z9 AF can match my A1 for what I shoot and demand form the camera which is close to 100% hit rate... Nikon doesn't mention its core AF sampling rate. Sony samples at 120Hz, I doubt Z9 can do that or Nikon would be advertising it. Z9 has only 495 phase detect points compared to 759 phase detect points + 425 contrast detect (almost 3 x more points) points in A1 backed by multiple generations of improved AF AI, system has many degrees of customization designed from ground up as opposed to copied from old DSLR's.
you said A1 drops to 3.60 "mp" when "AF is optimized"? is that some kind of joke? typo? no idea what you're talking about.
Shutter :
Lack of mechanical shutter is a drawback for me not a plus. I am not sure how you conclude the readout speed is faster for Nikon but even at 1/300sec there are some subjects like humming birds where you get rolling shutter on the wings and ruin the frame, I'd like to have mechanical shutter for those shots. Nikon doesn't... Sony max sync speed is 1/400 sec Nikon is 1/200 sec. having a feature is always better than not having it.
Video:
Sony is clear winner with 4:2:0 10 bit internal and 16bit RAW video external recording. Sony internal recording is at a whopping 400mbps. unlimited record length. Sony log is broadcast and production standard as one of the world's largest video camera maker for generations. Nikon is new to video, Z9 only supports 4:2:2 10 bit recording, it cannot record RAW video and is limited to 120 min. Nikon doesn't quote recording bit rate, I expect it is 100-200Mbps at best.
IQ:
Sony's 50 mega pixel sensor is industry leading in its class in terms of SNR and DR, it is at almost at the theoretical limit. Nikon Z9 is TBD....
build:
I prefer the light weight construction of Sony, much easier to carry around all day long. The small form factor makes it more stealth so I can use it everywhere without many noticing the camera or its value. When I had the D5 it always attracted unwanted attention . In fact I bought a pair of D850's just for places where I wanted to be more discrete.
I sold 40 grand of Nikon gear to move to Sony in late 2019 and I'd do it again today  for me A1 would still be worth it at $10K compared to what else is on the marker now.
but Nikon is moving in the right direction and I do wish them success. On the other hand Canon's R5 can also do 50 mega pixel @ 20 fps for a lot cheaper so we have to see if Nikon's AF and other features are truly better than the Canon. something tells me that is the case but before reputable, skilled and independent photographers in each discipline give it a shot, we don't know for sure.
competition is always a good thing for the consumer at the end.
cheers  ...Show more →
I'm sorry but I find this exchange funny.
The post you are replying to is a subjective, personal opinion. And honestly it really just seems like maybe your feelings got hurt because that person had the audacity to say that, in their opinion the Z9 is overall a better camera for THEM (maybe something to do with the fact you got rid of "40k in nikon gear" recently?) .
But the funny part is your reasoning for disagreeing with their opinion that the Z9 seems better overall for THEM, is due to a bunch of reasons that YOU prefer the A1 because of what and how YOU shoot?
Some notes:
- Yes, the sony EVF has a faster refresh rate of 240fps and higher resolution, but you cannot actually use AF and take pics with the Sony at 240 refresh rate AND 9M dots. If you want to use the highest resolution then the refresh rate drops to 60, to get to 240, you have to drop resolution and magnification.
We'll see real world comparisons soon enough. Some have already stated that the Z9 EVF looks more natural. Polin had been a bit pissy with Nikon but even he said he doesnt see a big difference in the EVFs.
In the end, we're basically talking about 1.5k @ 0.9x mag vs 1k at 0.8x mag during real use.
Here's a rundown from someone else that has used it already:
The Z9 EVF. I shot with both eyes open, I was shooting one of out electric motorcycles hooding about in the dirt. Hand on heart, it was just like looking with both my own eyes. No delay in the right eye and absolutely no blackout on that eye either. It was astounding.
Going back to work with my Z7 the next day was a revelation in the backwards sense of the word. S L O W startup, slow focus, slow AF tracking. A capable camera but I really had been spoiled rotten by those short moments with the Z9.
Winner - Sony probably but not nearly as huge a deal as people are trying to make it out to be.
- It took Sony until, what May via a FW update to fix issues with IBIS and EVF blacking out? How many A1 buyers had to put tape over the sensor in order for it to work correctly for the first few months?
- Both cameras shoot full lossless RAW at 20fps, neither camera shoots full RAW at 30FPS (and for the A1 to get the 30FPS with the lossy RAW it has to be with certain lenses and certain shooting modes...beware of those lossy compression artifacts)
And if we're talking about having to reduce file size to get to 30FPS anyway, then 120FPS is better than 30FPS. People will draw their proverbial lines in the sand at different spots. I don't see this being a big win for either camera.
- AF sensitivity on the Z9 is better
- Sensor readout speed is better on the Z9
- The Z9 can record 8k much, much longer.
- I personally prefer the iso64-25,600 vs the A1's 100-32000, though that is a super minor difference in most instances, it is just my preference, and I would really only use iso64 occasionally since I am mainly wildlife, but its still nice to have that option.
- The Z9 is $1000 less than the A1 and $1400 less if you wanted to add a grip to the A1.
So yes, there are obviously some reasons why someone could have the OPINION that the Z9 is the better camera for them. And there are reasons why someone could have the OPINION that the A1 is the better camera for them.
|
