Archive 2021 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.37 #1 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
Buckeye2604 wrote:
The pre-release capture seems to be a feature birders will find beneficial.
doubtful, given that this pre-buffer doesn't work with raw files or in 20fps mode, and it's apparently only 1-second long.
there are other things to like more in this update, and although nikon dropped the ball again by not including high-frequency led flicker reduction in this update, it's apparently supposed to be coming later this summer.
p.37 #2 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
j4nu wrote:
This got me thinking about the EVF resolution drop when focusing in AF-C on Sony, do we know by any chance if that happens on other cameras too?
No idea. I only know of it becoming a topic because of Sony's 9.4 million dot EVF.
Personally, I haven't noticed any drop in A1 resolution when out actively shooting. I only know about this from the threads on this forum. Or maybe I am not using the exact combinations of settings that causes a change I would notice.
9.4 million dots is already something at the incredible level, dropping down in some settings combos to 5.7 million dots is still very good/competitive IMO.
p.37 #3 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
LBJ2 wrote:
No idea. I only know of it becoming a topic because of Sony's 9.4 million dot EVF.
Personally, I haven't noticed any drop in A1 resolution when out actively shooting. I only know about this from the threads on this forum. Or maybe I am not using the exact combinations of settings that causes a change I would notice.
9.4 million dots is already something at the incredible level, dropping down in some settings combos to 5.7 million dots is still very good/competitive IMO.
Yes, that's a good point - it is subjective after all. I guess I'll have to try it myself ...
p.37 #4 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
osv2 wrote:
doubtful, given that this pre-buffer doesn't work with raw files or in 20fps mode, and it's apparently only 1-second long.
One second would be plenty. But with only JPEG supported I'm not sure I'd even bother with it.
p.37 #5 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
Steve Spencer wrote:
Unfortunately, it seems to be only for jpeg. That you have to have the target in the frame and composed well for precapture to work limits its usefulness considerably. I don't think the A1 is missing much by not having this feature.
Agree. I would find pretty much no use for this feature with its limitations. You need to put the camera in a special mode to get this feature operational.
With the A1 I can shoot approximately 3 seconds at 30 fps. This allows me to get better and more consistent results when I need that much time resolution. The NIkon implementation will only help when you realize you missed the "moment" within 1 second after it happened. I prefer just shooting 30fps RAW in such circumstances.
I don't shoot 8K video.
At high frame rates the A1 EVF resolution is still better after dropping. When not shooting at such FPS I really prefer the super high resolution of my A1.
Although I think that this is a great thing for our friends who shoot Nikon, these features are low on my want list for the A1. There are others I would much prefer such as focus stacking, long exposure setting beyond 30 seconds, and a few others.
p.37 #6 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
1 second is plenty unless your reaction time is slow as molasses. A lot of people utilize JPEG, sports media especially. Would have been nice to add the flicker compensation, but like you said another round of updates is on the way.
osv2 wrote:
doubtful, given that this pre-buffer doesn't work with raw files or in 20fps mode, and it's apparently only 1-second long.
there are other things to like more in this update, and although nikon dropped the ball again by not including high-frequency led flicker reduction in this update, it's apparently supposed to be coming later this summer.
p.37 #7 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
How does 30fps save you from a missed moment? Or are you saying you’d rather have 30fps raw. If you must be in raw there’s no denying the capture feature is useless.
I’ve just started getting into bird photography so I’m wondering, does everyone stay in RAW? I’m in JPEG often when I know I won’t be doing critical editing afterwards or will just be posting to social media.
1bwana1 wrote:
Agree. I would find pretty much no use for this feature with its limitations. You need to put the camera in a special mode to get this feature operational.
With the A1 I can shoot approximately 3 seconds at 30 fps. This allows me to get better and more consistent results when I need that much time resolution. The NIkon implementation will only help when you realize you missed the "moment" within 1 second after it happened. I prefer just shooting 30fps RAW in such circumstances.
I don't shoot 8K video.
At high frame rates the A1 EVF resolution is still better after dropping. When not shooting at such FPS I really prefer the super high resolution of my A1.
Although I think that this is a great thing for our friends who shoot Nikon, these features are low on my want list for the A1. There are others I would much prefer such as focus stacking, long exposure setting beyond 30 seconds, and a few others. ...Show more →
Apr 14, 2022 at 11:24 AM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.37 #8 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
Buckeye2604 wrote:
1 second is plenty unless your reaction time is slow as molasses.
it's actually not 1-second reaction time, it's 1-second minus 0.273/sec human reaction time: "The average (median) reaction time is 273 milliseconds, according to the data collected so far." https://humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime
so if you are for example waiting for a perched bird to launch into flight, are you going to be able to hit the shutter button less than a second after it launches? for most people, i think not with any consistency.
i shoot sports, and i can't imagine many instances where i'd need this... back when i shot nostalgia top fuel one click at a time on a crappy old k10d i desperately wanted pre-buffering... those cars have 60' times of a second or less, the driver has to dump the clutch before the light goes green, and i couldn't usually see the light, so i'd be guessing at it based on motor noise on the rev limiter... nowdays with 30fps i'd be fanning it down ahead of time anyway, no pre-buffer needed.
p.37 #9 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
Buckeye2604 wrote:
How does 30fps save you from a missed moment? Or are you saying you’d rather have 30fps raw. If you must be in raw there’s no denying the capture feature is useless.
I’ve just started getting into bird photography so I’m wondering, does everyone stay in RAW? I’m in JPEG often when I know I won’t be doing critical editing afterwards or will just be posting to social media.
I would imagine most people shoot raw. For example, under wing lighting could be dark and benefit from raw.
However, the way I see it, having the pre capture feature or not, is fundamental difference. While I don't care about jpg in pre capture, from jpg to raw is just incremental, and I'm sure just a matter of time.
p.37 #10 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
Buckeye2604 wrote:
How does 30fps save you from a missed moment? Or are you saying you’d rather have 30fps raw. If you must be in raw there’s no denying the capture feature is useless.
I’ve just started getting into bird photography so I’m wondering, does everyone stay in RAW? I’m in JPEG often when I know I won’t be doing critical editing afterwards or will just be posting to social media.
I only shoot in RAW. Just too many benefits in post at this time, including DR, noise management, and cropping, So for me that is the end of the question.
30 fps cannot save you from a completely missed moment. But most of the time I find I can anticipate and start a burst. Even if the moment doesn't happen, the A1's file management by burst groups makes deleting the wasted shots easy. The number of totally missed moments for me won't compensate for the increased captures. If it truly is a unique moment the quality of RAW significantly adds to the value of the image.
Birds are the most random of things I shoot. Getting balls on bats, and other sporting moments are much more predictable.
p.37 #11 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
Buckeye2604 wrote:
How does 30fps save you from a missed moment? Or are you saying you’d rather have 30fps raw. If you must be in raw there’s no denying the capture feature is useless.
I’ve just started getting into bird photography so I’m wondering, does everyone stay in RAW? I’m in JPEG often when I know I won’t be doing critical editing afterwards or will just be posting to social media.
I mainly shoot birds and also shoot only in RAW. The fact that Nikon’s pre-capture comes in JPG doesn’t really bother me. For one, people are downplaying the edit-ability of JPGs. They can still be edited quite a bit. Your exposure and white balance need to be very close to correct, but those should be pretty easy with a Z9. Otherwise, a JPG can be printed large, cropped, sharpened, etc. And there is room to pull down highlights and bump shadows. It’s just less than with RAW.
And pre-capture should be incredible for birds taking off or hopping from one perch to another. The (give or take) one second to react is more than enough given that AF must be engaged for pre capture to work.
p.37 #12 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
j4nu wrote:
This got me thinking about the EVF resolution drop when focusing in AF-C on Sony, do we know by any chance if that happens on other cameras too?
Sony seems to be the main offender for dropping resolution in the EVF in a lot of scenarios.
I do really like the A1 EVF but I don't think it lives up to the hype of the 9.1 million dots. The main reason is that for the way I shoot I basically never get to see the camera using 9.1 million dots except I think in playback. What I do find lives up to the hype is the 0.9x magnification. That to me is the one advantage the A1 EVF has over the competition.
IMO the actual viewing experience through an R5 or R3 EVF is nicer than the A1 other than the smaller magnification. The 5.x million dot resolution is the same as what I get to see in the A1 EVF when I'm shooting. But it seems the A1 drops even further when actively focusing in some situations. Overall the R5/R3 EVF is a nicer image when actively focusing and shooting. Of course the big downside on the R5 is the frame insertion which certainly takes it down many notches compared to shooting any of the stacked sensor cameras. I actually don't even think the stacked R3 is giving a live feed to the EVF but it was still pretty smooth to shoot at 30FPS.
I think it is also worth pointing out, something I never see talked about, is that even on the A1 the "live feed" to the EVF is still dependent on your SS once actively firing. Just shoot slower SS in the rain or snow to see the effect. As you shoot you see the elongated raindrops or snowflakes. I guess this makes sense as the feed is not being split off early enough and is therefore showing what the camera is recording....is this technically a slideshow? Is this a little less than "reality" while actively shooting? Is Nikon's dual-feed actually better for this? I'm not sure...I should have tested this when I had the camera.
I've tried the 240Hz of the A1 but every time I do I find I'm missing the 0.9x mag more so than any realized advantage going from 120 to 240. In fact I've yet to see the 240 make a difference in my shooting. I do plan to try and test this more. I may just shoot at the lower EVF mag in 120 to get used to it and then do some testing at 240.
As for the Z9, I actually found the EVF image to be better than expected for only 3.x million dots. Nikon certainly uses better optics. I didn't really notice a big issue with the 60Hz but I didn't have my best test subjects available at the time (hummingbirds flitting from one flower to the next) where I've had issues at 60Hz in the past when testing 60 vs 120 on the A9. I find it really strange that Nikon was able to just up the EVF refresh via FW with no compromises to the display feed. Why didn't they ship the camera like this? The only downside is battery life. My biggest issue with the Z9 EVF is I found it very difficult to judge my exposure. Obviously I missed my Sony zebras but I don't have issue nailing exposure with the R5/R3 EVF. With the Z9 even with histogram active I was always off. WYSIWYG is not good on the Z9. Maybe the EVF lacks DR or something??
Bottom line, the spec sheets don't correlate well with the actual EVF experience. Only trying them for yourself can you figure out where the compromises come in and where the spec sheets don't live up to the hype. Or sometimes where the EVF outshines the spec sheet.
p.37 #13 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
I attribute some of this to your own vision and how good that is up close. I cannot shoot any cam with EVF without my glasses on, the viewfinder I can but not the EVF. Its almost like needing readers to see it. For some cases its why I switch to manual focus if im after SEEING critical focus.
p.37 #14 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
arbitrage wrote:
Sony seems to be the main offender for dropping resolution in the EVF in a lot of scenarios.
I do really like the A1 EVF but I don't think it lives up to the hype of the 9.1 million dots. The main reason is that for the way I shoot I basically never get to see the camera using 9.1 million dots except I think in playback. What I do find lives up to the hype is the 0.9x magnification. That to me is the one advantage the A1 EVF has over the competition.
IMO the actual viewing experience through an R5 or R3 EVF is nicer than the A1 other than the smaller magnification. The 5.x million dot resolution is the same as what I get to see in the A1 EVF when I'm shooting. But it seems the A1 drops even further when actively focusing in some situations. Overall the R5/R3 EVF is a nicer image when actively focusing and shooting. Of course the big downside on the R5 is the frame insertion which certainly takes it down many notches compared to shooting any of the stacked sensor cameras. I actually don't even think the stacked R3 is giving a live feed to the EVF but it was still pretty smooth to shoot at 30FPS.
I think it is also worth pointing out, something I never see talked about, is that even on the A1 the "live feed" to the EVF is still dependent on your SS once actively firing. Just shoot slower SS in the rain or snow to see the effect. As you shoot you see the elongated raindrops or snowflakes. I guess this makes sense as the feed is not being split off early enough and is therefore showing what the camera is recording....is this technically a slideshow? Is this a little less than "reality" while actively shooting? Is Nikon's dual-feed actually better for this? I'm not sure...I should have tested this when I had the camera.
I've tried the 240Hz of the A1 but every time I do I find I'm missing the 0.9x mag more so than any realized advantage going from 120 to 240. In fact I've yet to see the 240 make a difference in my shooting. I do plan to try and test this more. I may just shoot at the lower EVF mag in 120 to get used to it and then do some testing at 240.
As for the Z9, I actually found the EVF image to be better than expected for only 3.x million dots. Nikon certainly uses better optics. I didn't really notice a big issue with the 60Hz but I didn't have my best test subjects available at the time (hummingbirds flitting from one flower to the next) where I've had issues at 60Hz in the past when testing 60 vs 120 on the A9. I find it really strange that Nikon was able to just up the EVF refresh via FW with no compromises to the display feed. Why didn't they ship the camera like this? The only downside is battery life. My biggest issue with the Z9 EVF is I found it very difficult to judge my exposure. Obviously I missed my Sony zebras but I don't have issue nailing exposure with the R5/R3 EVF. With the Z9 even with histogram active I was always off. WYSIWYG is not good on the Z9. Maybe the EVF lacks DR or something??
Bottom line, the spec sheets don't correlate well with the actual EVF experience. Only trying them for yourself can you figure out where the compromises come in and where the spec sheets don't live up to the hype. Or sometimes where the EVF outshines the spec sheet....Show more →
Wow, thanks for the super-detailed reply . I guess there are even more limitations than I was aware of and every brand has some...
The issue with Sony resolution drop during AF-C is that people are more or less prone to notice it. For me, it's rather obvious when I'm shooting static detailed target, especially close. It's a bit frustarting as it makes judging the focus actually harder than when not focusing at all...
That's an interesting point regarding SS impact on the live view, but I always assumed that's a limitation of the current mirrorless systems. If Nikon managed to get around it, that would be another point for the Z9 I guess .
Regarding 120 vs 240 HZ, I really believe this is beyond only "seeing", but rather in the realm of perception/reaction/muscle memory/etc. That's my impression from high refresh rate monitors at least .
p.37 #15 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
arbitrage wrote:
Sony seems to be the main offender for dropping resolution in the EVF in a lot of scenarios.
I do really like the A1 EVF but I don't think it lives up to the hype of the 9.1 million dots. The main reason is that for the way I shoot I basically never get to see the camera using 9.1 million dots except I think in playback. What I do find lives up to the hype is the 0.9x magnification. That to me is the one advantage the A1 EVF has over the competition.
IMO the actual viewing experience through an R5 or R3 EVF is nicer than the A1 other than the smaller magnification. The 5.x million dot resolution is the same as what I get to see in the A1 EVF when I'm shooting. But it seems the A1 drops even further when actively focusing in some situations. Overall the R5/R3 EVF is a nicer image when actively focusing and shooting. Of course the big downside on the R5 is the frame insertion which certainly takes it down many notches compared to shooting any of the stacked sensor cameras. I actually don't even think the stacked R3 is giving a live feed to the EVF but it was still pretty smooth to shoot at 30FPS.
I think it is also worth pointing out, something I never see talked about, is that even on the A1 the "live feed" to the EVF is still dependent on your SS once actively firing. Just shoot slower SS in the rain or snow to see the effect. As you shoot you see the elongated raindrops or snowflakes. I guess this makes sense as the feed is not being split off early enough and is therefore showing what the camera is recording....is this technically a slideshow? Is this a little less than "reality" while actively shooting? Is Nikon's dual-feed actually better for this? I'm not sure...I should have tested this when I had the camera.
I've tried the 240Hz of the A1 but every time I do I find I'm missing the 0.9x mag more so than any realized advantage going from 120 to 240. In fact I've yet to see the 240 make a difference in my shooting. I do plan to try and test this more. I may just shoot at the lower EVF mag in 120 to get used to it and then do some testing at 240.
As for the Z9, I actually found the EVF image to be better than expected for only 3.x million dots. Nikon certainly uses better optics. I didn't really notice a big issue with the 60Hz but I didn't have my best test subjects available at the time (hummingbirds flitting from one flower to the next) where I've had issues at 60Hz in the past when testing 60 vs 120 on the A9. I find it really strange that Nikon was able to just up the EVF refresh via FW with no compromises to the display feed. Why didn't they ship the camera like this? The only downside is battery life. My biggest issue with the Z9 EVF is I found it very difficult to judge my exposure. Obviously I missed my Sony zebras but I don't have issue nailing exposure with the R5/R3 EVF. With the Z9 even with histogram active I was always off. WYSIWYG is not good on the Z9. Maybe the EVF lacks DR or something??
Bottom line, the spec sheets don't correlate well with the actual EVF experience. Only trying them for yourself can you figure out where the compromises come in and where the spec sheets don't live up to the hype. Or sometimes where the EVF outshines the spec sheet....Show more →
I have been keeping the A1 in 240hz mode. If I wanted to try out the .9 magnification, what settings would I need to change?
Apr 15, 2022 at 09:13 AM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.37 #16 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
shadow9d9 wrote:
I have been keeping the A1 in 240hz mode. If I wanted to try out the .9 magnification, what settings would I need to change?
Standard: Displays the subject at a normal frame rate on the viewfinder.
High: Displays the movements of the subject more smoothly on the viewfinder.
Higher: Displays the movements of the subject more smoothly on the viewfinder than [High].
When [Finder Frame Rate] is set to [Higher], the viewfinder resolution becomes lower and the display magnification becomes smaller.
When [Finder Frame Rate] is set to [High] or [Higher], [Display Quality] becomes locked to [Standard].
Even if [Finder Frame Rate] is set to [High] or [Higher], the frame rate may be restricted depending on the temperature of the shooting environment and the shooting conditions.
The frame rate is restricted in the following situations:
During playback
During HDMI connection
When the temperature inside the camera’s body is high
When [Shutter Type] is set to [Electronic Shutter] or [Auto] and continuous shooting is performed.
========================================
MENU →(Setup) → [Finder/Monitor] → [Display Quality] → desired setting.
High: Displays in high quality.
Standard: Displays in standard quality.
When [High] is set, battery consumption will be higher than when [Standard] is set.
When the temperature of the camera rises, the setting may become locked to [Standard].
When [Finder Frame Rate] is set to [High] or [Higher], [Display Quality] becomes locked to [Standard].
When “-” is displayed as the setting value for [Display Quality], you cannot view or change the setting. Set [Finder Frame Rate] to [Standard] to change the setting for [Display Quality].
Apr 15, 2022 at 09:43 AM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.37 #17 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
arbitrage wrote:
I think it is also worth pointing out, something I never see talked about, is that even on the A1 the "live feed" to the EVF is still dependent on your SS once actively firing.
when does it stop becoming wysiwyg is probably the way to look at it.
arbitrage wrote:
Just shoot slower SS in the rain or snow to see the effect. As you shoot you see the elongated raindrops or snowflakes. I guess this makes sense as the feed is not being split off early enough and is therefore showing what the camera is recording....is this technically a slideshow?
"feed being split off" sounds like nikon-think; z-mount is not a wysiwyg platform, and neither is rf-mount for that matter, see the dof preview button.
if you turn off the a1 wysiwyg it might address those elongated raindrops??
Live View Display: Sets whether to reflect all the shooting settings on the monitor and display the Live View in conditions close to what your picture will look like once the settings are applied, or to display the Live View without reflecting the settings. ([Setting Effect ON] / [Setting Effect OFF])
If you select [Setting Effect OFF], you can easily check the composition even when shooting with the image composition on the Live View display.
Exposure Effect: Sets whether or not to display the Live View with automatic correction by reflecting the exposure from the flash when [Live View Display] is set to [Setting Effect ON]. ([Exposure Set. & flash] / [Exposure Setting Only])
When using the flash for shooting a portrait, select [Exposure Setting Only] to manually set the exposure based on the ambient lighting. Frame Rate Low Limit:
Sets whether or not to keep the frame rate of the Live View from becoming too slow. ([On] / [Off])
If you select [On], the frame rate of the Live View will not become slow even when shooting in a dark place, but noise may appear on the Live View or the display may become dark. Also, blackout may occur during continuous shooting depending on the shutter speed.
Standard: Displays the subject at a normal frame rate on the viewfinder.
High: Displays the movements of the subject more smoothly on the viewfinder.
Higher: Displays the movements of the subject more smoothly on the viewfinder than [High].
When [Finder Frame Rate] is set to [Higher], the viewfinder resolution becomes lower and the display magnification becomes smaller.
When [Finder Frame Rate] is set to [High] or [Higher], [Display Quality] becomes locked to [Standard].
Even if [Finder Frame Rate] is set to [High] or [Higher], the frame rate may be restricted depending on the temperature of the shooting environment and the shooting conditions.
The frame rate is restricted in the following situations:
During playback
During HDMI connection
When the temperature inside the camera’s body is high
When [Shutter Type] is set to [Electronic Shutter] or [Auto] and continuous shooting is performed.
========================================
MENU →(Setup) → [Finder/Monitor] → [Display Quality] → desired setting.
High: Displays in high quality.
Standard: Displays in standard quality.
When [High] is set, battery consumption will be higher than when [Standard] is set.
When the temperature of the camera rises, the setting may become locked to [Standard].
When [Finder Frame Rate] is set to [High] or [Higher], [Display Quality] becomes locked to [Standard].
When “-” is displayed as the setting value for [Display Quality], you cannot view or change the setting. Set [Finder Frame Rate] to [Standard] to change the setting for [Display Quality]. ...Show more →
Thanks. So just put high display quality and below high in framerate.
And how does the extra magnification affect things? It is just easier to see thinga closer in the evf?
...
. I guess there are even more limitations than I was aware of and every brand has some...