Archive 2021 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.39 #1 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
wordfool wrote:
Indeed. As I understand it (hopefully correctly), pre-capture would mean that when I react a split second too late (due to being human) to a zippy, unpredictable warbler taking off from a branch, I would actually have some shots of the bird taking off as opposed to my usual experience of just ending up with shots of a tail end of the bird leaving the frame (or just a bare branch with no sign of bird life).
As for composition, I'd be happy to deal with that via cropping after getting the shot instead of having no shot to begin with. ...Show more →
Yes, but it has to be a split second (i.e., less than a second on the Z9) and the target has to be in the frame (if it moves out of the frame of course that is what you will get from that point on), and on the Z9 it will be a jpeg and a compressed one.The bottom line is if you wait for movement, you have to recognize the movement, react to it and press the shutter. That doesn't leave that much of that second of precapture left. It might work well for you, but I am not that interested. As I said above the things I shoot, I can predict pretty well and I would much rather predict the movement and press the shutter before the movement than rely on precapture, but of course, YMMV.
p.39 #2 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
wordfool wrote:
Indeed. As I understand it (hopefully correctly), pre-capture would mean that when I react a split second too late (due to being human) to a zippy, unpredictable warbler taking off from a branch, I would actually have some shots of the bird taking off as opposed to my usual experience of just ending up with shots of a tail end of the bird leaving the frame (or just a bare branch with no sign of bird life).
Kinda. The faster of them leave a branch in less then 100ms, with little or no warning. So practically impossible to react to. But of course there also is AF, exposure time and the limited field of view to be considered. And you won't be able to track a launching song bird, either. So, as per usual, there doesn't seem to be a free launch. [I'll see myself out]
p.39 #3 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Thread bump.
Question for Z9 owners who happen to be A1 users as well. What's your overall take on the Z9 autofocus capabilities following months of firmware updates?
I'm asking because a local retailer is offering me a brand-new Z9 at a good price and I'm thinking of taking the plunge. Unfortunately, I don't have the option to rent the camera and try it out myself.
Things like ergonomics, menus, JPG colors, etc. are purely subjective - I'm mainly interested in reading more opinions about autofocus and how it compares to the A1.
I don't need the Z9 but the NIKKOR Z 400mm f/4.5 piques my interest. I'm willing to spend the money if this combo can offer an enjoyable shooting experience.
p.39 #4 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Well, the proof is in the pudding so I ended up buying the Z9 anyway.
I was lucky enough to secure a brand new copy of the NIKKOR 400 f/4.5 which should arrive next Sunday.
The rest of the Z mount lens lineup does not intrigue me much. I will probably order the Megadap ETZ21 adapter so I can use my Sony lenses for still subjects.
Until next week, the Z9 will just rest on the table
p.39 #5 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Sundial wrote:
Well, the proof is in the pudding so I ended up buying the Z9 anyway.
I was lucky enough to secure a brand new copy of the NIKKOR 400 f/4.5 which should arrive next Sunday.
The rest of the Z mount lens lineup does not intrigue me much. I will probably order the Megadap ETZ21 adapter so I can use my Sony lenses for still subjects.
Until next week, the Z9 will just rest on the table
Best
Let us know how it is. Do you have A1 also?
I only had my Z9 for 2 weeks on FW 1.0 (or 1.1..can't remember) with adapted 500PF. I'd like to try one again on latest FW and with a native lens like the 400/4.5. Sounds like it is much improved based on ongoing reports in the Nikon forum.
p.39 #6 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
After a few weeks of testing on native and adapted lenses, I sold my Z9 last week. Just too bulky and heavy. Had I moved from a DSLR to Z9, I may not find it much different. But after using z6ii, z7ii, Sony a6600, a9, a7R4, a1, I just couldn't enjoy the weight and bulk of the Z9. In a small bag that fits a1 + 70-200 and z6ii + z 24-70 f/2.8, the z9 had trouble fitting inside, making the bag bulge out. I loved the EVF on Z9 though, and its a wonderful upgrade over the AF of other Z bodies. I replaced it with a Z6ii to use on the 2 Z lenses I have.
p.39 #7 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
saaketham wrote:
After a few weeks of testing on native and adapted lenses, I sold my Z9 last week. Just too bulky and heavy. Had I moved from a DSLR to Z9, I may not find it much different. But after using z6ii, z7ii, Sony a6600, a9, a7R4, a1, I just couldn't enjoy the weight and bulk of the Z9. In a small bag that fits a1 + 70-200 and z6ii + z 24-70 f/2.8, the z9 had trouble fitting inside, making the bag bulge out. I loved the EVF on Z9 though, and its a wonderful upgrade over the AF of other Z bodies. I replaced it with a Z6ii to use on the 2 Z lenses I have....Show more →
Did you use any long lenses on the Z9? How did it compare for AF vs the A1?
p.39 #8 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
arbitrage wrote:
Let us know how it is. Do you have A1 also?
I only had my Z9 for 2 weeks on FW 1.0 (or 1.1..can't remember) with adapted 500PF. I'd like to try one again on latest FW and with a native lens like the 400/4.5. Sounds like it is much improved based on ongoing reports in the Nikon forum.
Yeah I do have the A1. That's why I was hesitant as I don't really need a high speed camera from a different system.
saaketham wrote:
After a few weeks of testing on native and adapted lenses, I sold my Z9 last week. Just too bulky and heavy. Had I moved from a DSLR to Z9, I may not find it much different. But after using z6ii, z7ii, Sony a6600, a9, a7R4, a1, I just couldn't enjoy the weight and bulk of the Z9. In a small bag that fits a1 + 70-200 and z6ii + z 24-70 f/2.8, the z9 had trouble fitting inside, making the bag bulge out. I loved the EVF on Z9 though, and its a wonderful upgrade over the AF of other Z bodies. I replaced it with a Z6ii to use on the 2 Z lenses I have....Show more →
Saaketham, you are such a buzzkill
Your posts in the Nikon forum of the Z9 + 70-200 GM II was one of the key motivators for me to consider the Z9, now I feel cheated on
p.39 #9 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
arbitrage wrote:
Did you use any long lenses on the Z9? How did it compare for AF vs the A1?
I did use 2 long lenses, but both were adapted, and hence it's not a fair comparison
The lenses I use on the z9 are
Nikon lenses
- z 24-70mm f/2.8 S
- z 50mm f/1.2 S
Sony lenses on ETZ21
- 70-200 f/2.8 GM ii
- 200-600 G
- 600 GM
Sundial wrote:
s I have.
Saaketham, you are such a buzzkill Your posts in the Nikon forum of the Z9 + 70-200 GM II was one of the key motivators for me to consider the Z9, now I feel cheated on
You will love it, if you're not used to light weight bodies.
I really liked the Z9 EVF a lot and the image quality is top notch, especially out of camera JPEGs with Vivid picture setting.
The 70-200 GM ii and Z9 worked really well together.
Sorry .. ha ha .. I have too much gear, and not enough bags, that's why I sold the Z9.
If you can handle the bulk and weight, it's an excellent camera.
p.39 #11 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
I agreed with your assessment. Even with latest fw 2.1 for me the a1 is still better at grabbing bif with busy backgrounds (big or small birds). Though I dont have native z lenses as I only used adapted 500/800 FL. From the exchanges I had with Alex Phan, z9 af behaves same way whether its Nikon z or adapted lenses under similar shooting conditions.
saaketham wrote:
After a few weeks of testing on native and adapted lenses, I sold my Z9 last week. Just too bulky and heavy. Had I moved from a DSLR to Z9, I may not find it much different. But after using z6ii, z7ii, Sony a6600, a9, a7R4, a1, I just couldn't enjoy the weight and bulk of the Z9. In a small bag that fits a1 + 70-200 and z6ii + z 24-70 f/2.8, the z9 had trouble fitting inside, making the bag bulge out. I loved the EVF on Z9 though, and its a wonderful upgrade over the AF of other Z bodies. I replaced it with a Z6ii to use on the 2 Z lenses I have....Show more →
The 600GM looks very good on the Z9, very nice contrast and Nikon smoothness. My 800PF has been moved ahead to 2023, so slowly the 600GM comes in sight funding wise.
How well do you cope with the 600GM size, knowing that you too are weary of overly big and heavy gear? The 600GM has the edge on IQ for sure, and has f4 for early morning shooting.
p.39 #14 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
FWIW I recently bought a Z9 for VIDEO use but returned it after briefly testing against my A1. I didn't do any extensive testing, just spent a number of hours videoing birds in my backyard. After corresponding with some owners who shoot video with both the A1 and Z9 I was hopeful the Z9 would perform well enough to justify it's consideration but those conversations focused on more challenging BIF since I assumed the Z9 do fine with simple static video work.
I was wrong.
The Z9 may AF well using native glass and in ideal conditions, but it preformed poorly using adaptive glass (a Sony 200-600G with the Megadap adapter) when shooting video. I'm talking about dead simple "static" shooting situations using spot AFF on a bird 20 feet away. The Z9s AF would simply freeze even in high-contrast situations and I had a hard time getting AF to activate when using the "fast AF-ON" override. I'd have to focus on something else to kick-start the AF then return to the subject. The A1s AF is hardly perfect but when AF locks up and I press the AF-ON button it almost always forces the AF into action and eventually finds the target whereas the Z9 froze like a "deer in the headlights".
I never bothered to extend testing to BIF and more demanding action as there was no point. When shooting in dynamic area AFF and the bird was out in the open and eye was clearly visible the Z9 did a respectable job and I was thrilled with the oversampled IQ which was far better than on the A1. But since I video birds in the wild in typically difficult environments which require spot focusing, the Z9 fell short of my needs. Too bad really, because I loved the IQ and would have appreciated the wider range of Nikon lens offerings. But if the camera can't focus, nothing else really matters.
I can't say anything about the Z9s stills AF capability as hardly shot any stills.
p.39 #15 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Gary Irwin wrote:
FWIW I recently bought a Z9 for VIDEO use but returned it after briefly testing against my A1. I didn't do any extensive testing, just spent a number of hours videoing birds in my backyard. After corresponding with some owners who shoot video with both the A1 and Z9 I was hopeful the Z9 would perform well enough to justify it's consideration but those conversations focused on more challenging BIF since I assumed the Z9 do fine with simple static video work.
I was wrong.
The Z9 may AF well using native glass and in ideal conditions, but it preformed poorly using adaptive glass (a Sony 200-600G with the Megadap adapter) when shooting video. I'm talking about dead simple "static" shooting situations using spot AFF on a bird 20 feet away. The Z9s AF would simply freeze even in high-contrast situations and I had a hard time getting AF to activate when using the "fast AF-ON" override. I'd have to focus on something else to kick-start the AF then return to the subject. The A1s AF is hardly perfect but when AF locks up and I press the AF-ON button it almost always forces the AF into action and eventually finds the target whereas the Z9 froze like a "deer in the headlights".
I never bothered to extend testing to BIF and more demanding action as there was no point. When shooting in dynamic area AFF and the bird was out in the open and eye was clearly visible the Z9 did a respectable job and I was thrilled with the oversampled IQ which was far better than on the A1. But since I video birds in the wild in typically difficult environments which require spot focusing, the Z9 fell short of my needs. Too bad really, because I loved the IQ and would have appreciated the wider range of Nikon lens offerings. But if the camera can't focus, nothing else really matters.
I can't say anything about the Z9s stills AF capability as hardly shot any stills. ...Show more →
p.39 #16 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Gary Irwin wrote:
The Z9 may AF well using native glass and in ideal conditions, but it preformed poorly using adaptive glass (a Sony 200-600G with the Megadap adapter) when shooting video. I'm talking about dead simple "static" shooting situations using spot AFF on a bird 20 feet away.
200-600 is a slow lens and adapted with a 3rd party adapter, you cannot really make a decision about the camera's AF. In my tests with ETZ21, the z9 worked well with Sony 70-200 gm ii, poorly with 600 gm, and excellent with native lenses. And the IQ and EVF were excellent. I only sold it due to the bulk and weight. Compared to a9, a1, etc .. which focus equally well, the body size and weight is a bit ridiculous.
p.39 #17 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
saaketham wrote:
200-600 is a slow lens and adapted with a 3rd party adapter, you cannot really make a decision about the camera's AF. In my tests with ETZ21, the z9 worked well with Sony 70-200 gm ii, poorly with 600 gm, and excellent with native lenses. And the IQ and EVF were excellent. I only sold it due to the bulk and weight. Compared to a9, a1, etc .. which focus equally well, the body size and weight is a bit ridiculous.
I am currently in West Virginia shooting landscape with my two A1s and, the new PZ 16-35, 24-70 GM II, 70-200 GM II and two Voigtlander lenses. I sure don't want to pack two Z9 size/weight cameras in my bag! I use my cameras for everything, not just shooting birds.
p.39 #18 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
saaketham wrote:
200-600 is a slow lens and adapted with a 3rd party adapter, you cannot really make a decision about the camera's AF. In my tests with ETZ21, the z9 worked well with Sony 70-200 gm ii, poorly with 600 gm, and excellent with native lenses. And the IQ and EVF were excellent. I only sold it due to the bulk and weight. Compared to a9, a1, etc .. which focus equally well, the body size and weight is a bit ridiculous.
Speed/tracking had nothing to do with it -- the Z9s AF was simply fussier when shooting video vs. the A1 in static situations where nothing was moving. It would respond by refocusing on the background/foreground object then return to the main subject, but you shouldn't have to do that. It don't see how the adapter would be at fault.
p.39 #19 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Since you only tried it with a 3rd party adapter, its not a conclusive test
I am not defending the z9, by the way
The a1 does AF better, in a much smaller form factor and much less weight.
But your observations are not correct regarding the z9 AF.
And if you don't see why an adapted lens that starts at f/5.6, on a 3rd party adapter not officially supported by Nikon won't slow it down, then ... 🥶
