p.6 #1 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
chez wrote:
Feel free to tell everyone that a big heavy bulky camera is more ergonomic and comfortable to drag along than a compact light camera. Too each their own...but heavy and big does not make it ergonomically better after a 12 hour day in your hands.
I never said that. I said they are for me, and many others. I'm saying there are some (perhaps even many, given preorder demand) who will find the new Nikon and Canon are what they've been waiting for.
I've spent more 12 hour days with a full-sized pro body in my hands than I can count; through markets, up mountains, down alleys, along sidelines, in venues, through rain forests, in studios...for me, this guy, the person typing, it is more comfortable to have my hands around a full sized body.
It's nice that everyone now has options. Weight has never been a big concern for me, I don't tend to notice it too much. Size? Yes, in the bag, it means an extra lens. I'm very happy with my Sonys now but, as I have said, were I to spend all day with a camera in my hands again regularly, I'd prefer the larger form factor.
p.6 #2 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
timgangloff wrote:
I believe you are wrong on this point. A gripped a1 is much more comfortable to hold and shoot for my style of shooting, which is mostly portraits and sports. I'd much prefer an R3 sized A1. When I shot Canon I had a hand strap on my 1dxII and with that, I never felt the camera was too heavy. And most of the time, the camera is attached to heavy lenses and sits on a monopod so weight is largely irrelevant. As has been stated, a reduction in weight alone does not make it easier to shoot with. Having a vertically oriented grip and shutter can make it much easier to shoot with. The A1 sans grip can be frustrating to use, which is my grip almost never comes off, unless I'm putting it into a cage to shoot video. ...Show more →
Wrong for you...right for me. Two reasons why I moved from Canon to Sony were the smaller lighter cameras and the high mpix sensors.
p.6 #3 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
NonDecaf wrote:
…
Yes, that is a benefit for the A1. But at the same time, there is a reason why Sony offers the grip, and many people purchase it, when it is easy to just carry a couple of extra batteries in your pocket. So if you're one of those people who prefer the handling with the grip, the weight is not really a major issue, and an integrated design will be sturdier than using a screw-on grip.
You would appreciate a grip if you are doing something like star trails, exposing hundreds of frames one right after another.
p.6 #4 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
Steve Spencer wrote:
There are at least four ways that the Z9 specs are better and those include:
Faster sensor scan speed (we will know more when the camera is release, but Nikon seems to have a small advantage here)
No known advantage in performance from this even if proven true.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Longer video shooting capabilities (the Z9 claims 2 hours of 8K video whereas Sony doesn't appear to be able to shoot that long).
Probably true, but the Sony shoots long enough for the vast majority of use cases.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Faster storage cards (the CFE B type cards in the Z9 are definitely faster than the CFE A type cards in the A1)
Absolutely true. But the difference in actual number of frames in the buffer are not big. The differences are mostly the result of file size optimizations. In both the Nikon and the Sony at 30fps where it really matters they can both shot JPEG until the cards fill.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Better battery life
More properly stated as the Nikon has a larger capacity battery as its only option. When gripped with equal capacity battery (actually still slightly smaller) the a1 actually gets more shots before having to switch. The a1 runs at a lower voltage. It is more efficient energy usage wise.
As you have said, the performance differences in the two cameras are now small. They will make a difference in only edge use cases. Pending confirmation of AF equivalency the primary difference is going to come down to form factor.
p.6 #5 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
1bwana1 wrote:
As you have said, the performance differences in the two cameras are now small. They will make a difference in only edge use cases. Pending confirmation of AF equivalency the primary difference is going to come down to form factor.
I think this is the key. On paper, it's great to see that Nikon is catching up and starting to flesh out a truly competitive camera range. It would be great if the choice between say, the A1 and Z9 was form factor...but the pessimist in me thinks that Nikon's AF likely hasn't caught up yet. I'd love to be wrong, for Nikon's sake.
But as you said, AF equivalency will be the primary factor here.
p.6 #6 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
There are a bunch of different needs when it comes to AF. Birders might have one need, sport photographers another, portrait photographers another and travel / culture photographers yet another need.
My biggest need is human eye detection and sticky tracking in very dim light.
p.6 #7 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
shadow9d9 wrote:
"In the hand, it's not only the ultralight mag-alloy design that aids in ease of handling and maneuverability, but much like in the 400mm f/2.8, there's also a thoughtful, deliberate optical design that places more of the lens elements (and thus weight) towards the rear of the lens for better balance. Plus, there's a large air gap between the lens' big front element and the rest of the elements that further aids in lightening the overall bulk and moving the balance back towards the lens and camera's center of mass, thus reducing front-heaviness." https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sony/fe-600mm-f4-gm-oss/review/
So, not only are those used Nikon and Canon lenses more front heavy, you then need to use adapters, which puts the center of gravity even farther forward. This poor front heavy balance is part of why people often think there is a need for the humongous and heavy dslr gripped cameras...to balance out the front heaviness....Show more →
Weight distribution is irrelevant if Sony doesn't offer a 300 2.8, a 120-300 2.8 or a 500f4. And probably even more important than weight distribution is price. It doesn't matter if a newer tech Sony lens has better balance if 90%of the sports shooters I know can't afford the 400 2.8.
p.6 #8 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
shadow9d9 wrote:
Well, it is super weird because inserted your own preference as the default comparison. No, the default comparison is the A1 vs the Z9. Not an A1 with an accessory attached.
And you inserted your own preference for smaller cameras. I'm not a review channel. Everybody here is presenting their own perspective and opinions for their own needs. Heck, half the opinions on auto-focus on this forum seem to come from people interested in shooting birds - not exactly something most sports/action shooters care about. Now I personally am not bothered by it, and I do think that there is a lot of value in their opinion too.
shadow9d9 wrote:
That isn't evidence in any way that there is a significant amount of people who would use grips. The existence of an accessory doesn't prove demand.
Sony/Nikon/Canon/Panasonic/Fuji and dozens of third-parties all invest time and money and engineering resources into a product that nobody wants. Maybe they know their market more than you - just something to consider.
shadow9d9 wrote:
And you also completely ignored my response to the E mount having 4x+ the amount of native lenses as Nikon. You claimed that third party lenses are less valuable because you can't get 30fps, yet with Nikon, you can only EVER get 30fps as JPEGS , and so 20fps is the max for raws, which is a negligible amount of difference compared to 15fps.
One of the the major selling points of an sports/action camera is FPS , along with fast, accurate focusing, etc. You're beating the drum on third-party lenses when there are none that can actually take advantage of the A1's speed. This is an (AFAIK) artificial limitation imposed by Sony. Not very open of them. This comparison is A1 vs Z9, not A7R vs Z7.
p.6 #9 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
I have average hands (or maybe slightly larger than average) and in no way I will ever buy and carry a brick the size and weight of Z9. Regardless of the attached lens, small cameras are always more comfortable to carry and use unless someone want to impress untrained eyes with their cameras, lol. Regardless of the excuses for wanting a big camera, the true reason some people may prefer a big camera the size of Z9 is because of the emotions and beliefs they have developed towards them or because they are giants 7feet tall with hands one feet wide, lol. I have used cameras as small as Nex 5n and found them as comfortable to hold as A7 series.
Nevertheless, I do admire the Nikon's bold move to remove the mechanical shutter even though it still offers some advantages (in the A1). I think all cameras will eventually be without a mechanical shutter but that will take another decade or more.
p.6 #10 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
The last few pages of this thread are hilarious. People will REALLY make arguments for having less choices (integrated grip/no mech shutter/less memory card formats)...what a world.
Anyways, if you shoot Nikon and need A1 performance, you've got it now.
If you shoot Sony and need A1 performance...well...save your money
This thread has clearly run its course on the Sony side.
p.6 #11 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
NonDecaf wrote:
One of the the major selling points of an sports/action camera is FPS , along with fast, accurate focusing, etc. You're beating the drum on third-party lenses when there are none that can actually take advantage of the A1's speed. This is an (AFAIK) artificial limitation imposed by Sony. Not very open of them. This comparison is A1 vs Z9, not A7R vs Z7.
Most 3rd party glass is made for uses other that fast action sports or wildlife. I agree that buying long third party lenses for those uses makes no sense for use on the stacked sensor bodies.
p.6 #12 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
chez wrote:
There are a bunch of different needs when it comes to AF. Birders might have one need, sport photographers another, portrait photographers another and travel / culture photographers yet another need.
My biggest need is human eye detection and sticky tracking in very dim light.
Eye AF is mine too these days. I'm an undemanding AF user now, so I suspect something like Nikon's Z7II would work perfectly for me...I am, after all, still rocking my A7RII. For something like the Z9 and its intended audience, it will likely need to be close to the A1 in its ability to track and nail fast moving objects.
For me, I'll be amazed by the AF of my next upgrade, be that a used RIV or the yet to be released RV...
p.6 #13 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
RoamingScott wrote:
The last few pages of this thread are hilarious. People will REALLY make arguments for having less choices (integrated grip/no mech shutter/less memory card formats)...what a world.
Anyways, if you shoot Nikon and need A1 performance, you've got it now.
If you shoot Sony and need A1 performance...well...save your money
This thread has clearly run its course on the Sony side.
Or, you know, make arguments for what they like, despite being continuously told how foolish they are for liking what they like. What a world
p.6 #14 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
Dave Sanders wrote:
Or, you know, make arguments for what they like, despite being continuously told how foolish they are for liking what they like. What a world
In general, posting about another company's products on any given brand's forum will lead to that. Not many people are shooting Sony because they like Z9 style bodies.
I'm getting more than annoyed about Nikon and Canon threads in the Sony forum, as well as the behavior of many of our Sony posters. Those forums are a click away if I or anyone else want to read about and discuss those brands' offerings.
p.6 #15 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
RoamingScott wrote:
In general, posting about another company's products on any given brand's forum will lead to that. Not many people are shooting Sony because they like Z9 style bodies.
I'm getting more than annoyed about Nikon and Canon threads in the Sony forum, as well as the behavior of many of our Sony posters. Those forums are a click away if I or anyone else want to read about and discuss those brands' offerings.
That's true, people take their brand preferences seriously, especially if they've spent time making the decision. It's like asking my Bavarian friend how he feels about front wheel drive BMW's
That said, comparisons of competing models across brands has been the bread and butter of online photography forums since I can remember. I can remember the heated debates about the Minolta Maxxum 9 (ungripped!) vs. the Nikon F5 (gripped!) in the old Yahoo Minolta Users Group...or even those of us who had 'seen the light' with the Maxxum 7 vs. the 9...
p.6 #16 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
RoamingScott wrote:
In general, posting about another company's products on any given brand's forum will lead to that. Not many people are shooting Sony because they like Z9 style bodies.
I'm getting more than annoyed about Nikon and Canon threads in the Sony forum, as well as the behavior of many of our Sony posters. Those forums are a click away if I or anyone else want to read about and discuss those brands' offerings.
Get used to it, that will never change. It is actually a good thing when done respectfully.
p.6 #17 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
RoamingScott wrote:
In general, posting about another company's products on any given brand's forum will lead to that. Not many people are shooting Sony because they like Z9 style bodies.
I'm getting more than annoyed about Nikon and Canon threads in the Sony forum, as well as the behavior of many of our Sony posters. Those forums are a click away if I or anyone else want to read about and discuss those brands' offerings.
The point is to be accepting of someone else's _opinion_ without needlessly berating them to change their mind. After adding "to me" , "for my use" , "my preference" , if you're told you're a dummy for thinking so - the thread is obviously going to go South..
p.6 #18 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
RoamingScott wrote:
I'm getting more than annoyed about Nikon and Canon threads in the Sony forum, as well as the behavior of many of our Sony posters.
Those forums are a click away if I or anyone else want to read about and discuss those brands' offerings.
Scott, I'd like to formally invite you to spend just 8 hours on the Nikon forum.
You may be interested to see the Sony users who spend a lot of time there,
educating us poor Nikon users (I shoot both, and I don't care to argue with them as much since the z9 launch)
about the fatal flaws in Nikon products, how DSLRs are dead, how anyone still shooting DSLRs are crazy old people,
how the z bodies are worthless and how only the A1 can save our souls.
I've ordered a z9, but continue using and loving my a1. I am trying all means to save my soul.
p.6 #19 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 – The 10 main differences"
saaketham wrote:
Scott, I'd like to formally invite you to spend just 8 hours on the Nikon forum.
You may be interested to see the Sony users who spend a lot of time there,
educating us poor Nikon users (I shoot both, and I don't care to argue with them as much since the z9 launch)
about the fatal flaws in Nikon products, how DSLRs are dead, how anyone still shooting DSLRs are crazy old people,
how the z bodies are worthless and how only the A1 can save our souls.
I've ordered a z9, but continue using and loving my a1. I am trying all means to save my soul....Show more →
I'm already dangerously close to losing my minds in these trying times, I'm not sure I'd survive 8 hours over there
