p.4 #1 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
shadow9d9 wrote:
The thing is, the A1 is not just for birds. It is also a high resolution sensor that works with landscape or anything else that you throw at it. Plus, it is silent to boot. An all in one. The Om1 is low resolution and one purpose, in a system that won't evolve..the last of a company that exoted the business and now in the hands of a liquidator company..meanwhile, Sony is at the top of its game and releasing new producta and innovations all the time. The future is bright. If you only do birding and nothing else, yes, the om1 is good, and a good value....Show more →
The a1 also costs 40% more, so I’d expect it be better.
p.4 #2 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
dcisive wrote:
I've tried my best to get the electronic shutter to illustrate an issue. I don't shoot fast moving subjects nor a flash at this time. So far there has been NO evidence of ANY artifacts, loss of dynamic range (it remains 14bit by the way), rolling shutter or anything else for that matter. Same same as far as I'm concerned. I love the quiet as I've shot with just ES for several years now with other cameras I had or have (such as the OM-1). Unless I'm going to be in a situation where electronic shutter is KNOWN to have issues I'll use it. There are no real world down sides for what I'm shooting (real estate, wildlife that isn't flying or running, portraits and landscapes. ...Show more →
I think it's best to sum up what slow readout speed (electronic shutter) means:
1) movement -> rolling shutter effect (moving objects are distorted)
2) shooting with flash requires MS
3) banding due to light source, LEDs especially as they can flicker with various frequencies. You need to be shooting using variable s.s. in ES, as anti-flicker mode works only in MS on A7RV.
That's it I hope .
Now, regarding movement, I used to shoot ES on A7III, which has a bit faster readout speed, and I've still run into the distortion from time to time (kids mostly), so it's about one being able to accept that some percentage of the shots will be unusable...
p.4 #3 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
jhapeman wrote:
I have both and have used both extensively, with a whole suite of GM lenses; it's not an exaggeration. The "stickiness" is only what you see on the screen with the green boxes. That *looks* good when you're shooting, but when you go pixel-peep the images the percentage of shots in critical focus is much lower than the A1 (or even the A9) and much lower than those green boxes would imply. Part of this is no doubt the fact that the slower readout on the sensor means vastly fewer AF calculations per second; the AI chip can only help locate the objects to focus on, it can't compensate for what happens with motion in between those readouts and AF calculations.
This is why for action and/or fast-moving subjects the A1 does so much better. I spent several full days in my blind shooting birds with the A7RV and down at my favorite place for shooting BIF. It's a great camera. IMO its a huge leap up from the previous A7 series cameras in terms of AF performance (although not so huge over the A7IV which is really quite good as well), but it's just not in the same class as the A1. Static subjects or very slowly moving ones it can excel, and the AI chip actually gives it an edge on finding subjects and locking onto them vs. an A1, but that again doesn't mean a greater total number of keeper shots at the end of the day. Even perched small birds tend to rapidly move their head around, and in bursts with both the A7RV and A1 I still get more critically sharp images from the A1, in no small part due to the fact that at 2-3x the fps you simply statistically increase your odds in a linear fashion.
If you're a mixed-use shooter and you don't do a lot of action photography, the A7RV is a superb camera and really the best choice, but if you like to shoot any kind of action the A1 is the vastly superior option.
Same experience here.
I replaced my A7RIII with the RV and I'm happy with the improvements (mostly landscape shooting).
However, for fast moving subjects my A9 still does much better than the RV. It must be because of the faster AF calculations of the stacked sensor.
I've seen people selling their A1 because they believed the AF of the RV is an upgrade. A big mistake.
p.4 #4 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
Jochenb wrote:
Same experience here.
I replaced my A7RIII with the RV and I'm happy with the improvements (mostly landscape shooting).
However, for fast moving subjects my A9 still does much better than the RV. It must be because of the faster AF calculations of the stacked sensor.
I've seen people selling their A1 because they believed the AF of the RV is an upgrade. A big mistake.
I've also got an A9 but so far I've been very impressed with how the green tracking box has translated to in-focus photos on the A7RV (unlike what I experienced with the A7RIV). Certainly using the 50mm GM and 70-200 GM II on erratic toddlers and dogs I've not felt like it was lacking anything compared to the A9. The colour OOC also seems like a big upgrade to me from the older RIV model too.
I'll keep the A9 when I need 20fps or better electronic shutter but otherwise on my current findings it will be primarily the backup camera.
p.4 #5 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
Geeeeeezus this whole rolling shutter thing is truly a DEAD HORSE! I get it already. Let's bottom line it. If you have a A7RV and are shooting fast moving subjects or desiring to fast pan set your shutter to Mechanical. If you're shooting static portraits, landscapes, real estate and such the electronic shutter will work PERFECTLY FINE unless of course you're dealing with LED lighting. Can we move on from it for crying out loud already. The poor A7RV is getting pummeled to death as if it's incompetent all because a number of folks shoot faster moving stuff and can't stand it that it doesn't have a stacked sensor. Sheesh......
p.4 #7 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
dcisive wrote:
Geeeeeezus this whole rolling shutter thing is truly a DEAD HORSE! I get it already. Let's bottom line it. If you have a A7RV and are shooting fast moving subjects or desiring to fast pan set your shutter to Mechanical. If you're shooting static portraits, landscapes, real estate and such the electronic shutter will work PERFECTLY FINE unless of course you're dealing with LED lighting. Can we move on from it for crying out loud already. The poor A7RV is getting pummeled to death as if it's incompetent all because a number of folks shoot faster moving stuff and can't stand it that it doesn't have a stacked sensor. Sheesh.........Show more →
Not sure if this was meant as a reply to me but I wasn't implying the A7RV electronic shutter was no good. Its great and I use it for most things. The sigma fp-l camera has a similar sensor and no mech shutter at all and works just fine.
Occasionally I shoot golf, which is the main time the A9 is more suitable. Shooting silently with high FPS and minimising rolling shutter are important (to me) in that case.
p.4 #8 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
chez wrote:
Why not just shoot mechanical shutter for those occasions?
Yes, absolutely.
I was just pointing out what slow readout means in practice, as it can be risky to get used to ES.
If I had a non-stacked camera now, I'd probably be shooting full mechanical .
p.4 #12 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
GMPhotography wrote:
You all let a Troll get to you.
It’s a dead issue and a limitation that most of us can get around. I’m done talking about it except I’d like to figure out LED regardless of shutter
Isn't the only solution the variable shutter rate? That's how I got around it on the A7RV here in my office--I installed LED lights a few years ago to replace the fluorescents.
p.4 #13 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
jhapeman wrote:
Isn't the only solution the variable shutter rate? That's how I got around it on the A7RV here in my office--I installed LED lights a few years ago to replace the fluorescents.
Anti-flicker for those regular (50/60 or 100/120 hz) leds...
p.4 #14 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
jhapeman wrote:
Isn't the only solution the variable shutter rate? That's how I got around it on the A7RV here in my office--I installed LED lights a few years ago to replace the fluorescents.
That last job I had anti - flicker mechanical with variable off and it worked. I think anti- flicker does more than just fluorescent lighting. We seriously need to test this all out. I may try
p.4 #15 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
j4nu wrote:
Anti-flicker for those regular (50/60 or 100/120 hz) leds...
Isn't anti-flicker for fluorescent lights and variable shutter for LEDs? That is how the Help Guide for the A1 makes it sound. But I don't really know.
This whole issue cries out for a thorough "dummies-style" explanation from someone who is an engineer, is a photographer, and who can communicate clearly to non-experts and non-engineers. Spencer Cox over at photographylife.com did a very nice job on the differences among types of shutters, with pros and cons for each case. Something like that on LEDs, other modern forms of lighting, and sensors and shutter types would be great to have. Something that included the differences among residential and office LEDs, stage and stadium LEDs, etc.
LEDs are clearly where lighting is going. My whole house is exclusively LEDs at this point except for two spots in one bathroom, under-counter lights in the kitchen, and a couple of hard-to-access over-counter spotlights in the kitchen. And they are the next to go.
p.4 #16 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
chiron wrote:
Isn't anti-flicker for fluorescent lights and variable shutter for LEDs? That is how the Help Guide for the A1 makes it sound.
This whole issue cries out for a thorough "dummies-style" explanation from someone who is an engineer, is a photographer, and who can communicate clearly to non-experts and non-engineers. Spencer Cox over at photographylife.com did a very nice job on the differences among types of shutters, with pros and cons for each case. Something like that on LEDs, other modern forms of lighting, and sensors and shutter types would be great to have. Something that included the differences among residential and office LEDs, stage and stadium LEDs, etc.
LEDs are clearly where lighting is going. My whole house is exclusively LEDs at this point except for two spots in one bathroom, under-counter lights in the kitchen, and a couple of hard-to-access over-counter spotlights in the kitchen. And they are the next to go....Show more →
It's the flicker rate that matters, not the lightning type. We're seeing most issues with LEDs because they are capable of different flicker rates and often use some kind of a "controller" to steer them.
Anti-flicker "fixes" only 50/60 and 100/120 hz (which corresponds to typical lightning on the grid, not run through a dedicated controller) according to A1 help guide...
p.4 #17 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
j4nu wrote:
It's the flicker rate that matters, not the lightning type. We're seeing most issues with LEDs because they are capable of different flicker rates and often use some kind of a "controller" to steer them.
Anti-flicker "fixes" only 50/60 and 100/120 hz (which corresponds to typical lightning on the grid, not run through a dedicated controller) according to A1 help guide...
Exactly this, most modern LEDs are not tied to the frequency of the electrical system, which gives them many advantages but it does mean you have to use the variable shutter speed to tune into a place where you won't get banding. Doesn't matter what digital camera you are using. AFAIK, there's also no "easy" setting for it, as the rate can vary by the light, so you have to figure it out.
p.4 #18 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
j4nu wrote:
It's the flicker rate that matters, not the lightning type. We're seeing most issues with LEDs because they are capable of different flicker rates and often use some kind of a "controller" to steer them.
Anti-flicker "fixes" only 50/60 and 100/120 hz (which corresponds to typical lightning on the grid, not run through a dedicated controller) according to A1 help guide...
Yes, I think that is why the help guide pegs anti-flicker to fluorescent lights, because they flicker with the grid but LEDs do not and vary, so they get the variable shutter. It seems to me more likely that the variable shutter would work for fluorescents than that the anti-flicker would work for LEDs.
p.4 #19 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
jhapeman wrote:
Exactly this, most modern LEDs are not tied to the frequency of the electrical system, which gives them many advantages but it does mean you have to use the variable shutter speed to tune into a place where you won't get banding. Doesn't matter what digital camera you are using. AFAIK, there's also no "easy" setting for it, as the rate can vary by the light, so you have to figure it out.
This is where on the A7RV they put in Variable shutter scan so you can scan the scene under those lights. I need the help guide here to explain how it works. Its been a guessing game
.