j4nu wrote:
Whether the new feature is a part of pre-planned development unannounced previously or a feature developed in an agile way due to market demands is mostly irrelevant to end users, such as us.
Z9 got pre-capture, R5 got high-res IBIS mode, A1 got S/M RAWs - the customers are certainly happy they got them, even if they were unnanounced earlier.
The only case I remember of missing feature on launch that was announced for Z9 was 8k60p video and it was indeed added later in firmware update. That update also included EVF refresh rate bump to 120hz, a nice example of managers not crippling tech capabilities of the camera, as we're seeing now with A1. Z9 was also missing true anti-flicker mode (in a camera without mech shutter ), which was luckily also added later on.
Back when Sony provided significant updates (also to 3rd gen bodies, A7III and A7RIII - eyeAF completely changed the way it worked, but I guess some don't remember those dark times) it was around the time C&N entered the mirrorless market. That's it I think - as long as Sony does not feel endangered somehow, I don't think we'll see any significant updates to old cameras. ...Show more →
I don't disagree, but I'd subsitute Nikon and Canon in there for Sony in your last sentence. I think 100% of what you have seen in recent years is about this battle as the market has undergone the first major technology shift since the switch from film to digital. Given the economics and complexities involved, I just don't see future significant changes in features via firmware to be a model any of the camera manufacturers will be looking to stick with.
I think for many (most?) A1 owners it is still the camera they would choose if they were buying today. I think that as long as this is the case Sony will not feel the need to update it. When that becomes not true, they will probably bring out the A1-II.
For me, I am very satisfied with my A1's feature set, and performance as a "all around camera". Sony could surprise me with some astounding new technology, but as of today I don't see any new features in the industry that would entice me to upgrade to an A1-II.
1bwana1 wrote:
I think for many (most?) A1 owners it is still the camera they would choose if they were buying today. I think that as long as this is the case Sony will not feel the need to update it. When that becomes not true, they will probably bring out the A1-II.
For me, I am very satisfied with my A1's feature set, and performance as a "all around camera". Sony could surprise me with some astounding new technology, but as of today I don't see any new features in the industry that would entice me to upgrade to an A1-II.
Still, I always appreciate a new, free upgrade......Show more →
I bought and used an A7RV for a little while, and I have to say the AI object recognition was amazing. In many ways it allows a slower camera to compete with the A1 in many AF situations. I will be at the front of the line for an A1II under the assumption Sony will bring that to their flagship. When that happens, the AF on the A1 will take another leap forward IMO. Other than that the other stuff is more like a "nice to have," particularly the firmware update from a card.
Like any other company, Sony does not have unlimited resources; it could be just a matter of time before they release another A1 update—that this thread exists from a rumour may have some merit.
jhapeman wrote:
I bought and used an A7RV for a little while, and I have to say the AI object recognition was amazing. In many ways it allows a slower camera to compete with the A1 in many AF situations. I will be at the front of the line for an A1II under the assumption Sony will bring that to their flagship. When that happens, the AF on the A1 will take another leap forward IMO. Other than that the other stuff is more like a "nice to have," particularly the firmware update from a card.
My local store let me take and try an A7RV. I agree the AI focusing is excellent. I am sure it will be even more amazing on the A1. But, I am also not missing focus with my current A1 with what and how I shoot. I'm not sure the juice would be worth the squeeze if my net result is the same.
I am always open to being amazed, and have a pattern of trying to have the best in my bag. So, never say never...
Certainly A7RV AF impressed me more than I ever thought it would. I thought the lack of a stacked sensor with slow readout and relatively low AF calculations/sec would hamper it for actual fast action. I thought the AI chip would give it better subject detection when things weren't moving fast.
Low and behold, the AF for fast birds like kestrels, swallows, diving terns and osprey was just amazingly consistent. I'm sure this is helped by the camera "only" shooting 10FPS. I'm sure if it was allowed to shoot 30FPS it would fall apart with that sensor. BUT, it was so accurate that even at 10FPS I got lots of great keepers and culling was way faster with 1/3 the # of files I would have had from my A1.
The AI chip worked really well for a bee hovering around some flowers. I need to test the insect mode more before I send back the camera. I also noted it did do better looking past distracting sticks/foliage to see the perched bird. Although it wasn't a huge improvement and really I don't want those shots anyways. I've mixed feelings about it showing the birds body rectangle and then head and then eye...I sort of just like the dancing squares until it finds the eye. I know I can turn off that display for body and head if I want to so no big deal.
For what I shoot, I'm not going to buy an A7RV but it has got me way more excited and ready to part with some $$$ for an A1II and maybe even an A9III (MP dependent).
I'm thinking A9III might be the "Olympic" camera and A1II not till later 2024 or even Jan 2025 at the 4 year mark....I hope not...would like the A1II to also come before the Olympics so I can get it sooner than later.
arbitrage wrote:
Certainly A7RV AF impressed me more than I ever thought it would. I thought the lack of a stacked sensor with slow readout and relatively low AF calculations/sec would hamper it for actual fast action. I thought the AI chip would give it better subject detection when things weren't moving fast.
Low and behold, the AF for fast birds like kestrels, swallows, diving terns and osprey was just amazingly consistent. I'm sure this is helped by the camera "only" shooting 10FPS. I'm sure if it was allowed to shoot 30FPS it would fall apart with that sensor. BUT, it was so accurate that even at 10FPS I got lots of great keepers and culling was way faster with 1/3 the # of files I would have had from my A1.
The AI chip worked really well for a bee hovering around some flowers. I need to test the insect mode more before I send back the camera. I also noted it did do better looking past distracting sticks/foliage to see the perched bird. Although it wasn't a huge improvement and really I don't want those shots anyways. I've mixed feelings about it showing the birds body rectangle and then head and then eye...I sort of just like the dancing squares until it finds the eye. I know I can turn off that display for body and head if I want to so no big deal.
For what I shoot, I'm not going to buy an A7RV but it has got me way more excited and ready to part with some $$$ for an A1II and maybe even an A9III (MP dependent).
I'm thinking A9III might be the "Olympic" camera and A1II not till later 2024 or even Jan 2025 at the 4 year mark....I hope not...would like the A1II to also come before the Olympics so I can get it sooner than later....Show more →
I'm 100% with you on this I was also really surprised on the keeper rate, particularly with BIF. It also was a big bonus for me shooting perched birds in busy scenes--the AI chip/software really did a great job finding a bird in the shot. I used to really want an A9III but I've become so addicted to the A1 megapixels it would be hard to go backwards, especially since I've known spent all the monies on the huge hard drives, etc.
arbitrage wrote:
Low and behold, the AF for fast birds like kestrels, swallows, diving terns and osprey was just amazingly consistent. I'm sure this is helped by the camera "only" shooting 10FPS. I'm sure if it was allowed to shoot 30FPS it would fall apart with that sensor. BUT, it was so accurate that even at 10FPS I got lots of great keepers and culling was way faster with 1/3 the # of files I would have had from my A1.
Interesting, the other poster here said that when it comes to objects (not birds though) moving erratically, especially towards the camera, A1 had a visible higher number of keepers... Maybe I should "side"-grade then .
j4nu wrote:
Interesting, the other poster here said that when it comes to objects (not birds though) moving erratically, especially towards the camera, A1 had a visible higher number of keepers... Maybe I should "side"-grade then .
There's a higher number and then a higher percentage. I can shoot 3x as fast with an A1, so the "keeper" rate on the A1 might be lower but you'll still have a greater total number of good shots.
The A1 definitely does better with more rapid or erratic movement but that's not too surprising. Regardless, given what that AI chip can do for the slow sensor/AF in the A7RV, I'm pretty darned excited to see it on the A1 or an A9III if they make one.
Yeah...also consider that for fast motion, only the A9/A9II/A1 are mostly immune to rolling shutter effects using the electronic shutter. That might be worth considering for fast moving animals/birds/sports.
People say they think the R5 and Z9 were released early with the idea that features that weren't ready yet would be added with firmware upgrades. So why do people assume Sony didn't do the same with the first gen A9? That all the features Sony added were ones they had planned on being in the body but didn't want to wait.
Dr Al wrote:
People say they think the R5 and Z9 were released early with the idea that features that weren't ready yet would be added with firmware upgrades. So why do people assume Sony didn't do the same with the first gen A9? That all the features Sony added were ones they had planned on being in the body but didn't want to wait.
Well one reason may be that Nikon actually said this was the case. On release Nikon listed some specs that were not yet in the camera. They said these would come in future firmware updates. They even listed these features in advertising and on product packaging.
1bwana1 wrote:
Well one reason may be that Nikon actually said this was the case. On release Nikon listed some specs that were not yet in the camera. They said these would come in future firmware updates. They even listed these features in advertising and on product packaging.
Dr Al wrote:
People say they think the R5 and Z9 were released early with the idea that features that weren't ready yet would be added with firmware upgrades. So why do people assume Sony didn't do the same with the first gen A9?
because nikon in particular dropped the ball, for example they released the z9 without the industry-standard hi-frequency led flicker reduction that other camera bodies already had, and it took 'em at least two firmware updates to get it.
that's pretty much a mandatory feature on modern sports cameras.
Dr Al wrote:
That all the features Sony added were ones they had planned on being in the body but didn't want to wait.
that is speculation, sony never stated that they were developing real-time tracking subject acquisition, and afaik it's still unequalled in the industry today.
swldstn wrote:
But you still give Canon credit. Why is that?
I don't give Canon credit. I didn't even mention them because I don't follow them and don't have any knowledge about what they have done. I follow Sony, Leica, and Nikon because those are the companies whose products I use.
because nikon in particular dropped the ball, for example they released the z9 without the industry-standard hi-frequency led flicker reduction that other camera bodies already had, and it took 'em at least two firmware updates to get it.
that's pretty much a mandatory feature on modern sports cameras.
that is speculation, sony never stated that they were developing real-time tracking subject acquisition, and afaik it's still unequalled in the industry today.
It may be speculation but Sony is very tight lipped about what they are doing. The A9 was a game changer for Sony. Before it they were making cameras that were trying to compete with the other brands. When it came out Sony showed that they wanted to be a leader, not a follower. It's success lead to them taking a chance with the A1.
I'm not sure if I would use the A9 as the example of what Sony needs to always do. I don't know any more than anyone else but it's very possible that the features they added with firmware updates were features that were always there but disabled. As they got them working they enabled them. Again, speculation but it's just as likely as they decided after the fact to add them.
I know it is important for Sony to stay tight lipped and secretive about their approach to camera and firmware development but it’s also important to their customers that we understand what we are buying and how a product will be supported. The purchase of one body like the A1 is a small fraction of the owners costs incurred when you buy into a brand. Overall the body cost is probably only one tenth or one fifth the system cost. A proper balance needs to be achieved and as on owner of more than 17 Sony A7x, A7Rx, A9x, A1, and A6xxx I’m not sure these days I’m comfortable with Sony’s openness on their priorities and their willingness to share these. Not sure what the have to do but it seems their user community is frustrated with them.
), which was luckily also added later on.
