chez wrote:
So if one does not shoot fast moving objects, the A1 does not really add anything over the A7R5 and loses out in things like resolution, ibis, lcd usability, focus stacking and stickier AF
Silent shooting in houses of worship or weddings. Silent shooting doesn't alert animals or bother people. Usability with A1 is better. No shutter vibration lets you hold the camera more still.
shadow9d9 wrote:
Silent shooting in houses of worship or weddings. Silent shooting doesn't alert animals or bother people. Usability with A1 is better. No shutter vibration lets you hold the camera more still.
Yea, there are situations where a silent shutter is handy…but it wasn’t that long ago we all got by with the mechanical shutter.
As far as shooting handheld, I’ve seen some images from the A7R5 that are shot at unheard of shutter speeds, into the seconds range.
Looking through the images posted on the A1 image thread, really the only ones posted that would be difficult to do with the A7R5 would be some of the birds in flight…others I can’t see any benefits of the A1 over the A7R5.
Yes, if one shoots BIF, then the A1 is your camera…but shooting birds on a perch, that can easily to accomplished with the A7R5…or in fact the A7R3.
I see a lot of people claiming the silent shooting as being so big, but looking at the images that are posted, not so much.
chez wrote:
I see a lot of people claiming the silent shooting as being so big, but looking at the images that are posted, not so much.
Really depends on how close you are and how skittish the critter is. I have seen birds take off after the first click of an A7RIV shutter, which is fairly well dampened. Of course that isn't common. But then really close encounters aren't common either.
chez wrote:
Yea, there are situations where a silent shutter is handy…but it wasn’t that long ago we all got by with the mechanical shutter.
As far as shooting handheld, I’ve seen some images from the A7R5 that are shot at unheard of shutter speeds, into the seconds range.
Looking through the images posted on the A1 image thread, really the only ones posted that would be difficult to do with the A7R5 would be some of the birds in flight…others I can’t see any benefits of the A1 over the A7R5.
Yes, if one shoots BIF, then the A1 is your camera…but shooting birds on a perch, that can easily to accomplished with the A7R5…or in fact the A7R3.
I see a lot of people claiming the silent shooting as being so big, but looking at the images that are posted, not so much....Show more →
The silent shooting is about the experience and ability to do it unobtrusively and without disturbing others around you. It is something that wouldn't be seen in the photos. It is in the experience and courtesy. It is magical imo.
The AF performance of the RV is very often being overrated in my opinion.
I did a test with a dog running at me. Lens: 70-200 GM II, so very fast focusing.
A7RV: the subject recognition works very nice, but AF-C just can't keep up with the fast movement. A lot of photos are completely out of focus.
A9: All perfect.
I repeated the test multiple time, always the same results.
This shows me how much better a stacked sensor really is for fast action. The readout speed of the sensor in the RV is just too slow. The stacked ones can do a lot more AF calculations.
For all subjects that are slower the A7RV is great, just not for fast moving subjects.
The AF performance of the RV is very often being overrated in my opinion.
I did a test with a dog running at me. Lens: 70-200 GM II, so very fast focusing.
A7RV: the subject recognition works very nice, but AF-C just can't keep up with the fast movement. A lot of photos are completely out of focus.
A9: All perfect.
I repeated the test multiple time, always the same results.
This shows me how much better a stacked sensor really is for fast action. The readout speed of the sensor in the RV is just too slow. The stacked ones can do a lot more AF calculations.
For all subjects that are slower the A7RV is great, just not for fast moving subjects. ...Show more →
The AF performance of the RV is very often being overrated in my opinion.
I did a test with a dog running at me. Lens: 70-200 GM II, so very fast focusing.
A7RV: the subject recognition works very nice, but AF-C just can't keep up with the fast movement. A lot of photos are completely out of focus.
A9: All perfect.
I repeated the test multiple time, always the same results.
This shows me how much better a stacked sensor really is for fast action. The readout speed of the sensor in the RV is just too slow. The stacked ones can do a lot more AF calculations.
For all subjects that are slower the A7RV is great, just not for fast moving subjects. ...Show more →
I don’t see anyone saying the A7R5 is the better camera for shooting fast moving subjects…but many people don’t shoot fast moving subjects. Just cruise through the A1 image thread and you’ll see the majority of posted images are not fast moving subjects.
The AF performance of the RV is very often being overrated in my opinion.
I did a test with a dog running at me. Lens: 70-200 GM II, so very fast focusing.
A7RV: the subject recognition works very nice, but AF-C just can't keep up with the fast movement. A lot of photos are completely out of focus.
A9: All perfect.
I repeated the test multiple time, always the same results.
This shows me how much better a stacked sensor really is for fast action. The readout speed of the sensor in the RV is just too slow. The stacked ones can do a lot more AF calculations.
For all subjects that are slower the A7RV is great, just not for fast moving subjects. ...Show more →
This sums up my dilemma,
I went from the a7riii to the a9 shooting 70% wildlife including bif, and the difference in focusing was night and day,
I still do about 50/50 wildlife, living in the UK with its many dull days I regularly find myself at the limits of the cameras focusing capabilities, I fear I will be frustrated with the A7rv when out doing wildlife.
chez wrote:
I don’t see anyone saying the A7R5 is the better camera for shooting fast moving subjects…but many people don’t shoot fast moving subjects. Just cruise through the A1 image thread and you’ll see the majority of posted images are not fast moving subjects.
I'm talking about all the reports I've seen about how good the A7RV's AF is. The AI subject recognition stuff is nice, but the actual AF performance is nothing spectacular at all. A lot of people seem to think it's close to the A1/A9, which it's really not (for fast action).
It's true that a lot of people don't shoot action and in that case the A7RV is great.
The AF performance of the RV is very often being overrated in my opinion.
I did a test with a dog running at me. Lens: 70-200 GM II, so very fast focusing.
A7RV: the subject recognition works very nice, but AF-C just can't keep up with the fast movement. A lot of photos are completely out of focus.
A9: All perfect.
I repeated the test multiple time, always the same results.
This shows me how much better a stacked sensor really is for fast action. The readout speed of the sensor in the RV is just too slow. The stacked ones can do a lot more AF calculations.
For all subjects that are slower the A7RV is great, just not for fast moving subjects. ...Show more →
What are the differences you see between the A7RV and the A9 in focusing on slow or stationary subjects?
Jochenb wrote:
I'm talking about all the reports I've seen about how good the A7RV's AF is. The AI subject recognition stuff is nice, but the actual AF performance is nothing spectacular at all. A lot of people seem to think it's close to the A1/A9, which it's really not (for fast action).
It's true that a lot of people don't shoot action and in that case the A7RV is great.
Again, I agree with you regarding fast action, but the majority of people do not shoot fast action…in fact the majority of people that shoot wildlife are not shooting fast action.
I don’t have the A7R5, but what I’ve seen regarding the stickiness of the focus is very impressive and from the majority that don’t shoot fast action, this focus stickiness is a huge benefit.
By the way, I have many great shots of my Dobi running directly at me taken with a lowly Canon 7D.
chez wrote:
Again, I agree with you regarding fast action, but the majority of people do not shoot fast action…in fact the majority of people that shoot wildlife are not shooting fast action.
I don’t have the A7R5, but what I’ve seen regarding the stickiness of the focus is very impressive and from the majority that don’t shoot fast action, this focus stickiness is a huge benefit.
By the way, I have many great shots of my Dobi running directly at me taken with a lowly Canon 7D.
I know, but it's just something to keep in mind for the people that DO shoot some action.
The difference really isn't small. That's why I don't sell my A9.
Jochenb wrote:
I know, but it's just something to keep in mind for the people that DO shoot some action.
The difference really isn't small. That's why I don't sell my A9.
Which one of your cameras would you rather be using to photograph active children or adults in candid interaction (in other words, moving around, talking, playing, not posed)? I find that these situations often result in less-than-optimal focus because of slight sudden movements by the subjects as they move and interact.
I am interested in other's experience between the A9 and A7RV in these situations as well. I'm debating switching from my current A9 to an A7RV for this use case. My A9 doesn't pick up my kids eyes more often than I like in when their heads are tilted downwards or to one side, especially in backlit situations. This is even with GM lenses. I'm not sure if Asian eyes (especially smaller kids eyes) that tend to be narrower affects the eye AF acquisition as well. Another use case I would be interested in is initial lock and stickiness where kids are running around playing, turning their heads often. Does the A7RV lock onto the eyes and hold on better than the A9?
The A9 is great once it locks on but it could definitely improve in initial lock in for me.
chiron wrote:
Which one of your cameras would you rather be using to photograph active children or adults in candid interaction (in other words, moving around, talking, playing, not posed)? I find that these situations often result in less-than-optimal focus because of slight sudden movements by the subjects as they move and interact.
chiron wrote:
Which one of your cameras would you rather be using to photograph active children or adults in candid interaction (in other words, moving around, talking, playing, not posed)? I find that these situations often result in less-than-optimal focus because of slight sudden movements by the subjects as they move and interact.
Peter, I was under the impression that you have and use the A1, right? Did you experience that with that camera? Maybe, just maybe the shutter speed you used was not fast enough to freeze the motion and that can look like areas that are out-of-focus. Plus, camera/lens movement can also render similar effect. I am not saying that to be the case but there is that likelihood.
chiron wrote:
Which one of your cameras would you rather be using to photograph active children or adults in candid interaction (in other words, moving around, talking, playing, not posed)? I find that these situations often result in less-than-optimal focus because of slight sudden movements by the subjects as they move and interact.
The A7RV should be fine for that. It finds the eyes much easier than the A9 and most interaction doesn't involve that much movement.
What I also prefer about the RV for people is the better, more consistent colors/AWB.
I use my A9 when I know there's fast/erratic movement or I want to use a good electronic shutter.
One comment with regards to wildlife: High FPS is useful even if its large wildlife that isn't moving fast. I often have to shoot in extremely awkward situations and in low light. Hammering off a big burst of 20-30fps means I can usually get 1 sharp shot. This is very useful for me. The A7RV has superior IBIS to the A1 and A9, so it may not require as many shots to get one that is sharp, but this is something to consider IMO.
