berimbolo wrote:
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.
AGeoJO wrote:
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.
Hi Joshua. Yes, I appreciate your point. I have had that happen where my shutter speed was not high enough. With the A1 and also with my A9, if I get a blur, it is almost always a problem of shutter speed. (It may even be that some of the criticism of the autofocus on the Sigma 45/2.8 actually has to do with the use of lower shutter speeds because of the smaller max aperture on that lens.)
But the reason I asked my question was because I was curious about the degree of movement at which the lower autofocus rate of the A7RV would have an effect on accuracy vs. the higher autofocus rate of the A1. For example, someone moving their eyeball to look somewhere else while one has eye-focus engaged.
There are many things that I like about the A7RV. But I am still holding off because of the absence of a fast read-out and stacked sensor--though I know those features don't matter for many photographers or types of images.
