Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
p.9 #1Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
KarmaKramer wrote:
The BS is that you care what people say on internet forums. People you don’t even know! Move on man. Do some jumping jacks.
The Z-mount long lens line up beats Sony quite easily IMO, but not easily enough to justify switching systems.I have no reason to think so but I agree when it comes to long tele lenses, all three players are probably at about the same stage as of now though the lenses aren't exactly equivalent. The person to whom I responded, did not seem being a long tele lens shooter anyway. I checked his website, and to me, it seemed his talk of Nikon over Sony was not justified. For me and for him Sony is clearly a better choice: better autofocus and better lens line up.
PS. Forgot to mention: there are third party long tele zooms ( from Tamron and Sigma) in the Sony ecosystem which as far as I know aren't available in the Nikon and Canon systems. These lenses are more affordable than oem so for budget conscious shooters, Sony is still a better choice even in the long tele range.The Nikon telephoto lineup completely smokes Sony’s telephoto lineup. Sorry, but It’s not even close.Wow, that's so BS. Brand prejudice at all high, lol.
Dude, that's not BS. Isn't that weird that you care that I care about what random people say online BUT you do not care what those random people say. You don't know me and by your own logic, you should not care what I say either.
Anyway, if you don't care, fair enough; just move on. I care and want to reflect that. The guy enraged and even started insulting me just for asking him to justify his claim.
The BS is that you care what people say on internet forums. People you don’t even know! Move on man. Do some jumping jacks.
raminolta wrote
CATProductions wrote
raminolta wrote
berimbolo wrote
raminolta wrote
A9 iii is aimed at pro sport and action shooters who can make use of its exceptional abilities. It's not a surprise that Sony has released the camera and the 300mm lens before the upcoming Olympic games. I am sure Sony wants to lure all those professional sport photographers to Sony. This camera is clearly not aimed at you, nor at me as I don['t even shoot sports or any sort of action. If this camera doesn't fit your budget, a used Sony A1 does which can be found for around $4000 nowadays. A1 is a better camera than Z8, IMO.If it were me, I would choose a used A1 for Z8 any day. Just the lenses that are available for the ony system alone, makes it a better choice.PS. Forgot to mention: there are third party long tele zooms ( from Tamron and Sigma) in the Sony ecosystem which as far as I know aren't available in the Nikon and Canon systems. These lenses are more affordable than oem so for budget conscious shooters, Sony is still a better choice even in the long tele range.
Dude, that's not BS. Isn't that weird that you care that I care about what random people say online BUT you do not care what those random people say. You don't know me and by your own logic, you should not care what I say either.
Anyway, if you don't care, fair enough; just move on. I care and want to reflect that. The guy enraged and even started insulting me just for asking him to justify his claim.
Nov 09, 2023 at 07:14 PM
p.9 #2Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
wind30 wrote:
If you don't see the benefit of this camera it is not for you, it is that simple. It is not a camera for the masses but for some niche applications this is basically a game changer and easily worth the price.People are complaining that Sony has ignored a large market segment who wants an updated stacked sensor camera at usd4k price point.
I'm sure Sony will continue selling the A9ii for the foreseeable future to satisfy those who want a still-very-capable stacked sensor camera for <$4K, although to compete with the Z8 they'll have to cut the price closer to $3K.
The A9iii price does make me worry about how much the A1ii will potentially cost though :/ Still, it's fun to speculate what the A1ii will be -- perhaps no global sensor, but a faster-readout "regular" stacked sensor incorporating all the other new features of the A9ii and A7Rv like pre-shot, focus stacking, AF improvements, flippy screen etc.
randomguy wrote
KarmaKramer wrote
Certainly created for pro sports shooters but have those guys & gals been missing shots? I don’t think. Over 6K (almost 9k to me before taxes) seems ridiculous. The A9 and A9II can still freeze Olympic action just fine. Oh and the A1 and hell even the A7IV could do the job. I would feel like a sucker buying a camera this pricey.I'm sure Sony will continue selling the A9ii for the foreseeable future to satisfy those who want a still-very-capable stacked sensor camera for <$4K, although to compete with the Z8 they'll have to cut the price closer to $3K.
The A9iii price does make me worry about how much the A1ii will potentially cost though :/ Still, it's fun to speculate what the A1ii will be -- perhaps no global sensor, but a faster-readout "regular" stacked sensor incorporating all the other new features of the A9ii and A7Rv like pre-shot, focus stacking, AF improvements, flippy screen etc.
Nov 09, 2023 at 09:40 PM
p.9 #3Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
berimbolo wrote:
The Z-mount long lens line up beats Sony quite easily IMO, but not easily enough to justify switching systems.I have no reason to think so but I agree when it comes to long tele lenses, all three players are probably at about the same stage as of now though the lenses aren't exactly equivalent. The person to whom I responded, did not seem being a long tele lens shooter anyway. I checked his website, and to me, it seemed his talk of Nikon over Sony was not justified. For me and for him Sony is clearly a better choice: better autofocus and better lens line up.
PS. Forgot to mention: there are third party long tele zooms ( from Tamron and Sigma) in the Sony ecosystem which as far as I know aren't available in the Nikon and Canon systems. These lenses are more affordable than oem so for budget conscious shooters, Sony is still a better choice even in the long tele range.The Nikon telephoto lineup completely smokes Sony’s telephoto lineup. Sorry, but It’s not even close.Wow, that's so BS. Brand prejudice at all high, lol.I think the 600F4 and 400F2.8 from Nikon are best in class. The 800PF is also a cool lens. I personally don't care at all for the 600PF or 400PF, but some people love them. I think it is fair to say that the NIkon telephoto lineup is the best amongst the big 3.
Sony has good glass, but in terms of price to performance, yes, it cant come close to Nikon. In fact, nothing from Sony or Canon can match Nikon Z's 1.8S lenses (20mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm). Still, to each their own. Sony definitely has some unique glass
raminolta wrote
CATProductions wrote
raminolta wrote
berimbolo wrote
raminolta wrote
A9 iii is aimed at pro sport and action shooters who can make use of its exceptional abilities. It's not a surprise that Sony has released the camera and the 300mm lens before the upcoming Olympic games. I am sure Sony wants to lure all those professional sport photographers to Sony. This camera is clearly not aimed at you, nor at me as I don['t even shoot sports or any sort of action. If this camera doesn't fit your budget, a used Sony A1 does which can be found for around $4000 nowadays. A1 is a better camera than Z8, IMO.If it were me, I would choose a used A1 for Z8 any day. Just the lenses that are available for the ony system alone, makes it a better choice.PS. Forgot to mention: there are third party long tele zooms ( from Tamron and Sigma) in the Sony ecosystem which as far as I know aren't available in the Nikon and Canon systems. These lenses are more affordable than oem so for budget conscious shooters, Sony is still a better choice even in the long tele range.
Sony has good glass, but in terms of price to performance, yes, it cant come close to Nikon. In fact, nothing from Sony or Canon can match Nikon Z's 1.8S lenses (20mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm). Still, to each their own. Sony definitely has some unique glass
Nov 09, 2023 at 10:44 PM
p.9 #4Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
wordfool wrote:
The A9iii price does make me worry about how much the A1ii will potentially cost though :/ Still, it's fun to speculate what the A1ii will be -- perhaps no global sensor, but a faster-readout "regular" stacked sensor incorporating all the other new features of the A9ii and A7Rv like pre-shot, focus stacking, AF improvements, flippy screen etc.
I believe the A1ii will come out this summer and will MSRP at $7K-ish. I think for the foreseeable future Sony will have the A9 line as GS and the A1 line without, to help delineate the two lines.
Could very well be wrong though, anyone who bets what Sony will do next may as well use the cash for Powerball instead
The A9iii price does make me worry about how much the A1ii will potentially cost though :/ Still, it's fun to speculate what the A1ii will be -- perhaps no global sensor, but a faster-readout "regular" stacked sensor incorporating all the other new features of the A9ii and A7Rv like pre-shot, focus stacking, AF improvements, flippy screen etc.
I believe the A1ii will come out this summer and will MSRP at $7K-ish. I think for the foreseeable future Sony will have the A9 line as GS and the A1 line without, to help delineate the two lines.
Could very well be wrong though, anyone who bets what Sony will do next may as well use the cash for Powerball instead
Nov 09, 2023 at 11:36 PM
p.9 #5Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
The more I think on the A1II, I believe it won't be a GS and therefore Sony may be able to keep the price at $6500 or $7K at the most. The GS will be the differentiator between the A9 and A1 lines and that allowed them to price the A9 line much closer to the A1 line. If the A1 had GS the price would skyrocket but I don't think Sony is close to being able to provide 50MP GS.
So I think I'm looking forward to an A1II that incorporates the new body design, pre-capture, boost button, FPS increase, new rear screen and EVF resolution improvements. Of course all the other minor improvements that have come in lesser bodies since the A7RV like in body DMF, FW from memory cards, faster card formatting, BEAF in video etc. My guess is we will see 40FPS in lossy and 30FPS in lossless this time around. Likely with the same 50MP sensor but just better processing to make things work. Hopefully with the A1II likely 1-1.5yrs away it will adopt the faster CFe-A standard which was a huge miss for the A9III as the buffer is too small for 120FPS on that camera.
I'm not expecting any good stills feature in the upcoming A1 FW....if we get pre-capture that would be huge but it seems it is just going to be some video upgrades.
So I think I'm looking forward to an A1II that incorporates the new body design, pre-capture, boost button, FPS increase, new rear screen and EVF resolution improvements. Of course all the other minor improvements that have come in lesser bodies since the A7RV like in body DMF, FW from memory cards, faster card formatting, BEAF in video etc. My guess is we will see 40FPS in lossy and 30FPS in lossless this time around. Likely with the same 50MP sensor but just better processing to make things work. Hopefully with the A1II likely 1-1.5yrs away it will adopt the faster CFe-A standard which was a huge miss for the A9III as the buffer is too small for 120FPS on that camera.
I'm not expecting any good stills feature in the upcoming A1 FW....if we get pre-capture that would be huge but it seems it is just going to be some video upgrades.
Nov 10, 2023 at 04:29 AM
duncang
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.9 #6Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
aCuria wrote:
When the global read-out speed becomes really fast, a lot of computational features will happen in full frame.
Sony introduced a feature called "composite RAW" with the A9III. Not sure what exactly that is for now, but it seems that it can be used with moving subjects.It’s absolutely true, on a A7iii / A7iv body, while the body is capable of 10fps, if AF prio mode is used maybe you can only achieve 6fps because the camera delays shutter release until an af lock is achieved
Ditto for the A1, while the body is capable of 30fps, if AF prio mode is used maybe you can only achieve 20fps....I assume this is pure speculation on your part because I have always used Focus Priority mode with the A1 and get 30fps nearly 100% of the time regardless of whether I am shooting a static subject or a small fast subject.
Similarly I have an a6700 and shoot that in Focus Priority mode at Hi (7fps) and it never seems to skip a frame. You can find links to sequences with both cameras in previous posts of mine.It seems to depends on how hard the subject is for the camera to track, how fast the lens autofocus speed is and how bright the lens is.
Admittedly its difficult to tell what the exact frame rate is on the A1, but on the A7iv its more obvious
I cannot comment on the a6700, which I have not used.
I get the same result with the 70-350 APS-C, 100-400, 200-600 and 600 - there are almost never any missing frames. So lens has little or no affect in my use.
There seems to be a lot of misinformation about the autofocus speed of lenses - they can all rack focus much faster than any living animal can move so that is definitely no issue - with the exception of macro lenses of course, which may have much finer and slower focus control.
As for the A1 frame rate, It is extremely easy to tell exactly what the A1 frame rate is - you just check the timestamp on the images - the time is recorded to 1/1000 of a second so you can expect to get one image every 0.033 seconds. Check the EXIF "Sub-second Time Original" for the milliseconds.
Here is a typical example - 2 frames missing from 34 - actually it is not that typical because I very seldom find any missing frames. That bird had just come out of a dive hoping to flush some sandpipers and was travelling at quite some speed. My guess is it covered some 30+ meters in that 1 second - so around 120km/hr. No idea how I kept it in the frame but the camera has no trouble getting 28 fps. Something would be very wrong if you are getting only 20fps.
I know a lot of Nikon users would like to believe the A1 can only get 20fps when used in the real world.
It just occurred to me this image might look rather busy if shot at 120fps
duncang wrote
aCuria wrote
campanulace wrote
120FPS or faster is very useful even if you don't need to shoot at 120 FPS.When the global read-out speed becomes really fast, a lot of computational features will happen in full frame.
Sony introduced a feature called "composite RAW" with the A9III. Not sure what exactly that is for now, but it seems that it can be used with moving subjects.
Ditto for the A1, while the body is capable of 30fps, if AF prio mode is used maybe you can only achieve 20fps....
Similarly I have an a6700 and shoot that in Focus Priority mode at Hi (7fps) and it never seems to skip a frame. You can find links to sequences with both cameras in previous posts of mine.
Admittedly its difficult to tell what the exact frame rate is on the A1, but on the A7iv its more obvious
I cannot comment on the a6700, which I have not used.
I get the same result with the 70-350 APS-C, 100-400, 200-600 and 600 - there are almost never any missing frames. So lens has little or no affect in my use.
There seems to be a lot of misinformation about the autofocus speed of lenses - they can all rack focus much faster than any living animal can move so that is definitely no issue - with the exception of macro lenses of course, which may have much finer and slower focus control.
As for the A1 frame rate, It is extremely easy to tell exactly what the A1 frame rate is - you just check the timestamp on the images - the time is recorded to 1/1000 of a second so you can expect to get one image every 0.033 seconds. Check the EXIF "Sub-second Time Original" for the milliseconds.
Here is a typical example - 2 frames missing from 34 - actually it is not that typical because I very seldom find any missing frames. That bird had just come out of a dive hoping to flush some sandpipers and was travelling at quite some speed. My guess is it covered some 30+ meters in that 1 second - so around 120km/hr. No idea how I kept it in the frame but the camera has no trouble getting 28 fps. Something would be very wrong if you are getting only 20fps.
I know a lot of Nikon users would like to believe the A1 can only get 20fps when used in the real world.
It just occurred to me this image might look rather busy if shot at 120fps
Nov 10, 2023 at 04:44 AM
p.9 #7Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
arbitrage wrote:
... My guess is we will see 40FPS in lossy and 30FPS in lossless this time around. ...
I am hoping they can get rid of that limitation. The A9III supposedly does 120FPS regardless of whether you pick uncompressed, lossless compressed or lossy compressed raws.
... My guess is we will see 40FPS in lossy and 30FPS in lossless this time around. ...
I am hoping they can get rid of that limitation. The A9III supposedly does 120FPS regardless of whether you pick uncompressed, lossless compressed or lossy compressed raws.
Nov 10, 2023 at 04:59 AM
duncang
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.9 #8Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
arbitrage wrote:
The more I think on the A1II, I believe it won't be a GS and therefore Sony may be able to keep the price at $6500 or $7K at the most. The GS will be the differentiator between the A9 and A1 lines and that allowed them to price the A9 line much closer to the A1 line. If the A1 had GS the price would skyrocket but I don't think Sony is close to being able to provide 50MP GS.
So I think I'm looking forward to an A1II that incorporates the new body design, pre-capture, boost button, FPS increase,...Show more →
Priced much closer - the a9iii is AUD2,500 more expensive than the A1 here in AU !!
Gone are the days of relatively cheaper Sony cameras in Australia it seems !!
The problem with GS on the A1 might be the compromise on the image quality - there are challenges putting the additional components for managing the GS on the sensor and more so when the pixels are very small.
But then my M3 MacBook just arrived with a 3nm fabricated chip - let's hope Sony is still using 8nm fab on the A9iii chips because then there is lots of room for further miniaturisation.
The more I think on the A1II, I believe it won't be a GS and therefore Sony may be able to keep the price at $6500 or $7K at the most. The GS will be the differentiator between the A9 and A1 lines and that allowed them to price the A9 line much closer to the A1 line. If the A1 had GS the price would skyrocket but I don't think Sony is close to being able to provide 50MP GS.
So I think I'm looking forward to an A1II that incorporates the new body design, pre-capture, boost button, FPS increase,...Show more →
Priced much closer - the a9iii is AUD2,500 more expensive than the A1 here in AU !!
Gone are the days of relatively cheaper Sony cameras in Australia it seems !!
The problem with GS on the A1 might be the compromise on the image quality - there are challenges putting the additional components for managing the GS on the sensor and more so when the pixels are very small.
But then my M3 MacBook just arrived with a 3nm fabricated chip - let's hope Sony is still using 8nm fab on the A9iii chips because then there is lots of room for further miniaturisation.
Nov 10, 2023 at 05:21 AM
p.9 #9Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
arbitrage wrote:
Hopefully with the A1II likely 1-1.5yrs away it will adopt the faster CFe-A standard which was a huge miss for the A9III as the buffer is too small for 120FPS on that camera.
People here will call me a whiner again
, but this is seriously a very weird decision by Sony. There have been new cards already announced (type B, but 4.0 - 2800 MB/s sustained write ) by Prograde...
Hopefully with the A1II likely 1-1.5yrs away it will adopt the faster CFe-A standard which was a huge miss for the A9III as the buffer is too small for 120FPS on that camera.
People here will call me a whiner again
, but this is seriously a very weird decision by Sony. There have been new cards already announced (type B, but 4.0 - 2800 MB/s sustained write ) by Prograde...Nov 10, 2023 at 05:49 AM
p.9 #10Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
raminolta wrote:
A9 iii is aimed at pro sport and action shooters who can make use of its exceptional abilities. It's not a surprise that Sony has released the camera and the 300mm lens before the upcoming Olympic games. I am sure Sony wants to lure all those professional sport photographers to Sony. This camera is clearly not aimed at you, nor at me as I don['t even shoot sports or any sort of action. If this camera doesn't fit your budget, a used Sony A1 does which can be found for around $4000 nowadays. A1 is a better camera than Z8, IMO.If it were me, I would choose a used A1 for Z8 any day. Just the lenses that are available for the ony system alone, makes it a better choice.The Z-mount long lens line up beats Sony quite easily IMO, but not easily enough to justify switching systems.I have no reason to think so but I agree when it comes to long tele lenses, all three players are probably at about the same stage as of now though the lenses aren't exactly equivalent. The person to whom I responded, did not seem being a long tele lens shooter anyway. I checked his website, and to me, it seemed his talk of Nikon over Sony was not justified. For me and for him Sony is clearly a better choice: better autofocus and better lens line up.
PS. Forgot to mention: there are third party long tele zooms ( from Tamron and Sigma) in the Sony ecosystem which as far as I know aren't available in the Nikon and Canon systems. These lenses are more affordable than oem so for budget conscious shooters, Sony is still a better choice even in the long tele range.The Nikon telephoto lineup completely smokes Sony’s telephoto lineup. Sorry, but It’s not even close.Wow, that's so BS. Brand prejudice at all high, lol.
Not to stoke the fire, but do you really not see that Nikon's line up smokes Sony's?
Sony has
200-600
300 f2.8
400 f2.8 (no TC)
600 f4 (no TC)
Nikon has
180-600 (which is an actual 600mm, not the ~550mm of the Sony)
400 f2.8 w/ TC
400 f4.5
600 f4 w/ TC
600 f6.3
800 f6.3
your argument seems to be about the quality of the optics, but you literally can't compare optical quality on most of these - because Sony has no offerings in that range lol
Nikon is miles ahead of both Sony/Canon in their telephoto lineup, and that's objective fact with no room for interpretation.
Additionally, all of Sony's E Glass is adaptable to Nikon, but not the other way around. And that's not even taking F glass into consideration.
Back to on topic - these Sony releases are very exciting. as others mentioned the A9III will not be a camera for me, since it is targeted specifically for high end sports shooters. but the capabilities are nice, because inevitably those will filter down to "mid-grade" bodies in the near future.
and a 300 f2.8 at the weight of past 70-200s is certainly awesome. I've been waiting to see which manufacturer would bring out a modern 200 f2, and I think Sony may be on the right track
Edited on Nov 10, 2023 at 09:10 AM · View previous versions
CATProductions wrote
raminolta wrote
berimbolo wrote
raminolta wrote
wind30 wrote
Z8 cheaper. Sony does not understand that they need a good eshutter camera at around a7r5 price point.PS. Forgot to mention: there are third party long tele zooms ( from Tamron and Sigma) in the Sony ecosystem which as far as I know aren't available in the Nikon and Canon systems. These lenses are more affordable than oem so for budget conscious shooters, Sony is still a better choice even in the long tele range.
Not to stoke the fire, but do you really not see that Nikon's line up smokes Sony's?
Sony has
200-600
300 f2.8
400 f2.8 (no TC)
600 f4 (no TC)
Nikon has
180-600 (which is an actual 600mm, not the ~550mm of the Sony)
400 f2.8 w/ TC
400 f4.5
600 f4 w/ TC
600 f6.3
800 f6.3
your argument seems to be about the quality of the optics, but you literally can't compare optical quality on most of these - because Sony has no offerings in that range lol
Nikon is miles ahead of both Sony/Canon in their telephoto lineup, and that's objective fact with no room for interpretation.
Additionally, all of Sony's E Glass is adaptable to Nikon, but not the other way around. And that's not even taking F glass into consideration.
Back to on topic - these Sony releases are very exciting. as others mentioned the A9III will not be a camera for me, since it is targeted specifically for high end sports shooters. but the capabilities are nice, because inevitably those will filter down to "mid-grade" bodies in the near future.
and a 300 f2.8 at the weight of past 70-200s is certainly awesome. I've been waiting to see which manufacturer would bring out a modern 200 f2, and I think Sony may be on the right track
Edited on Nov 10, 2023 at 09:10 AM · View previous versions
Nov 10, 2023 at 09:02 AM
|
RoamingScott
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.9 #11Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
And you didn't even list all of the great, exotic tele F lenses that work better on Z cameras than they ever did on F mount DSLRs 
I wasn't aware this was even a debate
I wasn't aware this was even a debate
Nov 10, 2023 at 09:03 AM
p.9 #12Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
RoamingScott wrote:
And you didn't even list all of the great, exotic tele F lenses that work better on Z cameras than they ever did on F mount DSLRs
I wasn't aware this was even a debate
yeah I did that on purpose so as to not completely overwhelm the guy
I'm hoping he looks back and realizes we (the 4 of us or however many engaged) are talking about different things. I think he is trying to say the optical quality doesn't blow away Sony - which I would agree.
At this point in time, IQ for all the brands is so damn close I don't think anyone could consistently pick images from each camera/lens setup.
but I just don't know how anyone could remotely think Sony/Canon have half the telephoto lineup capability of Nikon
And you didn't even list all of the great, exotic tele F lenses that work better on Z cameras than they ever did on F mount DSLRs
I wasn't aware this was even a debate
yeah I did that on purpose so as to not completely overwhelm the guy
I'm hoping he looks back and realizes we (the 4 of us or however many engaged) are talking about different things. I think he is trying to say the optical quality doesn't blow away Sony - which I would agree.
At this point in time, IQ for all the brands is so damn close I don't think anyone could consistently pick images from each camera/lens setup.
but I just don't know how anyone could remotely think Sony/Canon have half the telephoto lineup capability of Nikon
Nov 10, 2023 at 09:10 AM
p.9 #13Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
nmerc_photos wrote:
The Z-mount long lens line up beats Sony quite easily IMO, but not easily enough to justify switching systems.I have no reason to think so but I agree when it comes to long tele lenses, all three players are probably at about the same stage as of now though the lenses aren't exactly equivalent. The person to whom I responded, did not seem being a long tele lens shooter anyway. I checked his website, and to me, it seemed his talk of Nikon over Sony was not justified. For me and for him Sony is clearly a better choice: better autofocus and better lens line up.
PS. Forgot to mention: there are third party long tele zooms ( from Tamron and Sigma) in the Sony ecosystem which as far as I know aren't available in the Nikon and Canon systems. These lenses are more affordable than oem so for budget conscious shooters, Sony is still a better choice even in the long tele range.The Nikon telephoto lineup completely smokes Sony’s telephoto lineup. Sorry, but It’s not even close.Wow, that's so BS. Brand prejudice at all high, lol.Not to stoke the fire, but do you really not see that Nikon's line up smokes Sony's?
Sony has
200-600
300 f2.8
400 f2.8 (no TC)
600 f4 (no TC)
Nikon has
180-600 (which is an actual 600mm, not the ~550mm of the Sony)
400 f2.8 w/ TC
400 f4.5
600 f4 w/ TC
600 f6.3
800 f6.3
your argument seems to be about the quality of the optics, but you literally can't compare optical quality on most of these - because Sony has no offerings in that range lol
Nikon is miles ahead of both Sony/Canon in their telephoto lineup, and that's objective fact with no room for interpretation.
Additionally, all of...Show more →
I believe the discussion was about optical quality not number of available lenses.
Stop this teenage language of 'smoke', 'miles ahead', etc.. I am glad for Nikon users if they have multiple tele lens options. I think there are plenty enough in the Sony FE mount too for those who can afford them. If there is any real advantage for people who are bragging about Nikon tele lenses over Sony, I wonder who among them really possess any of these expensive lenses? Canon on the other hand has interesting tele lenses that are affordable for most people. Canon might be well ahead of Sony and Nikon in this regard with their economic approach: several very affordable tele lenses. Besides, Canon has multiple different EF-RF adapters to use EF lenses on RF mount seamlessly. However, I don't want to continue discussing this, because the original claim was about performance, not the number nor the price.
Edited on Nov 10, 2023 at 06:09 PM · View previous versions
raminolta wrote
CATProductions wrote
raminolta wrote
berimbolo wrote
raminolta wrote
A9 iii is aimed at pro sport and action shooters who can make use of its exceptional abilities. It's not a surprise that Sony has released the camera and the 300mm lens before the upcoming Olympic games. I am sure Sony wants to lure all those professional sport photographers to Sony. This camera is clearly not aimed at you, nor at me as I don['t even shoot sports or any sort of action. If this camera doesn't fit your budget, a used Sony A1 does which can be found for around $4000 nowadays. A1 is a better camera than Z8, IMO.If it were me, I would choose a used A1 for Z8 any day. Just the lenses that are available for the ony system alone, makes it a better choice.PS. Forgot to mention: there are third party long tele zooms ( from Tamron and Sigma) in the Sony ecosystem which as far as I know aren't available in the Nikon and Canon systems. These lenses are more affordable than oem so for budget conscious shooters, Sony is still a better choice even in the long tele range.
Sony has
200-600
300 f2.8
400 f2.8 (no TC)
600 f4 (no TC)
Nikon has
180-600 (which is an actual 600mm, not the ~550mm of the Sony)
400 f2.8 w/ TC
400 f4.5
600 f4 w/ TC
600 f6.3
800 f6.3
your argument seems to be about the quality of the optics, but you literally can't compare optical quality on most of these - because Sony has no offerings in that range lol
Nikon is miles ahead of both Sony/Canon in their telephoto lineup, and that's objective fact with no room for interpretation.
Additionally, all of...Show more →
I believe the discussion was about optical quality not number of available lenses.
Stop this teenage language of 'smoke', 'miles ahead', etc.. I am glad for Nikon users if they have multiple tele lens options. I think there are plenty enough in the Sony FE mount too for those who can afford them. If there is any real advantage for people who are bragging about Nikon tele lenses over Sony, I wonder who among them really possess any of these expensive lenses? Canon on the other hand has interesting tele lenses that are affordable for most people. Canon might be well ahead of Sony and Nikon in this regard with their economic approach: several very affordable tele lenses. Besides, Canon has multiple different EF-RF adapters to use EF lenses on RF mount seamlessly. However, I don't want to continue discussing this, because the original claim was about performance, not the number nor the price.
Edited on Nov 10, 2023 at 06:09 PM · View previous versions
Nov 10, 2023 at 12:52 PM
p.9 #14Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
I really like Nikons tele lens lineup. The bodies are boring though. Big heavy, useless pro capture (for me), max 20fps raw. But instead of built in TC, personally I think I would prefer a 100mp body with 50mp mraw and 25mp sraw options and 1.4x and 2.0x crop modes unless there would be some drawback with that which I haven't thought about.
Nov 10, 2023 at 01:17 PM
p.9 #15Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
nmerc_photos wrote:
but I just don't know how anyone could remotely think Sony/Canon have half the telephoto lineup capability of Nikon
If we are talking about capability then the interesting thing about the Nikon list is that even with the few extra choices in Nikon's list there is really no addition capability in image creation between the Nikon and Sony choices. If anything Sony has some advantages in edge case situations. It is a lighter, faster, more agile, more configurable, and higher resolution system. Preferences will be the deciding factor.
From the posted list:
Nikon has
180-600 (which is an actual 600mm, not the ~550mm of the Sony): The focal length difference is really only noticeable in a narrow range of distance to subject. It is also entirely made up in croppability through higher resolution. The sony is also a much faster focusing lens. Just trade offs in my opinion. Both will give you indistinguishable images in almost all cases.
400 f2.8 w/ TC: Sony has this lens exactly. You just have to add the TC when you want. But then you get both 1.4 and 2.0.
400 f4.5 : Notice no 300 2.8 in Nikon's list. Sony has the fastest, lightest, and highest IQ, of this FL lens ever produced. Now if you add a 1.4 TC to the amazing 300mm f/2.8 you get a 400 f/4.0. So in this range Sony has more FLs available, and faster aperture, and smaller package.
600 f4 w/ TC: Sony has an excellent 600 f/4 (some say the best). Only difference is TC with a switch for convenience. But no image making advantage in aperture or focal length.
600 f6.3: Once again Sony has an even better 600 with f/4.0 aperture. You can't make an image with this lens that the Sony cannot.
800 f6.3: Just add the 1.4 TC to the 600 f/4 and you have 840mm at f/5.6. I see no image making advantage here either. If anything the Sony is a bit faster at f/5.6.
So, when it comes to actual image making capabilities I see no images that the Nikon system can make that the Sony cannot (or vice versa) based on lenses. I do see an A1 that can shoot RAW faster and at a slightly higher resolution than Nikon. There is also in the Sony system a A7RV with a much higher resolution than any Nikon camera. This cropping ability, combined with faster RAW shooting has real value in long lens shooting applications in my opinion.
I don't know who is smoking what, but I don't see either of these systems smoking each other in actual image making capabilities. Nikon looks to have a couple of more choices in lenses, and a TC convenience advantage. Sony seems to have speed, and resolution advantage along with RAW advantages. No big deal either way. Same image goes on the wall.
Edited on Nov 10, 2023 at 02:44 PM · View previous versions
but I just don't know how anyone could remotely think Sony/Canon have half the telephoto lineup capability of Nikon
If we are talking about capability then the interesting thing about the Nikon list is that even with the few extra choices in Nikon's list there is really no addition capability in image creation between the Nikon and Sony choices. If anything Sony has some advantages in edge case situations. It is a lighter, faster, more agile, more configurable, and higher resolution system. Preferences will be the deciding factor.
From the posted list:
Nikon has
180-600 (which is an actual 600mm, not the ~550mm of the Sony): The focal length difference is really only noticeable in a narrow range of distance to subject. It is also entirely made up in croppability through higher resolution. The sony is also a much faster focusing lens. Just trade offs in my opinion. Both will give you indistinguishable images in almost all cases.
400 f2.8 w/ TC: Sony has this lens exactly. You just have to add the TC when you want. But then you get both 1.4 and 2.0.
400 f4.5 : Notice no 300 2.8 in Nikon's list. Sony has the fastest, lightest, and highest IQ, of this FL lens ever produced. Now if you add a 1.4 TC to the amazing 300mm f/2.8 you get a 400 f/4.0. So in this range Sony has more FLs available, and faster aperture, and smaller package.
600 f4 w/ TC: Sony has an excellent 600 f/4 (some say the best). Only difference is TC with a switch for convenience. But no image making advantage in aperture or focal length.
600 f6.3: Once again Sony has an even better 600 with f/4.0 aperture. You can't make an image with this lens that the Sony cannot.
800 f6.3: Just add the 1.4 TC to the 600 f/4 and you have 840mm at f/5.6. I see no image making advantage here either. If anything the Sony is a bit faster at f/5.6.
So, when it comes to actual image making capabilities I see no images that the Nikon system can make that the Sony cannot (or vice versa) based on lenses. I do see an A1 that can shoot RAW faster and at a slightly higher resolution than Nikon. There is also in the Sony system a A7RV with a much higher resolution than any Nikon camera. This cropping ability, combined with faster RAW shooting has real value in long lens shooting applications in my opinion.
I don't know who is smoking what, but I don't see either of these systems smoking each other in actual image making capabilities. Nikon looks to have a couple of more choices in lenses, and a TC convenience advantage. Sony seems to have speed, and resolution advantage along with RAW advantages. No big deal either way. Same image goes on the wall.
Edited on Nov 10, 2023 at 02:44 PM · View previous versions
Nov 10, 2023 at 01:34 PM
p.9 #16Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
Let's give credit where credit is due, Nikon right now offers a wider selection of telephoto lenses, it's just silly to argue otherwise. I agree with Morten (randomguy), a higher resolution body may be a better way to deal the focal length issues, if ISO performance is there. If anyone can come up with such a body first, I bet it will be Sony.
Nov 10, 2023 at 02:13 PM
RoamingScott
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.9 #17Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
Disregarding the advantages of built in TCs is asinine. Those alone could easily get you an image you'd miss while fumbling with a dedicated TC in the field.
In the end, anyone worth their salt will make the best possible image that each system will allow, and those resulting images brand-to-brand would be nearly indistinguishable to 99.9% of viewers. It's all so much pissing against the wind, so anyone who gets invested and butthurt over any of this just ends up covered in their own filth
In the end, anyone worth their salt will make the best possible image that each system will allow, and those resulting images brand-to-brand would be nearly indistinguishable to 99.9% of viewers. It's all so much pissing against the wind, so anyone who gets invested and butthurt over any of this just ends up covered in their own filth
Nov 10, 2023 at 02:32 PM
duncang
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.9 #18Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
Well I can't see too many problems with the A9iii image quality. These are from preview sample gallery and processed with Topaz nr.
Nov 10, 2023 at 02:40 PM
p.9 #19Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
1bwana1 wrote:
.....400 f2.8 w/ TC: Sony has this lens exactly. You just have to add the TC when you want. But then you get both 1.4 and 2.0...
...600 f4 w/ TC: Sony has an excellent 600 f/4 (some say the best). Only difference is TC with a switch for convenience. But no image making advantage in aperture or focal length.
To say having the TC in the lens and available with a switch is only a "convenience" and has "no image making advantage" is way too far for me. Having the TC quickly available makes many shots much better. Trying to put the TC on the lens while I am out on the trail is a major PITA and not effective if a situation develops quickly that would benefit from having the TC instantly available. Being able to quickly flip the TC into place is a great advantage, not just a convenience.
A few years ago when I was shooting with Canon equipment I had their 200-600/4 w/TC. It is one of my all time favorite lenses. It was super heavy but having that built-in TC was a terrific benefit. I held on to it for years after I switched to Sony, hoping Canon would intro a camera I like. A couple of years ago I finally gave up and sold it.
Nikon has introduced their 400/2.8 and 600/4 with TC and that is a big incentive for me to switch. If Nikon was a bit faster with camera technology I would switch, but they lag and the Sony A1 is keeping me with Sony. But I see no prospect of Sony ever offering a 600 with built-in TC. It would not take a lot of improvement in Nikon's camera offering to get me to switch to get the 600/4 w/TC.
nmerc_photos wrote
but I just don't know how anyone could remotely think Sony/Canon have half the telephoto lineup capability of Nikon...600 f4 w/ TC: Sony has an excellent 600 f/4 (some say the best). Only difference is TC with a switch for convenience. But no image making advantage in aperture or focal length.
To say having the TC in the lens and available with a switch is only a "convenience" and has "no image making advantage" is way too far for me. Having the TC quickly available makes many shots much better. Trying to put the TC on the lens while I am out on the trail is a major PITA and not effective if a situation develops quickly that would benefit from having the TC instantly available. Being able to quickly flip the TC into place is a great advantage, not just a convenience.
A few years ago when I was shooting with Canon equipment I had their 200-600/4 w/TC. It is one of my all time favorite lenses. It was super heavy but having that built-in TC was a terrific benefit. I held on to it for years after I switched to Sony, hoping Canon would intro a camera I like. A couple of years ago I finally gave up and sold it.
Nikon has introduced their 400/2.8 and 600/4 with TC and that is a big incentive for me to switch. If Nikon was a bit faster with camera technology I would switch, but they lag and the Sony A1 is keeping me with Sony. But I see no prospect of Sony ever offering a 600 with built-in TC. It would not take a lot of improvement in Nikon's camera offering to get me to switch to get the 600/4 w/TC.
Nov 10, 2023 at 02:46 PM
p.9 #20Official: Sony A9 III and FE 300mm f/2.8 GM announced
RoamingScott wrote:
Disregarding the advantages of built in TCs is asinine. Those alone could easily get you an image you'd miss while fumbling with a dedicated TC in the field.
In the end, anyone worth their salt will make the best possible image that each system will allow, and those resulting images brand-to-brand would be nearly indistinguishable to 99.9% of viewers. It's all so much pissing against the wind, so anyone who gets invested and butthurt over any of this just ends up covered in their own filth
Your language buries your point in filth. Even when what you say has validity. Time for you to take a long bath. Be sure to use a lot of soap.
I thought I was hidden? Please....
Disregarding the advantages of built in TCs is asinine. Those alone could easily get you an image you'd miss while fumbling with a dedicated TC in the field.
In the end, anyone worth their salt will make the best possible image that each system will allow, and those resulting images brand-to-brand would be nearly indistinguishable to 99.9% of viewers. It's all so much pissing against the wind, so anyone who gets invested and butthurt over any of this just ends up covered in their own filth
Your language buries your point in filth. Even when what you say has validity. Time for you to take a long bath. Be sure to use a lot of soap.
I thought I was hidden? Please....
Nov 10, 2023 at 02:47 PM