The more I look at the images captured using the A9 III, the more my resistance in getting that camera crumbles... I am trying hard not to succumb to the temptation by staying away from this thread 😎.
arbitrage wrote:
I think this latest set were all 60FPS or less.
I've found that using 120FPS with precapture is very limiting because of the buffer. Like if I'm shooting an Osprey diving I get a single chance to use it. So I have to just hold down precapture and then press the button as soon as I see it hit...this is going after a very specific shot of talons just touching water....but then the buffer can ruin the entire exiting sequence and the shake etc as the buffer struggles to clear.
I've been finding the ideal is to use 30 or 60FPS with precapture as a more general shooting mode and 120FPS only on occasion. So even with these backyard birds blasting to and from the feeders I've mostly just stuck at 60FPS.
They need to get the buffer better when they release the A1II....hopefully they can increase the internal buffer AND upgrade to the faster CFe-A cards. I assume the A1II will only get to 60FPS but even then that would perform similar to A9III at 120FPS if the buffer stays the same and the camera doesn't support the faster cards....Show more →
Overall it looks like it performs extremely well for you. I am getting very tempted to buy on. Seems every camera has some sort of trade off
I took the A9III out for a spin this weekend and I'm happy I did. There was one bird that stayed further away and I would have preferred the A1 for that one, but otherwise I was able to get close enough that the pixels of the A9III were enough. I get so many more "keeper" shots with the A9III due to the faster and more accurate AF (it nails the eye much more consistently than the A1). These are all with the 600GM and 2x TC. One other thing I've noted about the A9III--the Auto WB is just super and the colors straight out of the camera just look great. I do virtually no editing on the shots from this camera.
jhapeman wrote:
I took the A9III out for a spin this weekend and I'm happy I did. There was one bird that stayed further away and I would have preferred the A1 for that one, but otherwise I was able to get close enough that the pixels of the A9III were enough. I get so many more "keeper" shots with the A9III due to the faster and more accurate AF (it nails the eye much more consistently than the A1). These are all with the 600GM and 2x TC. One other thing I've noted about the A9III--the Auto WB is just super and the colors straight out of the camera just look great. I do virtually no editing on the shots from this camera.
I apologize for posting a Micro Four-Thirds image in this Sony thread.
But it explains the features I miss in the Sony A1.
Apparently I ignored for too long (2021) the groundbreaking capabilities of my OM-D E-M1 Mark III.
Cooper's Hawk shot with Pro Capture High at 60 FPS, 35 frames before shutter fully pressed.
Didn't you use a Sony lens adapted to a Nikon body previously? I thought the was a Sony GM 300mm, right? Now, the camera body is a Sony A9 III with a Sony lens. Did you switch or? The second image is a heavy crop, huh? Impressive!
AGeoJO wrote:
Didn't you use a Sony lens adapted to a Nikon body previously? I thought the was a Sony GM 300mm, right? Now, the camera body is a Sony A9 III with a Sony lens. Did you switch or? The second image is a heavy crop, huh? Impressive!
Yeah, I'm normally a Nikon shooter, just kinda bored and wanted to try something totally new to me so I picked up an A9III to mess around with. I really like it so far, could be a gateway drug to more Sony
Just for reference, I totally botched the exposure on the crane shot posted above and was still able to save it. DR may be weaker than other bodies on the global shutter but it still holds it's own.
Kasper6188 wrote:
Just for reference, I totally botched the exposure on the crane shot posted above and was still able to save it. DR may be weaker than other bodies on the global shutter but it still holds it's own.
What ISO is this? Is this the "saved" version or the "botched" version. Could you post the other version?
I ask about the ISO as the A9III DR is identical to the A1 from ISO 800 and above and better than the Z8 at most ISO. We should expect results on par with most of the high end cameras. Only if one is using the A9III to shoot below ISO 250 (because it can't) will there be a DR hit.
arbitrage wrote:
What ISO is this? Is this the "saved" version or the "botched" version. Could you post the other version?
I ask about the ISO as the A9III DR is identical to the A1 from ISO 800 and above and better than the Z8 at most ISO. We should expect results on par with most of the high end cameras. Only if one is using the A9III to shoot below ISO 250 (because it can't) will there be a DR hit.
The dark one posted is the original raw file just exported from LR to jpg. My post above is after I boosted the exposure. I just checked, it was base @250
Magnum PI wrote:
^^^
Coming back with so many photos from a single day would make me sick, and drop out of this passion the same night.
I take quality over quantity any day of the week.
I usually come back with 30 photos, I develop maybe 3, and I call myself lucky if I keep ONE photo.
Granted, things would be different with certain wildlife or sports photography, but 120 FPS makes no sense in my book.
I believe the idea is to take bursts at 120fps of a fast moving subject, select thé perfect position like wing position of a bird or exact moment of bal contact of a sportsman, and then delete the other 95-99% of the images.
And repeat that same routine on many if not all intended shots.
Is that fun to do? I guess that depends on how passionately you are after that perfect pose.
I would not want 120fps myself though, and would not enjoy working through so many images.
