old-gregg wrote:
Film has nothing to do with it. In addition to film, I regularly shoot three digital platforms from Sony, Canon and Fuji. The only two tangible dimensions of improvement for digital imaging since the early DSLR days where dynamic range, resolution and image stabilization. Nothing else mattered or made any noticeable difference. And this thread (which I read every message in) is 100% dedicated to nothingness.
If you wanted the A1 II to NOT be a disappointment, it would be nice to hear what you're expecting. And not a single poster formulated a coherent vision for what they're missing in this new camera. You know why? Because none of us are capable of reaching the limits of A1 v1 performance envelope. Sony, along with other manufacturers, are now releasing products with capabilities exceeding the needs of their users.
GAS is fantastic. GAS drivers progress. But GAS requires imagination. You should be wanting something, but you don't. All I hear is "I am not impressed" followed by silence. In the early 2000s people were dreaming about specific things: more megapixels, more sensitivity, more battery life, or whatever. Now people just passively wait to be entertained....Show more →
"And not a single poster formulated a coherent vision for what they're missing in this new camera."
Global shutter with the same DR as conventional stacked sensors.
"Because none of us are capable of reaching the limits of A1 v1 performance envelope."
Bollocks. I am very much capable of finding the limits of the A1 with my shooting: LED light flicker with shutter speeds around 1/320-1/640. It's the primary reason I have a mechanical shutter R7V as a backup camera, although even that isn't a perfect solution to the issue. GS makes that issue entirely moot.
patotts wrote:
I have the a7RV for close to two years now. It is not my favorite camera, but Sony glass keeps me on the platform. a7RV is great for landscape and portraits, but the rolling shutter is a real downer - the sensor readout speed is annoying slow. The way the EVF framerate drops in continuous AF in unnerving. I could use more FPS at time. Video is OK but not great. No pre-caputre. Want me to go on?
I know that for my needs and wants, the Canon R5 II is a better fit as an imaging platform, but still, I don't like the Canon RF glass options, thus I stay on Sony, even if they miss that $4K semi-pro all-around body that would fit my needs. And no, I don't want to, or feel that I should have to, spend $6,500 + tax a Sony A1 II to get what I want (along with plenty of stuff I would never take advantage of).
Well said! In my year of shooting still with the RV around the world, the two things that really annoy me are the AF-C EVF res drop and the unmarked exposure comp dial. I really don't miss higher FPS for travel except for that occasional on-snow action sequence.
@old-gregg - maybe I'm pointing out the obvious, but FPS, AF and precapture really matter for certain genres of shooting, of which there are a probably over-represented population here on FM. When I shot my first collegiate ultimate frisbee game with the A9iii a few weeks ago, the number "the right moment keepers" I never would have gotten in the past was staggering. Then I took video of a game this week and the video AF and global shutter handling of LED lights was similarly magical. Sony is delivering improvements to what I can do with my glass at a cadence that will keep me buying their bodies for years to come
octo wrote:
For me, just the 60fps burst and 8k60 video on top of the existing improvements.
+ Better trained neural network, however this is just software training, nothing to do with the camera itself.
CFExpress B doesn't make sense because then:
1) either the body would have to be much larger to accomodate 2 card slots with proper heating management
2) or just 1 CFE-B and 1 UHS-II, like the competition, which is inferior to 2x CFE-A
3) also, looking at the competition, the camera never write at faster than 800MB/s with CFE-B cards, even the Z9, so it would not even be faster.
Yeah, CFE-B cards don't look so hot anymore when you realize the camera is not really able to utilize their speed...
wordfool wrote:
The R5ii might have a stacked sensor but IIRC its readout speed is still significantly slower than the A1's so IMO that makes it a bit less versatile for anyone wanting to predominantly use the e-shutter for fast-moving subjects. It's one reason I still would not consider a high-MP canon body despite having a soft spot for Canon from my dSLR days
---------------------------------------------
arbitrage wrote:
Yes it is slower. But it is the exact same readout as the A9 and A9II which we all raved about never having to use MS for action.
Yes, as arbitrage said, it is in the A9/a9II range for readout speed, which is perfectly fine for almost all purposes. The principal reason I want a stacked sensor is to avoid hassles and ruined picture with LED and other flickering light sources. But the A9 speed readout was fast enough to cover a golf swing, and that is pretty quick. The real problem that I have with the R5II is the size of the body. Even dpreview says it is not suitable for travel because of its size. Nor do I want to carry and aim a large camera at people on the street or family & friends in everyday life.
The A7C and A7CR are a perfect size for me and my purposes in photography. If one of them had a stacked sensor at 40 or more mpix, I would be very happy. An improved EVF would also be nice, but even that I could live without.
old-gregg wrote:
... All of these cameras are amazing. None present any obstacles to achieve any result you want. We're so past the point where equipment was the bottleneck to our process, that I refuse to take any arguments in this thread seriously. Every feature and every aspect of every camera mentioned in this thread solidly lands into "this is more than you'll ever need" terriotiry, regardless of who you are and which feature you're talking about.
It seems that your photographic efforts are not pushing the envelope.
I didn't notice any improvement whatsoever in the images people post online since the year 2000 or so...
I read it as a bit of a strawman response, but there is a lot of underlying truth in his statement/rant/plea. There is always a lot of moaning about things that someone wanted but are not included and how these (in my opinion) generally incremental changes have suddenly become "essential" and how the camera I bought only 3 years ago is now a piece of junk etc etc. He seems to be restating the trope that it is the photographer that matters not the gear and this is particularly true over, say the last 5-10 years. If you can't get a decent shot with any of these then it is probably not the gear.
Robin Smith wrote:
I read it as a bit of a strawman response, but there is a lot of underlying truth in his statement/rant/plea. There is always a lot of moaning about things that someone wanted but are not included and how these (in my opinion) generally incremental changes have suddenly become "essential" and how the camera I bought only 3 years ago is now a piece of junk etc etc. He seems to be restating the trope that it is the photographer that matters not the gear and this is particularly true over, say the last 5-10 years. If you can't get a decent shot with any of these then it is probably not the gear. ...Show more →
I'm not among those who will say my 4-year-old camera is now a piece of junk. As a wildlife specialist the original a1 allowed me to push the envelope in numerous ways, as did several iterations of its predecessors. The envelope has become much larger but is nowhere near as big as it can get.
One can certainly make the same photographs now that were possible 5 to 10 years ago but that's not the point of pushing the envelope. The technologies that have been developed since then solve specific problems:
LED light banding wasn't a problem before LED lighting became common.
A silent shutter doesn't startle my subjects like an SLR did, digital or otherwise.
Combine the silent electronic shutter with fast readout and distortion of a flapping wing is eliminated.
faster frame rates mean I choose the wing position that best suits the composition, and choose the image(s) without the nicititating membrane covering the eye.
AF on the sensor, subject recognition and eye AF means AF is 'Accurate Focus' instead of 'Almost Focussed'.
pre-capture means it's more likely I'll photograph the kinglet's head during the nanosecond when it's turned toward the camera.
RAW pre-capture vs. jpg allows more latitude when processing the images.
none of these technologies will make a photograph, it's still up to the photographer, but the tech features will make a successful photograph more likely in specific circumstances. Those who don't encounter these conditions will not make use of or appreciate these features but for those of us who do, the newer cameras with features that address these problems will be more productive.
For myself, the a1 II's new features that will help solve problems are the flippy screen and pre-capture, but I'm not in a hurry to switch from the a1 because I personally don't often encounter the conditions where these would be useful. YMMV.
You buried the lede - lenses. Sony has a wider selection of lenses that also are lighter. Indeed, the ai II is lighter than the z9 and z8 (not lighter than the Canon). I switched from Nikon to Sony a couple of years ago in part for the a7rv but mostly for the excellent stable of lenses. I have not been disappointed.
"That's the 7RV you're describing. Honestly, I've been following this thread with disbelief. Since when 10fps became slow? In my humble opinion, if you're photographing at 30fps that's not photography."
With respect, there are many different types of photography that benefit massively from speed, including even beyond 30fps, and things like pre-capture. Ever try to capture climax moment of a beaver slapping it's tail ? It is near impossible to react in time for this. High fps and precapture make it so much easier. This is just one of countless examples in the wildlife/action photography genre, that I focus on. But I'm sure there are many other genres that could benefit from this as well.
j4nu wrote:
Yeah, CFE-B cards don't look so hot anymore when you realize the camera is not really able to utilize their speed...
Already today CFecoress B cut import type in half.
And it seems clear that cameras shooting twice as fast would probably be able to write to card twice as fast also. The point being that the card should not be the bottleneck.
As far as bulk goes, one CFecoress B and one CFecpres A is a possibility as well.
matth4ever wrote:
Ever try to capture climax moment of a beaver slapping it's tail ? It is near impossible to react in time for this. High fps and precapture make it so much easier. This is just one of countless examples in the wildlife/action photography genre, that I focus on. But I'm sure there are many other genres that could benefit from this as well.
If this forum believes that flipping through 60 frames of video footage to pluck an image you like can be called photography, then we don't have much in common to talk about. I am wondering though, suppose Sony adds a "beaver mode" where a trained AI will automatically press the shutter for you, will you continue chasing beavers?
old-gregg wrote:
..... suppose Sony adds a "beaver mode" where a trained AI will automatically press the shutter for you, will you continue chasing beavers?
I don't currently chase beavers, but if Sony adds "beaver mode" I will take up chasing beavers.
BTW, I recall from my high school days that "beaver" was a euphemism. I assume you are referring to the four legged critters that swim around and chew up trees.
old-gregg wrote:
If this forum believes that flipping through 60 frames of video footage to pluck an image you like can be called photography, then we don't have much in common to talk about. I am wondering though, suppose Sony adds a "beaver mode" where a trained AI will automatically press the shutter for you, will you continue chasing beavers?
I want to deliver frames of the moment when one of the team members touches the frisbee in a sea of other players. Or is laying out horizontally to just get the disc. I can cull 2500 frames in an A9iii over several games to 200 in less than 5 minutes. It IS photography - I'm getting a higher number of keeper images. The tech just speeds my work flow to the best images. I kmow it will do the same for folks shooting the A1ii for wildlife in motion.
Newenglandrocks wrote:
I want to deliver frames of the moment when one of the team members touches the frisbee in a sea of other players. Or is laying out horizontally to just get the disc. I can cull 2500 frames in an A9iii over several games to 200 in less than 5 minutes. It IS photography - I'm getting a higher number of keeper images. The tech just speeds my work flow to the best images. I kmow it will do the same for folks shooting the A1ii for wildlife in motion.
Not sure how this is "not photography".
The definition of photography (according to google) is:
"Photography is the process of recording an image – a photograph – on light sensitive film or, in the case of digital photography, via a digital electronic or magnetic memory."
When I was young boy and I got my first "box camera", I aimed and pressed the button on the side of the camera. Of course I had to go and get the film developed (or later, I developed it myself and then printed the result)
Today, 2024, we get instant gratification with a digital image... This is still photography, just faster... Extrapolating the "speed" further, we only have to press the "button" once and we get 50..., 100..., 200 images. This is still photography, just at speeds we never dreamed of back in 1950 (when I was 4 y/o).
The further difference today is that many more photographers can capture that elusive "moment" (of the beaver slapping his/her tail) than could in the past devaluing the art/skill required to achieve that special moment in the past.
The point I think old greg was trying to make is where we go in "post processing" when we alter the image we capture into a representation that didn't exist when we took the photograph...
old-gregg wrote:
If this forum believes that flipping through 60 frames of video footage to pluck an image you like can be called photography, then we don't have much in common to talk about. I am wondering though, suppose Sony adds a "beaver mode" where a trained AI will automatically press the shutter for you, will you continue chasing beavers?
Can you please share some of the amazing photos you've taken so that beginners like me can learn something from a true master of photography?
old-gregg wrote:
then we don't have much in common to talk about.
No we don't. This is a gear forum. The photography discussions and presentations are in a different section.
That is where you discuss photography. This is where you discuss GAS.
old-gregg wrote:
If this forum believes that flipping through 60 frames of video footage to pluck an image you like can be called photography, then we don't have much in common to talk about. I am wondering though, suppose Sony adds a "beaver mode" where a trained AI will automatically press the shutter for you, will you continue chasing beavers?
I don't know but you might want to ask the Z9 owners because they have exactly that feature already.
Imagine that - you can set your Z9 up on the game trail - head back home and watch Netflix or troll some Sony shooters on FM - and return the next day to admire the shots you took.
