p.5 #1 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
terencepatrick wrote:
I owned the A1, sold it and got the Z9 upon release of that camera because the specs looked amazing. What I didn't give Sony credit for was the engineering to squeeze as much performance in as small of a package (body & lens) as they did. I travel regularly for work and had a very compact kit of two gripped A1s, the 24-70, 100-400, and 50 1.2 lens plus a Profoto flash into a 26L backpack that could fit under a plane seat. Upon owning the Z9 and getting the same lenses, I was no longer able to use any of the bags or cases I previously owned. I had to get a bigger case, could no longer travel with my lenses attached, yada yada yada. Then everything was much heavier - which was felt going up an NYC walk up many floors. The features like RAW N-Log video that I was initially excited for became kind of a headache because I had to change from Final Cut to Davinci Resolve.
So, what I'm getting at is that while other brands come out with specs and features that are basically playing catch up, Sony was already doing much of these technical capabilities and is now working on the physical qualities of their latest generation of lenses and bodies. GM lenses v1 over v2 usually resulted in significant weight savings with improved optics. The latest generation of body design in the A7RV and A1 II is very good ergonomically. The menu is actually pretty easy to navigate now! Heck, the A1 has had 1/400 flash sync and for someone like me, that's an amazing feature that can't easily be found on other bodies. Maybe Sonys are no longer the darlings of the internet photography world any more but in the professional market Sony is still very much in demand where the relative "slowness" of innovation is a positive as massive changes often negatively affect a whole slew of people and businesses from rental houses, camera assistants, photo assistants, repair techs, etc etc. Just look at the Buy & Sell forum. There's people with *hundreds* of transactions. That's a lot of purchasing and selling as new crap comes out. That can't be good. ...Show more →
The compact size of Sony's cameras has always been one of their major draws for me, from my original foray into Sony with the NEX-7. The only thing I dislike about the A1 II is that it is a smidge bigger than the A1, though still much smaller than Nikon's and Canon's offerings. The A7CR and and A7CII are amazing cameras. Now I want Sony to put a stacked sensor with a very fast read-out in a very compact body, no larger than the original A9, for a moderate price. No need for high FPS or 8k video. That would be a real photographer's camera, Leica-like in its hand-management, smallness, and lightness. The A7CR and the A7CII are already significantly smaller than M series Leicas.
p.5 #2 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
chiron wrote:
The compact size of Sony's cameras has always been one of their major draws for me, from my original foray into Sony with the NEX-7. The only thing I dislike about the A1 II is that it is a smidge bigger than the A1, though still much smaller than Nikon's and Canon's offerings. The A7CR and and A7CII are amazing cameras. Now I want Sony to put a stacked sensor in a very compact body, no larger than the original A9, for a moderate price. No need for high FPS or 8k video. That would be a real photographer's camera.
I also opted for Sony over Canikon when moving to mirrorless largely because of the size of the bodies (and also because the OG A9 was so ahead of its time) despite being a Canon dSLR shooter. I'd love a fast stacked sensor in that original sized body, with the current A1ii EVF and AF processor and without all the video stuff (which I suspect is all just implemented via firmware rather than dedicated hardware), but I wonder if there's a reason Sony's bodies are increasing in size beyond just alleged ergonomic reasons -- all that extra processing power probably needs more space on circuit boards. And I also suspect either a large minority or a majority of buyers of Sony MILCs do want video features, so our fantasy camera would be a bit niche and never make Sony any money
p.5 #3 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
wordfool wrote:
I also opted for Sony over Canikon when moving to mirrorless largely because of the size of the bodies (and also because the OG A9 was so ahead of its time) despite being a Canon dSLR shooter. I'd love a fast stacked sensor in that original sized body, with the current A1ii EVF and AF processor and without all the video stuff (which I suspect is all just implemented via firmware rather than dedicated hardware), but I wonder if there's a reason Sony's bodies are increasing in size beyond just alleged ergonomic reasons -- all that extra processing power probably needs more space on circuit boards. And I also suspect either a large minority or a majority of buyers of Sony MILCs do want video features, so our fantasy camera would be a bit niche and never make Sony any money ...Show more →
I think a lot of the gradual increase in the size of Sony's largest bodies may have been to accommodate the many large telephoto lenses that Sony has introduced in the last five years. I do think the handling of those lenses calls for a slightly larger body with a deeper grip, and that is where Sony has gone with the A9III and the Ai II.
But Sony does seem very responsive to the desire for small, easy-to-hand and easy-to-carry gear, as in the A7Cxx bodies and the smaller G lenses that Sony has also introduced.
p.5 #4 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
I think Sony's C line was a great idea. I just wish they put a full shutter in them so you didn't have to worry about the possible side effects on bokeh. If they put a stacked sensor in one, so we didn't need the shutter like a Z8 that may also interest me, as long as it's at an affordable price.
Last night, I was using my Z8 and a7rIV for landscapes side by side with similar lenses. Z8 was on a tripod, and a7rIV was handheld. It really hit me how different they are, and how much smoother I found using the Z8. Usually, I am using them more differently, such as one for landscapes and one for wildlife. Hopefully what ever Sony puts out next helps close the gap.
p.5 #5 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
See, I’m in a totally different camp. I don’t really care about bokeh that much. I have a 50 1.2 and usually shoot at f4. I found the z8 not as forgiving in high contrast scenes and the flash sync speed was crappy (vs the a1). I also felt like there were too many individual buttons.
DWOfPaul wrote:
I think Sony's C line was a great idea. I just wish they put a full shutter in them so you didn't have to worry about the possible side effects on bokeh. If they put a stacked sensor in one, so we didn't need the shutter like a Z8 that may also interest me, as long as it's at an affordable price.
Last night, I was using my Z8 and a7rIV for landscapes side by side with similar lenses. Z8 was on a tripod, and a7rIV was handheld. It really hit me how different they are, and how much smoother I found using the Z8. Usually, I am using them more differently, such as one for landscapes and one for wildlife. Hopefully what ever Sony puts out next helps close the gap. ...Show more →
p.5 #7 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
DWOfPaul wrote:
I think Sony's C line was a great idea. I just wish they put a full shutter in them so you didn't have to worry about the possible side effects on bokeh. If they put a stacked sensor in one, so we didn't need the shutter like a Z8 that may also interest me, as long as it's at an affordable price.
Last night, I was using my Z8 and a7rIV for landscapes side by side with similar lenses. Z8 was on a tripod, and a7rIV was handheld. It really hit me how different they are, and how much smoother I found using the Z8. Usually, I am using them more differently, such as one for landscapes and one for wildlife. Hopefully what ever Sony puts out next helps close the gap. ...Show more →
What do you mean by smoother? Obviously shooting off a tripod gives you a totally different experience than shooting handheld.
p.5 #8 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
DWOfPaul wrote:
I think Sony's C line was a great idea. I just wish they put a full shutter in them so you didn't have to worry about the possible side effects on bokeh. If they put a stacked sensor in one, so we didn't need the shutter like a Z8 that may also interest me, as long as it's at an affordable price.
Last night, I was using my Z8 and a7rIV for landscapes side by side with similar lenses. Z8 was on a tripod, and a7rIV was handheld. It really hit me how different they are, and how much smoother I found using the Z8. Usually, I am using them more differently, such as one for landscapes and one for wildlife. Hopefully what ever Sony puts out next helps close the gap. ...Show more →
My problem with Sony the lack of ergonomics and feel you hold a camera. For larger lenses I'd prefer a larger body like Z8. For smaller primes still better larger bodies, A7CR with the grip quite ok, but wasted the grip area for a better EVF. I like C line rangefinder, brick like style, but too small. I don't know why Sony afraid from a bit wider and especially taller bodies (but not thicker). I like GFX100RF, Leica Q bodies with proper EVF, rangefinder brick shape, tilting screen, but every manufacturer expect Fuji refuse to make such ILCE bodies. We have those mini DSLR style bodies with cramped controls, lack of proper area for last 1-2 fingers to hold. I use an A7III with grip extension (shares with A7RIII), it is quite good this way.
p.5 #9 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
Lukacs wrote:
My problem with Sony the lack of ergonomics and feel you hold a camera. For larger lenses I'd prefer a larger body like Z8. For smaller primes still better larger bodies, A7CR with the grip quite ok, but wasted the grip area for a better EVF. I like C line rangefinder, brick like style, but too small. I don't know why Sony afraid from a bit wider and especially taller bodies (but not thicker). I like GFX100RF, Leica Q bodies with proper EVF, rangefinder brick shape, tilting screen, but every manufacturer expect Fuji refuse to make such ILCE bodies. We have those mini DSLR style bodies with cramped controls, lack of proper area for last 1-2 fingers to hold. I use an A7III with grip extension (shares with A7RIII), it is quite good this way....Show more →
I think the size/shape of Sony's FF bodies is part of their selling point. They're smaller than the competition, which a lot of people like (me included, and I have large hands). I am not, however, a fan of the APS-C (and the A7C) bodies from Sony -- they're a bit too small and the viewfinder off to the left is just awkward IMO.
If Sony put a stacked APS-C sensor into a FF body at 30fps they'd have a hit although some would argue they already have such a camera, albeit an expensive one, in the form of the A1 (21MP in crop mode). A pure APS-C equivalent costing about $3K would be a better option IMHO.
p.5 #10 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
chez wrote:
What do you mean by smoother? Obviously shooting off a tripod gives you a totally different experience than shooting handheld.
The Z8 was faster all around. The brackets fire off quicker, the camera processes images faster, so I can review them quicker, button presses seem a bit quicker, and zero black out was nice. I also was preferring the out of camera colors better on the Z8, granted, I know I can get them close to each other in post. Overall, the Z8 just felt like it got out of my way more and let me think more about my photos and less about the camera.
BTW I don't want to sound like I am dissing the a7rIV. The next night I was mainly using the a7rIV with my 200-600mm for some wildlife photos and video and it worked great for the situation I was in. It was just a bit surprising seeing how differently the two cameras functioned under very similar conditions.
p.5 #11 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
Lukacs wrote:
My problem with Sony the lack of ergonomics and feel you hold a camera. For larger lenses I'd prefer a larger body like Z8. For smaller primes still better larger bodies, A7CR with the grip quite ok, but wasted the grip area for a better EVF. I like C line rangefinder, brick like style, but too small. I don't know why Sony afraid from a bit wider and especially taller bodies (but not thicker). I like GFX100RF, Leica Q bodies with proper EVF, rangefinder brick shape, tilting screen, but every manufacturer expect Fuji refuse to make such ILCE bodies. We have those mini DSLR style bodies with cramped controls, lack of proper area for last 1-2 fingers to hold. I use an A7III with grip extension (shares with A7RIII), it is quite good this way....Show more →
I disagree. I found the z8 uncomfortably big.
The size made it more difficult to get a good grip on the camera. It would be easier for the z8 to slip out of my hands than the A1.
p.5 #12 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
aCuria wrote:
The size made it more difficult to get a good grip on the camera. It would be easier for the z8 to slip out of my hands than the A1.
Interesting. While sometimes I appreciate the smaller size of Sony, I feel like I have a better grip on my Z8, especially with bigger lenses than my a7rIV. I also feel like I can use my Z8 one handed with small to medium sized lenses better. Guess it depends on the size / shape of your hand.
Speaking of grip, back in the DSLR days, I almost always had a vertical grip on my cameras. For some reason, I have found them less needed with mirrorless cameras.
p.5 #13 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
Realistically, it is doubtful there is a one size fits all solution here. Sony may cater to small and medium, Nikon may cater to medium and large. Arguably Canon and Nikon both are sort of the medium/large camp. Sony is the small/medium.
Preferences are preferences, different strokes for different folks.
p.5 #14 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
EB-1 wrote:
Sony could use a 45MP body in the <$4000 range, but having a usable ES mode and 20 FPS. Somehow that has to be inferior enough to the a1 II, which is probably the problem. The a1 II is just too pricey for many amateurs yet the a7r V is too slow for many purposes.
EBH
I believe this is a big problem for Sony at the moment. I somewhat recently switched to Sony from Canon primarily due to the lens shenanigans from Canon. The R5ii is directly comparable to the A1ii, and arguably better in some ways (and cheaper). The A1ii at $7k only makes sense if you don't know about the R5ii. I think somewhere along the line Sony was, for whatever reason, forced into deviating from their 10yr plan for releasing camera bodies, or maybe Canon just completely caught them off-guard with the R5ii.
p.5 #15 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
MMP wrote:
I believe this is a big problem for Sony at the moment. I somewhat recently switched to Sony from Canon primarily due to the lens shenanigans from Canon. The R5ii is directly comparable to the A1ii, and arguably better in some ways (and cheaper). The A1ii at $7k only makes sense if you don't know about the R5ii. I think somewhere along the line Sony was, for whatever reason, forced into deviating from their 10yr plan for releasing camera bodies, or maybe Canon just completely caught them off-guard with the R5ii.
Its not obvious from the spec sheet, but Canon gimped the R5ii for some reason
R5ii Buffer is only 93? raw files, and it locks up after buffer is full.
The critical difference is that even if the A1 runs out of buffer, it will still shoot 9.8fps until the card is full. The R5ii will just lock up
R5ii's buffer clearing speed is also really slow if you shoot to both cards. Its similar to the A7iv where you get limited by the sd card's speed because you cant put 2 CF cards into the camera.
p.5 #16 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
This is always strange to me. I use XL gloves. There is never a time when I want a larger camera and I hate that sony keeps going larger. Even with a 200-600 or 300gm, the hand on the lens is almost the entirety of the weight and balance. I never want extra clunk.
DWOfPaul wrote:
Interesting. While sometimes I appreciate the smaller size of Sony, I feel like I have a better grip on my Z8, especially with bigger lenses than my a7rIV. I also feel like I can use my Z8 one handed with small to medium sized lenses better. Guess it depends on the size / shape of your hand.
Speaking of grip, back in the DSLR days, I almost always had a vertical grip on my cameras. For some reason, I have found them less needed with mirrorless cameras.
p.5 #17 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
aCuria wrote:
Its not obvious from the spec sheet, but Canon gimped the R5ii for some reason
R5ii Buffer is only 93? raw files, and it locks up after buffer is full.
The critical difference is that even if the A1 runs out of buffer, it will still shoot 9.8fps until the card is full. The R5ii will just lock up
R5ii's buffer clearing speed is also really slow if you shoot to both cards. Its similar to the A7iv where you get limited by the sd card's speed because you cant put 2 CF cards into the camera.
There are a couple of things which are not in the datasheet. The R5II is an exceptional camera, especially for the price, but I found the A1II snappier to operate, I like the free configurability of the buttons and the files have a bit more reserves to squeeze out in post (not that this matters much). But foremost it’s the accessibility of the large lens variety of the E Mount, which makes the difference. If you are not invested in either system and you need glasses as well affordability becomes very quickly a different beast. This is even the case for the A1II, but if you start with lower priced E Mount bodies you are looking to a big potential price advantage.
Certainly, in case you are invested in a specific system it is a different story.
p.5 #18 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
aCuria wrote:
Its not obvious from the spec sheet, but Canon gimped the R5ii for some reason
R5ii Buffer is only 93? raw files, and it locks up after buffer is full.
The critical difference is that even if the A1 runs out of buffer, it will still shoot 9.8fps until the card is full. The R5ii will just lock up
R5ii's buffer clearing speed is also really slow if you shoot to both cards. Its similar to the A7iv where you get limited by the sd card's speed because you cant put 2 CF cards into the camera.
I remember noticing this awhile ago. I dismissed it as I don't think I've ever fired off 90+ consecutive shots, but it did catch my eye when I saw it. The card speed limitation is a real annoyance and I often resorted to recording to single CF card and removing the SD card on my R5i. It's a shame Canon didn't update the R5ii with 2xCF slots. I'm obviously guessing, but I wonder if it all has something to do with heat management. The first R5 had some notable temperature issues, primarily with video, but I did manage to get shutdown warnings while shooting stills at an outdoor wedding on a 90degree day. Even when I wasn't getting warnings, the camera often became uncomfortably warm in video mode or in picture mode on hot days.
p.5 #19 · Do you feel Sony is falling behind on the low to mid range FF market?
MMP wrote:
I remember noticing this awhile ago. I dismissed it as I don't think I've ever fired off 90+ consecutive shots, but it did catch my eye when I saw it. The card speed limitation is a real annoyance and I often resorted to recording to single CF card and removing the SD card on my R5i. It's a shame Canon didn't update the R5ii with 2xCF slots. I'm obviously guessing, but I wonder if it all has something to do with heat management. The first R5 had some notable temperature issues, primarily with video, but I did manage to get shutdown warnings while shooting stills at an outdoor wedding on a 90degree day. Even when I wasn't getting warnings, the camera often became uncomfortably warm in video mode or in picture mode on hot days.
I suspect the R5ii camera body cannot physically accommodate 2 CF-B cards.
However if the R5ii is unable to write to card faster than the 1GB/s possible on a CF-A card, they really should have used dual CF-A cards which can fit in the body
