p.9 #1 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
As a non professional, I feel that any issue is valid if you have customers. If you customers are sensitive to any issue, you will check output as necessary. Stating the issues here is valid.
p.9 #2 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Steve Spencer wrote:
I don't know. I have a different view of what the A7 V should be and that is partly because I was not impressed with that A7 IV. I think the A 7 IV should have used the A9II sensor and brought a fast sensor scan speed to that camera. That would have left them with a camera with no base ISO DR advantage over the a6700, but I think it would have been a fantastic camera, just like I thought the A9 was.
There is of course a tradeoff. Fast sensor scan speed lets you shoot silently even for pretty fast moving targets. It improves video. It improves the viewfinder. It improves the AF by increasing the number of calculations possible. It does, however, generally mean lower DR and lower MP in an entry level camera. If you want fast scan speed, higher DR, and lots of MP you are talking the A1/A1II sensor or the Z8/Z9 sensor. That isn't going to happen in a lower level camera.
My preference would be that Sony would balance this tradeoff and allow a bit lower DR and keep the MP down and increase the sensor scan speed. The Z6 II might not have enough sensor scan speed to allow flash sync speeds for most shooting (even the A9 didn't really do that), but the sensor scan speed is four and a half times faster than the sensor scan speed of the A7 IV. It is even slightly faster than the Canon R5. This speed allows useful use of the silent electronic shutter for slower moving targets and the silent electronic shutter only has to be avoided for faster moving targets. This translates into people photography well. The silent electronic shutter on the Z6 II or R5 can be used for almost all people photography (sports is the one exception) but the silent shutter of the A7r V or the A7 IV can't really be used for people photography without risk of motion induced distortion. That is a useful difference and that difference alone, IMO, justifies a hit in DR. Of course, YMMV.
By the way, I expect Sony to use the exact same sensor in the A7 V that they used in the A7 IV, so I think Sony agrees with you. I think Sony would be better off, however, to have a line up with a fully stacked sensor with high MP and DR for the A1 series, a max MP and max DR camera in the A7r series that often needs a manual shutter, and a partially stacked sensor in the A7 series, that sometimes needs a manual shutter but can often shoot even things moving fairly fast with the electronic shutter. Sure this camera takes a DR hit and has lower MP (if you want DR and MP step up to the A7r series), sure it can't use the electronic shutter for almost everything (if you want that step up to the A1 or even the A9 III that really can use the electronic shutter for everything including flash). I think that is a better line up of cameras and pushes people to the higher level cameras if they need it, but Sony isn't asking me what they should build and I could be wrong is six different ways. I think Sony will not be doing what I am suggesting even though Nikon did....Show more →
No I don't own an A7 IV, but I do use an FX2 that I have at work, which has the same sensor so I understand its strengths and weaknesses well.
I am not sure what the screen shots with lots of motion blur are trying to demonstrate, but they just seem to demonstrate a shutter speed too slow to freeze action.
p.9 #4 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Steve Spencer wrote:
No I don't own an A7 IV, but I do use an FX2 that I have at work, which has the same sensor so I understand its strengths and weaknesses well.
I am not sure what the screen shots with lots of motion blur are trying to demonstrate, but they just seem to demonstrate a shutter speed too slow to freeze action.
the image posted was a still extracted from shooting 4 k video from side by side cameras, what it demonstrates is that sensor speed has very little difference to rolling shutter shooting extrem action, and for the record the next concert i shot 4k at 1/320 sec on the a7iv just to extract sharp stills ,which i did with great detail. and also for the record you could barely tell the difference in video quality whatching the 1/320 sec and 1/60 sec 4k 30 from the a7iv.
Sep 21, 2025 at 08:39 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #5 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
A74me wrote:
the image posted was a still extracted from shooting 4 k video from side by side cameras, what it demonstrates is that sensor speed has very little difference to rolling shutter shooting extrem action, and for the record the next concert i shot 4k at 1/320 sec on the a7iv just to extract sharp stills ,which i did with great detail. and also for the record you could barely tell the difference in video quality whatching the 1/320 sec and 1/60 sec 4k 30 from the a7iv.
So in other words the images you posted had nothing to do with my post. I wasn't talking about video. That is a different matter and still images taken from the video tell us nothing about shooting stills.
p.9 #8 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Steve Spencer wrote:
So in other words the images you posted had nothing to do with my post. I wasn't talking about video. That is a different matter and still images taken from the video tell us nothing about shooting stills.
p.9 #9 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Mike
In the other thread I suggested to look into recall shooting function. I have two buttons mapped to it. First is non hold, other is hold. The non hold button is my single button way to get into action shooting immediately. I use the hold button when I need to quickly change the recall options. E.g I press the button to recall RSF settings , change shutter speed to faster or slower, and that changes my RSF setting to that shutter speed. Same way I can change subject, af area, and metering too. I believe frame rate can be changed too. In this way I have more flexibility then Sony implementation where it is not possible to dynamically change the parameters.
MikeEvangelist wrote:
Hit a big bump in the road on my switch to Nikon. I've run up against a built-in limitation that I find so absolutely stupid, I can hardly believe it can be true. Namely, the user memory slots on the Z8 (shooting banks in Nikon parlance) don't store some of the most crucial settings, including drive mode and pre-capture settings.
This means in order to switch from my normal shooting mode to one more suitable for birds, for example, I have to first switch to the right memory bank, and then still manually set the drive mode and pre-capture format/settings. So there is virtually no chance of doing it quickly to catch an unexpected opportunity that might pop up.
The Z6iii user modes don't have this ridiculous handicap, nor do the similar memory modes on Sony cameras. I can't fathom why Nikon would adopt such a brain dead approach. And further it boggles my mind that the Z8 is less capable in this regard than the lower-in-the-hierarchy Z6iii.
I'm still hopeful I can find an alternate workflow that will achieve what I need, but right now I'm very frustrated....Show more →
Sep 21, 2025 at 10:16 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #10 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
A74me wrote:
Your confused
I guess I am. I don't see the point of your post at all. The relation to my post is as clear as mud.
p.9 #11 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
indusphoto wrote:
Mike
In the other thread I suggested to look into recall shooting function. I have two buttons mapped to it. First is non hold, other is hold. The non hold button is my single button way to get into action shooting immediately. I use the hold button when I need to quickly change the recall options. E.g I press the button to recall RSF settings , change shutter speed to faster or slower, and that changes my RSF setting to that shutter speed. Same way I can change subject, af area, and metering too. I believe frame rate can be changed too. In this way I have more flexibility then Sony implementation where it is not possible to dynamically change the parameters.
p.9 #12 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Steve Spencer wrote:
I guess I am. I don't see the point of your post at all. The relation to my post is as clear as mud.
Your quote
"My preference would be that Sony would balance this tradeoff and allow a bit lower DR and keep the MP down and increase the sensor scan speed. The Z6 II might not have enough sensor scan speed to allow flash sync speeds for most shooting (even the A9 didn't really do that), but the sensor scan speed is four and a half times faster than the sensor scan speed of the A7 IV. It is even slightly faster than the Canon R5. This speed allows useful use of the silent electronic shutter for slower moving targets and the silent electronic shutter only has to be avoided for faster moving targets. This translates into people photography well. The silent electronic shutter on the Z6 II or R5 can be used for almost all people photography (sports is the one exception) but the silent shutter of the A7r V or the A7 IV can't really be used for people photography without risk of motion induced distortion. "
the a6700 scan speed is 15 ms i cant see any difference in rolling shutter to the a7iv 🤔
p.9 #13 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
chiron wrote:
I don't expect to ever again buy any Sony camera body until they make a smallish body with a stacked, or possibly a very fast semi-stacked, sensor.
I'm done with photos ruined by banding vs. an inability to use silent shooting, and with lumps of plastic and magnesium that are painful to take traveling, or to carry two of when alternating lenses fast is desirable, or to just take along easily in everyday life.
It already exists, the A9, A9ii, A9iii, A1 and A1ii
If you don’t want banding the A9iii is the only option though, regardless of brand
Sep 22, 2025 at 01:26 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #14 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
A74me wrote:
Your quote
"My preference would be that Sony would balance this tradeoff and allow a bit lower DR and keep the MP down and increase the sensor scan speed. The Z6 II might not have enough sensor scan speed to allow flash sync speeds for most shooting (even the A9 didn't really do that), but the sensor scan speed is four and a half times faster than the sensor scan speed of the A7 IV. It is even slightly faster than the Canon R5. This speed allows useful use of the silent electronic shutter for slower moving targets and the silent electronic shutter only has to be avoided for faster moving targets. This translates into people photography well. The silent electronic shutter on the Z6 II or R5 can be used for almost all people photography (sports is the one exception) but the silent shutter of the A7r V or the A7 IV can't really be used for people photography without risk of motion induced distortion. "
the a6700 scan speed is 15 ms i cant see any difference in rolling shutter to the a7iv 🤔...Show more →
Here is the database generated by a very helpful FM member:
For stills the a6700 and the A7 IV have a very similar 1/22 vs 1/15 ms sensor scan speed. Neither of them is a partially stacked sensor. It makes sense that you don't see a difference between those two cameras. They are very similar in sensor scan speed for stills.
And for video the A7 IV does pretty well for most modes in sensor scan speed (not so much in 4K 30p and 4K 24p, but good in 1080 120p for example). It is that 1/15 ms for stills that holds the camera back for silent electronic shooting in stills. And the A6700 which I believe is the same as the a6400 in the database is only a little bit better. The difference between 1/15 (or 1/22)and 1/69 (which is the sensor scan speed of the Z6 III) is a notable difference and allows the Nikon to be shot for most people shots (sports excepted) using the silent electronic shutter, whereas that is a gamble with the A7 IV. That was my point.
p.9 #15 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
aCuria wrote:
It already exists, the A9, A9ii, A9iii, A1 and A1ii
If you don’t want banding the A9iii is the only option though, regardless of brand
I own the A9 and the A1 II and I have owned and extensively used an A1. None of them produced banding of any note in my use. Nor have I had rolling shutter problems in still photographs with any of those cameras. I know they can yield a banded photo with some LED lights, as demonstrated by Jim Kasson. But they rarely present a banding problem in my experience, very unlike the banding problems I have had with the A7xxx and A7Cxx series cameras.
And as far as size goes, the A9 is as large as I want a camera to be. In my hands and camera bags, and in use with documentary subjects, it is significantly smaller than the others. I find the others annoyingly too large for how I want to use and carry my cameras. YMMV.
I would like an A7Cxx-sized or A9-sized camera with a stacked or very fast semi-stacked sensor, current AF and IBIS technology, and significantly more mpix than the A9xx cameras. I will be surprised if Sony does not produce one in the nearish future. I don't think I will be buying another Sony camera until they do.
For stills the a6700 and the A7 IV have a very similar 1/22 vs 1/15 ms sensor scan speed. Neither of them is a partially stacked sensor. It makes sense that you don't see a difference between those two cameras. They are very similar in sensor scan speed for stills.
And for video the A7 IV does pretty well for most modes in sensor scan speed (not so much in 4K 30p and 4K 24p, but good in 1080 120p for example). It is that 1/15 ms for stills that holds the camera back for silent electronic shooting in stills. And the A6700 which I believe is the same as the a6400 in the database is only a little bit better. The difference between 1/15 (or 1/22)and 1/69 (which is the sensor scan speed of the Z6 III) is a notable difference and allows the Nikon to be shot for most people shots (sports excepted) using the silent electronic shutter, whereas that is a gamble with the A7 IV. That was my point.
i used to shoot netball with my a7r2 and the em1mk2, the a7r2 used to leave the olympus (1/60) for dead in every aspect and never seen any rolling shutter in video or stills even panning a play the poles in the background were always vertical., the whole emphasis on sensor speed is way over exaggerated, btw there is no such thing as a partial stacked sensor period, marketing is just to mislead the uneducated.
here is a comparrision between the new nikon Zr and the a7r2 rolling shutter.
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #17 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
A74me wrote:
i used to shoot netball with my a7r2 and the em1mk2, the a7r2 used to leave the olympus (1/60) for dead in every aspect and never seen any rolling shutter in video or stills even panning a play the poles in the background were always vertical., the whole emphasis on sensor speed is way over exaggerated, btw there is no such thing as a partial stacked sensor period, marketing is just to mislead the uneducated.
here is a comparrision between the new nikon Zr and the a7r2 rolling shutter.
I had the A7r II as well and know the camera well. Are you saying you shot netball with the electronic shutter rather than the mechanical shutter? The A7r II, of course did not have issues with sensor scan speed and movement distortion in mechanical shutter mode, but it was a serious issue for electronic shutter mode. I saw it as a problem fairly often when I tried electronic shutter.
p.9 #18 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Steve Spencer wrote:
I had the A7r II as well and know the camera well. Are you saying you shot netball with the electronic shutter rather than the mechanical shutter? The A7r II, of course did not have issues with sensor scan speed and movement distortion in mechanical shutter mode, but it was a serious issue for electronic shutter mode. I saw it as a problem fairly often when I tried electronic shutter.
both images are extracted stills from video, the zr was from a review video.
Sep 22, 2025 at 04:41 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #19 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
A74me wrote:
both images are extracted stills from video, the zr was from a review video.
As I have said repeatedly I am not discussing video. That is a different kettle of fish, and that is why I have said the relation of your posts to mine is as clear as mud.
p.9 #20 · After 13 years of all Sony, I'm trying Nikon
Steve Spencer wrote:
As I have said repeatedly I am not discussing video. That is a different kettle of fish, and that is why I have said the relation of your posts to mine is as clear as mud.
Steve, a video is ultimately a sequence of photos. Its not all that different from shooting photos with electronic shutter.
On mirrorless cameras, sensor readout speed actually matters more for video than for photos. That’s because when shooting video the camera has no rotary disc shutter, while with still photography we have the focal-plane shutter.
When recording video, you’re entirely dependent on the sensor’s readout speed.
