2nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
p.1 #12nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren. The nit is I occasionally do wildlife including birds. Often this is coupled with my landscape trips. I don’t normally bother with 2 bodies while traveling, but I always do with landscape; usually the main lens on one cam, a wider zoom on the other. Money is a factor but not crucial and hence the nit. Would I be better off with a 2nd A7R6 because it’s “adequate for what I do and equivalent to my main squeeze,” or an A1ii for the enhanced AF capability — and live with the different batteries and sensor?
Aug 30, 2026 at 07:18 PM
p.1 #42nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
I have the A7rvi, A1ii, and A9iii.....Except for very specialized work, I've been grabbing the A7rvi for everything. And when the specialized need arrives, it's the A9iii. Thus the A1ii has become my high resolution backup which means I'm typically not grabbing it at all.
I assumed the A7rvi would not be fast enough for fast moving swallows catching bugs or even hummingbirds, but empirically it's doing fine with faster initial acquisition than the A1ii. Only difference I see is a slight advantage on the A1ii in keeper rate once you're tracking that bird in flight but at most it's like a 5 percent difference out of a burst. And like I said initial aquisition is faster on the A7rvi with in some cases acquisition at all (blue grosbeaks this evening embedded in prairie grass would have required me to force the A1ii to get the initial aquisition by putting a small xs spot on the bird then waiting a bit, on the A7rvi it was instant)
The airshow last weekend the A9iii was the perfect tool. So, I'd say if it's just for backup and you normally do landscapes, you might even just opt for something that fills a different niche like the A7rc compact version of the A7rv.
Pocket that savings and look to your next lens
I assumed the A7rvi would not be fast enough for fast moving swallows catching bugs or even hummingbirds, but empirically it's doing fine with faster initial acquisition than the A1ii. Only difference I see is a slight advantage on the A1ii in keeper rate once you're tracking that bird in flight but at most it's like a 5 percent difference out of a burst. And like I said initial aquisition is faster on the A7rvi with in some cases acquisition at all (blue grosbeaks this evening embedded in prairie grass would have required me to force the A1ii to get the initial aquisition by putting a small xs spot on the bird then waiting a bit, on the A7rvi it was instant)
The airshow last weekend the A9iii was the perfect tool. So, I'd say if it's just for backup and you normally do landscapes, you might even just opt for something that fills a different niche like the A7rc compact version of the A7rv.
Pocket that savings and look to your next lens
Aug 30, 2026 at 08:16 PM
p.1 #52nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
Jack Flesher wrote:
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren. The nit is I occasionally do wildlife including birds. Often this is coupled with my landscape trips. I don’t normally bother with 2 bodies while traveling, but I always do with landscape; usually the main lens on one cam, a wider zoom on the other. Money is a factor but not crucial and hence the nit. Would I be better off with a 2nd A7R6 because it’s “adequate for what I do and equivalent to my main...Show more →
If you only shoot birds occasionally and mainly do landscape and grandkids, the A7RVI would be a better tool, IMHO. This is coming from someone who owns two A1IIs and an A7RVI. The A7RVI's slower sensor read speed and AF calculation/second may not yield as many keepers as the A1II but there are still plenty to choose from. Now, if you shoot 75% fast stuff and 25% landscape, the A1II is a no brainer, IMHO. Not sure what kind of sports your grandkids play. The A7RVI may show funny looking balls, bats, golfclubs...
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren. The nit is I occasionally do wildlife including birds. Often this is coupled with my landscape trips. I don’t normally bother with 2 bodies while traveling, but I always do with landscape; usually the main lens on one cam, a wider zoom on the other. Money is a factor but not crucial and hence the nit. Would I be better off with a 2nd A7R6 because it’s “adequate for what I do and equivalent to my main...Show more →
If you only shoot birds occasionally and mainly do landscape and grandkids, the A7RVI would be a better tool, IMHO. This is coming from someone who owns two A1IIs and an A7RVI. The A7RVI's slower sensor read speed and AF calculation/second may not yield as many keepers as the A1II but there are still plenty to choose from. Now, if you shoot 75% fast stuff and 25% landscape, the A1II is a no brainer, IMHO. Not sure what kind of sports your grandkids play. The A7RVI may show funny looking balls, bats, golfclubs...
Aug 30, 2026 at 08:56 PM
p.1 #62nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
For me a true backup is a second camera exactly the same as the first. Then you can copy all the setttings from the CAMSET and not have any mental issues with the differences.
I often have two different cameras and a third as a backup the same as one of the other two.
It's a good idea to rent cameras if unsure. Personally I'm awaiting the A1 III, which will almost certainly have a new sensor and use the NP-SA100.
EBH
I often have two different cameras and a third as a backup the same as one of the other two.
It's a good idea to rent cameras if unsure. Personally I'm awaiting the A1 III, which will almost certainly have a new sensor and use the NP-SA100.
EBH
Aug 30, 2026 at 09:26 PM
p.1 #72nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
Jack Flesher wrote:
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren.
Jack, I am in your shoes. Very similar usage pattern, and I've been very happy with the A7RV for all of these use cases. But then one day I got hit by GAS and ordered the A1 II. This "upgrade" did absolutely nothing for me: my AF hit rate has been more or less the same. I guess kids/dogs running around aren't serious enough action to show off the superior sensor speed of the A1 II, and I never needed more than 5-10fps. Couldn't care less about an electronic shutter.
HOWEVER... handling two different bodies was annouing as hell. Despite being mostly identical, there was too much friction shooting with both at the same time:
1. Muscle memory. I kept trying to press the non-existing Fn button on the A7RV
2. Impossible to quickly sync all settings across cameras (camsets), so they would diverge over time in random places.
3. Post-processing was annoying because of different color profiles. Can't just copy-paste adjustments on a series of photos.
4. In your case, you'll have two incompatible batteries too.
So I went back to a single body, and if I add a second one again, it will be exact same model.
TLDR: get another A7R6
P.S. BTW I have the Nikon ZF as well, and weirdly I found shooting with two completely different bodies to be less confusing for my brain. Somehow, the moment my fingers feel the drastically different shape of the ZF, it activates different parts of my muscle memory and there's no confusion at all. But the post-processing pain is still there, so I never shoot them together. One for lightweight travel, another for "serious" work.
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren.
Jack, I am in your shoes. Very similar usage pattern, and I've been very happy with the A7RV for all of these use cases. But then one day I got hit by GAS and ordered the A1 II. This "upgrade" did absolutely nothing for me: my AF hit rate has been more or less the same. I guess kids/dogs running around aren't serious enough action to show off the superior sensor speed of the A1 II, and I never needed more than 5-10fps. Couldn't care less about an electronic shutter.
HOWEVER... handling two different bodies was annouing as hell. Despite being mostly identical, there was too much friction shooting with both at the same time:
1. Muscle memory. I kept trying to press the non-existing Fn button on the A7RV
2. Impossible to quickly sync all settings across cameras (camsets), so they would diverge over time in random places.
3. Post-processing was annoying because of different color profiles. Can't just copy-paste adjustments on a series of photos.
4. In your case, you'll have two incompatible batteries too.
So I went back to a single body, and if I add a second one again, it will be exact same model.
TLDR: get another A7R6
P.S. BTW I have the Nikon ZF as well, and weirdly I found shooting with two completely different bodies to be less confusing for my brain. Somehow, the moment my fingers feel the drastically different shape of the ZF, it activates different parts of my muscle memory and there's no confusion at all. But the post-processing pain is still there, so I never shoot them together. One for lightweight travel, another for "serious" work.
Aug 30, 2026 at 09:45 PM
p.1 #82nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
I really appreciate the feedback. I am leaning to a 2nd A7R6. Same body, same battery, same UI all make a lot of sense. My AF needs are not A1ii or A9iii critical.
Aug 30, 2026 at 09:53 PM
p.1 #92nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
Jack Flesher wrote:
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren. The nit is I occasionally do wildlife including birds. Often this is coupled with my landscape trips. I don’t normally bother with 2 bodies while traveling, but I always do with landscape; usually the main lens on one cam, a wider zoom on the other. Money is a factor but not crucial and hence the nit. Would I be better off with a 2nd A7R6 because it’s “adequate for what I do and equivalent to my main...Show more →
Two bodies of the same brand sounds extremely... well, boring.
I get that it's nice to have custom settings dialed in and all that, but is that really you? Do you really need two of the exact same body? You aren't getting paid for this stuff. Grab something else that inspires you for the moment.
Would an A9 III make you want to shoot birds more? Would an A7CR make you carry a small prime so you always have something on you for the grandkids? Would an A1 II do something different for you? Or would another A7R VI just fill the void and give you exactly what you already need/have?
Two identical bodies where you just pick one up or the other depending on what lens is attached, to shoot a kid or a bird? That's how I look at it: all the bodies overlap. Grab two that are different and excel at different aspects of photography!
It’s very personal- I would much rather go out with a Leica M11 and a Sony A7R6 on a trip and pick vs the same body but we all have different needs-
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren. The nit is I occasionally do wildlife including birds. Often this is coupled with my landscape trips. I don’t normally bother with 2 bodies while traveling, but I always do with landscape; usually the main lens on one cam, a wider zoom on the other. Money is a factor but not crucial and hence the nit. Would I be better off with a 2nd A7R6 because it’s “adequate for what I do and equivalent to my main...Show more →
Two bodies of the same brand sounds extremely... well, boring.
I get that it's nice to have custom settings dialed in and all that, but is that really you? Do you really need two of the exact same body? You aren't getting paid for this stuff. Grab something else that inspires you for the moment.
Would an A9 III make you want to shoot birds more? Would an A7CR make you carry a small prime so you always have something on you for the grandkids? Would an A1 II do something different for you? Or would another A7R VI just fill the void and give you exactly what you already need/have?
Two identical bodies where you just pick one up or the other depending on what lens is attached, to shoot a kid or a bird? That's how I look at it: all the bodies overlap. Grab two that are different and excel at different aspects of photography!
It’s very personal- I would much rather go out with a Leica M11 and a Sony A7R6 on a trip and pick vs the same body but we all have different needs-
Aug 31, 2026 at 12:49 AM
p.1 #102nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
RustyRus wrote:
Two bodies of the same brand sounds extremely... well, boring.
I get that it's nice to have custom settings dialed in and all that, but is that really you? Do you really need two of the exact same body? You aren't getting paid for this stuff. Grab something else that inspires you for the moment.
Would an A9 III make you want to shoot birds more? Would an A7CR make you carry a small prime so you always have something on you for the grandkids? Would an A1 II do something different for you? Or would another A7R VI just fill the...Show more →
this is totally me. i always have 2 different bodies. just grabbed a fuji x100vi, and its a backup for my a7iv for pro shoots.
Jack Flesher wrote
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren. The nit is I occasionally do wildlife including birds. Often this is coupled with my landscape trips. I don’t normally bother with 2 bodies while traveling, but I always do with landscape; usually the main lens on one cam, a wider zoom on the other. Money is a factor but not crucial and hence the nit. Would I be better off with a 2nd A7R6 because it’s “adequate for what I do and equivalent to my main squeeze,” or an A1ii for the enhanced AF capability — and live with the different batteries and sensor?I get that it's nice to have custom settings dialed in and all that, but is that really you? Do you really need two of the exact same body? You aren't getting paid for this stuff. Grab something else that inspires you for the moment.
Would an A9 III make you want to shoot birds more? Would an A7CR make you carry a small prime so you always have something on you for the grandkids? Would an A1 II do something different for you? Or would another A7R VI just fill the...Show more →
this is totally me. i always have 2 different bodies. just grabbed a fuji x100vi, and its a backup for my a7iv for pro shoots.
Aug 31, 2026 at 04:11 AM
|
p.1 #112nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
old-gregg wrote:
Jack, I am in your shoes. Very similar usage pattern, and I've been very happy with the A7RV for all of these use cases. But then one day I got hit by GAS and ordered the A1 II. This "upgrade" did absolutely nothing for me: my AF hit rate has been more or less the same. I guess kids/dogs running around aren't serious enough action to show off the superior sensor speed of the A1 II, and I never needed more than 5-10fps. Couldn't care less about an electronic shutter.
HOWEVER... handling two different bodies was annouing as hell. Despite being...Show more →
I completely agree with these reasons to have two of the same body. Image processing compatibility is a big one.
I started with two A1 II's, then converted one of them to an A7R5 (later, an A7R6).
For you, Jack, the most sensible choice would likely be two A7R6's. For me, I find the mechanical shutter to be annoying after shooting mostly electronic shutter (also with flash synch on the A1 II on electronic shutter). I would prefer to go back to two A1 II's. I would miss the new battery and, perhaps, in a very small way, miss the added dynamic range; but, I just thoroughly enjoy shooting the A1 II, and really like the added adjustment dial. I shoot a lot of candid portraits and having silent shutter when using flash is great. Also, never worrying about rolling-shutter when panning or shooting action adds confidence.
Jack Flesher wrote
I’m now debating my next Sony body. I do mostly landscape, including night-astro and travel. The sports I shoot are my grandchildren.HOWEVER... handling two different bodies was annouing as hell. Despite being...Show more →
I completely agree with these reasons to have two of the same body. Image processing compatibility is a big one.
I started with two A1 II's, then converted one of them to an A7R5 (later, an A7R6).
For you, Jack, the most sensible choice would likely be two A7R6's. For me, I find the mechanical shutter to be annoying after shooting mostly electronic shutter (also with flash synch on the A1 II on electronic shutter). I would prefer to go back to two A1 II's. I would miss the new battery and, perhaps, in a very small way, miss the added dynamic range; but, I just thoroughly enjoy shooting the A1 II, and really like the added adjustment dial. I shoot a lot of candid portraits and having silent shutter when using flash is great. Also, never worrying about rolling-shutter when panning or shooting action adds confidence.
Aug 31, 2026 at 05:57 AM
p.1 #122nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
Good thoughts, appreciate you all providing insight.
Control layout similarity, battery compatibility and processing similarity all matter to me, so there is that. I’ve never “enjoyed” working with two different systems or bodies, but never hated it either. Fumbling around trying to find a non-existent button or dial on was an occasional nit.
If the A1iii has the new sensor and battery, that would change things.
An A7CR is an interesting idea. But I just sold my A7Cii because the size wasn’t hugely different and the battery and sensor incompatibility were nits. And then there’s the EVF, so probably not. Which leaves an A7V, which is something I did consider; but it’s not better at anything other than being a good lens cheaper for a good used one. And it still has the battery and sensor differences.
Control layout similarity, battery compatibility and processing similarity all matter to me, so there is that. I’ve never “enjoyed” working with two different systems or bodies, but never hated it either. Fumbling around trying to find a non-existent button or dial on was an occasional nit.
If the A1iii has the new sensor and battery, that would change things.
An A7CR is an interesting idea. But I just sold my A7Cii because the size wasn’t hugely different and the battery and sensor incompatibility were nits. And then there’s the EVF, so probably not. Which leaves an A7V, which is something I did consider; but it’s not better at anything other than being a good lens cheaper for a good used one. And it still has the battery and sensor differences.
Aug 31, 2026 at 06:31 AM
p.1 #132nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
I have the Sony A1ii and the Hasselblad X2D2 I find shooting the X2Dii (except for fast action) a dream camera the files and ability to PP the files amazing. The X2D2 is only missing the longer glass and the burst shooting. Just took a trip to Maine and Chicago shot 5500 frames got 4 great images for my current style the Hasselblad produced all four images. However I didn't shoot any wildlife if I did the Sony would have been the workhorse. Admittedly I used ChatGPT to help me reconstruct my H2D2 camera settings to determine why I missed some of the Chicago Street images and to my surprise changing a few of the settings would have been a better setup for Street. I have been through three iterations of settings for Street action now the camera is dialed. Where I got it wrong was minimum shutter speed it was a 1/250sec it's now at 1/500sec. The other big change was the metering of the Highlights I now found the way to expose for the highlights so the in camera histogram doesn't fool me into thinking that the RAW file is clipped when indeed only the JPG file is clipped and the RAW image has much more headroom...its a simple concept but those are sometimes the hardest to understand.
I had some time in Chicago and went into the Lecia store to look around boy the M's looked great with the small lenses brought back memories. Then I got back home and reviewed all the Images I was getting bored so I looked at some older files with my Leica M11, M10 and to my surprise I like a lot of the images but the Focus in many images was so not sharp compared to my Sony and Hasselblad files then I remembered why I sold all my M's. Bottom line any camera can do the job I don't see a difference between the few Sony's you mentioned but the difference with GFX and the X2D2 files are a completely different story.
I had some time in Chicago and went into the Lecia store to look around boy the M's looked great with the small lenses brought back memories. Then I got back home and reviewed all the Images I was getting bored so I looked at some older files with my Leica M11, M10 and to my surprise I like a lot of the images but the Focus in many images was so not sharp compared to my Sony and Hasselblad files then I remembered why I sold all my M's. Bottom line any camera can do the job I don't see a difference between the few Sony's you mentioned but the difference with GFX and the X2D2 files are a completely different story.
Aug 31, 2026 at 07:04 AM
p.1 #142nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
I have shot with digital medium format quite a bit and do enjoy the ethos. But for me at my age, doing travel with them is too cumbersome. If my travel was photo specific, I would absolutely consider that route again and would look hard at a new Hassy kit. But my travel now is with my wife and family, so my photography is an adjunct to—and not the purpose of—the trips.
One of the reasons I switched to Sony was their generally trimmer body and lens sizes, coupled with excellent full-frame sensors.
One of the reasons I switched to Sony was their generally trimmer body and lens sizes, coupled with excellent full-frame sensors.
Aug 31, 2026 at 07:47 AM
p.1 #152nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
2613pch wrote:
indeed only the JPG file is clipped and the RAW image has much more headroom...
I apologize for the offtopic comment, but this observation is 100% correct, but also maddening to me. How is it even possible in 2026? All these manufacturers, who have been supposedly struggling with the shrinking market, and fighting tooth&nail to preserve their marketshare, continue to add more and more niche capabilities to their cameras, while simultaneously completely ignoring the fundamentals.
What I mean is that all currently manfuactured cameras [1] come with JPEG engines that don't even try to take advantage of the huge dynamic range of the sensors manufactured in the last decade. My dad's PowerShot S95 point&shoot from 2010 produces nearly identical JPEGs to the latest $5K mirrorless cameras with sensors 20 times (!) bigger.
Don't be dismissive because you only shoot RAW. Your camera's metering intentionally slightly under-exposes because the dumb JPEG engine simply ignores the upper bits of highlights, even if JPEGs are turned off. This means that most cameras can benefit from a permanent exposure compensation of +0.5 to +1EV. This is definitely the case with Sonys. With some scenes you need +1.5EV.
TLDR: All in-camera JPEG engines were designed in the 8EV DR era and haven't been upgraded in decades. Instead of evolving them, the metering was degraded to compensate.
[1] Relying on personal experience, having owned cameras from all big 4 brands within the last decade.
indeed only the JPG file is clipped and the RAW image has much more headroom...
I apologize for the offtopic comment, but this observation is 100% correct, but also maddening to me. How is it even possible in 2026? All these manufacturers, who have been supposedly struggling with the shrinking market, and fighting tooth&nail to preserve their marketshare, continue to add more and more niche capabilities to their cameras, while simultaneously completely ignoring the fundamentals.
What I mean is that all currently manfuactured cameras [1] come with JPEG engines that don't even try to take advantage of the huge dynamic range of the sensors manufactured in the last decade. My dad's PowerShot S95 point&shoot from 2010 produces nearly identical JPEGs to the latest $5K mirrorless cameras with sensors 20 times (!) bigger.
Don't be dismissive because you only shoot RAW. Your camera's metering intentionally slightly under-exposes because the dumb JPEG engine simply ignores the upper bits of highlights, even if JPEGs are turned off. This means that most cameras can benefit from a permanent exposure compensation of +0.5 to +1EV. This is definitely the case with Sonys. With some scenes you need +1.5EV.
TLDR: All in-camera JPEG engines were designed in the 8EV DR era and haven't been upgraded in decades. Instead of evolving them, the metering was degraded to compensate.
[1] Relying on personal experience, having owned cameras from all big 4 brands within the last decade.
Aug 31, 2026 at 12:36 PM
p.1 #162nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
Hahaha. Grandkids? You can make do with an A7V.
Aug 31, 2026 at 12:49 PM
p.1 #172nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
3catsinky wrote:
Hahaha. Grandkids? You can make do with an A7V.
Or any camera as long as you get knee replacement to shoot pictures at their level
Hahaha. Grandkids? You can make do with an A7V.
Or any camera as long as you get knee replacement to shoot pictures at their level
Aug 31, 2026 at 01:27 PM
p.1 #182nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
Landscape is your main thing. Do you mind missing a few fast moving bird shots? If not, then you already know the answer. Either camera will handle your grandkids. I opted for the A7R6 and X2D2. The Sony is for fast action, which is no more than an old man chasing his grandkids.
Aug 31, 2026 at 01:44 PM
p.1 #192nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
old-gregg wrote:
I apologize for the offtopic comment, but this observation is 100% correct, but also maddening to me. How is it even possible in 2026? All these manufacturers, who have been supposedly struggling with the shrinking market, and fighting tooth&nail to preserve their marketshare, continue to add more and more niche capabilities to their cameras, while simultaneously completely ignoring the fundamentals.
What I mean is that all currently manfuactured cameras [1] come with JPEG engines that don't even try to take advantage of the huge dynamic range of the sensors manufactured in the last decade. My dad's PowerShot S95 point&shoot from 2010...Show more →
I’m not certain this is responsive to your point, but one issue is that while sensors have improved a great deal and can record higher dynamic ranges… the jpg format hasn’t really changed. It has always had a much more limited DR, and today it falls even further behind what sensors are capable of.
I believe that cameras attempt ot optimize the raw to jpg internal conversion to some extent, but there’s only so much they can do without manual intervention.
- - -
As to Jack’s question, assuming he actually needs two new bods (in addition the the A7c I think he has), you can argue the question both ways. (I know, that’s not much help, right?)
On one hand, the A1ii has some characteristics that the A7r6 either lacks or where its specs fall slightly short. So there’s an argument for getting a body optimized for one sort of thing (e.g. landscapes) and antlers optimized for something else (e.g. fast wildlife, sports, etc).
On the other hand, the A7r6 seems to actually be pretty darned good for those wildlife photographs, despite having some specs that measure a bit lower than the A1ii. In fact, I think it is a real question whether he would accrue any real advantage in his photography from the A1ii… while having two cameras that he wants to use side by side but which have slightly different interfaces.
2613pch wrote
indeed only the JPG file is clipped and the RAW image has much more headroom...What I mean is that all currently manfuactured cameras [1] come with JPEG engines that don't even try to take advantage of the huge dynamic range of the sensors manufactured in the last decade. My dad's PowerShot S95 point&shoot from 2010...Show more →
I’m not certain this is responsive to your point, but one issue is that while sensors have improved a great deal and can record higher dynamic ranges… the jpg format hasn’t really changed. It has always had a much more limited DR, and today it falls even further behind what sensors are capable of.
I believe that cameras attempt ot optimize the raw to jpg internal conversion to some extent, but there’s only so much they can do without manual intervention.
- - -
As to Jack’s question, assuming he actually needs two new bods (in addition the the A7c I think he has), you can argue the question both ways. (I know, that’s not much help, right?)
On one hand, the A1ii has some characteristics that the A7r6 either lacks or where its specs fall slightly short. So there’s an argument for getting a body optimized for one sort of thing (e.g. landscapes) and antlers optimized for something else (e.g. fast wildlife, sports, etc).
On the other hand, the A7r6 seems to actually be pretty darned good for those wildlife photographs, despite having some specs that measure a bit lower than the A1ii. In fact, I think it is a real question whether he would accrue any real advantage in his photography from the A1ii… while having two cameras that he wants to use side by side but which have slightly different interfaces.
Aug 31, 2026 at 03:05 PM
p.1 #202nd A7R6 or an A1ii?
gdanmitchell wrote:
I’m not certain this is responsive to your point, but one issue is that while sensors have improved a great deal and can record higher dynamic ranges… the jpg format hasn’t really changed. It has always had a much more limited DR, and today it falls even further behind what sensors are capable of.
Dan, you're poking at the core here. 100% relevant. Remember the film days? Anyone familiar with the zone system intuitively understood the point of compression and expansion: the contrast ratio (what we call DR now) across media weren't the same, and was always (!) far narrower than the real world. And photographers carefully managed the zones from a scene (14EV+) to a negative (10EV), and finally to a print (6EV). What I am saying is the JPEG engines in modern cameras are horrible, horrible printers! They behave as if they're "printing" from a transparency onto a fixed-grade paper.
Meanwhile, the smartphone industry is on the opposite end of the spectrum: the iPhone's engine is "making up pixels" extrapolating from the paltry input to make up for the limited DR of its sensor. The gap is mind blowing, and instead of closing it, camera makers decided to give us pre-capture.
I’m not certain this is responsive to your point, but one issue is that while sensors have improved a great deal and can record higher dynamic ranges… the jpg format hasn’t really changed. It has always had a much more limited DR, and today it falls even further behind what sensors are capable of.
Dan, you're poking at the core here. 100% relevant. Remember the film days? Anyone familiar with the zone system intuitively understood the point of compression and expansion: the contrast ratio (what we call DR now) across media weren't the same, and was always (!) far narrower than the real world. And photographers carefully managed the zones from a scene (14EV+) to a negative (10EV), and finally to a print (6EV). What I am saying is the JPEG engines in modern cameras are horrible, horrible printers! They behave as if they're "printing" from a transparency onto a fixed-grade paper.
Meanwhile, the smartphone industry is on the opposite end of the spectrum: the iPhone's engine is "making up pixels" extrapolating from the paltry input to make up for the limited DR of its sensor. The gap is mind blowing, and instead of closing it, camera makers decided to give us pre-capture.
Aug 31, 2026 at 03:42 PM