aCuria wrote: mholdef wrote: aCuria wrote: mholdef wrote:
I just switched from Nikon to Sony and had to decide what bodies to pick up. I do a range of photography from studio and portraits to dance performances and sports. So was really down to either two A1IIs or one of each, knowing for events I'd be shooting two bodies. On the plus side, both have the same bodies, ergonomics, AF etc, and while I was attracted by the Global shutter to avoid LED banding, shoot at higher shutter & sync speeds, having noisier files with the A9III is what held me back, so I went for two A1IIs.
The A9iii has very little chroma noise and mostly has luminance noise.
As a result noise reduction software is extra effective because software has always been really good at removing luminance noise, but struggles with chroma noise
After NR has been applied the A9iii files look cleaner at the same iso
One of my buddies is in charge of the Sony Pro service here and we talked about it - I usually shoot at ISO between 3200-6400 during ice hockey games in rinks that have poor lighting. He suggested staying with the A1II for cleaner files
• tripod which did not move between shots
• same lens (35GM)
• iso 6400
• 1/400s
• f/5.6
• processed the same way
• deep crop to centre of frame
• equal Lightroom NR applied to both.
The test shots have equal NR applied, but the A9iii file can be pushed harder (more NR) without skin looking plastic
Thanks for sharing. I don't doubt you can't process the files to a pleasing result, but there is no doubting there is more noise from the base ISO all the way up compared to the A1II. The A9III is a great camera, there are just shortcomings for my style of shooting.
Aug 10, 2025 at 06:10 AM
Previous versions of mholdef's message #16867622 « A9III VS A1II… General shooting »
