Sony A9 - announcement live stream

[webrunner5]

9 minutes ago, Rodolfo Fernandes said:

I beg to differ, i shoot weddings, and the guys i 'worship' and really like to look at their work still use the D700, working hard gets you a long way, having the lastest and best gear isn't that important, most people tend to use what they are more confortable with and that allows them to focus on other matters besides the technical ones. 

Weddings are a bit different than covering the Summer Olympics. I doubt their D700, which is a fine camera, works out that well for sports. But very few people shoot weddings And sports. 

I have a friend that still shoots weddings on film with his Hassy.  Mostly in B&W. He makes more money than the digital guys around him. But he is a rare bird.

[Rodolfo Fernandes]

7 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Weddings are a bit different than covering the Summer Olympics. I doubt their D700, which is a fine camera, works out that well for sports. But very few people shoot weddings And sports. 

I have a friend that still shoots weddings on film with his Hassy.  Mostly in B&W. He makes more money than the digital guys around him. But he is a rare bird.

I used to take my 500CM to weddings too, and once took a Mamiya super 23, but there is no market for that where i live, and its not practical for most types of weddings.

[BTM_Pix]

17 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

There are plenty of replies on this thread that show how few of these jobs are even left! I don't think you can rest of your Laurels, or gear anymore like you could 10 years ago.

Unfortunately, resting on the gear is becoming more and more prevalent as its getting increasingly difficult to afford to replace it.

We can take images today that we couldn't have taken 10 years ago without the technology but I'm not sure its the case to say thats the case from, say, 3 or 4 years ago.

The last eyebrow raising lens that came out for sport was Canon's 200-400f4 with the switchable 1.4TC. Its an absolutely fantastic lens and for quite a number of Nikon shooters that I worked alongside who were at an upgrade point, that lens and the 1Dx which meant Canon had caught up low light wise tipped them into switching over. But that was 4 years ago now and nothing has really come along since that anyone has really gone "yep, game changer. That'll make my images better". 

So, as we are on this plateau and money is tight, people are going to sit tight as they've got bigger challenges than being able to get the right images with what they have. The images are the least of the problems!

The opportunity is with people like me who are approaching a crossroads as there isn't enough gaffa tape left to hold their gear together and the prospect of spending £12-15K on a body and lens isn't hard to stomach both financially and emotionally! 

Thats why I think they've made a bit of misstep here because its not cheap enough and the rest of the system just isn't there yet. 

Far from forcing Nikon and Canon's hand into an instant panic response as they presumably thought would happen, they've probably bought them more time by coming in at this price and without the rest of the eco-system to go with it. Having to use adapters even to use their own brand of lens and relying on other manufacturers to produce adapters that will let you possibly use Canon lenses more slowly and maybe without being able to use TCs ? Its not even bringing a gun to a knife fight to be honest. It just reminds me of Neville Chamberlain on the steps of that plane waving that piece of paper that guaranteed peace in our time. Only this time, its a spec sheet.

And this lukewarm reaction to it is coming from me, someone who is mad enough to be actually actively pursuing using compromised mirrorless systems for shooting sport professionally! Imagine what the cynical ones amongst my brethren think about it.

But as I keep saying, though, I bet it will be a fine camera.

[BTM_Pix]

35 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I doubt their D700, which is a fine camera, works out that well for sports. But very few people shoot weddings And sports. 

You'd be surprised how many I still see kicking around. They've mainly been gracefully moved off the front line to serve as remote cameras behind the goal etc but they're still a very competent camera low light wise so they still see duty with short primes on for wider perspective shots (or when players come over the ad boards over your head celebrating!) as without the grip on they're compact enough to be sat on top of your bag to be grabbed if needed.

I've shot weddings and boxing on the same day a few times.

Often at the same event

[webrunner5]

40 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Unfortunately, resting on the gear is becoming more and more prevalent as its getting increasingly difficult to afford to replace it.

We can take images today that we couldn't have taken 10 years ago without the technology but I'm not sure its the case to say thats the case from, say, 3 or 4 years ago.

The last eyebrow raising lens that came out for sport was Canon's 200-400f4 with the switchable 1.4TC. Its an absolutely fantastic lens and for quite a number of Nikon shooters that I worked alongside who were at an upgrade point, that lens and the 1Dx which meant Canon had caught up low light wise tipped them into switching over. But that was 4 years ago now and nothing has really come along since that anyone has really gone "yep, game changer. That'll make my images better". 

So, as we are on this plateau and money is tight, people are going to sit tight as they've got bigger challenges than being able to get the right images with what they have. The images are the least of the problems!

The opportunity is with people like me who are approaching a crossroads as there isn't enough gaffa tape left to hold their gear together and the prospect of spending £12-15K on a body and lens isn't hard to stomach both financially and emotionally! 

Thats why I think they've made a bit of misstep here because its not cheap enough and the rest of the system just isn't there yet. 

Far from forcing Nikon and Canon's hand into an instant panic response as they presumably thought would happen, they've probably bought them more time by coming in at this price and without the rest of the eco-system to go with it. Having to use adapters even to use their own brand of lens and relying on other manufacturers to produce adapters that will let you possibly use Canon lenses more slowly and maybe without being able to use TCs ? Its not even bringing a gun to a knife fight to be honest. It just reminds me of Neville Chamberlain on the steps of that plane waving that piece of paper that guaranteed peace in our time. Only this time, its a spec sheet.

And this lukewarm reaction to it is coming from me, someone who is mad enough to be actually actively pursuing using compromised mirrorless systems for shooting sport professionally! Imagine what the cynical ones amongst my brethren think about it.

But as I keep saying, though, I bet it will be a fine camera.

Oh I am not saying everyone that shoots Canon and Nikon is going to switch, far from it. But if you are just getting into doing sports I think you have to give this camera a damn hard look. A DSLR can not do what Sony has just done here no matter how hard Canon, Nikon tries. This camera is the future, and Canon has to come out with a mirrorless camera to compete with it.

And Sony now has a huge lead over them, and they will push harder and harder on Canon. I think Nikon is finished sad to say. They are not financially set to build one R&D wise, or manufacturing wise. Plus you know and I know this A9 will be able to shoot with Canon EOS lenses nearly as well as on a Canon body just like the A7r mkII can, maybe even better who knows yet.

If you own the top Canon, Nikon bodies you can no longer say you have the best as of yesterday. You have just lost that edge you had 2 days ago.

[noone]

12 hours ago, leeys said:

Most definitely. That glow in the middle is rather distracting though. Cute bowtie, is that EL wire?

Don't know.     yes that reflection is a bit distracting but I couldn't move as there were people on both sides of were I was standing and it was their last song as they were running out of batteries.    It was a lot better than the previous night when very well lit but right into the camera. 

[BTM_Pix]

14 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

If you own the top Canon, Nikon bodies you can no longer say you have the best as of yesterday. You have just lost that edge you had 2 days ago.

Spec wise undoubtedly not but until they bring out the lenses and the rest of the package then I'd still say that for the job we use it for then we still have the better tool for that job.

To paraphrase Muhammad Ali....The sensor can't capture what the lens can't see. Float like an optically stabilised 400mm f2.8 and shoot with a D3* 

 

*Yes,yes,but D5 didn't rhyme

[noone]

5 hours ago, sanveer said:

Just checked the Comments on Imaging-Resource.com and I came across this:

"AUTO/Electronic Shutter:*7*8*9
Continuous shooting:
Hi: max. 20 fps
Mid: max. 10fps
Lo: max. 5 fps

Mechanical Shutter:
Continuous shooting:
Hi: max. 5 fps
Mid: max. 5fps
Lo: max. 2.5 fps"

 

The 20fps headlines, therefore seem like click-bait. Especially if the quality of the electronic shutter isn't the same as a mechanical shutter.

Actually, it seems 20fps is very real and not just clickbait.

This camera is made to be mainly used in electronic shutter mostly (where it is completely silent).      You only use the mechanical shutter for flash or a few other uses.

Look at some of the videos around the place.     Way beyond me but very nice.

Should be a lot more about it later today as the various sites start putting up more hands on stuff.  

I am looking forward to seeing what the NON Sony artisan sports PJs that Sony got to test it think.

 

[webrunner5]

Wow I would think the mechanical shutter can shoot higher than 5 fps. Well maybe it doesn't LoL. This page has a HUGE amount of specs about the Sony A9 at the bottom.

http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/04/19/sony-α9-the-mirrorless-camera-goes-pro/

[noone]

31 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Wow I would think the mechanical shutter can shoot higher than 5 fps. Well maybe it doesn't LoL. This page has a HUGE amount of specs about the Sony A9 at the bottom.

http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/04/19/sony-α9-the-mirrorless-camera-goes-pro/

Seems to me that it doesn't shoot faster than 5fps with the mechanical shutter but it doesn't need to use that very often at all.

IE, most shoot their A7 series cameras with EFCS with the mechanical shutter but most will shoot the A9 only with the electronic shutter (or at least that seems what it is designed for).

[webrunner5]

8 minutes ago, noone said:

Seems to me that it doesn't shoot faster than 5fps with the mechanical shutter but it doesn't need to use that very often at all.

I wonder what is the life of the Electronic shutter??  20fps would eat up a shutter pretty quick if you were a Birder, Sports Photog. I guess it would be the curtain that would fail first?

Hmm looking it up, I guess a Electronic shutter Has no moving parts. DuH!

[noone]

5 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I wonder what is the life of the Electronic shutter??  20fps would eat up a shutter pretty quick if you were a Birder, Sports Photog. I guess it would be the curtain that would fail first?

Well since there is no physical shutter it could be decades. 

It will mean the mechanical shutter lasts longer too (if it is not being used).    Electronic shutter is just turning it on and off electronically.       Some will probably break after the warranty runs out and other will last until the first pro uses it in the rain and others will outlive most of us.

Sony has a video about this (can not remember where) and how with no mirror and no shutter there is much less to break.

[webrunner5]

2 minutes ago, noone said:

Well since there is no physical shutter it could be decades.     It is just turning it on and off electronically.       Some will probably break after the warranty runs out and other will last until the first pro uses it in the rain and others will outlive most of us.

Sony has a video about this (can not remember where) and how with no mirror and no shutter there is much less to break.

Yeah I just figured that out. Learn something new everyday. But it sort of leads to more Rolling Shutter doesn't a Electronic shutter?

[tugela]

3 hours ago, Leica50mm said:

Whats the big deal? Canon 1DX MK II does 16 fps with live view, and it works great.        Are sports photographers going to switch over four frames a second? 

And the little RX100M5 does 24 fps in burst mode for up to 150 frames (a bit less if you are doing raw at that speed as well). 16fps is too slow for a modern camera.

[noone]

Just now, webrunner5 said:

Yeah I just figured that out. Learn something new everyday. But it sort of leads to more Rolling Shutter doesn't a Electronic shutter?

Yes it does but that is part of why this is so good.

It is a LOT less.     In one of those videos, there is a shot comparing a golf club swing and with the other camera the club has a very pronounced bend but with the A9 shot the club is still straight.

I will see if I can find some of the videos later but I am sure there will be many more very soon.

[tugela]

3 hours ago, forofilms said:

Without 4k 60p, DPAF and a robust codec, the A9 doesn't touch the 1Dxii when it comes to video capabilities, I'm sorry to say. The A7siii, however....remains to be seen. 

The focusing on the A9 is faster than DPAF.

[SR]

It's been almost 2 years since the A7Rii and A7SII was announced. Hope this is simply a teaser for what's to come.

[Andrew Reid]

8 minutes ago, tugela said:

The focusing on the A9 is faster than DPAF.

Isn't it a hybrid system with phase detect AF points on the sensor and contrast detect too?

I don't see how that can compete with Dual Pixel AF.

Even if it is faster for single shot AF in stills mode (with Sony's lenses only) - you have far less information from that kind of autofocus system.

It won't be as good at object tracking in video mode. The sensor has to run at 24fps which means the read out is too slow to get the AF information off the chip for fast and reliable results.

With DPAF every pixel gives AF information to the lens and processor... Millions of them.

Sony should move to DPAF.

[webrunner5]

11 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Isn't it a hybrid system with phase detect AF points on the sensor and contrast detect too?

I don't see how that can compete with Dual Pixel AF.

Even if it is faster for single shot AF in stills mode (with Sony's lenses only) - you have far less information from that kind of autofocus system.

It won't be as good at object tracking in video mode. The sensor has to run at 24fps which means the read out is too slow to get the AF information off the chip for fast and reliable results.

With DPAF every pixel gives AF information to the lens and processor... Millions of them.

Sony should move to DPAF.

I would surely think Canon has a Patent on the DPAF thingy?

2 hours ago, Rodolfo Fernandes said:

I used to take my 500CM to weddings too, and once took a Mamiya super 23, but there is no market for that where i live, and its not practical for most types of weddings.

Well I guess for 150 years film seemed to work for weddings LoL. I know I shot a lot of them with a Hassy and 3 lenses. I am sure the new digital ones can look better. But you end up with 1,000 shots, not the say 100 to 120 I used to shoot a wedding with. I don't have a clue what you could even shoot 1,000 shots of??

[Kisaha]

@jonpais 

this is the post. Just an example of things can go wrong.