fbpixel
  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 36 posts | 
by Jens Peermann on Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:01 am
User avatar
Jens Peermann
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4845
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Location: Behind a camera
Member #:00298
Watch here       (It was a life stream and it's over now)

Here's some more

dpreview on the 100-400

dpreview on the a9


Promised to be available May 25th.
Life without a camera is possible but pointless!


Last edited by Jens Peermann on Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:18 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 

by prairiewing on Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:37 am
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
It looks like an interesting camera. While the 70-400 is welcome addition I'm a little baffled why they chose to debut the A9 in this segment without the fast primes to back it up. I'd have thought a high mp successor to the A7r2 would have more appeal but what do I know? Perhaps the high MP version isn't too far behind. It will sure be interesting to see if it performs as advertised.
Pat Gerlach
 

by Jens Peermann on Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:46 am
User avatar
Jens Peermann
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4845
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Location: Behind a camera
Member #:00298
prairiewing wrote:
It looks like an interesting camera.  While the 70-400 is  welcome addition I'm a little baffled why they chose to debut the A9 in this segment without the fast primes to back it up. I'd have thought a high mp successor to the A7r2 would have more appeal but what do I know?  Perhaps the high MP version isn't too far behind. It will sure be interesting to see if it performs as advertised.


I'm sure the a9r will follow just like the a7r followed the a7.

It's a 100-400, not a 70-400, and at $2,500 it will have to be excellent to lure buyers away from the Canon 100-400 ($2,000) and even the Sigma 100-400 C ($800). Considering the sample variations that Sony lenses suffer, this will be a tough job.
Life without a camera is possible but pointless!
 

by sdaconsulting on Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:22 pm
sdaconsulting
Forum Contributor
Posts: 523
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: Moncure, NC
prairiewing wrote:
I'm a little baffled why they chose to debut the A9 in this segment without the fast primes to back it up. 


Because it will take a while to deliver a 600/4, 500/4, 300/2.8 FE, and in the meantime they can sell this camera to lots of people who will buy it to use with shorter fast glass, like the wedding / PJ market.
Matthew Cromer
 

by prairiewing on Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:12 pm
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
20fps for a wedding? Spec-wise it looks like more of a challenge to the 1Dx2 and D5 but they're smart folks and I'm sure they have a good roadmap going forward.
I own one Sony, the A7r2 and like it so I'm kind of a fan but just haven't been able to convince myself to go deeper into their system.
Pat Gerlach
 

by DChan on Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:23 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1554
Joined: 09 Jan 2009
prairiewing wrote:
20fps for a wedding?  ...



I'm guessing that if it can shoot 20 fps, it can also shoot 1 fps or other slower frame rates. Well, at least that's a choice other cameras give to the camera users.
 

by prairiewing on Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:36 pm
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
DChan wrote:
prairiewing wrote:
20fps for a wedding?  ...



I'm guessing that if it can shoot 20 fps, it can also shoot 1 fps or other slower frame rates. Well, at least that's a choice other cameras give to the camera users.



Wow!  Thanks for pointing that out.
Pat Gerlach
 

by DChan on Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:52 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1554
Joined: 09 Jan 2009
prairiewing wrote:
DChan wrote:
prairiewing wrote:
20fps for a wedding?  ...



I'm guessing that if it can shoot 20 fps, it can also shoot 1 fps or other slower frame rates. Well, at least that's a choice other cameras give to the camera users.



Wow!  Thanks for pointing that out.


Hey, you're welcome Pat !

It's just common sense after all if you think about it.

And yes, you can choose to shoot wedding at 20 fps, too, if you want to.
 

by prairiewing on Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:55 pm
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
DChan wrote:

It's just common sense after all if you think about it.




Maybe that's why I didn't think it had to be discussed.
Pat Gerlach
 

by prairiewing on Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:59 pm
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
Jens Peermann wrote:
prairiewing wrote:
It looks like an interesting camera.  While the 70-400 is  welcome addition I'm a little baffled why they chose to debut the A9 in this segment without the fast primes to back it up. I'd have thought a high mp successor to the A7r2 would have more appeal but what do I know?  Perhaps the high MP version isn't too far behind. It will sure be interesting to see if it performs as advertised.


I'm sure the a9r will follow just like the a7r followed the a7.

It's a 100-400, not a 70-400, and at $2,500 it will have to be excellent to lure buyers away from the Canon 100-400 ($2,000) and even the Sigma 100-400 C ($800). Considering the sample variations that Sony lenses suffer, this will be a tough job.



I'm sure you're right on the money Jens.  I'd love to shoot with one.  It sounds like an entirely different experience-- quiet and with no blackout for example.
Pat Gerlach
 

by DChan on Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:12 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1554
Joined: 09 Jan 2009
prairiewing wrote:
DChan wrote:

It's just common sense after all if you think about it.




Maybe that's why I didn't think it had to be discussed.


And yet you brought it up...probably in a hurry I supposed.
 

by prairiewing on Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:29 pm
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
DChan wrote:
prairiewing wrote:
DChan wrote:

It's just common sense after all if you think about it.




Maybe that's why I didn't think it had to be discussed.


And yet you brought it up...probably in a hurry I supposed.



No hurry, I just thought I was dealing with mature people.
Pat Gerlach
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:35 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 79609
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
How about we talk about the camera guys!
 

by DChan on Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:42 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1554
Joined: 09 Jan 2009
prairiewing wrote:
DChan wrote:
prairiewing wrote:
DChan wrote:

It's just common sense after all if you think about it.




Maybe that's why I didn't think it had to be discussed.


And yet you brought it up...probably in a hurry I supposed.



No hurry, I just thought I was dealing with mature people.


And I should have heeded your advice. My apologies !
 

by prairiewing on Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:44 pm
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
sdaconsulting wrote:
prairiewing wrote:
I'm a little baffled why they chose to debut the A9 in this segment without the fast primes to back it up. 


Because it will take a while to deliver a 600/4, 500/4, 300/2.8 FE, and in the meantime they can sell this camera to lots of people who will buy it to use with shorter fast glass, like the wedding / PJ market.



You're right Matthew.  I guess I'm just used to Canon where I need a different body for every different task--one for high mpx, one for high speed and another for all-purpose.  Sony's A99II is the first camera that has that has all those features rolled into one body--at least all the features I want--except for the lens mount.   And in the E mount every length is now covered without adapters up to 400 so this is probably a great all-around option for many.
I was shooting this evening with the 1DxII and it seems blazing fast, I can't imagine what 20 frames per second would be (except for a lot of editing after the shoot.)
Pat Gerlach
 

by Jens Peermann on Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:38 pm
User avatar
Jens Peermann
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4845
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Location: Behind a camera
Member #:00298
prairiewing wrote:
I can't imagine what 20 frames per second would be (except for a lot of editing after the shoot.)

I have 11fps on the a6500 (in bursts up to 100 with RAW and 300+ in JPEG) and that is already too much IMO. I set the camera to 8fps, which is plenty for me. The editing part you mention is a big contributing factor in this.

A bit of history may put those 20fps into perspective. When the first motion pictures hit the big screen, they ran at 12fps. That was too slow for a smooth transition between frames. So the rate was raised to eventually reach 24fps. That was fast enough to make the transitions undetectable for the human eye.

However, this created a problem for the cartoon movie industry, which faced double the expenses for producing in-between cells, because those movies ran on the same 24fps projectors as all other movies. So they started experimenting and eventually found that using each cell for two consecutive frames will result in a movie that runs just as smooth as if they would have produced twice the amount of cells.

In other words, with 20fps we will leave the still photography territory and be well into the motion picture realm.
Life without a camera is possible but pointless!
 

by Jens Peermann on Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:47 pm
User avatar
Jens Peermann
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4845
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Location: Behind a camera
Member #:00298
sdaconsulting wrote:
  …and in the meantime they can sell this camera to lots of people who will buy it to use with shorter fast glass, like the wedding / PJ market.


The photojournalism market is actually heading toward the iPhone/IPad level for instant submission from the location to the editor. Those devices produce fairly decent images, definitely adequate for something that gets printed on a medium that's just a notch above toilet paper.
Life without a camera is possible but pointless!
 

by prairiewing on Wed Apr 19, 2017 10:57 pm
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 364
Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
E.J. Peiker wrote:
How about we talk about the camera guys!




I thought we were talking about the Sony A9. 

Who are "the camera guys?"  
Pat Gerlach
 

by Neilyb on Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:18 pm
User avatar
Neilyb
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2499
Joined: 07 Feb 2008
Location: Munich
New battery. Finally. Although double the capacity might not last a few bursts :o of 20fps.

Still need those long primes if they want to sell a fast sports camera.
 

by Jens Peermann on Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:51 am
User avatar
Jens Peermann
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4845
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Location: Behind a camera
Member #:00298
Neilyb wrote:
New battery. Finally. Although double the capacity might not last a few bursts :o of 20fps.


Sony will offer a battery pack/charger. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any further information on it besides that it is also compatible with cameras that use the NP-FW50 batteries, and this picture:

Image
Life without a camera is possible but pointless!
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
36 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group