FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Sony a9: 20 FPS Full-Frame with no blackout

Page  <1 678
Author
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 22126
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 hours 57 minutes ago at 12:43
Originally posted by stiuskr stiuskr wrote:

My basic thoughts are: a9R, why? Doesn't the a9 meet that criteria? A9s, same thought.
Some people need (or think they need) more than 24 MP. Same reason the A7R, A7RII and A99II are popular cameras.

I feel 24 MP is enough for me, but I can imagine 42 MP is nice to have for making really big prints or or having an 18 MP+ APS-C file.
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
 



Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 1308
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 hours 56 minutes ago at 12:44
Originally posted by stiuskr stiuskr wrote:

My basic thoughts are: a9R, why? Doesn't the a9 meet that criteria? A9s, same thought.

The A9 seems to have an AA filter while past R's have not had them. The RX1R had a 24 MP sensor without an AA filter. An A9R could be similar.
Sony SLT A65 30M 35/1.8 50/1.8 16-50 16-80 16-105 18-135 18-250 55-300
Sony A5000 LA-EA1 16/2.8 16-50PZ Rokkor 45/2 55/1.7 58/1.4
Minolta Maxxum 70 24/2.8 28/2.8 50/1.7 85/2.8 100M 135/2.8 100-300
Back to Top
stiuskr View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Joined: 01 September 2006
Country: United States
Location: West Virginia
Status: Offline
Posts: 10234
Post Options Post Options   Quote stiuskr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 hours 52 minutes ago at 12:48
Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

Originally posted by stiuskr stiuskr wrote:

My basic thoughts are: a9R, why? Doesn't the a9 meet that criteria? A9s, same thought.

The A9 seems to have an AA filter while past R's have not had them. The RX1R had a 24 MP sensor without an AA filter. An A9R could be similar.


misspoke earlier

Originally posted by stiuskr stiuskr wrote:

ehh, dyslexia rearing it's head here. I was thinking it's 42MP, realize now that's the a99II so I reckon there is an argument for an R version but I thought this camera was already geared towards sports shooters.
Rob Suits Jr.
a99 a77 a700 KM7D|Min24/2.8 Min35/2 So50/1.4 So50/2.8 Min85/1.4G Tam90/2.8 Tam180/3.5|Tam17-50 KM28-75D So70-200G1 So70-300G So70-400G1|MFC-1000w/1200AF Metz54MZ-4i SonyF60 PW's x3
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 1833
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 hours 34 minutes ago at 13:06
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

Full-frame doesn't make sense to me for sports. People are complaining that there are no long lenses for E mount, but choosing a larger sensor makes all lenses shorter. You aren't getting a resolution advantage with these from the larger sensor. The A9 doesn't have the dynamic range either. What does it get from having a larger sensor other than being more costly to manufacture? Even the stabilization has to be worse.
This is basically the "Medium Format is dead now Canon released the 12mpx 1Ds" argument - the smaller sensor is so close to the larger one, what is reason to get the larger sensor camera. And it turned out to be flawed - because if a smaller sensor gets the same amount of pixels, dynamic range or (lack of) noise, that doesn't make it any bigger, and a bigger sensor makes a difference. The likes of Phase One and Hasselblad sold medium format cameras with CCD sensors and crappy AF for years after DSLR's became low-light marvels with CMOS sensors, just because of sensor size. I know not everybody sees the difference, but it is real. There is no substitute for real estate

As always, this argument gets confused by what you hold constant. For a given state of technology the noise performance of the sensor is similar for the different sensor size and pixel size, and noise is determined primarily by the amount of light falling on the sensor, not the size of the sensor or the Pixels. If you shoot at the same shutter speed with the same size opening in the lens (physical aperture, entrance pupil, not F no.) and adjust the focal length to suit, the image will be the same on each sensor size and so will the noise performance.
The problem comes because most of the people complaining about noise performance use constant-aperture zooms which have a smaller entrance pupil at shorter focal lengths, and so may well have inferior snr at APS-C size. But if you pick long prime lenses and accept that the APS-C will have a shorter focal length and a wider aperture, the noise performance is more likely to be equal.
So, I agree with QuietOC that for applications using long telephoto lenses, there is little if any advantage in FF in image terms (though there might be in feature sets, Af performance, etc).
A58, 5d, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .
Back to Top
owenn01 View Drop Down
Alpha Eyes group
Alpha Eyes group

Joined: 20 May 2008
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Kent
Status: Offline
Posts: 8647
Post Options Post Options   Quote owenn01 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 hours 33 minutes ago at 13:07
I suspect that Sony are keeping their options open - just waiting to see what the market uptake and response from their competitors is... No point in wasting all one's nails if one in a coffin is enough
My Mantra: "Comment on other's work as you would wish to have yours commented upon". Go on - it's fun!
Back to Top
Simurg View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 24 October 2016
Status: Offline
Posts: 33
Post Options Post Options   Quote Simurg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 9 hours 32 minutes ago at 19:08
Originally posted by lonewolf lonewolf wrote:



I believe the embargo on images from the Press event expires on Thursday so i'd expect a flood of reviews from the usual sources then


The reviews are out there. Everyone is claiming that focus tracking and accuracy is as good as the best DSLR's.

I guess low light could be an issue but there are reports of great success over there as well.

I don't understand how Sony did this. This is amazing achievement, actually unbelievable.
 



Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 12807
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 8 hours 36 minutes ago at 20:04
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

... a bigger sensor makes a difference ...

As always, this argument gets confused by what you hold constant ...

No matter what factors are held constant, the sensor sizes - and recorded image sizes - remain different. Should we think that a 40mp smartphone sensor can always produce an identical result compared with a 40mp medium format sensor - all other things being equivalent and as optimized as possible? If in that example anything changes as a result of different final enlargement factors for equivalent viewing size, we can say something also changes when comparing APS-C and full frame, but to a smaller degree.
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 7474
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 7 hours 51 minutes ago at 20:49
It is so difficult to explain what I see. The smartphone analogy is a nice one.

Maybe this article by Ming Thein gives you some more insight. Especially the paragraph Angle of view, depth of field and depth of field transition. But it isn't as detailed as the article I was looking for. However, when he writes about "the abruptness of the out of focus transition" he seems to echo my "roll off" remark.

Anyway, you don't need to agree. It is much cheaper not to agree
Das Bild ist ein Modell der Wirklichkeit - Wittgenstein
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 1308
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 7 hours 24 minutes ago at 21:16
The depth-of-field transitions of MF could be due to leaf shutters. Leaf shutters give you the STF effect for free.

Some sensor engineer should work on an electronic leaf shutter (i.e., some semi-radial sensor readout). It shouldn't be that hard. It would have to be baked into the chip. Maybe in some future A9x.

Edited by QuietOC - 7 hours 17 minutes ago at 21:23
Sony SLT A65 30M 35/1.8 50/1.8 16-50 16-80 16-105 18-135 18-250 55-300
Sony A5000 LA-EA1 16/2.8 16-50PZ Rokkor 45/2 55/1.7 58/1.4
Minolta Maxxum 70 24/2.8 28/2.8 50/1.7 85/2.8 100M 135/2.8 100-300
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > E-mount full frame Page  <1 678

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Find us on Google+

Feel free to contact us if needed.