p.3 #1 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
guidostow wrote:
The A1/A9 cameras handle the speed and fast sensor read space just fine just fine.
Yes but the latest versions of these two cameras, the A1II and A9III, cost you between $6500 to $7000. Also Sony has no plan to improve firmware for the A1 or A9II to keep them current or add any features.
So do you migrate to the Canon EOS R5 Mark II to get a new camera with great features at half the price? I was lucky owning glass in both Sony FE and Canon RF systems to try that out and saved $3300 by swapping one of my two A1 (version1) straight up for the Canon R5 Mark II. It’s really just an experiment since eventually I will move back to only one system but had a need to have both.
p.3 #2 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
For me, getting pleasing colors from images shot with my Sony camera is a breeze. I simply don't think about, it just happens automatically.
The only way to test if you really prefer Canon colors over Sony, is a blind test done by someone else. Otherwise, your bias would most likely kick in.
Cliff L. wrote:
The blue line on the chart below is the Canon... please explain how the Sony cameras have "way more dynamic range" using this actual measured data...
As for the colours, I don't ever shoot in JPEG, but I find it takes a great deal more work to get pleasing landscape/nature/wildlife colours out of the Sony RAW files than it does from the Canon files, but that's obviously subjective. However, if you're wiling to put in a little extra work, the Sony files are certainly good enough.
p.3 #3 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
raminolta wrote:
The only way to test if you really prefer Canon colors over Sony, is a blind test done by someone else. Otherwise, your bias would most likely kick in.
Clearly, your bias is affecting your reasoning... again.
p.3 #4 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
I would say more certainly it is your bias affecting your reasoning here because you have failed to demonstrate even one instance to back up your assertion about Canon color over Sony colors. It is all talk from you and others with no evidence to back it up.
Cliff L. wrote:
Clearly, your bias is affecting your reasoning... again.
p.3 #5 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
raminolta wrote:
I would say more certainly it is your bias affecting your reasoning here because you have failed to demonstrate even one instance to back up your assertion about Canon color over Sony colors. It is all talk from you and others with no evidence to back it up.
I'm pretty sure I've posted more proof to back up my observations than you have, but then I don't really expect anything more from someone who accused me of being a scammer.
p.3 #6 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
To all, sorry this thread has become a war on the colors of Canon vs. Sony. It was more to be my feedback on the positioning of cameras in the Sony product line with the announcement of the new A7V camera. I just wanted to know if others thought there was a wide price hole between the A7V and the A9III or A1 II.
p.3 #7 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
I have no claim to prove because I never claimed Sony colors are better than Canon or any other camera. My claim was that Sony colors have been pleasing to me. Your claim was a comparison between Sony and Canon colors for which you have presented no evidence whatsoever. If you had, I am sure you would included the link(s) here.
I never accused you of being a scammer. I just stated your are biased just like anyone who believes in something then naturally becomes biased in his opinion. This is not scam but the effect of a belief on human mind. I have observed some people (maybe not all) who stated they preferred Canon colors over Sony but in a blind test, they chose Sony images over Canon images.
Cliff L. wrote:
I'm pretty sure I've posted more proof to back up my observations than you have, but then I don't really expect anything more from someone who accused me of being a scammer.
p.3 #8 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
Sony has always let older cameras fill the price hole, and the A1 is nearly identical to the A1ii. Canon is irrelevant due to a combination of inferior tech in much of their cameras and the most limited, consumer hostile closed mount.
swldstn wrote:
To all, sorry this thread has become a war on the colors of Canon vs. Sony. It was more to be my feedback on the positioning of cameras in the Sony product line with the announcement of the new A7V camera. I just wanted to know if others thought there was a wide price hole between the A7V and the A9III or A1 II.
p.3 #9 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
shadow9d9 wrote:
Sony has always let older cameras fill the price hole, and the A1 is nearly identical to the A1ii. Canon is irrelevant due to a combination of inferior tech in much of their cameras and the most limited, consumer hostile closed mount.
I understand Sony’s approach letting an older reduced price A1 fill in between. But it’s my opinion that this approach only works if they commit to keeping firmware up to date for that older model. I’ve never seen any justification of why the original A1 could not have had pre-capture added with firmware. Does anyone know why? Also, for most people the $4100 price difference between the A7V and A1II is huge. Why is there no product Sony could create, say for shooting sports, that could benefit in the $4800 price range that is more attractive to than an A7V but still cost less than an A1 II?
p.3 #10 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
Tariffs scale with price. The A1ii was $6500 at release and when I bought it.
The A1 should absolutely have gotten precapture. It was Sony's least supported flagship by firmware and a solid letdown from the A9.
But if you take the A1 for what it is, I don't think it needs any more firmware to function. Same goes for the original A9 or the A7rv, etc. With sales and used prices, there are many models to choose from. The A74, A7cii, A7rc, and apsc cameras all exist as well.
Hell, the A7r3 was a solid camera, and needs to firmware to function well. A high resolution camera that could be had very reasonably.
swldstn wrote:
I understand Sony’s approach letting an older reduced price A1 fill in between. But it’s my opinion that this approach only works if they commit to keeping firmware up to date for that older model. I’ve never seen any justification of why the original A1 could not have had pre-capture added with firmware. Does anyone know why? Also, for most people the $4100 price difference between the A7V and A1II is huge. Why is there no product Sony could create, say for shooting sports, that could benefit in the $4800 price range that is more attractive to than an A7V but still cost less than an A1 II?...Show more →
p.3 #11 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
It’s very possible that Sony needed to make hardware changes to support pre capture RAW on the A1ii. It’s probably the same reason we will never see pre capture raw on the Z9 or Z8, despite being able to do raw video. Pre capture RAW is quite complex on both the software and hardware side.
I do agree though it would be nice to see Sony continue to support the A1 with firmware updates as much as possible, especially since they're still selling it. Especially in the case of the A1, I don’t feel like keeping the old model around is helping much. The A1 is basically 6k new and the a1ii is 7k new. How many people are going to spend 6k on a camera and not spend the full 7k to get the newer model. I can’t help but feel like Sony did this purposefully to push people to the A1ii. Also 6k is still about 2k more then an R5II, Z8, or A7RV and about 3k more then an A7V.
p.3 #12 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
DWOfPaul wrote:
It’s very possible that Sony needed to make hardware changes to support pre capture RAW on the A1ii. It’s probably the same reason we will never see pre capture raw on the Z9 or Z8, despite being able to do raw video. Pre capture RAW is quite complex on both the software and hardware side.
I do agree though it would be nice to see Sony continue to support the A1 with firmware updates as much as possible, especially since they're still selling it. Especially in the case of the A1, I don’t feel like keeping the old model around is helping much. The A1 is basically 6k new and the a1ii is 7k new. How many people are going to spend 6k on a camera and not spend the full 7k to get the newer model. I can’t help but feel like Sony did this purposefully to push people to the A1ii. Also 6k is still about 2k more then an R5II, Z8, or A7RV and about 3k more then an A7V....Show more →
I don't think there is software difficulty to add pre capture RAW. The following are the two possibilities that I can think of. (1) On the hardware side, running pre capture RAW may draw too much current that the battery can not support. The premature shutdown of A1ii reported earlier may be an indication of that, and they need a more power efficient chip to run it reliably. Though on Nikon side, Z9's battery should be strong enough for that. (2) On the business side, just like A1ii, I don't expect Z9ii/Z8ii to be much different (such as meaningful increase in resolution) other than adding pre capture RAW. If they enable that in the first version, what's to motivate people buying the second version.
I do agree Sony lacks an offering at $4-5k that have pre capture, which has now become default expectation on new upper range cameras. Maybe Sony is betting on people buying $4-5k cameras unlikely to be first time buyers and less likely to switch. Also Nikon doesn't have an exact offering there either since its pre capture is not RAW. At the end, I suppose if enough people do switch at that market segment, Sony may be more likely to come up with a solution.
p.3 #13 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
I love reading these theoretical threads that devolve into cheap Tele-novella fictions with rivalries, name calling, based and baseless accusations… at some point I should cancel my streaming subscriptions and just read various forum posts.
‘hammerguy1957: look, the only real hammer is a classic Estwing … wooden handles suck and should be relegated to the the dustbin of history’
‘technoframer-xoxo: look hammerguy1957, I wanna see you frame a house without a Paslode XPro… it can fire 300 nails per second and it has that AI firing chip now - it anticipates the best moment to fire as you hold down the trigger halfway. Try that with your hammer from the Iron Age!!!’
‘Moderator: guys just a reminder to keep it civil in here.’
‘WaldenPond15348!: you guys are both full of crap, a real carpenter uses various wooden handled hammers - from framers to finishers in various weights depending on the task at hand. The wood lets you feel a deep connection with your work and it’s the brain behind the hammer that is the most important. With a wooden handle you suffer less fatigue throughout the day and because you have a collection of them in various weights you can select the right tool for the job.’
‘SteelersForLifeFan: it’s bullshit that you guys still frame houses with wood! Swinging hammers or pulling the trigger on a nail gun is so last century. Get with the program dudes. Steel framing even for residential homes is the future. Leave the trees for the squirrels and the birds.’
‘Moderator: time to lock this one up, don’t you guys have any hobbies like photography or knitting or something?’
p.3 #14 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
bmike-vt wrote:
I love reading these theoretical threads that devolve into cheap Tele-novella fictions with rivalries, name calling, based and baseless accusations… at some point I should cancel my streaming subscriptions and just read various forum posts.
‘hammerguy1957: look, the only real hammer is a classic Estwing … wooden handles suck and should be relegated to the the dustbin of history’
‘technoframer-xoxo: look hammerguy1957, I wanna see you frame a house without a Paslode XPro… it can fire 300 nails per second and it has that AI firing chip now - it anticipates the best moment to fire as you hold down the trigger halfway. Try that with your hammer from the Iron Age!!!’
‘Moderator: guys just a reminder to keep it civil in here.’
‘WaldenPond15348!: you guys are both full of crap, a real carpenter uses various wooden handled hammers - from framers to finishers in various weights depending on the task at hand. The wood lets you feel a deep connection with your work and it’s the brain behind the hammer that is the most important. With a wooden handle you suffer less fatigue throughout the day and because you have a collection of them in various weights you can select the right tool for the job.’
‘SteelersForLifeFan: it’s bullshit that you guys still frame houses with wood! Swinging hammers or pulling the trigger on a nail gun is so last century. Get with the program dudes. Steel framing even for residential homes is the future. Leave the trees for the squirrels and the birds.’
‘Moderator: time to lock this one up, don’t you guys have any hobbies like photography or knitting or something?’...Show more →
Longest, and most out of topic and cryptic post of the entire thread. For what.
p.3 #15 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
tctmp wrote:
I don't think there is software difficulty to add pre capture RAW. The following are the two possibilities that I can think of. (1) On the hardware side, running pre capture RAW may draw too much current that the battery can not support. The premature shutdown of A1ii reported earlier may be an indication of that, and they need a more power efficient chip to run it reliably. Though on Nikon side, Z9's battery should be strong enough for that. (2) On the business side, just like A1ii, I don't expect Z9ii/Z8ii to be much different (such as meaningful increase in resolution) other than adding pre capture RAW. If they enable that in the first version, what's to motivate people buying the second version....Show more →
Another big potential issue can be the buffer size. In theory to give a 1 second pre capture raw + 1 second burst after pressing the shutter you would need a buffer that can support at least 60 raw files. The processor would also have to be able to deal with this work load without over heating. Sometimes in software you can optimize for low memory by using more CPU or optimize for low CPU by using more memory but if your low on both there may be no realistic path forward.
p.3 #16 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
Woo, some of the posts on this thread are wild xD
I don't think the A1II is too overpriced. It's one of the most expensive flagships but we knew that for ages. It's a tad pricier than the R1 series.
The mid-range for Sony has always been incredibly weird. There was never a mid 'do it all' camera until the A7V came around, and it's the first Sony body in a long time that I'm considering getting brand new. Really excited for it.
I most certainly don't think it's an entry level camera. Can you call any $2900 camera 'entry-level'? Seems like the A7CII is supposed to carry that torch, or they just keep selling the A74.
Before the A7V, it seemed like Sony had a range of rather specialized cameras, but the A7V now definitely seems like a better 'do-it-all' option without having to fork over $7k.
p.3 #17 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
As far as I'm concerned the "missing camera" in Sony's lineup is something like the Zf: a retro body with manual controls. Just give it a fast sensor and make it smaller: the Zf is too big.
p.3 #18 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
Sarpedon wrote:
As far as I'm concerned the "missing camera" in Sony's lineup is something like the Zf: a retro body with manual controls. Just give it a fast sensor and make it smaller: the Zf is too big.
If I want to shoot retro, I’ll grab a film camera and actually shoot retro rather than pretend. The A7cr is Sony’s compact camera.
p.3 #19 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
Yeah I already have a collection of film cameras that I use when I want to shoot film, thanks, but I don't want to shoot film all the time: most of my workflow is digital. I want a digital camera with retro controls because i think it's a better, more intuitive, and more enjoyable experience, just like a lot of Leica and Nikon users on this board. I grew up shooting film, I don't need to pretend anything.
I think the A7Cr feels like junk in the hand and the senor is too slow for silent work. (Edit: also, the EVF sucks!)
p.3 #20 · Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
Sarpedon wrote:
As far as I'm concerned the "missing camera" in Sony's lineup is something like the Zf: a retro body with manual controls. Just give it a fast sensor and make it smaller: the Zf is too big.
For me, as a Zf owner, I'd say it is on the larg'ish side, but not crazily so. If it was 10% lighter, it would be perfect. Really, my major wants are:
- A real dedicated AF-On button
- 36 Mpx instead of 24
- A better grip so that you don't get these situations where everybody is screwing in a grip on the bottom
- Auto-ISO on the ISO dial
A fast readout is a 'nice to have', but part of the allure of the Zf is the sound and feel of the mechanical shutter. The Zf, Z6, and Z7 are my favorite mechanical shutter sounds.
I think Sony has a lot of good bases covered, but the A7V was exactly what was needed. Theoretically, the A7CII can be regarded as the entry level camera.
I don't know what Sony can do on the tactility/manual game. Theoretically, a lot of their cams do provide lots of controls: exposure comp dial, lots of lenses with aperture rings, but there are SO many challenges to achieve a good retro Zf-like body.
The e-mount is so limiting that it's hard to adapt a bunch of lenses from other mounts, but perhaps that isn't necessary. You already have Sigma I series, Voigtlander, etc. that give you that tactility.
