Anyone think they'll limit it to 60 calculations per second, rather than 120 like the A1 or A9iii? That, and the readout speed, are enough for me to pass on it. In my testing with my A1 vs A7RV, the A1 wins in the autofocus department, even tho the RV has the upgraded algorithm/hardware. RV tracks better but doesn't calculate fast enough for action, for me.
I think the new camera will just turn out like the A7V, just more resolution.
I think the new camera will just turn out like the A7V, just more resolution.
Well I hope not. The a7V has only one Type A slot and a lower res EVF like a cheaper camera. The a7rVI needs two CFe Type A slots and at least as good an EVF as the a7rV.
EB-1 wrote:
Well I hope not. The a7V has only one Type A slot and a lower res EVF like a cheaper camera. The a7rVI needs two CFe Type A slots and at least as good an EVF as the a7rV.
EBH
Hope not as well. I want good screens too. I can see lines and squares in my A7RV screen, like when you put your face up to a TV and can see the individual squares in the screen. Pretty lame compared to any of the Canon screens my cameras have had.
I think it's a great thing. It's just going to either be significantly less exciting than the rummors are making it out to be. I don't think it will be close to an A1 killer, like the A7V isn't an A9 or A1 killer.
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
I think it's a great thing. It's just going to either be significantly less exciting than the rummors are making it out to be. I don't think it will be close to an A1 killer, like the A7V isn't an A9 or A1 killer.
Yeah that’s how I feel. Intuitively I feel like it’s far more likely to be a higher resolution A7V than a higher resolution A1II.
As Nikon lack - Z7 III / I am also very interested with this relase. If ithe the price is about $4000 I may take a closer look
Sony 70-200 f4 II lens would be another plus to own Sony camera ( but I have to admit this lens feels poor quality comparing to every Nikon or Canon 70-200 lens I used before )
It's unlikely to go "backwards." It would keep two slots, the somewhat better evf, etc. I don't know if it's time to move off the current SD and/or battery compatibility. I'd prefer not. That could means"two" things for spares, perhaps different chargers and readers, etc. I think the evf, while better than many of the other models, is perhaps Number 2 in "Could be better" complaints/concerns after "roling shutter."
I don't think it will be huge threat to the A1 series. I expect they have their ideas about pricing v volume on any of the models. What may have changed is the corporate and users' sidelong glances to the Canon and Nikon offerings.Like the Z8, Loyalists may point out it's only 45 mp or how much larger. Others will look and see it at $3400.
I'm really hoping the battery pack is only different in capacity/performance and still has the same form factor/charging with the USB PD charger I like to use.
sidaths wrote:
Please just give it a break. Your petty need to be “correct” and extract admissions from others on this forum is tiresome.
I said in the previous post I was hoping to let it go, but you somehow wants to interject and extend it. Am I the one who wants to be "correct" or is he the one who wants to be "corect" by keeping on shifting his positions? Did you read the thread? If I wanted to be "correct", I would have beaten back his "logic" why I was wrong immediately in the first place. But I didn't even bother to respond to him.
And am I expecting to get an admission from him? I dont think anyone reading his posts expects that to happen. Nevertheless, I'm justified to point out that, especially since he was criticizing my position. This is not about correctness of rumors/predictions, this is about people throwing out all the "logic/reasoning" why others were wrong, then immediately contradicting themselves afterwards. What's the point in trying to comprehend what they write and whether there is any reason/value in it in the first place then.
Now I hope this can go to rest.
Edit: And to people who can't comprehend this and just choose to call others names anyway, and are not even capable of writing more than a word, and to those people who like those name callings, you actually fit very well the names you try to throw out, and in this case are indeed very pathetic.
Steve Spencer wrote:
My longer term prediction for Sony is:
fast but not fast enough for fast moving action 16ms sensor scan speed is in the A7 series: plain A7 V gets 33 MP, A7r VI gets double the resolution at 67 MP
ultrafast sensor scan speed goes to the A9 and A1 series: A9 IV reuses the 24 MP global shutter with tweaks to improve its performance at a price reduction; A1 III gets double the resolution with a ~48 (maybe 50) MP global shutter
A7C series (both C and Cr) reuses the A7 series sensors and keeps things ultra small for those who want that. ...Show more →
Sounds entirely plausible. It would be nice if Sony had something unexpected to pull out of the hat, but I’d be (pleasantly) surprised by anything more. It’s always interesting to hear a considered opinion like this.
(As for some of the other discussion recently in this thread …. as JM Keynes may have said, it seems to me that there’s nothing wrong with changing one’s mind if the information changes.)
I had been wondering about swapping our old A7V IV for an A7CR (mainly to have something smaller, but also to have a second body with better (in some respects) AF to complement my A1 for wildlife). But I’m now inclined to hold off for a few days. And an A1 III with global shutter — if they can pull that off any time soon — would be awfully tempting ….
This may be a bit unrelated to this particular announcement, but I am still curious to hear what others think.
We seem to have hit a dynamic range ceiling some years ago.
We are also close to the diffraction limits of the full frame format in terms of resolution, if I am not mistaken.
Regarding fps, I'd say we are already at a usable limit for all genres apart from those involving fast action.
Autofocus still has some room to improve, but I feel it is already more of a lens challenge than body at this stage.
Where do you see the field going in the next few generations? Global shutter seems like a likely next step but it could become harder to convince people to continue investing in bodies at some point. I'd probably be at that point a long time ago if I were a landscape or macro shooter.
umut_h_toprak wrote:
This may be a bit unrelated to this particular announcement, but I am still curious to hear what others think.
We seem to have hit a dynamic range ceiling some years ago.
We are also close to the diffraction limits of the full frame format in terms of resolution, if I am not mistaken.
Regarding fps, I'd say we are already at a usable limit for all genres apart from those involving fast action.
Autofocus still has some room to improve, but I feel it is already more of a lens challenge than body at this stage.
Where do you see the field going in the next few generations? Global shutter seems like a likely next step but it could become harder to convince people to continue investing in bodies at some point. I'd probably be at that point a long time ago if I were a landscape or macro shooter....Show more →
I think the logical situation in the medium term will be global sensors across the board with the main differentiator between cameras being resolution and the physical features of the camera bodies such as integrated vertical grips and additional function buttons and larger/higher resolution screens and viewfinders.
In the long term I think they will eventually reach a point where resolution is more or less maxed out even with the lowest end sensors much like LCD/OLED screen resolution for cell phones and laptops is largely irrelevant now. At that point the only differentiator will have to be body size and feature set.
I think the price differential between different sensor types will remain, perhaps tighten some. Different specializations can work against each other some, so I'd expect we'll still have several different body series for a while.
