stuuke wrote:
I don't think anyone thought this would be a sports camera but it's possible to create a non-sports specific camera that is capable of being used for sports. That rolling shutter makes it unusable. The stacked sensor and 30fps seems like they're teasing something it's not. Image quality, focusing and battery life should be great.
Since when is 10fps (mechanical) “unusable” for sports?
If you are in the small minority that truly needs faster than that, you wouldn’t be choosing a 67MP landscape camera as your tool for the job. It is perfectly capable being pressed into sports work for those who use it as a general camera. Any dedicated sports shooter is going to be using an A9 III or A1 II.
Is 10fps usable for sports? Yes. Is it usable for sports photos that you're getting paid for? Probably not, but maybe. Am I happy with 10fps for personal or unpaid work? No. Once you feel 15 - 20 fps, it's very difficult to go back. For me, anyway. Also, once you feel the AF calculation speed of the A1/A9, it is also hard to go back to 60 cals per second bodies. In the same vane, once you use a sensor with 5ms readout, and get rid of any rolling shutter, I have ZERO desire to go backwards in that department.
The dream would have been this camera with a 5 - 10ms readout speed, so I can crop more in sports and wild life. I cannot afford a 400 2.8 or 600 f4 lens to make up the reach.
May 13, 2026 at 11:35 AM
Previous versions of BigBabyMoses06's message #17037588 « Sony A7RVI »
