[biz-engineer]

Well, ideally you want more quantity of higher quality images.

It doesn't work that way. Composition is not something you have time to do between two frames at 30 FPS. Basically, such Sony A1 camera is for people who press the shutter and hope to get a good photo by luck. For me as still photographer, I consider that if I need 30 FPS for taking still photos it means I don't know what I'm doing. I even stopped taking sport photos, because it filled my storage of repetitive boring photos under artificial lighting (sport stadiums). I had taken a few thousand wildlife images (birds in flight etc) with my K3 and DFA150-450, I started to review them a few months ago before archival, after 5 minutes of reviewing I decided to select all and press delete , I deleted several thousand photos, it saved me a lot of time, who wants 3000 photos of the my same spray & pray crap TBH? I just pressed delete, and it felt good when I did it

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 01-28-2021 at 06:50 AM.

[Serkevan]

It doesn't work that way. Composition is not something you have time to do between two frames at 30 FPS. Basically, such Sony A1 camera is for people who press the shutter and hope to get a good photo by luck. For me as still photographer, I consider that if I need 30 FPS for taking still photos it means I don't know what I'm doing. I even stopped taken sport photos, because it filled my storage of repetitive boring photos under artificial lighting (sport stadiums).

Not necessarily, if you're at a stadium with a super tele you can't move around too much anyway, so you're stuck trying to follow the action. And then, panning after a player at 30fps is not functionally different from panning with a camera that does less frames per second.

This is a camera for agencies who want their people to get THE pose while striking the ball (as an example), and don't mind sorting through a couple hundred of less-than-stellar frames for that one. It's not for you or me

[Dan Rentea]

Well, according to Sony internet fans, the A1 is a Canon killer. Maybe Canon will run out of business
Still remains the question for each of us: should we shooting more quantities or lower quality images or less quantities or better quality images.

I tend to believe the other way around (regarding A1 being the R5 killer or a Canon killer in general) and I also tend to agree with this article. As for quality and quantity, fortunatelly we can have both from 35mp (or more) cameras. If I had to document something for websites or for social media, I don't care about resolution. Also, if I would have to shoot a cheetah hunting, I rather shoot at 20-30fps knowing the dynamic of the scene. If I need to print something large, I would pay more atention to take the best image possible with the camera I have given the available conditions. This means that I will try to keep my ISO as low as possible and expose so that i don't have to work too much in post.

Why the Sony A1 Actually Shows How Canon Is Winning the Mirrorless Game | Fstoppers

---------- Post added 01-28-21 at 02:40 PM ----------

@Dan Rentea;

Dan, I tend to agree -- the specs are impressive. There's a lot of 'tech' packed into that small box.

What I find interesting is that the 'headlines' -- even at Sony's website -- announce '50 MP at 30 fps'. However, while these specs apply in certain shooting modes, the performance is tempered in other modes.

The frame rate of 30 fps is achievable only when using the electronic shutter. However, I understand that Sony has made significant gains in reducing the read-out speed of their sensors, so some of the traditional disadvantages of an electronic shutter have been largely mitigated or relaxed.

To take advantage of the uncompressed RAW files, you are "limited" at 20fps. Sony is marketing those 30fps because it does shoot at 30fps and if the conditions are not extremely challenging, shooting compressed RAW may be suited for particular subjects.

Yes, the achievement in the electronic shutter and EVF are interesting to me because if they managed to eliminate the rolling shutter with the electronic shutter, then it's quite nice.

While looking at the specs in detail, I noted that the operating temperature is 0-40 degrees C. I wonder whether the camera would withstand colder temperatures. My K-3 II is rated to minus 10 C, and I've used it in temperatures as cold as minus 20 C. I don't think I've read any reports of the operability of these Sony cameras in sub-freezing temperatures or in winter in general. Furthermore, wearing gloves introduces certain challenges, as many of us in the higher latitudes have experienced, so ease-of-use is important.

- Craig

I don't know how well this Sony camera is build, but 1Dx and D6 both operate on paper in same temperature (0-40 degrees) and both are know for their ruggedness in any kind of weather. So, I wouldn't worry about this aspect, but we will have to see some tests with A1.

[KiloHotelphoto]

Basically, such Sony A1 camera is for people who press the shutter and hope to get a good photo by luck. For me as still photographer, I consider that if I need 30 FPS for taking still photos it means I don't know what I'm doing.

If you're trying to get that moment an eagle or osprey is just about to enter the water to grab a fish having all the frame rate you can get helps, it happens so fast, especially with osprey.

[biz-engineer]

If you're trying to get that moment an eagle or osprey is just about to enter the water to grab a fish having all the frame rate you can get helps, it happens so fast, especially with osprey.

That's true. I don't do this kind of photography, that's why I didn't see the point of having 30 FPS.

[neokind]

@Dan Rentea;

While looking at the specs in detail, I noted that the operating temperature is 0-40 degrees C. I wonder whether the camera would withstand colder temperatures. My K-3 II is rated to minus 10 C, and I've used it in temperatures as cold as minus 20 C. I don't think I've read any reports of the operability of these Sony cameras in sub-freezing temperatures or in winter in general. Furthermore, wearing gloves introduces certain challenges, as many of us in the higher latitudes have experienced, so ease-of-use is important.

- Craig

I haven’t looked at the operation temp range for their other cameras, but a Sony A7Riv just accompanied the group that summited K2 in the winter, where they recorded temps of -40C. I doubt you’d be doing a whole lot of shooting or putting the body through its paces at that temp or location for fear of not surviving yourself. But it did make it. Kind of reminds me of Rolex’s marketing exercises sending their Explorer to Everest and Deep Sea to challenger deep.

[c.a.m]

a Sony A7Riv just accompanied the group that summited K2 in the winter, where they recorded temps of -40C. I doubt you’d be doing a whole lot of shooting or putting the body through its paces at that temp or location for fear of not surviving yourself.

Wow, that would be a difficult environment for any equipment. I wonder whether the camera was used at the summit or only at base camp(s). I would think that taking off one's heavy mittens or gloves to use a camera would be risky (but I'm not a climber).


- Craig

---

Last edited by c.a.m; 01-28-2021 at 11:37 AM.

[repaap]

Wow, that would be a difficult environment for any equipment. I wonder whether the camera was used at the summit or only at base camp(s). I would think that taking off one's heavy mittens or gloves to use a camera would be risky (but I'm not a climber).


- Craig

After it is frozen to your mittens, there is no other way that to take it with you.

[MJKoski]

Someone wanted report of Sony in cold environment?



Been there. Done that with a7r1 and 2. Down to -35C (very long periods) where the rear LCD will freeze and stop displaying anything (OLED EVF still works). In short, they basically function but operating them is a real pain. Like. Real. Pain.





Canon 90mm TS-E is fun to operate in the same conditions. But it paid off big time. I had to wonder how the heck did that Metabones adapter even work flawlessly with the lens in those conditions. That Canon lens has fully electronic aperture and not once did it fail.

[MMVIII]

And the show goes on. Impressive specs. Anyway.
In all this numbers and specs dropping I find the claim of the reduction of rolling shutter for the electronic shutter the most interesting fact. They claim that it is on the level of mechanical focal plane shutter, which would actually make this redundant in a next step. This would mean that you could improve this only by using a leaf shutter. Even if it is not a global shutter this would be a huge achievement that could influence future cameras, maybe also DSLRs.
If this would be implemented in a mirrored camera the semitransparent mirror might allow to AF on the sensor and do all the things the mirrorless can now (feature detection, eye AF...).

[MJKoski]

Yea. There are two types of mirrorless cameras now which have some advantage over a DSLR

1) Very fast readout sensor cameras (only Sony)
2) Large sensor resolution monsters (Phase, Fuji) for maximum IQ

Everything else is junk on MILC front. Canon may get there but now they lag in the speed race due to slow sensor tech.

[Serkevan]

Yea. There are two types of mirrorless cameras now which have some advantage over a DSLR

1) Very fast readout sensor cameras (only Sony)
2) Large sensor resolution monsters (Phase, Fuji) for maximum IQ

Everything else is junk on MILC front. Canon may get there but now they lag in the speed race due to slow sensor tech.

Yup. And only the first one is actually because of being a MILC. There's nothing that stops a theoretical full frame 645Z-Super from stomping all over the Fuji.

Medium format gives you so much overhead in processing that crushing the image to whatever JPG the EVF can show you is doing a disservice to the format, if you ask me (but then again I have never shot medium format).

[Rondec]

I think you see quite a few folks falling into the trap of "If it's not for me, it'll be a flop."

We know that is not the case. I have no interest in such a camera. 6 or 7 fps is plenty for me -- regardless of RAW compression. I don't do video or sports or wildlife photography. But I'm sure it will sell some -- not sure how much mainly due to the price.

I guess the big take away for me, though, is that the "improvements" in cameras these days don't do a whole lot for me. I really want better quality still images (not more of them). That means better color depth, more dynamic range, and better high iso performance. I am sure those sorts of things are tough to add, but instead the camera brands are interested in offering me more megapixels and higher frame rates. Oh well, Pentax does seem to be still interested in still photographers who shoot the sorts of things I do...

[bobmaxja]

This was the camera for The Olympic game that everybody expected.

[BigMackCam]

I think you see quite a few folks falling into the trap of "If it's not for me, it'll be a flop."

We know that is not the case. I have no interest in such a camera. 6 or 7 fps is plenty for me -- regardless of RAW compression. I don't do video or sports or wildlife photography. But I'm sure it will sell some -- not sure how much mainly due to the price.

Well said. There's no such thing as "junk" cameras these days, and the fact that all the major brands have many, many satisfied users of each model is testament to that. There's only subjective likes and dislikes, for a variety of reasons. Different models suit different folks. I'm not in the market, nor am I the target market, for this new Sony, but if I were gifted one and a brace of lenses, I'd happily use it and probably enjoy it - and the same goes for any camera, from any brand. They're all good...