#LarryJones - "IIRC the R5 4K is oversampled from 8k"

Is that one reason why the r5 melts down and is so unreliable, which makes it unsuitable for professional use.

#LarryJones - "...and saves that extra time and space of editing 8k"

Oversampling is not relevant to editing.

Canon is using a 10-bit 4:2:2 h.265 codec on the r5, which does not have GPU hardware support, it's a nightmare to edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWaFOQTbZ88

So no, I'm not seeing how the r5 "saves that extra time and space".

Fujifilm, Panasonic, Zcam, and Sony all use 4:2:0 HEVC, which does have GPU hardware support. The a1 can also record 8k and HD proxy files in real time, so it doesn't need to be transcoded before editing, and with GPU hardware support it might do the final render faster, depending on the editing program that's used.

a1 8k is oversampled from 8.6k, no pixel binning and no line skipping, it looks sharper than the r5 8k to me.

The R5 is a good camera for sure. But the ability to shoot an hour+ continuous at 8k instead of 4k means more flexibility in post. And with the ability of saving HD proxies in real time on the camera or generating them on a computer after (in 4K or HD) I see no reason not to shoot in. 8K. If you want to talk R5 and you can handle the thermal limitations I would probably also use 8k (but not raw with crazy file sizes). If you need to record longer clips or more of them then the low quality 4k on the R5 isn’t really spectacular and doesn’t compare to the others you mentioned. I guess you can say the A1 is substantially more expensive but I guess you get what you pay for.

Oh and you yourself understand the value of shooting in higher resolution so I’m not sure why you brought up 4k.

https://m.dpreview.com/videos/6400950848/dpreview-tv-the-blackmagic-ursa-mini-pro-12k-could-teach-mirrorless-cameras-a-few-things/comments?comment=6280810308

#LarryJones - "It shoots for about an hour with a ninja V"

That's not relevant to this 8k thread, because the Ninja V can't record 8k from any camera.

Beyond that, having to buy a Ninja V just so you can get usable recording time with the r5, is just another example of what is wrong with the r5.

I suspect this is to appeal to the sports photographers who often shoot in JPG and high ISO that are used to 21MP images from their 1DX’s and D6’s and A9’s. I don’t think it’s “special” though as most cameras have been able to produce Dow samples JPGs for a while now. I do think it’s not an accident that the medium JPG size of 21MP happens to match the 21MP you get in APS-C/crop mode. And as I understand it when you select medium JPG your JPGs are 21MP whether you’re in full frame and the image is downsampled or in crop and the image is not downsampled. If you’re in the 21MP shooting mode both modes are 21MP.

Also there is a control ring on the big white lenses that can be set to zoom in that 1.5x. So it’s intuitive to use like a zoom lens.

I typically look at the fine detail in the clothing on the beatles and in the feathers as well as on the currency. Also I pay attention to the noise in the darker areas as ISO is raised. Doing Bird photography with extreme crops with the A7R4 - often having to shoot at 1600 or faster and pushing shadows I am a bit more critical than most. So as I said not much difference to my eye on the A1 and A7R4 - a little more difference comparing the A1 to the Canon and Nikon

Looking at one detail, I think camera A must be a tad better than the others, looking at somewhere else, camera C might look slightly ahead, When looking at shadow noise, camera A is the leder again, but when looking at contours in the same region, camera B looks cleaner and sharper ... or was it C or D? I think this sums up my impression.

Most modern sensors are so good, I wouldn't expect to see big differences in image quality, generation-to-generation.

The bigger question should be: 'is there any detrimental impact from the changes that deliver such a fast sensor?'

The improvement is in the readout (less rolling shutter, the ability to shoot 8K, faster updates to the AF system, e-shutter that can be used with flash at high shutter speeds), rather than noise or low light performance, where the likes of the a7R IV are already very, very good.

Gerald Undone confirms the presence of rolling shutter in 8K:

https://youtu.be/eO1B9p_p7cE?t=603

It's not bad but it is there.

Someone on another forum speculated that the A1does not use the the multi ADC DRAM fast readout for video like it does in stills, but instead uses a single ADC rolling shutter for video.

That's why in the one Sony 8K promo video for the a1 they don't move the camera much.

I've not had a chance to check rolling shutter figures yet but this is a progressive scan sensor (as opposed to an instantaneous/global shutter). It'll have a degree of rolling shutter in every mode, the question is how much.

“That's why in the one Sony 8K promo video for the a1 they don't move the camera much.”

Your fav brand (Canon) didn’t move the camera either in their 8K promo video. Source https://youtu.be/qfIq50JJBeI

So your point is…

I think we can cut them some slack. We are not quite out of this global event that is affecting supply chains in virtually every industry.

Or allow comments only after a period of 3 months minimum with posting at least 5 forum entries.
That would stop kicked-out commenters from simply creating a new account.

They should restrict number of commects one can make on each article.

Wow...ever heard of what's going on in China or Russia? Yes, bring on communism and censorship... But seriously, not everyone posts photographs online. I for one have close to 3 TB of photographs, and print the better ones for pleasure. I probably post a couple on FB, the rest remain at home framed or just as printed images. So the fact that I have been photographing since I was 15, which is 50 years ago, kind of makes me a bit knowledgeable about cameras. The fact that I was a professional with a business for 10 years also gives me insight in photo equipment. But your right, I have no images posted, so block me and my opinions.

"DPR should restrict comments!"... And they do, when it's offensive. But attending a photography forum doesn't need any other requirement then respect. I believe everyone is entitled for their opinion, even if I believe it's nonsense... What is nonsense for me may be exactly what other person is searching for.

The last thing I believe DPReview needs is censorship.

I can't tell you the last time I read a comment and then went to check a poster's gallery. I read all comments and don't need a litmus test. No big deal.

The Sony a1 looks impressive to me.

I am so sorry that my comment crashed your illusions. And then to the point that you had to pull the "troll" card.
Hey! Sony looks spectacular! All that beautiful random noise... like the beginning of universe itself!

Is it better now?

a·tro·cious
/əˈtrōSHəs/

adjective
- horrifyingly wicked.
- of a very poor quality; extremely bad or unpleasant.

If you think this describes what you are seeing on the A1 then I think the conversation is over. Have a good day.

@Tomas36 If you want people to take you seriously, you should adjust your comments to have a believable level of criticism. All of these cameras have fantastic IQ and are class-leading. You might not prefer Sony's results, but the idea that any of them are "atrocious" is hyperbolic and diminishes your opinion to the point where it can be discounted as irrelevant.

@Techjedi
I totally agree with your point. Every camera has its unique feature. In this case, the A1 emphasizes on more fps + high MP and 8K with manageable overheating capability. Higher MP more noise nothing new here. Quite frankly, the R6 or A7III outperform Z7ii, R5, A1, A7riv in terms of low iso and noise. I guess we can now all make fun of these higher MP bodies because they cost more based on that. There's no perfect camera. It's all about what you can/can't live with.

I don't disagree re: features, but tell that to the hundreds of commenters discussing them here haha - hence my comment.

Overall CMOS IQ pretty much topped out years ago, at least at the pixel level. You see marginal differences and Canon is still cooking their RAWs but overall everything is pretty similar between the major brands and nobody is going to make a system switch over anything seen here.

@Thoughts R Us
the fact that the A1 offers IQ barely discernible from the R5 and Z7 while retaining the very unique A9 sensor architecture, with twice the resolution and faster readout seems to be a feat. This sensor is not just about IQ.

Fast read out allows high speed electronic flash sync and less rolling shutter. It will make a difference with fast moving objects though as the AF acquires it.

it is indeed - I`d say (as a full time Photographer) that its still the best general work usage Professional Digital camera ever made and the A1 isn`t going to change that ..
I find that the D850 like the D5/D6 focusses in almost no light even through slow lenses (sensor AF is still a way behind dedicated AF sensor arrays like the D850 and D6 have for low light) , has no pixels needing mapping out for AF so no banding to be interpolated out - and best of all its as tough as boots like Pro DSLRs always have been and with better spaced buttons, real weather sealing and longevity . it is a work camera though, no way am I lugging that unless I`m being paid to - for leisure give me a light, compact, Mirrorless toy anyday ;)

Well, there is a comparing tool available om the Dpreview site. Take a closer look at jpg files from different camera models from the same maker.

Do you use factory settings and OOC jpg files from a Phase One camera?

go 12,800 read the small text a1 is most defined r5 mush ,contrast colours are due to the canon lens being probably superior ,hard to compare 4 different cameras all using different metrics.

I do not agree. Yes the Sony have a bit more boise in some places but the R5 looks soft and lacks fine detail. I will rather have fine detail and a bit more noise and have the opportunity to remove noise in the RAW converter.

David you do know the sony was on the left?? every place i look especially the green fluffy bits and the hair the R5 looked better

@David Cartagena this is exactly what i see and a7r3 is cleaner than all 4 with a cheaper lens ,the reason r5 looks a little better with contrast and colours is due to the lens being used ,the sony 85 f1.4 is not the best e mount lens anymore ,had it been the sigma the A1 would shine even more. hard to believe i am getting emotional over test charts. The A1 detail is better at 12,800 read the small text i can hardly read the canon text

#RCouto - "the Sony Alpha A7R IV is essentially the same camera"

No, it's not the same camera, not even close.

The a1 has a stacked sensor, carbon fiber mechanical shutter, carbon fiber heat sink on the IBIS mechanism, it does 8k and 30fps, flash with electronic shutter, etc.

The a7riv and a1 are targeted at entirely different market segments, so it can't possibly be cannibalization.

My sense is these sensors are all inherently similar in the noise department. canon does seem to be applying more heavy handed noise reduction on the raws. Of course once those details are removed they are gone for good. Some people go right to the swatches but if you don’t look around I don’t think you come away with the right conclusion.

It would be interesting to see if software like DXO and/or Topaz DeNoise after their updates to read the ARW files directly can extract more detail among higher levels of noise in comparison to the R5 files where some of the noise and detail has been removed in the camera.

I don’t think this question can be answered yet

Check this example if you think the R5 is better :-)
The Nikon is the clear number 1 in high ISO performance with least noise and the Canon is the clear number 3 of the 4 cameras in this comparison.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a1&attr13_1=canon_eosr5&attr13_2=nikon_z7ii&attr13_3=panasonic_dcs1r&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=25600&attr16_1=25600&attr16_2=25600&attr16_3=25600&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&attr171_0=1&attr171_1=1&attr171_2=1&attr171_3=1&normalization=full&widget=803&x=-0.11305677951833468&y=-0.9332950079989015

if you scroll down a bit and look at the word "blanc" on the wine bottle, the Canon is very competitive. The S1R looks about a full stop behind the other three but I don't see much difference between the Sony, Nikon, and Canon.

I agree with mosc the top three all look virtually the same. The Panasonic is behind clearly...

AKH I don’t agree but if for your application that’s what you see then that’s fine. There are a million different ways to analyze these images.

@AKH:
Why stop there?
Go to 102400 and include the 4 year old Sony A7R3.
It beats them all by a country mile!

About Topaz Denoise
Look at Shady1991's comment below . It appears the R5 does better with it.

"I processed the files in Topaz Denoise.
I must say that denoise works much better on Canon. While it preserves more details in A1 it also finds some weird patters in the noise and keeps them while in R5 the software clearly realizes what is noise and what is not. There are weird artifacts in A1 noise and I cant seem to understand why. I played with sliders but could not get as good results as R5."

Add the A7RIII and be amazed. That 42 MP sensor is a marvel

Canon applies low ISO NR into the RAW files. RAW files above ISO 640 do not have NR applied.

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64860057

whitelens:

The Canon and Nikon $6000 bodies' IQ sucks? In what regard? Both bodies are certainly better higher ISO bodies than this Sony, or the R5, Z7II, etc.

Also: Better IQ, with the exception of shooting high ISOs, comes almost exclusively from the lens/es used. So you've made a massive error conflating higher pixel count with better image quality.

Nor of course, does the A1 have the weather sealing or battery life of either the 1DX III or the D6. So they are not in the same market, by Sony's choice, since I'm sure the A1 does in fact have excellent AF.

@Dave Oddie : the A7R3 seems to be the perfect camera for you.

Then there is this description of how one of the winners from the wildlife photo contest got his winning shot:
“ Andy spent five weeks watching the mountain hares near Tomatin in the Scottish Highlands... As he watched, frozen and prostrate, with 50 to 60 mph winds surging relentlessly around him,...

Andy uses the Nikon pro bodies. Could the a1 hold up under similar extreme usage? It may. But I have yet to see any such reports.

So maybe those large rugged bodies still serve a purpose?

@TRU Why wouldn’t it? Do you really think there are no nature photographers using Sony cameras in harsh environments? And have been using them for quite some time? I follow quite a few on insta.
And I just watched this (really well made IMHO), he is using the Sony A7RIII on a Mount Everest summit:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kdqME9bso0g

@Thoughts R Us you have been postulating for a long time Sony cameras are built worse than ie. Canon and also that A1 is not as sturdy as 1Dx II. I have shown you it isn't true and now this.

Can we now please stop seeing false claims about Sony cameras lack of sturdyness from your hand.

@HowaboutRAW

The A1 have a solid body just like 1Dx or D6.
If you resize the A1 photos to 1Dx or D6 size it have much more details and a bit more color noise which easily can be removed in the RAW converter.

And you can print much larger with images from the A1 than the 1Dx or D6.

So let's say the A1 is more versatile.

David:

"The A1 have a solid body just like 1Dx or D6."

No, the A1 won't. It's the same body as the A7R IV. So nowhere near as tough, on the outside at least, as the D6 and 1DX III.

Downsampling photo files DOES NOT decrease noise as a fraction of the image data. Want low noise, start with low noise file. The 1DX III's and D6's are lower noise.

@HowaboutRAW

"No, the A1 won't. It's the same body as the A7R IV. So nowhere near as tough, on the outside at least, as the D6 and 1DX III."

The A1 DOESN'T have the same body as the A7rIV. DPR's test tells you that and here are shots of both body shells if you can't read.

A7rIV
https://www.sony.co.uk/image/10b45ab4a1cb236e59464ec178e3ed64?fmt=png-alpha&wid=378

A1
https://www.sony.co.uk/image/464fcb898ac10e1cdf29cfbe0fa356b2?fmt=jpeg&wid=400&qlt=85

The A1 has a 100% injected mag alloy body like the 1DXIII. https://d25tv1xepz39hi.cloudfront.net/2019-12-27/files/canon-eos-1-d-x-mark-iii-body_1965-9.jpg
Please explain to us how the injected mag alloy of Sony is somehow 'nowhere near as tough' as Canon's injected mag alloy.

RubberDials:

It's real close to the A7R IV's body. Also DPR's test here is a shooting studio samples.

"Please explain to us how the injected mag alloy of Sony is somehow 'nowhere near as tough' as Canon's injected mag alloy."

Assuming the A1's body is as strong as the Canon's and Nikon's is a big leap just based on the same material being used. Body strength also depends on wall thickness and ridge placement. Furthermore, toughness includes seals, sealing mechanisms, and hinges. I highly suggest that you handle a D5 or 1DX and then check out an A9II.

Also check out cameras like the Pentax K1, Leica SL2, Panasonic S1, Olympus EM1X, and even the Olympus EM1 and Fuji XT4.

"CMS, thank you. I’ve been asking this in earnest and you are the first to give me a real reply."

@TRU

Lair, I have been (as do other members) giving you some REAL replies regarding this nonsense you are claiming for a long time.

You ignored it here
https://www.dpreview.com/videos/8702427033/dpreview-tv-sony-a1-review?comment=4790920335

and I reminded you here (which you ignored as well)
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2677095861/hands-on-with-the-sony-alpha-1?comment=4865419216

You could check https://paulnicklen.com/ as he is a long time Sony user who spends weeks in the arctic in "extreme conditions".

Did you stop your habit of spreading misleading information? Clearly not.

@cbphoto

"You really need to stop posting a comparison of the 1DXIII's mag alloy shell to the A1's... they are not the same"

Why?

@cbphoto

Why is the forums is not a reliable source? These forums are for people to show and talk about their experience, are you calling them lairs?

"Sonys build quality/ergonomics has a reputation to not being up to the same level as Canon and Nikons flagship bodies"

Where are those claims?

"It's much more about reputation"

Reputation from comment sections? I have been using Sony cameras for almost 10 years without any issue with build quality.

@cbphoto

Both are using the same material, it doesn't matter if it is big, heavy and awkward to use, or it is small and light while having an amazing technology. Both will do the work in any environment they are designed for.

When you own both cameras do us a favor, do a comparison video for you claimed nonsense, then we might believe you.

@cbphoto

From where you heard, saw or knew this REPUTATION? Did you use any of the cameras and it faild in any of the categories you mentioned? If yes, show me a video of it. If not, then your claims are just coming from a baised person who have no evidence on his debate.

I shared one person who is using the cameras in the artic without issues, yet you still claim the same nonsense.

@cbphoto

Please don't avoid the question. You have said that the A1 body despite being the same thing - a camera body, and made from the same material - injection moulded magnesium alloy - is not as tough as the 1DXIII. Please explain how and why this is the case.

@RD

He won't answer, he don't have an evidence of what he and TRU claimimg, which is a video of Sony cameras fail to operate in extreme conditions.

They just do talking and spreading misleading information.

@zxaar
Thats because you don't listen.......your welcome....😊

@RubberDials
My gut feeling is that the Sony bodies do not have the same level of environmental sealing as the Nikon/Canon pro bodies. The Sony bodies do withstand a fair abuse but I would not bet on being on pair. That said, I have not held an A1 in my hands I am just extrapolating based on A7 and A9 series. Also, the sharp edges are not a good design choice, I do not understand why Sony insists on that. Paint wears out quick, not as pleasant to hold up. An A9 is priced well below Nikon and Canon flaghships and as such I though that such lean manufacturing design choice from Sony (keeping basically same design for all bodies) was justified. Not so for the A1. To me Sony matching the price of much more expensive bodies to manufacture is a statement for much bigger revenue margins. As much as the A1 is currently the more advanced camera on the market its intrinsic value is much less than its price tag. To me the A1 should have been the opportunity to revamp the body design.

zxaar:

"I only hear that canon and nikon are ergonomic disasters."

See what happens when you don't check, you get bad information and post it.

@cbphoto
Wasting your time with rubberdials I’m afraid...........hardened brand disciple.....😊
Zxaar is in the military wing....🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

@cbphoto.

Your Words:
"@Rubberdials...You really need to stop posting a comparison of the 1DXIII's mag alloy shell to the A1's... they are not the same, just because they are of the same material. This is plain to see for anyone..."

Please explain to me how they are not the same, 'just because they are the same material'. Don't say 'it's obvious' - explain the difference.

@Armandino

"My gut feeling is that the Sony bodies do not have the same level of environmental sealing as the Nikon/Canon pro bodies."

When evaluating the level of sealing of a new camera body, your gut can't help you. A much better resource is a diagram of the seals of each camera. :)

1DXIII
https://d25tv1xepz39hi.cloudfront.net/2020-01-06/files/canon-eos-1-d-x-mark-iii-weather-sealing_1965-10-b.jpg

A1
https://www.sony.co.uk/image/71025371f934526c9687b45773bdd8c7?fmt=jpeg&wid=400&qlt=85

"I have not held an A1 in my hands I am just extrapolating based on A7 and A9 series."

You can't do this unfortunately as the A1 has a new body design. There is a group of users (usually Canon for some reason) who seem to be under the impression that all the A series bodies are the same, when Sony has changed its body design on practically every camera. The A7R, A7RII, A7II, A7RIII, A9, A9II, A7RIV, A7SIII and A1 all have different bodies whilst superficially looking very similar in some cases.

Contd.

The physical composition and level of sealing differs wildly between them, as does compositional materials. There is a lot of metal in all of them, but many have plastic composites and glass fibre parts. Dan has thoughtfully provided a high definition comparison photo of the A1 and A7rIV. https://3.img-dpreview.com/files/p/sample_galleries/6775962929/1797584696.jpg

You can see the different geometry of the A1 grip - look at the collar around the right strap lug that isn't present on the A7rIV. The thumb catcher on the back is deeper and extends further rightwards. There is no front view, but the body and grip are taller in this body moulding.

"As much as the A1 is currently the more advanced camera on the market its intrinsic value is much less than its price tag."

If you mean it's material value, I think you're underestimating the cost of the sensor. It's certainly true in the case of the 1DXIII and D6 however.

@cbphoto
Sad I agree - faintly ludicrous as well though don’t you think.....❓

@cbphoto

Wait, you're arguing that the 1DXIII is tougher than the A1 because it's physically bigger? Are you sh*ting me? 😂

The principal determinant of strength in a rigid structure is DENSITY - mass has literally no bearing. That's why a diamond is harder than a tree.

The only time mass is relevant is when considering ductility or flexing - with bigger objects being more prone to it than smaller objects of the same composition.

Please... don't ever contact me again, seriously, - you're an imbecile.

RubberDials:

It's best to wait until someone (Lens Rentals, well Roger in his corner) tears down the A1 and compares it internally to the A7RIV or A7SIII before jumping to the conclusion, as you have, that the A1 is astoundingly better built than the just okay A7RIV and ASIII.

Yes, the A1 would have to be astoundingly better built to come moderately close to competing with the 1DX III, D6, and yes D500, for build quality.

Sony will have accomplished a major improvement if the A1's body is as well built as the Pentax K1.

@ Rubberdials
The A1 might be as robust as the 1DX3 - might not - the skeletal view of each suggests not....HOWEVER the stuff you have written above is straightforward nonsense - I guess Physics was not your forte at reform school...
Density is simply a measure of mass per unit volume - lead and gold have very high density (particularly gold) but neither are ‘hard’ or ‘rigid’. Diamond IS hard but is neither rigid or particularly dense. (Here think of glass which is hard but not rigid - it can be quite dense depending what metals are incorporated). Rigidity of a structure (camera body) depends on the materials used (not dense but yes with good structural rigidity - some alloys) and the construction. Read a book if this is all to much.....😊

@RubberDials
The fact that seal pattern looks comprehensive does not say everything about the quality of the seal. It does not take to be a mechanical engineering designer (which btw I am) to see the difference in the sealing quality. The bottom door seal of the A9/A7 is a joke when compared to the seal of the 1DX battery. The battery grip is an overpriced toy with questionable seals. I do not see the development of the A1 sensor being more expensive than the A9 sensor. Actually, given that the A1 sensor is an evolution of the A9 sensor I suspect being cheaper. I am generally on your side on opinions but the A1 looks overpriced to me. Actual reviews and time will tell, however holding up a 1DXIII or an A1 and taking a close look of the details can definitely give a sense of the "intrinsic value" of the camera. Note that while you are correct about the Sony body differences, they are underwhelmingly minor, which gives me little hope on the A1 sealing, I hope to be wrong.

@RubberDials
IMO the following is a list that the A1 should have had to join the $6500 club as uncompromised current state of the art mirrorless experience:
1) Dual axis monitor tilt
2) A superior hand grip extending above the top plate like all other brands do, with a better shutter and on/off button. Something like the Z series
3) Sturdier body, possibly thicker body gauge, better quality seals
4) A redesigned body shape to minimize impact and wear damage.
5) A better quality monitor
6) A faster mechanical shutter that does not trail current midrange FF mirrorless camera costing a fraction.

The A1 is fine as it is if priced like an A9 replacement.

I have no doubt that Canon and Nikon pro cameras are very well sealed and robust. However, they do not give a waterproof rating. Only Olympus does!
Canikon just talk about weather sealing. Does that mean the cameras can handle nice weather like sunshine?
Since Canikon does not give any warranties i prefer the measurable faster camera with significant higher resolution (or as I call it IQ)!
And that camera is Sony A1!

@whitelens
sure, if you cannot wait for the technology to trickle own to cheaper bodies go for it.
Owning an A9, an R5, and an A7RIV I do not see my shots to improve significantly with the A1. I will pass and wait for the next true game changer. Something like a global shutter (rumoured in the R1) or a ludicrous ISO or DR performance.

@armandino:
Looking at your website, your shots do not need any improvement, they are all excellent!
To me, cameras never were a question of need, it was always a want!
Maybe one day I will grow up, but I hope not!

@whitelens
ahah! fair enough! thanks for check out my page and leaving a comment ;-)
Apparently we are almost neighbours. I live in Victoria and shoot a lot in Vancouver ( you might have noticed plenty of Whitecaps shots...)

We will find that Rubberdials (in common with his type) will either disappear or change tack completely when they have been caught out. He (they) will never acknowledge that they are incorrect.......🤷‍♂️

This is rather pointless to discuss. I’m quite sure neither of you have taken apart a 1dx m2/3 or an a1. It’s all just speculation.

The fact is that nature photographers bring their Sony cameras to harsh environments and the do just fine, like the A7RIII on the Mount Everest documentary I linked. Thats enough for pretty much anyone.

And no camera can handle all, not even a 1dx. A trip to burning man was more than enough for the weather sealing of this 1dx m2 for example:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/08/please-dont-take-our-photography-and-video-gear-to-burning-man/

The 1dx might have its advantages with its larger more rounded design but also it’s disadvantages. It has more moving parts that can break and the weight/size is hardly always a good thing, like they say in the documentary, ever gram counts when going climbing for example.

C-M-S:

The the chemistry of the desert upon which Burning Man is held is, I believe, alkali. Seals won't last in that environment. It's also gritty and windy--as the Lens Rental blog you linked point out.

Stop with the, "but see the A7RIII went to Everest", top only implied. There's no doubt that you can take the A7RIII, or a camera of similar build quality, out of its warm protective case, insert an even warmer battery and likely use the camera on a Everest climb, as long as the weather is good and it's not 40 degrees below zero Fahrenheit. Whereas, assuming you have a warmed battery to insert, the Canon 1DX III or D6 will likely work in bad weather at that temperature without the camera having had to be warmed up. (Right, it would be best to warm those cameras up too.)

Then, cameras like the 1DX III are much more likely to survive a drop on to a hard surface from say 2 meters than Sony A7/9 bodies. No, that doesn't necessarily mean the Canon lenses would survive such a drop.

@Kandid

"The A1 might be as robust as the 1DX3 - might not - the skeletal view of each suggests not...."

There is literally nothing in either photo that suggests either moulding is stronger than the other. If you can see something please detail it.

"HOWEVER the stuff you have written above is straightforward nonsense"

Lol, you telling me I'm speaking nonsense! Almost everything you write is nonsense. Your vocabulary consists of ≤ 25 words and 200 emoticons.

Your post is classic example of trolling. You know I am speaking generally and that it is normal to speak about the mass of a camera body instead of volume. No-one is referring to the chemical mass of the material. And of course there are exceptions but generally hardness is modulated by density and certainly not volume, which is what CBphoto said, by pointing out the larger 1DX body. You have made no effort to 'correct' him I see.

@HowaboutRAW

"before jumping to the conclusion, as you have, that the A1 is astoundingly better built"

It looks like you are in pre-moderation and your comments are appearing later than everyone elses, so being missed.

I DID NOT conclude that the A1 was 'astoundingly better built', I merely pointed out - with proof - that it didn't have the A7rIV body, which is what you claimed, falsely. These are your words: "It's the same body as the A7R IV. So nowhere near as tough, on the outside at least, as the D6 and 1DX III." You're the one who is jumping to conclusions. It isn't the same body as the A7rIV.

@Armandino

The A1 has a different moulding to the A9 and the A7rIV. You can't compare it to those cameras. The grip already IS the same as the Nikon Z7 - there's literally nothing in it in terms of volume.

https://j.mp/3sdYTyl

I think you're underestimating the cost of the sensor. If Sony could sell the A1 under 4K they certainly would - sales would be through the floor.

The A1 screen is 1.440,00 dots. The Canon 2.100,000. Are you seriously claiming that this is an obstacle to the camera costing what it does? It's mirrorless. You review your shots in the eyepiece, which is 9.437,184 dots.

Why do you think the a global shutter would be a game changer and the A1 isn't? The A1 sensor is only a third of a stop slower than a mechanical shutter.

RubberDials:

I concede that the A1 is not exactly the same body as the A7R IV.

However given Sony's track record with A7/9 bodies, the A1's body is unlikely to be anything like a radical improvement upon the A7R IV body or the A9II body. And the A1 body would need to be staggeringly better built than the A9 II's body to come remotely close to the build quality of an 1DX III or a D6.

Think Pentax K1 build quality for the body, if Sony has significantly improved upon the A9 II's body.

@rubber...
You ought to keep away from physics as you are digging yourself deeper and deeper into the dopey patch......
1. It’s not trolling to point out you are talking scientific nonsense - it’s called education 😊
2. What is ‘chemical mass’ (as distinct from ‘mass’) and who was speaking about it?
3. ‘Hardness’ is not ‘modulated’ by density whatever that means. They are distinct - and I gave you clear examples of dense not hard (gold) and hard not dense (magnesium alloy).
I am sorry if your scientific understanding is weak - but at least it is consistent with your manners and your posting history 😁😁😁

@RubberDials
The A1 can only do marginally better what I already do with my A9+R5+A7RIV. Actually, the combination of the three allows me to do more than having only the A1. More speed than 20fps is a diminishing return. So it is evolution and not revolution. The extra benefits are not worth my money. Simply put imo the A1 is not worth $2k more than the A9II.
A global shutter would revolutionize flash photography and eliminate artifacts created by any non-simultaneous readout technology. I have a Fuji X100s exclusively because of its 1/4000 leaf shutter, the closest thing to a global shutter. Additionally, cameras will be finally free of moving parts under all conditions. That is revolutionary, not the A1. Watch closely the R1, rumours have it.

C-M-S:

"What is the point of this discussion? That is just one of many example of professional nature photographers using Sony cameras."

I didn't know that professional nature is a war zone. War zone photographers, given a choice, pick a Canon 1DX III or D6, and right the Canon is the quieter of the two.

I have no doubt that many Sony A7/9 bodies can shoot excellent nature + wildlife images. But so can many cameras. M4/3 gear is excellent, in the right hands, for bird photos.

How many full time photographers did the AP employ in the year 1990? Then how many in 2000? Then how many in 2010? Then how many in 2020?

Is the AP insisting that its stringer photographers, subcontractors or speculative shooters, only use Sony gear? I highly doubt that.

Oh well - as predicted retired hurt when caught writing complete nonsense I’m afraid......🧐

C-M-S:

I'm the one who said you take your 1DX III to a war zone, if you have the option.

You're going on implying that the A1 is just as tough as the 1DX III or D6. Therefore you very much implied you'd take an A1 to a war zone.

Sony A7/9 bodies, even the solidly built ones, are. NOT especially tough, unlike a D6.

I suggest you handle a 1DX III or D5/6 before posting further.

@Kandid

Nothing I wrote was nonsense - which you well know. Toughness, strength and rigidity are different things in scientific terms but in a discussion about a camera body on a forum like this are used interchangeably, as is mass for size. I replied to a comment that the size of something made it stronger, by pointing out in general terms the density of a substance makes it stronger, not the volume of it. You know this is true and should properly have attacked him but you didn't because he's a Canon DSLR shooter like yourself.

Elsewhere you asked a 'genuine question' of Magnar whether the A1 body and A7rIV are the same, but if you actually read my posts in this thread instead of attacking me with your chemistry CSE, you would know the answer. It's not the same moulding. There is lots of variation between the design of Sony mirrorless cameras as there is between the bodies of all manufacturers.

Contd.

Here's an example. Four A6xxx cameras in order of release. All have a different body design. Three are metal, one is plastic, one doesn't have a flash, etc.. People will talk on here ad nauseum about Sony using the same body, but they actually don't.
https://j.mp/3qYQrTn

Five FF A series cameras. Again, every body is different. Generally speaking the body gets thicker and the grip gets larger and its geometry changes. The difference between the A1 and the A7rIV is that the grip is slightly broader and taller. If you look closely at the A1 it has a plastic 'collar' around the right strap lug. This is to extend the grip slightly to the right and to accommodate a slightly steeper curve to the finger surface around the shutter release. This is more easily visible in DPR's shot.

https://j.mp/3qWTR92
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6775962929/sony-a1-beauty-shots/1797584696 (A1 on left, A7rIV on right)

A lot of people equate bigger with better/stronger.
The fact is that it is a lot harder for a bigger body to be as rigid as a smaller body!
Additionally, it is very important how a body is assembled.
Looking at Canon & Nikon lens mounts I can clearly see only 4 screws holding it to their body (even on their pro bodies).
All Sony bodies since A7R3 have 6 bolts!
Ask any mechanically inclined person if they would prefer 4 bolts over 6?

@whitelems
Need 6 wheels on your car do you❓ - 6 legs on your chair❓ - thought not. Rigidity depends on the quality of the fixtures as well as their number. 6 not necessary (as above) if you do things properly....😊

@rubber...
Where to start. I used to teach A level Chemistry and Biology and O level Physics (in a grammar school - not a reform school as you would be more familiar with) - long time ago..
You are talking and defending complete scientific nonsense - sorry to be blunt. For the last time greater density does not imply rigidity or strength. Also a more dense camera body (as opposed to very dense person) would be heavier - not one of your favourite boasts. You talk and defend scientific nonsense - mind you it fits alongside all the other nonsense you give us....

@Kandid:
You are funny. Are you implying that Canikons 4 bolts are done correctly and therefore are better than Sonys 6 bolts?
Your example of 6 wheels on my car and 6 legs on my chair is pretty lame.
I am sure you can do better than that!
How about your trademark 100 smileys;-)

@whitelens
Well - I think the point is 6 is unnecessary and just adds weight and complexity if 4 is sufficient (as with a car or a chair).....are you suggesting that the 1dx3 and D6 are NOT robust, have not proved themselves over and over again???????
😊😊😊😊 - 4 to be going on with....😊 - 5 (6 IS unnecessary 😊) ......damn....

whitelens:

"The fact is that it is a lot harder for a bigger body to be as rigid as a smaller body!"

And no one here is saying that the Canon 1DX III and D6 are tougher than Sonys because the bodies are bigger.

You need to have looked at (handled in person) the 1DX III, and examined the locking mechanism on its battery and card doors before digging yourself in further. Just those two differences, and the D6's construction is similar, make the Canon tougher than any early 2021 Sony.

Depending on the placement of ridges, so framing, and bigger bodies allow for bigger stronger interior framing. Therefore it's very possible that bigger means stronger bodies. Without taking the bodies apart you'd not see these ridges in the castings.

With the Sony A1, Sony will be lucky to have achieved the toughness of a Pentax K1 or Samsung NX1.

@Kandid:
Wrong again! Extra screws do not increase weight but increase the rigidity of the assembly!

@Kandid:
Are you sure you were teaching physics?
Let me explain how these screws work!
You will have to drill and tap a hole in the body.
Than you will have to drill and countersink a matching hole in the mount.
The metal to be removed for this procedure is more and heavier than the screw!
So additional screws do not make the camera heavier!
So, please stop fighting facts with nonsense!

@whitelens
In fairness physics not my strongest subject - adequate to teach up to 16 - just...(MUCH better at Biology and Chemistry - sadly 35 years ago....🧐)
HOWEVER it’s adequate to know that engineers will design in optimal fixtures. There is no point in adding more screws if 4 is sufficient (how many legs has your cat got?). If more is better why not 10 or 15? More screws means more holes. More holes more you weaken the structure so as to need more screws and so on... Also a screw could indeed weigh more than the hole - depends on what it’s made of - but it’s not a bad point. Suffice to say that both Canon and Nikon pro bodies are legendary for their robust indestructibility (as well as their price) including the mount. The same cannot yet be said for this Sony body (except the price bit).

@cbphoto123:
This video shows an old A7 with 4 screws for the mount. As I posted before since the A7R all Sony bodies have 6 screws. Sony decided that 6 is better than 4 and it makes perfect sense to me!
Kandid is trying to convince me that 4 is the better choice since cats and chairs have only 4 legs, not 6. Not very convincing, but very funny!

@cbphoto123:
I never said 4 screws is not good enough!
I said 6 screws are better, regardless of how many legs cats and chairs have!
This is simple mechanical design logic!
If you or Kandid are not willing or able to agree on that fact,I see no reason for further discussions!

@whitelens
Clearly you are as good at engineering as Rubberdials is at Physics 🙄. Are you honestly suggesting that Canon engineers could not have introduced extra screws if they were necessary❓Clearly they were necessary for the Sony mount for whatever reason but if a mount is robust with 4 screws it would be a pretty thick engineer that would introduce more. Finally if more is obviously better then why not 10 screws....❓❓❓❓Gosh some people are a bit slow off the Mark....🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

Sorry guys, I asked my cat (she used to work at Canon as a mechanical engineer) and she told me that her 4 legs are just perfect and 6 would be an overkill. So obviously you are right. My apologies!

@whitelens
No need to apologise - I know the concepts are difficult for some people ......🙂🙂🙂🙂
You keep chatting to your cat - it seems to have more sense than you do 🙂

Sorry, I just shot the cat for saying stupid things!

@Kandid

"Where to start. I used to teach A level Chemistry and Biology and O level Physics (in a grammar school - not a reform school as you would be more familiar with)"

Not that's worthy of an emoticon. 😂 Below is one of your posts in its entirety. The idea that you once worked in a school as anything other than a caretaker is simply unbelievable. I used to wonder if you were even an adult.

Your post:

//Right again! Extra screws MUST increase the weight (and complexity) - unless they are smaller and a bit puny. Are they a bit small and puny on the Sony❓ Is this what you are saying❓ Are you comfy in your 6 legged chair❓😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂😂🤣😂🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂😂🤣😂🤣😂😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂 there you go...//

Absolutely! Other than resolution, and DR, and high ISO, you're right! You can also pull up a Canon 5D and it takes very comparable 12mp ISO 400 pictures too. SHOCKING!

I like having more than 64k of memory in my computer too.

Cell phones take pictures and maybe that's all you need. Certainly is for most of humanity. Why is it so foreign to you that what is "good enough" for you may not be the same for everyone else?

@HowaboutRAW
"ISO 12 million is utter hyperbole (in 2021), but shooting at ISO 50K, so several stops below "just" ISO 1 million, is a very real thing."
I shoot a lot of low light events and sports. If you have the right glass I never see myself shooting more than 10K ISO. I'd say that 99% of my pictures are below 6400 ISO. 50K is not "a very real thing" for non specialized photography and honestly at that point I would not care if it is more crappy or less crappy. It will be a crappy picture no matter what.

I tend to agree with Magnar, I like the idea that people are discussing these more advanced technologies and learning about them, even in an imperfect way.

But I also agree with Livsimage, that if the conclusion is that these are absolutely necessary in a camera and that if your camera lacks any of these then that makes that camera seriously deficient, then that too is incorrect.

These are great technologies, but as time goes by the improvements are becoming more and more marginal. That is normal for any technology as it matures. And that is why for IQ you can't really tell much difference between a host of cameras at various prices over the last few years.

I don't like to shoot at high iso (pain in the ass to get something useful in post-production) but sometimes it's just that or no picture at all. A few weeks ago I was in swedish lapland. There was no light at all after 3pm and therefore I had to crank up the iso all the time.

Maybe give it a shot. There are some interesting photos that can be taken with high ISO (which normally implies evening or night lighting).

Their comparing methods have been the same for years. Please check your attitude before patronizing people.

All of a sudden rolling shutter has become this major problem. I've used the R5 for a few months and have never had that problem using it on birds and animals.
Many are using the R5 and other high speed cameras and it seems very few if any complain about rolling shutter.

I have a friend who attended the recent 24 hours of Daytona race and he did some racing photography for fun with a D810, for crying out loud. He didn't have problems with rolling shutter.

Sure in certain cases rolling shutter will manifest itself but for the majority of people it will not. And it has been shown that on 8K video that the a1 still has noticeable rolling shutter.

So it's nice to have less rolling shutter, but let's not pretend that this is the greatest breakthrough ever in photography.

"All of a sudden rolling shutter has become this major problem."

It is what separates A1 from R5 especially with flash photography and high speed AF performance. Image quality wise, A1 is still miles ahead based on the photos when it comes finer details and processing. Video specs are not trailing off either for a $6500 camera that can do far more than 1DXMK III and D6 can. It is expensive, but it is packed with value and reliability pros will definitely want to have in a smaller package.

@Lightright: Come on, the image quality of the A1 and R5 are so close that we get endless debate on this discussion as to which one is better, relying on tiny details. You lose credibility when you claim the A1 IQ is "miles ahead." If any company held a huge advantage in IQ it would be so noticeable that there would be little debate.

As to rolling shutter, for most users it won't be a problem with either camera. But you do speak correctly when you note that the rolling shutter performance does differentiate some between the A1 and R5. That's why Sony fans keep touting it, because it's one of the few areas where the A1 has some advantage.

But it does appear that the R5 has superior eye AF, for birds, animals, and even humans. And the R5 has a superior IBIS mechanism, and for many better ergonomics. Not bad for a camera that costs $2600 less than the A1.

I have been using the A7III since January 2019 and have taken 21000 photos. Most are of my small twins who were one year old when I bought the camera.

This body has given me phenomenal success with autofocus, almost always using eye-AF. This system has been designed to focus on eye lashes and this helps the camera detect the eye when I am focusing from the side, or when the eyes are closed or semi-closed. This is exactly what I want.

I cannot speak for other portrait shooters but this is the reason I bought Sony and I have more than achieved what I wanted - very fast and reliable eye(lash)-AF with my very mobile children, using the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 always at 2.8.

I am not surprised at all that Alpha 1, or any other Sony, does the same.

I think it is more impressive when you pay 3000 euro for a camera (Z7II) which has better IQ that the 7300 euro camera (A1).

@ mitsosmitsou: Well, there are lower priced Sony cameras that would match your Nikon if fine detail resolution and hardly noticeable differences in noise performance is important for you, and if you don't need all the A1 features.

Nice for Sony users to stay with the E-mount.

"there are lower priced Sony cameras that would match your Nikon"
You sound like Sony door-to-door seller.
Sorry if that comment offends you, but you do sound like it. Why, though?

Sony basically came up with an R5 competitor and is charging about double for it, so as not to have to force pricing down on all of their other cameras.

Now sure the Sony has some great features, and some that the R5 lacks, but the big picture is that the R5 and a1 are far more similar than different. And the R5 is even better in some areas!

The a1 has the same consumer body that other Sony cams do, and the stacked sensor and extra Bionz XR doesn't cost a few thousand dollars more.

So sure the a1 is still a great cam if you are in the Sony ecosystem. But it does make the R5 look very very good.

Uhuuu
TRU is trolling here!
😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂😂🤣🤣😂😂🤣😂😂😂
Read the article troll-boy, A1 is in 1DXmk3 class not in 5D/R5 or slowest camera 5DS!!!!
If you want to compare R5 you have many other cameras with similar specs - a7R2/R3, Z7/II, S1R,D850 and stuff like this. And suddenly it start to look too expensive for the IQ it provides......... So how much exactly R5 has better IQ compared to a7R2???? 2.44x TIMES????
Consumer body, blah blah blah! It has biggest EVF compared to every Canon so maybe all Canons have consumer OVF/EVFs?
And how you know how much it costs? Seems like for Canon it costs too much because they do not have such sensor in any product!
And Sony has many sensors like this in various sizes and products!

First, anyone can compare any camera they like with the a1.

The a1 is in the price category of the 1DXIII but is in the performance and build quality of the R5 class. You can go on all you want but that is the comparison that most will make because it makes the most sense.

High res/high speed 8K mirrorless to high res/high speed 8K mirrorless.

Neither Sony nor any of their fans get to dictate what comparisons are made.

The a1 is priced like a 1dXIII but performs like the far less expensive R5. That's what rubs some Sony fans the wrong way.

The A1 is a little bit more than a R5 competitor. It is a tool professionals can rely on in any conditions. It gives you a full uninterrupted 60+ frames view while shooting bursts, delivers max performance in artificial light without banding, fast panning action without skewed backgrounds, swinging baseball bats and golf clubs not looking bent. And it performs fully whether the battery is at 90% charge or if it is at 10% charge. It can also do video without atrocious downtime of the R5.

The R5 is a great spec sheet. Great for amateurs which can live with its limitations. As for competition to the A1 we will have to wait for the R1.

Yet some pro's are already using the R5. And the a1 has its own caveats and exceptions with high speed shooting.

Really one can do on an R5 90 to 95% what you can do on the a1. And get better IBIS and ergonomics and bird AF. It appears that even the human eye AF on the R5 is more accurate, with the a1 focusing a lot on the eyelashes.

In the real world there is little difference. And guess what? People are noticing.

@TRU, "Sony basically came up with an R5 competitor and is charging about double for it, so as not to have to force pricing down on all of their other cameras. "

Sony's competitor is not just R5, but also 1DX Mk III. You basically save an R5 by getting one Sony A1 if you want 1DX Mk III features such as high speed flash sync and reliable rolling shutter performance in addition to reliable 8K.

"Sony basically came up with an R5 competitor and is charging about double for it, so as not to have to force pricing down on all of their other cameras."

When R5 stops overheating and becoming NOT unresponsive we can start to make comparisons. R5 is overheating junk while A1 is something that is reliable. There is no comparison here.

@Thoughts R
as much as I think the A1 is overpriced, calling it an R5 competitor is either flat out brand bias or incompetence. I have the original A9 and the R5 and for serious sports work I will take the A9 over the R5 any day, never mind an A1.

The irony is that the Canon R5 has a more professional body style than the a1. The ergonomics, controls, and the build quality are better, if other Sony camera bodies are to be any guide.

As to performance it appears that the R5 has superior bird AF, animal AF, and maybe even human eye AF. It appears that the a1 may tend to get eyelashes rather than the iris in focus. Even the sample portrait shots on the Sony website show this.

Then there's this: in Sony ambassador Mark Galer's review, he raises an issue..and if he raises it, then it must be serious. It appears their popular 200-600 lens has some problems focusing on the a1 for fast moving BIF similar to the reported problems on the a7RIV.

The a1 is going to be a fantastic camera for those who use it, and perhaps they can fix those issues with a software update...but the a1 is not a flawless camera.

TRU and V-vs-P, you fight for questions of specs and prices between R5 and A1 but both of you are true and false.
Yes the A1 is far more expensive than the R5, and because of this price it's in front of 1DX3 and D6 series (even if the A1 beats these flagships in some ways). So why always comparing A1 and R5 ?
I think theses cameras are compared only because both do 8K and have excellent AF.
But then ?
A1 is far more expensive and logically we can expect higher performances from it. That's true for some specs but not for others. In the facts, the A1 is mostly superior because of its very fast readout sensor, and the consequences : less rolling shutter, flash possibilities, etc, which can be important for photographers who need that and can't be found on the R5. These are facts.
Nonetheless, with this enormous price difference, the R5 (seen as too expensive in 2020!) seems now to be a very good deal, regarding its main performances vs A1 !!
Sonysts, don't be so nervous !

@tru
True that......😁

The R5 is a professional camera. For the primary photography purspose, it's among the best now. The Raw frame-grabbing option is a big plus.

I'm still not sure what Sony is trying to do with the A1 with that pricing strategy. Many people here argue it is for professional sport photography, I'm not convinced given its built quality and others.
Yes it has a great AF ability, but the A9 2 has already done that, but Sony still can't really crack that market.
Now, how many event photographers would pay more than 10,000 for couple of these? I don't see many.
I shoot Sony btw.

@video
Check it out - the A1 is 5x the price of the a7r2 (yes 5x....!,) with the same IQ according to you. You should be protesting on the streets 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂💦💦

Again nonsense from t r o ll thoughsrus. Takes two images and makes an eye-brow focus issue out of that. Talks about pro-body style, seemingly thinking because th A1 is smaller, it doesn't have a pro body.
Then his nonsense "but is in the performance and build quality of the R5 class. "
How do you know that, did you design both cameras or cut the A1 in half to find out?
Performance in R5 class? Really? You mean a pathetic 1/60s sensor readout, handicapped E-shutter 20 fps, much lower flash syn andAF calc/s etc. suddenly put the a1 in r5 class?
You are making a clown of yourself in this forum. Absolutely clueless.

onemoreguy: You, too, are talking nonsens (sorry to be that blunt). How do you know built quality is lower?
I shoot events professionally and there is no camera giving you what the A1 offers in such a package. None. Given that it is similarly priced as a D5/D6/1dxii/1dxiii, given the performance and features it offers, this is absolutely ok. Don't people think anymore before posting? What is it?

@HLNM
I do and you do too if you shoot Sony, which no doubt that you do. There is no way in hell the A1 can take hardship as the D6 and 1D series. You know it too, you just talk out of your 4ss now. And I don't just talk about build quality. Try 2000 - 3000 shots per session without interruption. A grip attached further lowers the ability to withstand hardship.

"I shoot events professionally and there is no camera giving you what the A1 offers in such a package"
Please tell people something they don't know "Don't people think anymore before posting?" indeed. Read my comment again.

You did not finish your comment, then what? does that mean you will get a couple of these? Even if you do, how many people would pay $13,000 for a couple of these? The question is, what is the main target of this camera? their pricing strategy upon positioning strategy is questionable. I'm guessing business strategy is not your strong point, given this is the comment you made after you thought very hard.

Sorry no, you can't know that. (I used a D5 in the distant past).
In the past, I would have agreed with you. However, giving the steadily improved body and sealing, this is no longer guaranteed.

Um. The A1 is Sony's offering in the flagship category. It is similar in price to 1dxii,iii or D5/D6 but offers more. What is not to like about that? There are enough wanting one and getting one. AP is surely getting quite a few of them, event shooters and sport photograhpers as well as BIF enthusiasts, too.

We have a business, so subtracting sales tax and after tax deduction it costs as as much as we earn with one wedding. Where is the issue?

Yes, I do know that. I still have my F5, D1h, D2x, laying around somewhere in my house.
The fact you still argue about the build quality between these Sony cameras and those D6, 1D series already sums up your f boy position. Simply put - there is NO competition.

You ignore the battery part conveniently.

AP switched to Sony before this A1 exists, and I am talking about Sony's positioning and pricing strategy with THIS A1 camera. You seem to be clueless.

No, I do not argue how great the A1 for what it is, I just don't see how exactly it fits in any BU. Should I circle back and talk about the pro-grade build quality, battery, etc? You don't seem to get it.

Notice you still didn't say you would get the A1?

Would you shut up if I tell you the A1 is better than the R5? But that's NOT what I was talking about.

Anyway, I realize it's a waste of time to debate with blind f boys, not sure why I'm still doing this. lol

Have a good day. Go take some photos.

@onemoreguy - "You ignore the battery part conveniently"

Assuming equivalent sensor technology, a 50mp photo is going to use more battery life than a low-rez 20mp photo, that nobody wants. But the DSLRs in question do not have anywhere near the high-tech components that the a1 has.

The a1 in real-life use will have better battery life than the d5/d6/1DXM* series.

For example, I can easily get 3500-4000+ sports pics out of one a9 battery, with some charge left, and that's with chimping.

Your claims about "build quality" are total nonsense, this is the 4th-generation of Sony, and it's Canon that has failed q.c. with the r5, aka overheating, sensor misalignment, cracked lenses, etc.

@onemoreguy: Rude + no arguments but heresay and speculation.

You claim the A1 is not in the same ball park. What is your proof? Show it to us.

Battery: I am shooting wedding professionally. I shoot 12h weddings. I use the battery grip and don't have to change the battery _once_. The camera is always on during that stretch. I have the experience, have you? I know I can rely on Sony gear in every weather.

This camera easily holds is own against the 1dx,Dx series in performance. It shouldn't be so hard for you to see that its price then is comparable. It even offers me _more_. So why shouldn't it be allowed to cost as much? Because it is smaller?

Of course I buy the A1. We use 4 cameras at wedding (A9/A9iis, A7riv) and the A9 gets replaced by the A1. It is a no-brainer for us.

It is always funny to argue with amateurs, who don't make money with their gear.

Bring up some better arguments please or back up your claims.

@Thoughts R Us
"The irony is that the Canon R5 has a more professional body style than the a1"
that is simply untrue. The A1 could have a revamped grip but I find the R5 heavily relays on touch screen which is simply horrible for action photography. Thedirect access via dials and button of the A1 simply destroys the R5 professional user experience.
I tried to use the R5 e-shutter indoor for swimming events and the camera would overheat. The R5 is an amazing secondary body to have around. I would not use it for serious paid sports work as primary or only body. As amazing as the R5 is, this it a fact and as such is not on pair with the A1 even if the eye AF and animal AF might be more accurate. Let's not forget that current dual pixel af can be unreliable on horizontal patterns. The A1 just has a more mature AF.
I do agree that the A1 is overpriced, and the R5 is a steal by comparison, but let's not push the narrative that the two are at the same level.

@onemoreguy
The A1 is a bit overpriced but it will still take severe beating with a performance that makes the D6 and 1DXIII pale.
While not as rugged it is more reliable because of fewer mechanical moving parts. My A9 has approx 2M clicks and purring away with zero servicing. Try that with a D6 or a 1DXIII.

@Thoughts R Us
"Yet some pro's are already using the R5"
that is because the 1DXIII was so underwhelming that the 5D class mirrorless gets a similar job done for a lot less. It would make sense for a pro to keep a 1DXII which used value is going down the drain with a DSLr performance barely distinguishable from the 1DXIII and buy a much cheaper camera that has almost the same performance of the 1DXIII in liveview with the right usability in terms of ergonomics (EVF, flip screen, size, etc).

Onemoreguy: LOL. YOU claim the A1 is inferior in built quality. So YOU need to back up your claim, not me. You should revisit what you learned about frequentist statistics (or use Bayesian statistics ;-)).
Is the 1dx/Dx only for sports shooters? Why do so many event shooters use one, too (when I used Nikon in the past I had a Dx-model, too)? So why can't a flagship body not be for sports, BIF and event shooters alike?

Again too many ad hominem attacks of an obviously amateur shooter trying to explain how it is supposed to be.
"If you are at that scale of spending, it must be your major income source and during this pandemic, you would be broke now, "
LOL. We have a business and my wife draws her main income from it, it is my secondary job (my first being a full university professor. So spare me your rudimentary statistics knowledge to try to impress me ). Photographers can give workshops or do portrait or couple shoots to compensate. Do you understand such simple things?

@onemoreguy Stop this D5, D6 or 1Dx has better build quality than Sony A1 nonsense. It's a false claims.

The A9, and A7 cameras are sturdy cameras with magnesium bodies.

Wartime photographers like Jan Grarup and Rasmus Flindt Pedersen use Sony A9 and they survive a lot.
Rasmus's A9 took a hit on the top of the body from a cobblestone and still worked although it had a crack.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BwPxNFrBtoU/?igshid=phdzv2w4wu4o,

He said he made the right choice switching from Canon to Sony.

And the a7sIII has been on mount everest. https://youtu.be/bzl2gid36uc

@David
Nope, I'm not going to stop that. I've shot with both systems. There is NO comparison when it comes to build quality.

Your examples prove nothing. Those are not comparisons.

Keep in mind build quality is not the only thing I'm talking about. Somebody here claims they can shoot 2000 - 3000 photos in one session. That might be true but whatever you do, the battery in the Sony cameras only lasts for 3 - 4 hours, and that's only good for certain sports events. They can't cover all types the sporting event and you don't spend that much to compromise.

Do you think the A9 2 successfully crack that market? How would the A1 change the position in that particular market? High resolution? Better video output? Really?

He said he made the right choice because of build quality? What? There is something really wrong with f boys' mentality.

#onemoreguy - "I've shot with both systems"

You claimed to have been interested in an a6300 for video, which is nothing like the stacked sensor cameras being discussed here.

#onemoreguy - "Your examples prove nothing"

That's a funny thing to accuse him of, when you don't have any gallery pics, no challenge pics, no website, no flicker, no instagram, etc.

#onemoreguy - "whatever you do, the battery in the Sony cameras only lasts for 3 - 4 hours"

The smaller battery that's used in Sony crop cameras isn't anything like the bigger battery that's being used in electronic shutter mode. I know that because I own an a9 and I shoot sports with it. I've repeatedly run one battery to 3500-4000+ pics in an 8-hour session, with charge left over.

"Neither Sony nor any of their fans get to dictate what comparisons are made."

Says the guy who keep on dictating what comparisons are made :)

Ironic.

All of this debating and pixel peeping means one thing: that in the FF world there is no clear cut IQ advantage for any brand or model.

Really, if you want a noticeable difference in IQ you have to move up to the Fuji medium format cameras.

The differences in sensor image quality between brands is insignificant in the real world. Just look at the photos in the gallery for world wildlife competiotion recently showcased on DPR. Incredible images taken mostly with older DSLR's. The fact is image quality has been more than good enough for a long time. The strengths of the A1 are the its combination of speed and resolution the virtual removal of rolling shutter and high speed flash sync with the electronic shutter. If those are not important to you, then any of a myriad of other cameras will get the job done just as well.

The differences in sensor image quality between brands is insignificant in the real world. Just look at the photos in the gallery for world wildlife competiotion recently showcased on DPR. Incredible images taken mostly with older DSLR's. The fact is image quality has been more than good enough for a long time. The strengths of the A1 are the its combination of speed and resolution the virtual removal of rolling shutter and high speed flash sync with the electronic shutter. If those are not important to you, then any of a myriad of other cameras will get the job done just as well.

@TRU - "All of this debating and pixel peeping means one thing: that in the FF world there is no clear cut IQ advantage for any brand or model."

Really? There's no clear cut IQ advantage between the A1 and the 1-DXiii?

@Matt,
I seriously suggest that you take a look at the fantastic images on the national history museums wildlife photographer of the year website nhm.ac.uk/wpy/gallery
Taken with a wide variety of different caneras, many of them older models, many of the DSLR's.
Those images prove,more than any arguments in comments sections or pixel peeping, that the image quality of cameras has benn exceptional for a long time and in real world use there is little to seperate them. That said the A1 is at the top of the tech tree at this point, but it will be surpassed, as will its succesor, and on & on, while these older cameras will keep on cranking out great inages.

Note to self, don't use ISO 51200 for jpg's. Well that rules out the R5 as that was my go to ISO.

@Bank Shot: I have news for you: even many of those "sports shooters and eng/efp shooters" who will buy the a1 will not know or care that it has a "stacked sensor."

I doubt there are many photographers who say, "I don't want an unstacked sensor camera."

The key to most is simply the performance and results. They don't care how the engineers got there. That's marketing 101.

#Thoughts R Us - "who will buy the a1 will not know or care that it has a "stacked sensor.""

Of course they'll care that it has a stacked sensor, because that's what gives it the performance that it has. If it didn't have a stacked sensor, it wouldn't be leading the sports camera segment.

The people who don't care about performance will be buying 1DXMK3 and D6, and get a whole lot less for the same $6500 price as the a1.

@BankShot: you don't get it, do you? People buy benefits, not features. They buy 30 fps, not a stacked sensor. They buy the ability to capture a fleeting moment, not a stacked sensor. That's sales 101.

Now sure some will know it has a stacked sensor and understand that. But most will not. And that's entirely normal.

If the stacked sensor offers any tangible benefits to a customer then those benefits will speak for themselves.

#Thoughts R Us - You just don't get it, do you? People buy cameras for features like 30fps, that can't be obtained with anything other than a stacked sensor, period. That's sales 101.

Your claims that people won't buy the a1 for it's stacked sensor are therefore totally wrong. They can't get 30fps any other way, so they will be buying the a1 for the stacked sensor.

We get the fact that you are upset because Canon is technologically primitive in comparison to Sony, but trying to twist reality to make yourself feel better doesn't work. Calm down, it's just a camera.

@BankShot: I'm glad I don't have to hire you to be a salesperson or marketing person.

@thoughts and Bank Shot: The funny thing is that you both mean basically the same thing, but still argue ;). Thoughts is right that real pros don't care about the technical details behind a feature, as long as it gets them their desired results. And Bank is right with the claim that those results can only be achieved due to the technical details.

So please, have a coffee and relax ;).

@Banknote : Sport photographers who have 1DX3 or D6 can earn money with ther gears which are very fast, reliable effective tools ! That's true since many years ! They earn money with 10 to 16 fps cameras, and even if some of them could need 20fps, I think not many of them really want more than 20fps, because it's an huge job of sorting photos ! So, now they have 20fps on many cameras, do you really think they claim for 30fps ? And on the A1, using 30fps means using JPG or lossy compression RAW, so not the best quality from the camera. As a result, will they jump to 20fps to have best quality images ? Maybe...
Saying "The people who don't care about performance will be buying 1DXMK3 and D6" is insulting these photographers...

@FabBZH
20 fps is only a side benefit of the stacked sensor and, aside from some specialists, rarely needed.
But you get many other features being a first and offering you things NO other camera offers.
You can shoot in environments requiring silence at up to 30 fps in E-shutter wihout the fear of banding (think about golf, churches at weddings etc.).
You can use flash sync in mechanical up to 1/400s.
You can use flash with E-shutter (1/32000s was demonstrated, 1/200s guaranteed).
You can shoot at 1/32000s (great in harsh sunlight).
You can crop your images further than with D6/1dxiii if necessary.
You can shoot 8k video if necessary (not for most) and fantastic 4k.
You can combine AF modes with RTT and humand/animal/bird AF if needed.
You can use flicker detectio nin E-shutter
By the way, Sonys compressed raws are still great, rarely anybody had issues with those. Now lossless raw is available, too, up to 20 fps.

You don't need to values things like that. I do.

To my bare eye, the A1 noise looks natural, i.e. with the expectable natural (lower frequency) grittiness. The R5 has it as well, it is just subdued.
You can do a simple visual test. Because the R5 denoising's strengh seems to amount to 1 ISO step: just compare the a1 @ISO 3200 to the R5 @ISO 6400. Then, the noise has the same grittiness (lower-frequency structures) (the one you probably call "weird").

A new idea: could the reason be, that the R5 cheats their ISO scale, like Fuji does? so that what R5 calls 6400, is actually what the a1 calls 3200?

On the other hand, the R5 @6400 is flatter, less micro-contrasty on some tiny details than the a1 @3200. See e.g. the blue backs of the cards.

That accounts more for the R5 denoising theory again. Unless, the Canon lens is inferior to Sony's lens used here, but could it be by such a considerable margin? Don't take DPR the best of the best, what's available for a mount?

@dpthoughts
One can not cheat with ISO values if you let the same amount of light enter the sensor. I think DPR fixes the environment light level, ISO, SS, aperture and then try to match every camera with exposure compensation in post.

The lens still could skew the results but I would be surprised if DPR does not use the same lens adapted to each camera (or at least lenses with the same T-stops).

@shady,look here below, from arbitage:
Different raws processed from R5, A1 and Riv. He doesn't have a problem. Look, too, how much worse the R5 looks when not using any standard settings.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1685804/25
In addition, one shouldn't forget the AA filter in the Canon R5.

Except that the a1:

1) doesn't overheat,
2) doesn't have misaligned sensors,
3) doesn't lockup requiring a motherboard replacement,
4) Sony doesn't have cracked lens problems like Canon does,
5) Sony doesn't make ridiculous fixed f/11 primes,
6) Sony a1 has much better battery life than the r5,
7) Sony isn't stupidly trying to support 4 different incompatible lens mounts like Canon is, etc.

In other words, you get a lot more performance and reliability for your money with the a1, and the Sony platform in general.

@You have troubles with reading article and tech specs? Slightly better?
So how about comparing a7R2 with R5??? So R5 is slightly better than a7R2 but price is 2.44 TIMES HIGHER!!! This make sense now?

@bankshot
REALLY grasping at straws there 🤣😂🤣😂😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂. Feeling for you 🤔

Anulu, try the Medium-format cameras in the comparison you did above if you like high MP bodies. They're simply at another level.

Photodog2
I'm talking here FF, i tought this is obvious, but i see not for everyone...

I agree with photodog2: if you want a noticeable leap in pure IQ, you need to go to medium format at this point...and Fuji does have you covered. They announced at the same time their GFX 100s for $500 less than the Sony.

You can buy 50MP medium format cameras from Fuji for less than $5000.

More and more I see guys who used to shoot FF going to Fuji. At some point it will occur to people who want that next level IQ that Fuji has paved a way for about the same price as FF.

Yes in raw. Select "low light", raw and ISO 51200 or 25600 and select the dark parts to the left in the picture - for instance the label of the little dark bottle.

The difference is very clear with quite a bit more noise in the R5 image than the A1, and the R5 is almost a full stop behind the Nikon (could differ in other parts of the picture though).

Patlezinc
No, it's not
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a1&attr13_1=canon_eosr5&attr13_2=nikon_z7ii&attr13_3=sony_a7riii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=25600&attr16_1=25600&attr16_2=25600&attr16_3=25600&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&attr171_0=1&attr171_1=1&attr171_2=1&attr171_3=1&normalization=compare&widget=803&x=-0.16101962020329352&y=-0.9873567130652132

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a1&attr13_1=canon_eosr5&attr13_2=nikon_z7ii&attr13_3=sony_a7riii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=25600&attr16_1=25600&attr16_2=25600&attr16_3=25600&attr126_0=1&attr126_1=1&attr126_2=1&attr126_3=1&attr171_0=1&attr171_1=1&attr171_2=1&attr171_3=1&normalization=compare&widget=803&x=0.664848941664375&y=-0.6327146005792698

Depends, really...

A7RIII is better than Z7II based on that. Canon the worst and yet in the real world it matters hardly at all. They are all usable at even ISO 25600. If you are looking to knock the Canon on the sensor you really re clutching at straws. I'd happily own any of these cameras.