Prof thanks well thats quite an advantage then less demanding on flash tubes and no hss power drops

Now you have a global shutter power drop)
If your shutter speed is faster then duration of a flash pulse - you will loose power. But you can use non-HSS flashes and full-power sync speeds may be higher then"traditional" 1/250 s

Here is the perfect flash for this camera....a matching 1/80000 flash duration!!:
https://profoto.com/us/pro-10

Freeze mode: 1/1,000 s (2,400 Ws) - 1/80,000 s (2.4 Ws)

At 1/80000 s it has 1000 times less energy.

If you have a flash with 1/1000s duration and sample it for just 1/80000s you get 1/80th the power -- no need to have the flash duration be 1/80000s.

People buying iPhones have no idea what an electronic shutter is, let alone a global shutter.

iPhone customers don't need to know what the tech is, they just need to use it and benefit from it. It's the engineers who need to understand and of course they do.

Their sensors are quite competitive with anyone else, but they suffer from endless fans of other brands seeing them as the first choice enemy... Canon are particularly good at low rolling shutter (in rolling shutter sensors), where Sony lag unless they have a stacked sensor. Sony are good in having a high-MP stacked sensor first.
Canon still have more FSI sensors than Sony, but the use of clever micro-lens designs with light pipes makes the difference small, and BSI in sensors at m43 and above sizes gain very little, except the ability to make stacked sensors with them.

Sony don’t really do much in terms FSI they shifted entirely to BSI, also hardly something to praise anyone from using dated sensor technology.

Also Canon is clearly not on par their 24mp stacked has noticeable slower read out then the Sony 50mp. I’m rather convinced Sony could offer better read out on none stacked then Canon, they just decided to have other attributes instead.

There is always compromises, Canon FSI has lower IQ, worse DR and ISO performance that they try to fix by having high amounts of noise reduction, it’s a compromise they decided for, whether you find that an acceptable compromise is really up too you.

Canon sensors are great. All sensors these days are great. What is ironic is that with this sensor there seem to be trade offs in DR and high ISO performance. That was to be expected.

I agree with what some note and that these differences are not that big of deal and won't be noticeable in most situations. These matter more in tests and number and specs and pixel peeping.

But then some won't apply that common sense, real world approach to a competitor brand like Canon. All of a sudden it's back to specs, numbers and pixel peeping. While Sony can offer some engineering compromises and there be tolerance for that, Canon cannot. Canon has to be perfect and best in order to even be acceptable. That is a double standard that should end.

@jon555: There’s a logic to that, because if you launch a camera for the Olympics, the agencies, especially, that might want it really need to be able to give it a good going over at least a couple of months in advance. (Like when the Canon R1’s expected. . .cough, cough.) But. . .the A9iii is an ‘0lympics camera’ too. So. . Who knows?

It's getting clearer at each Sony announcement:
For Sony IF means Internal Focus, for others it is wether they can have any competitive product in the near future if...
While Sony improves IQ, the competition response is I Queue on the line...
As Sony perfects BSI, other brands lovers AKA Sony haters do the best they can by letting the I out.

if the AF on any camera would really improve each time they say it has been improved...

No, because many of us prefer the smaller and loghter older bodies and do not at all lole the move to bigger, bulkier, and heavier.

you can keep you're 5D along with other big ol cameras

@Mr_Win
I will. It's a pleasure. You can use your toy, too. Feel the pain and enjoy it every moment.

I had A7 and am now several generations later on A7iii. I wish Sony could package that technology somewhat smaller. There was nothing wrong with A7.

But if dislike ergonomics of A7, then surely you must hate anything Leica ever built, right? Ergonomics is often simply what you are used to.

"this camera isn’t made for birders"

Sony marketing dept would like to have a word with you! They will revoke your Sony promoter privileges :)

Are you a sports action photographer who uses flash a lot ❓❓❓

He doesn't need to be a sports action photog who uses flash a lot...he just has to have the money :)

And there's nothing wrong with buying something if you want it and have the money.

True TRU - but if he is not that sort of photographer then another of the very fine Sony bodies would be a better fit….🤷‍♂️❓

The A9 II is close to 4 years old and its price hasn't fallen dramatically. In fact, it seems to still be sold at its introductory price. I fear you will likely have to wait for second hand cameras get any significant saving on the A9 III.
Is the technology going to trickle down the A7 line? We can only hope, but this still did not happen for stacked sensors, 6 years after the original A9...

I need it for framing some shots. I naturally frame shots when I take them, not when I sit at my computer. I enjoy taking shots a lot more than sitting at my computer.

@KirillQPR

Don't Sony cameras have that option? I thought they did.
Other manufacturers do.

they do

I would say one of Sony's biggest "edges" is their sensor division which continues to work magic. That is hardware. Their Bionz processor also is first rate.

There is no doubt that Sony Semiconductor is a driving force behind their cameras and their innovation.

I do see a more and more Sony camera's used by especially younger colleagues, most older ones stick to their often long used brands (mostly Canon or Nikon)

We all know that Canon/Nikon eventually will come out with global shutter equiped camera's as well. The time of mass switching is over, with any technique or brand.

But it's great to see that Sony is doing some pioneering.innovation will keep photography (dedicated image taking) ialive

Sony was the first Full frame mirrorless Panasonic made the first mirrorless.

@ Son of Thunder

"Sony was the first Full frame mirrorless Panasonic made the first mirrorless."
Sony A7 was 4 years after the 1st Full frame mirrorless camera,
m4/3 2 years after 1st ApsH mirorless camera or 4 years after the 1st ApsC mirorless camera

Indeed, the first full frame mirrorless was the Leica M9 (it may not have an EVF but it definitely does not have an SLR mirror box!).
Sony has also not invented CMOS technology (that was Fairchild in the 60s) or even pioneered the use of quality CMOS sensors in cameras (that credit must go to Canon), but there's no denying that Sony Semiconductor has led most sensor progress lately.
Sony have also helped bringing full frame mirrorless to the masses and putting an end to the rule of DSLRs on the seriours and pro markets, not the least through their impressive AF system. If only they spent a bit more time on ergonomics: it took them 10y but this A9III at last starts looking like a proper Nikon now ;-)

@Kandid
Still in denial, eh? Even Sony admitted that.

Don't you just love it when an expert who has been on DPR for two whole months tells you how to feel about the grip on your camera?

Well in all fairness Sony did themselves say that the grip is improved and reduces fatigue. So Sony realized that their past grips needed improvement. That's a good thing BTW.

Blimey - I MEANT other brand users have already got a decent grip - so that is not a motivation to switch to Sony now that theirs is improving - crikey……🤦‍♂️ I can’t be blamed if my posts aren’t clear…………oh….

@Kandid I actually thought that your comment might be meant that way.

Anyway, best of luck; you might be labeled an expert now by some people.

@Kandid I read it as intended, and will continue to grip my ergonomically fantastic X-H1 firmly, while my knuckles don't hit even big lenses.

I guess it was more Tweets_Core’s response I was referring to……🤔

@zxaar
Then why did Sony re-design the grip? Are you going to complain about the new one?
You do recognize that half of the world’s photographers use Canon cameras, right?

Sony themselves has said they redesigned the grip in response to user feedback. So apparently enough Sony users wanted a better grip.

It's OK to admit that Sony doesn't do everything the best or in some ways needs improvement. Over time Sony is learning the same ergonomic lessons learned over the years by Canon and Nikon.

Sony didn't admit anything. They changed it to appeal to the loud minority. That is marketing. All it does it screw those that preferred small, sleek, and light.

TRU do you ever come up with something new because you really sound like a broken record, no matter how much you repeat yourself as a well trained parrot does not make your statement more correct

Not sure why it is a problem for the disciples to admit Sony ergonomics can and have improved when Sony themselves say exactly that ❓❓❓❓

@Kandid
Obviously Sony listens to Canon and Nikon users but NOT to Sony users!
Man, one can’t make this up. This is a different level of stüpid!ty.

Fuji had it perfect with the X-H1 using dials and replacing the EC dial with the top plate LCD. Now, to get that I need to buy their PASM video camera models. They're great cams, but for PASM video I can get full frame for the same money. Well, in a way, but I'd still have to buy all the lenses and stuff.

No one cares about top screens lol just tilt the camera a little and see your settings

Top screens are very useful, I love the implementation of Fuji in the GFX-100II best, you can see the settings even when the camera is off which enables to pick it and know in an instant whether a setting change is required.

Super valuable when shooting with multiple cameras in changing environments.

Sony has decided to prioritize size over anything else. There are many benefits but some downsides also.

@Aaalam: "...worse than my RP..."
Of course, couldn't be otherwise. Your RP is probably the best camera in the world, because... you have it. 😉
Apart from that, I'd be a bit more careful with making such bold statements without having seen any lab tests or direct comparisons.

Come back from SonyAlphaRumours...I guess I will find the same patch of people here

Well, i own that camera since launch

rp is the worst milc in term of high iso and i agree, a9III maybe took the crown but we will see once lab test is out

Without lab test you can clearly see messy image at iso 6400 and above

@ Aaalam: I played a bit with the ISO 12800 jpg files. They are underexposed so real ISO is one to two stop higher if you want a correct exposure. My impression after adjusting curves and correcting colors a tad: No worries for high ISO performance.

I'm not reserving judgement in this regard until someone provides Bill Claff an appropriate dataset for photonstophotos

Chris and Jordan made a comparative vs the A7rV in JPG. It seems that is comparable: not class leading but perfectly usable.

There was a lot of variation in the lighting between the various stages Sony provided. I suggest people look at Chris Jordan/Jordan Blake’s Petapixel preview.

It's interesting that the FE 85mm F1.4 GM failed to make the list, and instead, there is the 85 1.8.

The FE 85 1.8 is widely accepted to be a faster focuser than the GM. So this isn't really surprising. The original 70-200GM isn't in the list either. It's also not the fastest focuser. No doubt the rumored new 85 will be much faster than the original GM.

Simple answer. Yes. Back when Canon introduced R5 and R6. They have a list of EF lenses that can fulfill the green H+ Mechanical Continuous burst. The reason to not include older EF lenses is because the lens motor cannot keep up with the AF-C(AI Servo in Canon's terms).

With 120fps in GS. Even XD motor lenses might struggle to catchup, let alone older SSM motors.

The original Sony 70-200/4 G is only rated for 15 fps according to Sony, but Gordon Lang at CameraLabs managed to get 30 fps continuous AF with it on the A1 so I would say an empirical test is the only real way to know for sure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uazLXO3oLS4&t=1702s
28:23 in

This isn't a new issue at all, several of the DSLR systems also had lenses with motors that couldn't keep up with the tracking performance of the best DSLRs. Something like an EF 85 1.2 was definitely too slow to make use of the tracking on 1DX.

Honestly seems like Sony just wants to push their new lenses

The original 70-200 GM has the same AF drive as the 100-400 and both have a better one than 200-600. There is no reason it is not on that list except that the GM ii is out

The 70-200 GM I doesn’t AF as fast as the 100-400 GM. No way…
They may have the same drive motors, or the same generation, but the AF speed is NOT similar.

Definitely. Only newer lenses allow what I describe as "async status".

Normally, in E-mount, the lens control/status loop is tied to a 30 or 60 Hz clock (I cannot remember off the top of my head as I haven't done any reverse engineering in a LONG time). Normally there is only one batch of commands and one batch of status messages for each pulse of the clock (the clock has its own pin on the mount, BODY_VD_LENS, which pulses briefly once per clock period with extremely low duty cycle).

Newer lenses, such as the 24-105G on an A7M3 (have not thrown my A7M4 on the logic analyzer yet) have "async" status messages that are sent by the lens separately from the clock command/status loop at a much higher rate.

Also note that sometimes the problem with a lens is not that the motor is too slow, it is that it is too FAST combined with inertia. https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56692298 and https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59663845

@Entropy512

But the communication rate actually was not improved. The Sony A1 did 120 Hz AF updates, and the new A9 III also still does only 120 Hz AF updates. They did not increase that rate

@panther fan, I thought that was odd. The α9 II was 60hz and the α1 was 120hz, I was fully expecting to see 240hz this time around after hearing about the dedicated processor. But I guess there may be no need to refresh any significant amount faster. Diminishing returns.

According to peta pixel, the 3d party lenses will be limited to 15fps…
So, for higher speeds, you’ll need Sony lenses. But if the current ones don’t keep up with the speed, that could mean an increase in investment… That could put off a9 ii users from upgrading, if there’s no immediate/big benefit to it, IMHO…

https://youtu.be/pNGLhTDYpYM?si=1j9xlbD4r3KxN0cc

All best

"But the communication rate actually was not improved. The Sony A1 did 120 Hz AF updates, and the new A9 III also still does only 120 Hz AF updates. They did not increase that rate"

120 Hz for both A1 and A9III is already dependent on async updates.

I've never seen the sync loop operate at more than either 30 or 60 Hz (again I forget exactly which) even on bodies that claim faster AF processing. They can only do this with lenses that support async updates - which is only a subset of E-mount lenses.

@Entropy512

Yes but the 120 async updates are supported by the original 70-200 GM1, offering full compatibility with the 30FPS mode in the A1. So it seems artificial that 120 async updates are not supported on the A9 III

Yeah I think it’s too early to tell…. I’m still hopeful the high iso noise penalty isn’t too bad. I had a bad Jumbotron at yesterday’s game that I couldn’t fix above 1/640 and I believe a global shutter would have helped. I have a few low angle shots that I wish I had less disturbance on the Jumbotron, but it is what it is at this point…. (This was with A1 and 1/270s readout and also variable shutter…. There was no fractional shutter speed that synced up with the Jumbotron.)

@Georgeee

That's implied. It's not like the photons will clank each other when they hit the sensor.

Two Brand were once neck and neck in the Clanking world of DSLRs, 1 and 2 Worldwide with Sony badly behind. Enter Mirrorless and thing changed big time. I can see the very same for those lagging too far behind in the R&D towards Global Shutter development.

So what the Average Shutter Life of current mirrorless cameras with a Mech Shutter and what's the expected average life of cameras don't won't be having them in the future. Just another potential Huge benefit.

In the forums, Z8/Z9 users expected a very long camera life. So why not expect the same if not more when Global Shutters become the norm.

Most people never use the mechanical shutter to the extent of it needing replacement. Most mech shutters have lives of several hundreds of thousands of photos.

But any camera without a mech shutter will have one less part to break, and that is as true regardless of whether the sensor is stacked or GS or whatever.

As for GS becoming the norm...I wouldn't hold my breath. I've seen people say now for a few years that stacked sensors would become the norm and they really have not. The cost of both stacked sensors and GS sensors is high and there are not enough camera sales, esp at these prices, to manufacture in the volume needed to reduce costs dramatically.

Sony hasn't proliferated the stacked sensor across its entire product line and shows no signs of doing so. They won't do it with GS either.

And the fact remains that most users do not need GS or a stacked sensor.

@Tweets_Core Wrong! The photons make a "boink" sound as they bounce off the sensor. ;)

@ Thoughts R Us wrote: "I've seen people say now for a few years that stacked sensors would become the norm and they really have not."

Give the tech some more years to mature, and production prices to go down. Then the norm for mid range might be stacked, and single layer for low end. :-)

The Nikon Z9 has no mechanical shutter, yet has a silent mode to make the lens focus and the aperture change quieter. It also stops the sensor guard from shutting (which is clearly audible) when you go in the menus.

I video raccoons close-up and sometimes they'll get fascinated by the camera, although more so by the Z6II. I suspect both cameras may make subtle electronic noise above the range of human hearing.

@Thoughts R Us: I actually find what mechanical shutters already do far more amazing than a global shutter, but that's just me. Going forward, faster frame rates, longer burst times, and bigger cards are going to make mechanical shutters increasingly untenable. As for Sony's part, their GS feels as much a publicity stunt to one-up the shutterless Z8/Z9 as something to make better pictures -- they really hit those spec-sheet glamour-specs hard.

@JxM I think there's something to that. GS is still a breakthrough, but yeah they are hyping it pretty hard. Harder than the image quality I'm seeing should merit IMHO.

What I don't get is why, for example, there isn't a single shot in the DPR gallery for this camera that couldn't be gotten easily by any decent modern camera from m43 to medium format. With varying levels of bokeh, of course :-)

@JxM
"The Nikon Z9 has no mechanical shutter, yet has a silent mode to make the lens focus and the aperture change quieter. "

I am not sure about those but the 'Silent Mode" also silences any beeps that might be associated with tasks or activity.

Yes it is, for 6000 USD.

Zero banding, zero distortion. All the cameras you mention suffer from banding, and especially the Z8/9 since they don't have a mechanical shutter. It's something that can ruin your photos, so, quite important not to have it.

banding in artificial light is still an issue with non global shutter

To me the only real value is the resolution of banding in venues that use led lights.

The flash sync speed is not a real world issue since:
- HSS works great
- it's super easy to add a variable density filter to a lens if one doesn't want to use HSS

Sure, it's nice to be able to do without it but it's very far from delivering great value.

This is a professionals dream cam.

Jon snow, at 24 meg sensor, no thanks.

@ photography-lover: Stay with whatyou want. For me, as a professional, such a groundbreking hybrid tool is well worth the money! Actually, not much to pay compared to the total cost of running a business.

@photography-lover
HSS works well but only with relatively low flash power and relatively low shutter speeds. HSS efficiency decreases exponentially with shutter speed.

Banding is a much smaller probability with Z8 and Z9 now, and R3 has also mechanical shutter (all these also have high frequency flicker reduction setting). Banding was a much worse problem with the previous generation with 1/15 readout speeds. Read real world reviews from real people and you'll see that people don't see banding.
Yes global shutter is great but for 24 MP for 6000 USD. You will pay premium for new tech. That's what I mean. Otherwise it is good that Sony-Canon has this sensor race so that we can have excellent cameras.

@ Husband80: For sure, today's cameras are fully useable, even those without stacked sensor and just enough readout speed for video productions. New tech doesn't make them worse performers, they just look a bit older compared to the new leap.

Global sensor is simply another league. Hopefully prices will fall when competition heats up. For professional sports/action/wildlife/social event photographers this is a game changer that eliminate everything tied to rolling shutter. Well spent money! For those amateurs who have the money and want this kind of performance, just buy it!

For the rest: Cameras with stacked and single layer sensors are still excellent for covering most genres in photography.

Photography lover, you come across as disingenuous or ignorant when you talk about flash and HSS…. Sony published effective guide numbers for their speed lights at different shutter speeds with the A9III and the flashes are effectively 4-8 times more powerful compared to HSS. That means much faster recharge times, much longer battery life, a much smaller flash for the same light output, and for the same size flash, MUCH more power.

Anyway ignorance is bliss I guess. Not at all surprising to see you downplay HSS especially since your flagship of choice is limited to 1/200…

@Husband80
it depends on your field. I shoot a lot of events in artificial lights and there is still a lot of banding issues even for high speed read sensors. I shoot with the A1 and R3. Facts are that there are a number of situations where there is no substitute for global shutter and I have been waiting for this for a long time now.

I think if you have 6kUSD....buying rubber replacement for few dollars won't break your kidney right? ;)

@RubberDials
DPR do it for free. I will have to charge you if you need my help. I don’t think you can afford me.

It's common knowledge that the Z8/9 don't have a Mech Shutter. But it's not common throughout Nikon nor anywhere else. Hence my statement. As tech advances, eventually everyone get's to rid themselves of Shutter Shock along with plenty of other issues, not just those paying $4000 Grand or more. To get the fast enough FF type readout speeds required.

But of course it's more than just that. Which why so many folks are up in Arms about it.

So they better get with the Program or risk getting left behind. The Global Shutter brings wayyyyyy more to the game then what Nikon currently has. Wayyyyy more. If folks don't understand that yet, they will soon enough.

@BackToNature1
"Wayyyyy more."

You mean way more base ISO like 250? Or way more like max ISO of 25600?

Your first statement was about the shutter shock and now you're making it about Global Shutter vs other sensors! You're just digging. SMH.

Nobody is argument that the GS is a great advancement so stop making this about brands. Nikon and Fuji will eventually get the GS from Sony Sensor devision. And I am sure Canon will make their own.

No, your narrative is completely off base. I am seeing a future where Global Shutters are affordable and thus Shutter Shock is a thing of the past for almost everyone. But for some reason, you got stuck on mentioning Nikon. And yes you are digging. But the Global Sensor is already here, so it's a bit too late for that. You brought up Nikon, I brought up Global Shutters. Folks need to get their facts straights.

The idea of global shutters coming to all price points is laughable in yhe next 10 years even. Not sure you are trying to be funny, but you know it's unrealistic. Stacked sensors will trickle down the stack far far earlier than global sensors. Sony is charging an extra $1500 for the global sensor vs stacked sensor of the A9II and stacked sensors are about a $1000 premium on FF.

Also why are you even talking about shutter shock as though others haven't addressed this. Any camera with electronic shutter mode can avoid it.

Plenty of cameras have a electronic shutter most wouldn't want to use, regardless or not of the issues of shutter shock. Hence the problem.

Sony came out with their first FF stacked sensor in 2017. Now 6 years later Sony still doesn't produce a stacked sensor camera less expensive than that first A9.

Nikon just released a stacked sensor camera that is below the initial price of that first A9 but it is still $4000.

This GS will not come down in price anytime soon, if at all. GS sensors are even more complex than a rolling shutter stacked sensor...and as someone else pointed out, this GS sensor is also a stacked sensor architecture.

It would be interesting to know how long it takes to fabricate this sensor from start to finish. Nikon once said it took a year to make the stacked sensor in the Z9.

The market is not big enough to produce these sensors in that kind of volume.

BTW one more suggestion for DPR: please if possible visit the Sony plant that makes this GS and give us a rundown on all of the complexities of making these sensors. It's an amazing process.

The price isn’t coming down, GS in dual stack is incredible complex and expensive to make why this is 6k

We might see cheaper stacks but those will be of a different kind then this and the one’s found in A9, A1, R3 and Z8/9

The stack type we seen so far isn’t remotely ever going to be truly affordable. It will be interesting what Sony do with next A1

I suspect next A7R will be stacked but it will be of a complete different design

@Fred Mueller
Yeah but I am afraid the Japanese camera companies are too slow to adopt it. We need American companies like Google or Apple but unfortunately ILC industry is too small to care about.

I wish there was something like Geek Bench for cameras so we could compare Expeed /Bionz/Digic ... we get so much discussion about sharpness, resolution, FPS, etc when the real problem in all of photography has always been dynamic range : in the capture medium/device, and even more so, the delivery medium printed paper, now screens ... part of the art of photography has always been how to cram the world into this narrow(ed) "space" nicely, convincingly... just take a picture of your kitchen ... the lights are blown out, the window is blown out, even the wall next to the lights is blown out, and the shadows are likely "blown" to black ... but your human vision can easily see all of it without strain ... so I'm interested if Sony has the tech bandwidth to start to climb the dynamic range mountain (22 stops) ... from the 12 stop base camp there we have been stalled out most of my photographic life ...

A lot of Planet Earth if it’s like the previous ones are 120FPS shots which means fast readout, so no panning distortion. Also generally slow pans and natural light.. all things that really don’t scream for the need for global shutter…

What is the source of this info?

@Sadovski
You didn't read his post? He heard it :-) That should be enough for us.

It offers 4, 8, 16 and 32 shot options, presumably for 1, 2, 3 or 4 stops of noise improvement. That's all I can remember at present.

@Richard Butler
Thank you very much!!

That is outstanding news! Finally a controlled burst length!
Forget imaging edge, we already have tools for stacking. But controlled bursts make that concept soo much more usable

Now they only need to copy LUTs for stills from Panasonic and they finally made the camera that has all the features I ever wanted

Sony pulled Nikon and Canon into mirrorless. Then Sony lit another fire with the a9 stacked sensor tech. As well as all of the realtime tracking business. They just kept innovating and taking chances.

It’s good, man! I ain’t complaining. Otherwise it’s a stagnant pond where we just get one megapixel bump after another, as they churn out the same camera year on year out.

Sony has been putting a lot of effort into innovating.

Not just in sensors. They have developed several advances in lens making, too. They managed to create a way to polish aspheric elements far smoother than previously possible. They build lenses with paired focus groups for faster and more accurate AF. They combine elements that previously had to be separate, making it possible to build lenses that are lighter than previously possible - witness the new 300mm f/2.8 GM, which is just over half the weight of the Nikon 300, and a kilo lighter than the Canon.

Sony is incorporating change at a rate that is exciting.

Agreed Aleph. I’m just along for the ride. The whole industry benefits.

@Simonella - Sony did no such thing. That's something only fanboys would say.

Canon and Nikon had their mirrorless offerings in the works for years as well. That Sony came out first was irrelevant. They were not going to rush their cameras to market just because Sony was early.

If it were Canon or Nikon that came out first with mirrorless, you would have immediately claimed that Sony was just waiting to make it right first.

Just stop.

@Simonella
> Sony pulled Nikon and Canon into mirrorless

I don't think this is true. The real driver for going mirrorless is simplifying production (no mirror = less moving parts) and solving a user problem (with MILC you get exactly what you see, unlike DSLR).
Look at the timing too: Sony released its first MILC in 2010, Nikon in 2011 and Canon in 2012. You can't develop a new system in just one or two years, so it's likely that both Canon and Nikon started development long before Sony unveiled the NEX.

Gmon750

"Sony did no such thing. That's something only fanboys would say."

With respect Gmon, I think your recalling of events shows more brand favouritism than Simonella's.

Canon and Nikon launched their FF cameras six months after the launch of the A7III - Sony's THIRD enthusiast body, which is rather late in the game, and at launch - for example - the EOS R had no IBIS of any kind and the Z6/7 had no eye AF.

It was abundantly clear that both companies were caught napping by the success of Sony's mirrorless system and hadn't taken it sufficiently seriously. The EOS R seemed to treat FF mirrorless as a 'youth craze', with its unorthodoxly styled body and wacky 'Touch Bar'.

Neither clearly wanted to ditch their existing mounts, which going mirrorless entailed.

You could argue they're still on the back foot. The R3 is Canon's answer to the A9 but actually debuted six months after the A1 which raised the bar further.

@wjan

I'm talking about FF mirrorless. If you want to talk about M43 or aps-c or Nikon 1 format that's another discussion.

"The first and the second generation Sony FF MILCs were much worse than the first generation Nikon MILC. Nikon got it (almost) all right from the first go."

Wait, Sony's cameras from 2013 and 2015 were worse than the cameras Nikon released in 2018? Seriously? 😂

Anyone can drive on a road once someone else has built it. Sony created the paradigm of the FF mirrorless camera and were working without example. Another manufacturer coming later can look at all the mistakes they made and avoid them.

The Z6 and Z7 were much better efforts than the EOS R - I agree. Nikon had understood (still quite late in the day) that the DSLR was over and it had to make that paradigm shift. Canon tried to run two lines and seems to have thought that Pros would not take up mirrorless.

The A7ii is like all old electronics - what do you expect?

@@RubberDials
I do not understand why you are underlining FF MILCs as something very special. They have the same components as MILCs with smaller sensors, other than sensor itself. The core innovation of a MILC is not in its sensor size.

And Sony didn't "build a road", as no other company can use their know-how directly. Every other camera company had to develop their own system. Nikon mentioned in some interviews, that a lot of Nikon 1 DNA was used in Nikon Z. So, for Nikon that road was build by Nikon only. Same with Canon.

> Wait, Sony's cameras from 2013 and 2015 were worse than the cameras Nikon released in 2018? Seriously? 😂
More than that, Sony's cameras from 2013 and 2015 were also worse than Nikon's DSLRs from 2013 and 2015. In some respects even worse than Nikon's from 2007. I am talking not about electronics, but about usability, if you missed this word in my previous post. Sony was really bad at this, despite its experience with DSLRs.

Because it is better for ergonomics and shooting styles.
There is a reason why Canon have them. They take ergo seriously.

No. It’s just what you’re used to. If you have a camera without it for a few weeks, even you can adapt and you’ll find it’s not limiting at all. Anyway the camera is a powerful beast in a small package. That space on top is valuable real estate to give the shooter more controls to be able to make adjustments faster. For most people it’s a much better use of the space than a display you only use when you’re not shooting…

If you have a film camera you could get used to it. ;-)
As a Nikon user I think this no-lcd is quite strange.

I had a top LCD on previous cameras. I don't need it on modern Sony cameras. I'm happier using the space for more controls.

I prefer the information presented in the EVF or on the rear screen - I can see my subject and the information simultaneously.

I have set up the Fn menu to show me the current state of a dozen settings, so if I need more information I can press the Fn button and see my current drive mode, focus area, focus subject type, focus mode, and a lot more. All across the bottom of the EVF or rear screen.

I don't even need to take the camera from my eye to change those settings, either.

Maybe Nikon has to use a top LCD because their EVF is too low resolution to present the information? :-D

Agree. The other benefit of the Sony bodies is the button placement and customizability means I don’t have to think about whether I’m shooting with the A9II or the A1. I can change a host of settings without removing my eye from the EVF and without needing to worry which camera I’m using. Especially useful because I’m usually using both bodies and don’t need to be concerned with which body has which lens in the heat of the moment.

To me, not having the top LCD is a feature, same for LCDs on lenses btw, I don't want them and I'm ready to pay more to get rid of them.

Dedicated displays is like dedicated controls. Sure i don't need it, but sure it makes work easier. When Sony comes out with a top display, everyone will be asking, why didn't they do it sooner, just like the sensor protector that Canon launched in the R.

@trungtran
"When Sony comes out with a top display, everyone will be asking, why didn't they do it sooner, just like the sensor protector that Canon launched in the R."

That sums up Sony users for you.
Any feature or thing Sony cameras/lenses don't have is useless. And every feature or thing Sony cameras/lenses have is the best thing since sliced bread.

Tweets, not me... I don't want a larger camera body, and I don't want to give up the additional controls.. If sony replaces the controls with a top LCD or makes the camera larger to accommodate both, I will complain to Sony...

You can bookmark this comment, and then if it ever happens, you can call me on it with whichever account you've created for that month.

@jnd
> Why do you need it?

On my Nikon Z6ii, when I shoot with the main screen tilted up (which I do a lot), I like to keep only the frame content there, without distraction. Any technical information I might want to refer to or change goes to the shoulder display. I find it very practical. I could certainly live without it, but it would be less convenient. This is one of the reasons, I do not consider Sony cameras for my work, no matter how technically advanced they might appear otherwise.

Even my old film camera, Nikon F-801, had a top display.

@MikeRan, what if you could have both? The benefit of a top LCD is that you don't have to wake the camera up to see it's settings, potentially sacing battery over the course of a shoot. You can make changes or check it's status without looming through the EVF or LCD. The Z8/9 has the top panel AND the same amount of buttons up top. The Z8 has two Fn buttons on the front of the camera and z9 has 3. I don't want to get into brand wars, my point is that it's possible to have the same amount of controls and top LCD screen.

The Z8 and Z9 are both substantially larger than the A1. I think also in general the A1 is much more efficient battery wise, so I'm less concerned about waking the camera up, and frankly have my camera set to go to "sleep" after 30 minutes or something like that. The only time I'm "annoyed" is when the camera strap ends up near the back of the EVF and the camera thinks my eye is up there and the back LCD turns off.

Comparing the controls, the A1 has 5 dials on top (including the front dial). I haven't spent that much time with a Z8 in my hand, but there are substantially fewer controls on the top of the Z8's larger body, and that top LCD basically takes up almost the whole top right of the camera body. In my mind, that is wasted space. (Where is the PASM dial?)

Anyway, I prefer small and light and the A1 is smaller and lighter substantially than the Z8.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#867,907

It’s not that the Z8 is big. It’s that the a1 is small :~). I have a Great Dane. It’s normal sized dog. The rest that we encounter on our walks are just small. It’s about perspective and preference as you say.