Reading mode: Light Dark

Sony A9 from the perspective of long time Canon sports shooter

Go to last post
My first camera was a Sony and I've been shooting Sony since and I've tried the 5diii for a few events. The list of cons i could list for that camera is as long as yours, and some, like the menu system, i could say the same for canikon.

I think most of the problems you're having will disappear with time if u continur using the a9
 
re slow to power on

if you mean "to take a photo" you can focus and shoot before anything pops up on the screen. try it. you won't know where the focus box is tho, as it won't have shown up yet
 
dkeller said:
That naked mirror and shallow placement also make it very easy to clean off the occasional dust bunny with either blower or pen/brush.
Click to expand...
And the mirror does not affect the final image, unless it is on a SLT...
 
Sorry, meant sensor.
 
I was referring to the sensor, not mirror as, obviously, this camera doesn't have the latter!! No idea why I typed mirror!!
 
Quite a list. I wonder why the Sonys are so slow to boot up. It can't be simply mirrorless is slow as my XT2 boots up very quickly. An odd aspect to Sony electronics and an area that can be improved on.

Greg.
 
MRWEC said:
My first camera was a Sony and I've been shooting Sony since and I've tried the 5diii for a few events. The list of cons i could list for that camera is as long as yours, and some, like the menu system, i could say the same for canikon.

I think most of the problems you're having will disappear with time if u continur using the a9
Click to expand...
 
PWPhotography said:
Also after 6 hours, you only took 2000 pictures? It's low per A9 burst rate.
Click to expand...
It's refreshing to see someone have some restraint. I think a lot of people are finding themselves intoxicated by 20 fps and just letting it rip. Personally, when I go out, I challenge myself to take as few shots as possible without missing anything important.
 
Last edited:
Jonathan Brady said:
PWPhotography said:
Also after 6 hours, you only took 2000 pictures? It's low per A9 burst rate.
Click to expand...
It's refreshing to see someone have some restraint. I think a lot of people are finding themselves intoxicated by 20 fps and just letting it rip. Personally, when I go out, I challenge myself to take as few shots as possible without missing anything important.
Click to expand...
OP took action photos. So assume he used AF-C and shoot at least M (10fps) or Hi (20fps) burst on A9. So even only shoot at 10fps, it only needs 200 seconds to top 2000 photos. 200 sec = 3.33 min totally. So it means in such long 6 hours, OP only very occasionally took shots while most time just waited and saw, no more than 4 minutes totally :-D

I took several airshows before. Even shoot on 6fps from 5D3 with much shallower buffer, it took more than 6000 photos after merely 4 hours.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com
 
Last edited:
PWPhotography said:
OP took action photos. So assume he used AF-C and shoot at least M (10fps) or Hi (20fps) burst on A9. So even only shoot at 10fps, it only needs 200 seconds to top 2000 photos. 200 sec = 3.33 min totally. So it means in such long 6 hours, OP only very occasionally took shots while most time just waited and saw, no more than 4 minutes totally :-D

I took several airshows before. Even shoot on 6fps from 5D3 with much shallower buffer, it took more than 6000 photos after merely 4 hours.
Click to expand...
 
Jonathan Brady said:
PWPhotography said:
OP took action photos. So assume he used AF-C and shoot at least M (10fps) or Hi (20fps) burst on A9. So even only shoot at 10fps, it only needs 200 seconds to top 2000 photos. 200 sec = 3.33 min totally. So it means in such long 6 hours, OP only very occasionally took shots while most time just waited and saw, no more than 4 minutes totally :-D

I took several airshows before. Even shoot on 6fps from 5D3 with much shallower buffer, it took more than 6000 photos after merely 4 hours.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com
Click to expand...
But how many did you end up keeping? Pros, such as the OP, are pros for a reason. They're simply better with everything, including timing and prediction. I think 2000 images is more than enough for a professional over the course of 6 hours. It's us amateurs who need to rely, more often, on "spray and pray" techniques.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt OP technical skill. Unless OP shoot in AF-S and Single-shot mode, or chose L (5fps) or mechanical shutter (that also only shoot 5fps) burst, under even 10fps (M), technically he only needs total 3.33 min to top 2000 photos in 6 hours. It's not "spray and pray" technique but just not something you can control under such burst rate, or unless you can control duration when you hit shutter such as only took 0.5 sec or 0.3 sec :-D

BTW, it's debatable if "spray and pray" technique could improve chance of getting ideal photos for precise moments. In DPR A9 review, it says (not quoted original words exactly) despite D5 has better AF stickiness, A9 still can capture more moments due to 20fps. It's a headache to sort an ocean of files however.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com
 
Last edited:
Martinka said:
LIKES

Depth of field in the viewfinder. It's interesting to see resulting DOF in viewfinder during shooting (opposite to DSLR with focusing screens optimized to f2.8).
Click to expand...
Even a bottom entry level Canon DSLR can do that.... You can see it in the viewfinder and also in Liveview.
 
Azathothh said:
Martinka said:
LIKES

Depth of field in the viewfinder. It's interesting to see resulting DOF in viewfinder during shooting (opposite to DSLR with focusing screens optimized to f2.8).
Click to expand...
Even a bottom entry level Canon DSLR can do that.... You can see it in the viewfinder and also in Liveview.
Click to expand...
Only if there's enough light... (OVF)
 
Azathothh said:
Martinka said:
LIKES

Depth of field in the viewfinder. It's interesting to see resulting DOF in viewfinder during shooting (opposite to DSLR with focusing screens optimized to f2.8).
Click to expand...
Even a bottom entry level Canon DSLR can do that.... You can see it in the viewfinder and also in Liveview.
Click to expand...
no, dslrs hold the aperture open all the time, so unless you are shooting the lens wide open, you have to use the stop-down preview button to see the actual dof... sony mirrorless with native glass, or legacy glass, will usually show the actual dof and exposure all the time, depending on how "setting effect:ON" is set.
 
BBQue said:
- menu is complicated because you are not used to it. Someone switching from Sony to Canon will find Canon menus complicated. Once you customize your camera, you will have little need to get into the menus.
Click to expand...
If you think about it most people switching from Nikon or Canon had years and years of experience with the menus of that system and now they have days or weeks with a completely new menu system and they think they've had enough experience to list menus as a con.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top