Is Sony A9 the ultimate gear for action and sport?

Started Apr 25, 2017 | Discussions
orpheuslau
orpheuslau Regular Member • Posts: 114
Is Sony A9 the ultimate gear for action and sport?
1

Full content: https://orpheuslau.wordpress.com/2017/04/25/is-sony-a9-the-ultimate-gear-for-action-and-sport/

DSLR is dying, yes we are knew that.

Camera manufacturer can hardly ignore the fact that DSLR market is shrinking. At the same time, the Mirrorless product is gaining her momentum. Action and sport photography, the last edge of advantage of DSLR, could possibly be taken over by the coming Sony A9.

No. of AF points? fps? or what
Traditionally, more AF points especially cross-type AF point, means better AF performance. This has become an indicator to determine if a camera is capable of shooting action like tracking fast moving subject.

source: http://ilovehatephoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ilovehatephoto.com-sonya7rii-pdaf-hybrid-autofocus-399-point.jpg

Few years ago when A7RII comes to market, people were stunned by the overwhelming number of AF points (399 AF points) showing on her focal plane. Compared to the Flagship DSLR like Nikon D5(51 AF points), it seems DSLR should be trashed several years ago. The reality is, until today, the majority of sport and action photojournalist still hold their DSLR in their hand, why?

I am a owner of A7RII and I am sure you will have a better understanding on her performance for fast moving subject. Don’t make me wrong, I still love my A7RII, she is doing brilliantly except for shooting action. Maybe some will challenge by posting several precisely-focused action photos of A7RII, for me that means nothing.

Simply put, it is all about the successful hit-rate. You can use a manual-focused film camera to shot a flying bird, that’s absolutely possible we all see that happening in past century. You may refer to my previous testing and see how frustrating to use A7RII to shoot a moving subject.

The 693 AF points of A9 is convincing but that’s not enough.

To be continue....

Full content: https://orpheuslau.wordpress.com/2017/04/25/is-sony-a9-the-ultimate-gear-for-action-and-sport/

-- hide signature --
Sony a7R II Sony a9
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
orpheuslau
OP orpheuslau Regular Member • Posts: 114
Re: Is Sony A9 the ultimate gear for action and sport?

20 Frames Per Second
That’s very embarrassing, the flagship Nikon D5 can only take up to 14 frames per second but A9 can do 20, that’s 43% more. fps (Frames Per Second) is critical, for example you are taking an action completed in one second. For A9, a 20 fps camera, you can have captured that action by 20 pictures however for D5 you only get 14, theatrically the D5 shooter has inevitably missed to capture some moments.

source: https://www.spill.hk/article/1492662297/149266250550017.jpg

I am not an engineer, I can’t tell if DSLR can boost their fps like mirroless camera does. Personally I guess the mirror box system hinders the max fps that it can reach. If this is so, this short coming of low fps of DSLR is inherited and hardly be fixed unless it gives up the mirror box system(that simply makes it a mirrorless camera by definition)

To be continue

Full content: https://orpheuslau.wordpress.com/2017/04/25/is-sony-a9-the-ultimate-gear-for-action-and-sport/

-- hide signature --
orpheuslau
OP orpheuslau Regular Member • Posts: 114
Re: Is Sony A9 the ultimate gear for action and sport?
1

AF system

source: http://briansmith.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Sony-a99II-vs-a7RII-42-mp-Showdown-1.jpg

Although the A99ii the latest A-mount camera shares the same image sensor as A7RII, the former performs much better in action photography. I will not go into detail comparing between A99ii and AR7ii. Instead I simply want to point out that AF system is a crucial factor used to be overlooked.

Honestly I can’t perform a 100% objective test between DSLR and Mirroless, only I can share, as a user of A7RII, A99ii, D810 and D500, the reliability of DSLR AF system is still higher per my experience. Again this is my two cents only, you may share a different view.

To me, the reliability of AF system is the strongest reason that keeps DSLR in our hand. This is the core know-how accumulated for decades. However, the mirroless technology is advancing tremendously. From time to time it has beaten their DSLR counterpart surprisingly, no one can tell if A9 can breakthrough this time.

To be continue

Full story: https://orpheuslau.wordpress.com/2017/04/25/is-sony-a9-the-ultimate-gear-for-action-and-sport/

-- hide signature --
JimKasson
JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 35,338
Lenses
11

For traditional professional sports work, you need to have access to most of the following:

  • 200/2
  • 300/2.8
  • 400/2.8
  • 500/4
  • 600/4

For versatility, throw in a 200-400/4.

For the sidelines to be full of Sony shooters some say, Sony has to either make all those lenses, or convince photographers that they don't need the speed, and come out with a line of slower, but professional-grade lenses.

I personally hope they do the latter, and employ a lot of phase Fresnel technology.

Jim

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
blue_skies
blue_skies Forum Pro • Posts: 12,101
Re: I think that you miss the (AF) point entirely ...
3

Sony's AF in the A9 is going well beyond DSLR's capabilities today:

See Gary Fong's comments:

Focus accuracy on your subject:

Focus tracking of your subject:

This is far more advanced than a DSLR does today.

You have been shooting your A7rII alike your A99. Those are both yesteryears approaches. The A9 approach already bare fruit in the A6x00 cameras (see 4D subject tracking/focus). With the 693 AF points, the A9 can track a subject anywhere in the frame.

Only negative that I see is low light, there is a limit below which the PDAF fails, the A9 lowered it to -3EV, DSLRs can still focus at -4 to -5EV. For (illuminated) sports this doesn't matter, TV broadcast requires higher illumination than this.

Within a year, we will see the 'wow' photo's in sport all coming from the A9. With 20Fps and no-EVF blackout you can get that exact framing and exact moment that inspires people. DSLRs are taking a backseat here now, and I doubt that they can increase their frame-rate, unless they go mirror up, and effectively copycat Sony.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony a5100 Sony a7R II Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Sony 75-300mm F4.5-5.6 +35 more
blue_skies
blue_skies Forum Pro • Posts: 12,101
Re: Lenses

JimKasson wrote:

For traditional professional sports work, you need to have access to most of the following:

  • 200/2
  • 300/2.8
  • 400/2.8
  • 500/4
  • 600/4

For versatility, throw in a 200-400/4.

For the sidelines to be full of Sony shooters some say, Sony has to either make all those lenses, or convince photographers that they don't need the speed, and come out with a line of slower, but professional-grade lenses.

I personally hope they do the latter, and employ a lot of phase Fresnel technology.

Jim

Sony already failed for the A7rII market, look at all the f/2.8 zoom and f/1.4 prime GM lenses. The f/4 zoom and f/1.8 prime simply weren't enough.

Because such lenses (as you outline) exists today, they will be required to be available tomorrow.

The 'my-lens-is-bigger-than-yours' will translate to 'better', and this means that all such lenses will (have to) be made.

Now, sports/action photogs that can use slower lenses and 'get by' have a huge advantage, but this will be a tough initial sale. Tools of the trade remain tools of the trade.

Assuming all brands have access to same sensor technology, lens speed (aperture) does matter.

And AF has to be (always) spot on.

Sony suggests that the A9 will achieve a higher keeper rate (per scene, not per image) than the competition, as explained by some of the artisans. If so, it will be self-evident, and a pull towards Sony will be natural.

Also, the faster the lenses, the higher the cost, and inertia, of photogs switching over...

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony a5100 Sony a7R II Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Sony 75-300mm F4.5-5.6 +35 more
JimKasson
JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 35,338
Re: Lenses

blue_skies wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

For traditional professional sports work, you need to have access to most of the following:

  • 200/2
  • 300/2.8
  • 400/2.8
  • 500/4
  • 600/4

For versatility, throw in a 200-400/4.

For the sidelines to be full of Sony shooters some say, Sony has to either make all those lenses, or convince photographers that they don't need the speed, and come out with a line of slower, but professional-grade lenses.

I personally hope they do the latter, and employ a lot of phase Fresnel technology.

Jim

Sony already failed for the A7rII market, look at all the f/2.8 zoom and f/1.4 prime GM lenses. The f/4 zoom and f/1.8 prime simply weren't enough.

Because such lenses (as you outline) exists today, they will be required to be available tomorrow.

The 'my-lens-is-bigger-than-yours' will translate to 'better', and this means that all such lenses will (have to) be made.

Now, sports/action photogs that can use slower lenses and 'get by' have a huge advantage, but this will be a tough initial sale. Tools of the trade remain tools of the trade.

Assuming all brands have access to same sensor technology, lens speed (aperture) does matter.

And AF has to be (always) spot on.

Sony suggests that the A9 will achieve a higher keeper rate (per scene, not per image) than the competition, as explained by some of the artisans. If so, it will be self-evident, and a pull towards Sony will be natural.

Also, the faster the lenses, the higher the cost, and inertia, of photogs switching over...

Henry, have you ever used a PF lens?

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
JochenIs Forum Member • Posts: 60
Re: Lenses

I also whish to see more long lenses with phase fresnel technology like the Nikon 300mm f4 pf but longer. They would complement the small form factor of the Sony cameras nicely. Small size is a strong point of the e-mount system and could be a selling point for many wildlife / action shooters who need to carry their gear.

 JochenIs's gear list:JochenIs's gear list
Nikon D700 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G +1 more
JimKasson
JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 35,338
Re: Lenses

JochenIs wrote:

I also whish to see more long lenses with phase fresnel technology like the Nikon 300mm f4 pf but longer. They would complement the small form factor of the Sony cameras nicely. Small size is a strong point of the e-mount system and could be a selling point for many wildlife / action shooters who need to carry their gear.

I think it's game-changing technology, and I'd sure like to see more of it.

Jim

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
vett93
vett93 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,165
Re: Lenses

JimKasson wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

For traditional professional sports work, you need to have access to most of the following:

  • 200/2
  • 300/2.8
  • 400/2.8
  • 500/4
  • 600/4

For versatility, throw in a 200-400/4.

For the sidelines to be full of Sony shooters some say, Sony has to either make all those lenses, or convince photographers that they don't need the speed, and come out with a line of slower, but professional-grade lenses.

I personally hope they do the latter, and employ a lot of phase Fresnel technology.

Jim

Sony already failed for the A7rII market, look at all the f/2.8 zoom and f/1.4 prime GM lenses. The f/4 zoom and f/1.8 prime simply weren't enough.

Because such lenses (as you outline) exists today, they will be required to be available tomorrow.

The 'my-lens-is-bigger-than-yours' will translate to 'better', and this means that all such lenses will (have to) be made.

Now, sports/action photogs that can use slower lenses and 'get by' have a huge advantage, but this will be a tough initial sale. Tools of the trade remain tools of the trade.

Assuming all brands have access to same sensor technology, lens speed (aperture) does matter.

And AF has to be (always) spot on.

Sony suggests that the A9 will achieve a higher keeper rate (per scene, not per image) than the competition, as explained by some of the artisans. If so, it will be self-evident, and a pull towards Sony will be natural.

Also, the faster the lenses, the higher the cost, and inertia, of photogs switching over...

Henry, have you ever used a PF lens?

These PF lenses (and Canon's DO series) somehow are not the main stream. Do you know why?

-- hide signature --

"Keep calm and take photos"
Photography enthusiast, from 12mm to 500mm

 vett93's gear list:vett93's gear list
Sony a9 Sony a7R III Sony a6500 Apple iPhone 11 Pro
JimKasson
JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 35,338
Re: Lenses

vett93 wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Henry, have you ever used a PF lens?

These PF lenses (and Canon's DO series) somehow are not the main stream. Do you know why?

I don't. I do know that there were problems with earlier iterations of the technology, but my experience with the Nikon 300/4E PF was great. I gave it to my daughter-in-law because it doesn't work on a7x cameras and because I have a really nice Leica lens in that focal length.

http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/nikon-300mm-f4e-pf-ed-vr-on-nikon-d810/

Jim

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
jonas ar
jonas ar Contributing Member • Posts: 897
Re: Lenses

JimKasson wrote:

For traditional professional sports work, you need to have access to most of the following:

  • 200/2
  • 300/2.8
  • 400/2.8
  • 500/4
  • 600/4

For versatility, throw in a 200-400/4.

For the sidelines to be full of Sony shooters some say, Sony has to either make all those lenses, or convince photographers that they don't need the speed, and come out with a line of slower, but professional-grade lenses.

I personally hope they do the latter, and employ a lot of phase Fresnel technology.

Jim

very intetesting concept! How is the optical quality of existing photographic phase Fresnel systems. And why is it not more common?

blue_skies
blue_skies Forum Pro • Posts: 12,101
Re: Lenses

JimKasson wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

For traditional professional sports work, you need to have access to most of the following:

  • 200/2
  • 300/2.8
  • 400/2.8
  • 500/4
  • 600/4

For versatility, throw in a 200-400/4.

For the sidelines to be full of Sony shooters some say, Sony has to either make all those lenses, or convince photographers that they don't need the speed, and come out with a line of slower, but professional-grade lenses.

I personally hope they do the latter, and employ a lot of phase Fresnel technology.

Jim

Sony already failed for the A7rII market, look at all the f/2.8 zoom and f/1.4 prime GM lenses. The f/4 zoom and f/1.8 prime simply weren't enough.

Because such lenses (as you outline) exists today, they will be required to be available tomorrow.

The 'my-lens-is-bigger-than-yours' will translate to 'better', and this means that all such lenses will (have to) be made.

Now, sports/action photogs that can use slower lenses and 'get by' have a huge advantage, but this will be a tough initial sale. Tools of the trade remain tools of the trade.

Assuming all brands have access to same sensor technology, lens speed (aperture) does matter.

And AF has to be (always) spot on.

Sony suggests that the A9 will achieve a higher keeper rate (per scene, not per image) than the competition, as explained by some of the artisans. If so, it will be self-evident, and a pull towards Sony will be natural.

Also, the faster the lenses, the higher the cost, and inertia, of photogs switching over...

Henry, have you ever used a PF lens?

No, I have not. I can see Fresnel rings adding to the lens IQ (e.g. reduce CA), but doubt that it will make the lens faster, as the aperture dictates the radius, imho.

For e.g. the A9, in an outdoors or well illuminated sports venue, shooting at f/4 to f/5.6 should be no problem, imho. This would allow smaller and more compact lenses to be used

Still, the shooter next to you with his f/2.8 bazooka will hype his shallow DOF as the better image, after all he'd have to lug that thing around all day.

I think that PF lenses, alike STF lenses, are 'one-of' type of lenses, and won't hit the mainstream.

How do you feel about e.g. the Light L16? It should start shipping soon, and the question that I'd have is whether or not such technology is scalable upwards. Perhaps more of a question for Prof. HankD? Computational programming is becoming an ever more integral part to photography and videography (e.g. see 360 cameras), and shooting a scene with multi-lenses/sensors at once brings some very interesting problems and solutions with it. (But then again, Lytros already exited.)

Funnily, the larger format cameras, arguably better in some ways, never caught on, and the smaller cameras, arguably better in other ways, never did either. Perhaps the most brilliant decision was to nickname 35mm to be 'full-frame'?

Today's sensors are way ahead of yesteryear's film, but instead of this making things easier, the bar seems to have been raised higher.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony a5100 Sony a7R II Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Sony 75-300mm F4.5-5.6 +35 more
Philnw2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,683
Re: I think that you miss the (AF) point entirely ...
1

blue_skies wrote:

Sony's AF in the A9 is going well beyond DSLR's capabilities today:

See Gary Fong's comments:

Focus accuracy on your subject:

Focus tracking of your subject:

This is far more advanced than a DSLR does today.

You have been shooting your A7rII alike your A99. Those are both yesteryears approaches. The A9 approach already bare fruit in the A6x00 cameras (see 4D subject tracking/focus). With the 693 AF points, the A9 can track a subject anywhere in the frame.

Only negative that I see is low light, there is a limit below which the PDAF fails, the A9 lowered it to -3EV, DSLRs can still focus at -4 to -5EV. For (illuminated) sports this doesn't matter, TV broadcast requires higher illumination than this.

Within a year, we will see the 'wow' photo's in sport all coming from the A9. With 20Fps and no-EVF blackout you can get that exact framing and exact moment that inspires people. DSLRs are taking a backseat here now, and I doubt that they can increase their frame-rate, unless they go mirror up, and effectively copycat Sony.

I bought my A7rii in Aug 2015, and its continuing to surprise me.  I was at Ocean Shores WA last weekend, and in the evening, i was photographing the occasional jogger and people walking by on the beach at some distance to me.  I was using the a-mount 70-400 g2 to take pictures.  Depending on the size of the focus box, those tiny phase boxes would be firing off showing what the focus areas were.   I was some distance away from the joggers and beach line, but still those focus boxes would be dancing around firing to show the focus.  And when i got back home of my computer, sure enough, those tiny figures would be in focus.

And that is with 399 focus points, with the new A9's 693 focus points,  what new algorithms will be developed to take advantage of that situation.

I recently checked out the discussion on the Nikon D5 forum, and a  surprising number of threads about the A9.  There was the occasional grumbling about the A9 being discussed on the Nikon forum, but i thought i detected some interest as well.  Sure, the Sony focus sensels do not seem to be as sensitive to low light situations, but what they bring to the table is far more tracking capability that i don't think the DSLRs will be able to match.

Frankly, i think the A7s, A7rii and A9, indeed the whole A7 family, are all breakthrus and we're seeing larger numbers of people, including me, realizing the advantages such technology offers.  I mean WOW.

-- hide signature --

Phil B

 Philnw2's gear list:Philnw2's gear list
Sony a7R II Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +4 more
JimKasson
JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 35,338
Re: Lenses
2

blue_skies wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

For traditional professional sports work, you need to have access to most of the following:

  • 200/2
  • 300/2.8
  • 400/2.8
  • 500/4
  • 600/4

For versatility, throw in a 200-400/4.

For the sidelines to be full of Sony shooters some say, Sony has to either make all those lenses, or convince photographers that they don't need the speed, and come out with a line of slower, but professional-grade lenses.

I personally hope they do the latter, and employ a lot of phase Fresnel technology.

Sony already failed for the A7rII market, look at all the f/2.8 zoom and f/1.4 prime GM lenses. The f/4 zoom and f/1.8 prime simply weren't enough.

Because such lenses (as you outline) exists today, they will be required to be available tomorrow.

The 'my-lens-is-bigger-than-yours' will translate to 'better', and this means that all such lenses will (have to) be made.

Now, sports/action photogs that can use slower lenses and 'get by' have a huge advantage, but this will be a tough initial sale. Tools of the trade remain tools of the trade.

Assuming all brands have access to same sensor technology, lens speed (aperture) does matter.

And AF has to be (always) spot on.

Sony suggests that the A9 will achieve a higher keeper rate (per scene, not per image) than the competition, as explained by some of the artisans. If so, it will be self-evident, and a pull towards Sony will be natural.

Also, the faster the lenses, the higher the cost, and inertia, of photogs switching over...

Henry, have you ever used a PF lens?

No, I have not. I can see Fresnel rings adding to the lens IQ (e.g. reduce CA), but doubt that it will make the lens faster, as the aperture dictates the radius, imho.

A PF lens doesn't have Fresnel rings in the old sense. And the tech doesn't make the lens faster, but smaller and lighter.

For e.g. the A9, in an outdoors or well illuminated sports venue, shooting at f/4 to f/5.6 should be no problem, imho. This would allow smaller and more compact lenses to be used

Still, the shooter next to you with his f/2.8 bazooka will hype his shallow DOF as the better image, after all he'd have to lug that thing around all day.

Could be. With smaller lenses, you could be a lot mor mobile, and mabe carry more of them.

I think that PF lenses, alike STF lenses, are 'one-of' type of lenses, and won't hit the mainstream.

I hope you're wrong.

How do you feel about e.g. the Light L16? It should start shipping soon, and the question that I'd have is whether or not such technology is scalable upwards. Perhaps more of a question for Prof. HankD? Computational programming is becoming an ever more integral part to photography and videography (e.g. see 360 cameras), and shooting a scene with multi-lenses/sensors at once brings some very interesting problems and solutions with it. (But then again, Lytros already exited.)

I'm big on computational photography; after all, that's what I do a lot of the time. I'm taking a wait and see attitude towards the Light 16.

Funnily, the larger format cameras, arguably better in some ways, never caught on,

No mystery: we never figured out out to make a 4x5 inch area sensor economically. I still have a Betterlight back. The complexities of use and the scan time limitations were daunting. The imagee quality is still better than anything I can do with the other cameras I currently have, and that includes the GFX.

and the smaller cameras, arguably better in other ways, never did either.

iPhone?

Perhaps the most brilliant decision was to nickname 35mm to be 'full-frame'?

Could be. Anything smaller is a partial frame. However, back in the day, there were "full plate" cameras, and not everyone felt they needed to have something that big (6 1/2 x 8 1/2 inches, as I remember).

Today's sensors are way ahead of yesteryear's film,

To a point. Ahead of MF, maybe tied with 4x5, and behind 8x10 by some mertics.

but instead of this making things easier, the bar seems to have been raised higher.

It was ever thus. Look at the images from the greatest photographers of the 19th century. If most of those were being made today, we'd yawn.

Jim

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 Sony a7R IV Sony a9 II +1 more
mgonda Contributing Member • Posts: 574
Re:Lenses (300mm f/4 PF)

Its a great lens.  I use it with Commlite AF (FW V4.0) and a7Rii.  Size-wise its smaller than SEL70200f4 and lighter.

AF with Commlite is just fraction slower than 70200 and accurate, when works.  I say that because it hunts time to time but so does 70200.  I use it for mostly for sports and if the subject is moving, its very difficult with a7Rii.  I usually use my Nikon for sports but I like playing with a7Rii and this lens.

Three images from this past weekend taken from soccer field sideline.  All converted from raw to jpg in C1 V10 and adjusted for exposure and contrast.  These are full size images.

f/4 @1/4000

f/7.1 @ 1/2500

f4.5 @ 1/1600

 mgonda's gear list:mgonda's gear list
Sony a7R II Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm F4G ED VR Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +4 more
LargePrints New Member • Posts: 8
Re: Is Sony A9 the ultimate gear for action and sport?

I will be very interested to handle this camera. I have large hands so the grip will be a must.  I am not convinced this thing will be very ergonomic but time will tell.  Should be fun to let er rip at 20 FPS though!

Tristimulus Veteran Member • Posts: 8,301
Re: Is Sony A9 the ultimate gear for action and sport?

Most likely game changing in two ways:

1) small and light weight, several photographers find that attractive (surveys)...

2) fast focusing light weight lenses might replace the big bulky breed of lenses...

Weight is becoming more of an issue as lighter and more capable gear is available. SOme surveys show that especially female photographers want compact light weight gear...

Long lenses are not only about subject isolation, it is also about reach. So if the new breed of lenses can focus fast in dim light, why go for the big ones? Going from f/2.8 to f/5.6 is plain easy if raising ISO two steps - if not in need of the more shallow DOF. Raising the ISO two steps do not make that much difference with modern image sensors.

Leses like the new 100-400mm lens is dirt cheap compared to big white fast monsters, and if auto focus is in the same league in dim light, well then we might have something here...

If shallow DOF is important go for the fast big expensive white lenses.

Bruce Oudekerk
Bruce Oudekerk Veteran Member • Posts: 3,631
Re: Lenses

JimKasson wrote:

For traditional professional sports work, you need to have access to most of the following:

  • 200/2
  • 300/2.8
  • 400/2.8
  • 500/4
  • 600/4

For versatility, throw in a 200-400/4.

For the sidelines to be full of Sony shooters some say, Sony has to either make all those lenses, or convince photographers that they don't need the speed, and come out with a line of slower, but professional-grade lenses.

In hindsight, I'm a little surprised there was not an LA-EA6 offered with the a9 intro. That adapter would use the a99II tech which is quite nice I understand.  If the hit rate was high,  frame-rate degradation might be acceptable.  And there are still some  fast high quality a-mount screw drive long primes around.  It might work better in some situations than a Metabones/Canon combo.  ...don't know and just speculating.

On the other hand, an LA-EA6 might completely kill a99II sales.

Apparently the LA-EA3 works fairly well with electronic coupled lenses like the Sony a-mount 300mm f2.8 II still in production.

I personally hope they do the latter, and employ a lot of phase Fresnel technology.

Here, here.

Speaking of which, why are there no zooms using this tech.  My most desired lens is a 24-105 or 24-120 f4 class lens that is light, compact and optically stellar.  Could phase Fresnel technology facilitate that???

Bruce

 Bruce Oudekerk's gear list:Bruce Oudekerk's gear list
Sony a7R II Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G OSS Sony FE 50mm F1.8 Sony FE 24-105mm F4
Ken Sky Regular Member • Posts: 409
Re: Is Sony A9 the ultimate gear for action and sport?
1

If you make the operative word "action", I think this camera will appeal to a lot of well healed parents & grandparents trying to catch children in action. I bet this demographic outnumbers sports photographers. So the existing native lenses are probably sufficient. I know Sony is looking for a "halo" effect of attracting pros. But numbers speak loudly.

 Ken Sky's gear list:Ken Sky's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Alpha DSLR-A900 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a6000 Sony a7R IV +10 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads