A Masterpiece

[narainj]

Reviews for the A9 II are pretty scant, DP Review have yet to review it - perhaps because it is viewed as a modest update to its predecessor, the A9.

Even if that were the case, the significant ergonomic improvements and Sony’s ability to squeeze more performance out of the same processor is worthy of attention.

I typically don’t do comprehensive reviews but given the undeserving dearth of them in this case, I felt it was necessary to go deeper than usual.

Build Quality

At 687g it’s hard to believe that has produced something that is both so light and so sturdy which also handles so well. Every switch and dial is perfectly damped and dials are equipped with toggles to prevent accidental changes. There’s no reason that this camera shouldn’t last many years, especially given the option to shoot with an electronic shutter with almost no IQ penalty in the form of banding or rolling shutter.

Ergonomics

As good Sony’s A6x, A7x and A9x cameras have been, every review, no matter how positive, has come with the caveat that Sony’s menus and ergonomics fall short of Nikon, Canon, Panasonic (and even Pentax).

This is no longer the case with the A9 II. A deep but not bulky grip makes it comfortable to carry and hold for extended periods. An additional dial on the left side of the top plate for drive and AF modes, along with 4 customizable buttons, perfectly placed AF On button and focus point joystick mean that one never needs to visit the menu after initial setup and offer direct control over every photographic aspect.

Battery Life

Possibly the other weak point of a Sony cameras, one shared with most other mirrorless cameras, has been battery life. Again, this has been addressed and is no longer an issue.

There’s in-camera USB over both USB-C and micro-USB.

Autofocus

Along with 20 FPS shooting, fast, accurate, sticky continuous AF is what this camera is about. And it delivers in every way. I haven’t had the chance to shoot with the Canon 1DX M III, but I did own the M II.

The A9 II meets and beats it.

It’s hard to understate the level of confidence this inspires.

Ultimately, focus gets out of the way and allows one to think about composition and the tracking of moving subjects while still offering whatever degree of control one wants; AF + MF is a turn of the focus mode dial away and C buttons can be configured to further customize control. Back button focus gives one perfect control with either AF-C or DMF.

Low Light

My preferred exposure metering mode is highlight weighted and happily the A9 II offers it. Combined with a very intuitive Auto ISO mode and a exposure compensation dial that works in M, one has very fine grained control.


The A9 II falls just slightly short of the best low light cameras and the sensor is not ISO invariant (this is typical of cameras designed to capture fast motion, it’s the same with the Canon 1DX M II) but it is perfectly capable of shooting noise free up to ISO 8000 and 10000-12800 are more than acceptable with some noise reduction in post.


IBIS and a wide range of stabilized lenses enable handheld, low ISO, low SS work, if one is so inclined.


Lenses

The choice between the 24-70mm f/2.8 GM and the 24-105mm f/4 G is a tough call, price notwithstanding, but I opted for the extra reach of the 24-105mm and it is a lens that covers almost any scenario.

I recently got a Samyang 45mm (a focal length I love) f /1.8 to have a fast, lightweight prime and a Sony 70-200mm f/4 G to have a telephoto option but haven’t yet used either extensively.

Suffice it to say that between Sony’s 1st party offerings and 3rd party ones from Zeiss, Sigma, Voigtlander, 7Artisans and Lensbaby, E-mount has pretty much every shooting scenario covered.

Conclusion

There’s nothing that this camera can’t do, nor work that it isn’t suited for, other than that which demands high MP counts (in which case the Nikon 850, Sony A7R III or A7R IV, Nikon Z 7, Leica SL 2, Canon R and Panasonic S1R are the places to look).

It rivals or exceeds the Nikon D5 and Canon 1DX MII at continuous AF tracking speed and accuracy and comes very, very close to the Nikon Z 6/750/780 in low light performance and dynamic range .

Ergonomics and build quality have been the Achilles heel for Sony and they have more than addressed both with the A9 II (and A7R IV).

Sample Images


Lowlight portrait. ISO 8000 f/4 1/125 | Sony 24-105mm f/4 G OSS @ 89mm


Daylight static shot. ISO 100 f/4 1/250 | Sony 24-105mm f/4 G OSS @ 57mm


Twilight street shot. ISO 5000 f/4 1/320 | Sony 24-105 f/4 G OSS @ 105mm




Dusk landscape. ISO 500 1/400 f/4 1/400 | Sony 24-105mm f/4 G OSS @ 54mm

 

[LarryRC]

Reviews for the A9 II are pretty scant, DP Review have yet to review it - perhaps because it is viewed as a modest update to its predecessor, the A9.
Even if that were the case, the significant ergonomic improvements and Sony’s ability to squeeze more performance out of the same processor is worthy of attention.
I typically don’t do comprehensive reviews but given the undeserving dearth of them in this case, I felt it was necessary to go deeper than usual.

Build Quality

At 687g it’s hard to believe that has produced something that is both so light and so sturdy which also handles so well. Every switch and dial is perfectly damped and dials are equipped with toggles to prevent accidental changes. There’s no reason that this camera shouldn’t last many years, especially given the option to shoot with an electronic shutter with almost no IQ penalty in the form of banding or rolling shutter.

Ergonomics

As good Sony’s A6x, A7x and A9x cameras have been, every review, no matter how positive, has come with the caveat that Sony’s menus and ergonomics fall short of Nikon, Canon, Panasonic (and even Pentax).
This is no longer the case with the A9 II. A deep but not bulky grip makes it comfortable to carry and hold for extended periods. An additional dial on the left side of the top plate for drive and AF modes, along with 4 customizable buttons, perfectly placed AF On button and focus point joystick mean that one never needs to visit the menu after initial setup and offer direct control over every photographic aspect.

Battery Life

Possibly the other weak point of a Sony cameras, one shared with most other mirrorless cameras, has been battery life. Again, this has been addressed and is no longer an issue.

There’s in-camera USB over both USB-C and micro-USB.
Autofocus

Along with 20 FPS shooting, fast, accurate, sticky continuous AF is what this camera is about. And it delivers in every way. I haven’t had the chance to shoot with the Canon 1DX M III, but I did own the M II.

The A9 II meets and beats it.

It’s hard to understate the level of confidence this inspires.

Ultimately, focus gets out of the way and allows one to think about composition and the tracking of moving subjects while still offering whatever degree of control one wants; AF + MF is a turn of the focus mode dial away and C buttons can be configured to further customize control. Back button focus gives one perfect control with either AF-C or DMF.

Low Light

My preferred exposure metering mode is highlight weighted and happily the A9 II offers it. Combined with a very intuitive Auto ISO mode and a exposure compensation dial that works in M, one has very fine grained control.

The A9 II falls just slightly short of the best low light cameras and the sensor is not ISO invariant (this is typical of cameras designed to capture fast motion, it’s the same with the Canon 1DX M II) but it is perfectly capable of shooting noise free up to ISO 8000 and 10000-12800 are more than acceptable with some noise reduction in post.

IBIS and a wide range of stabilized lenses enable handheld, low ISO, low SS work, if one is so inclined.

Lenses

The choice between the 24-70mm f/2.8 GM and the 24-105mm f/4 G is a tough call, price notwithstanding, but I opted for the extra reach of the 24-105mm and it is a lens that covers almost any scenario.

I recently got a Samyang 45mm (a focal length I love) f /1.8 to have a fast, lightweight prime and a Sony 70-200mm f/4 G to have a telephoto option but haven’t yet used either extensively.

Suffice it to say that between Sony’s 1st party offerings and 3rd party ones from Zeiss, Sigma, Voigtlander, 7Artisans and Lensbaby, E-mount has pretty much every shooting scenario covered.

Conclusion

There’s nothing that this camera can’t do, nor work that it isn’t suited for, other than that which demands high MP counts (in which case the Nikon 850, Sony A7R III or A7R IV, Nikon Z 7, Leica SL 2, Canon R and Panasonic S1R are the places to look).

It rivals or exceeds the Nikon D5 and Canon 1DX MII at continuous AF tracking speed and accuracy and comes very, very close to the Nikon Z 6/750/780 in low light performance and dynamic range .

Ergonomics and build quality have been the Achilles heel for Sony and they have more than addressed both with the A9 II (and A7R IV).

Sample Images


Lowlight portrait. ISO 8000 f/4 1/125 | Sony 24-105mm f/4 G OSS @ 89mm


Daylight static shot. ISO 100 f/4 1/250 | Sony 24-105mm f/4 G OSS @ 57mm


Twilight street shot. ISO 5000 f/4 1/320 | Sony 24-105 f/4 G OSS @ 105mm


Dusk landscape. ISO 500 1/400 f/4 1/400 | Sony 24-105mm f/4 G OSS @ 54mm

Nice review! You state that it takes noise free photos at 8000 ISO but your first photo is noise full?

 

[Jimmy Simpleton]

Nice review! You state that it takes noise free photos at 8000 ISO but your first photo is noise full?

He probably means "noise free" compared to your A7r IV at that ISO.

 

[LarryRC]

Nice review! You state that it takes noise free photos at 8000 ISO but your first photo is noise full?

He probably means "noise free" compared to your A7r IV at that ISO.

That is fair.

 

[Editorrr]

I never regretted buying the A9 II. This is the best for sale today.
I use with lenses 27-70 GM, 70-200 GM, 24 GM. I bought the Voigtländer Apo Lanthar 50mm, but it is still in the process of delivery.

 

[macautio]

I have A92 and A7R4. I like them bought, but if i have choose only one it is definitely A92.

I use it 99% to electronic shutter, and i love to absolutely silent shooting it is open a new

world to photography.

Absolutly best features in A92.

 

[narainj]

I've only played with the A7R IV in shops.

What's the main points that tip you towards the A9 II?

 

[joger]

Nice review! You state that it takes noise free photos at 8000 ISO but your first photo is noise full?

He probably means "noise free" compared to your A7r IV at that ISO.

that's interesting ;-)

Acc. to photonstophots.com the two cameras are virtually identically at ISO 8000 scaled to the same output size:


I've marked ISO 8000 - the difference is some 2.5 % in dynamic range ( =noise ) at ISO 8000

Actually I find ISO 8000 ( almost ) useless at all currently existing cameras except you can't work around that.

I was able to make snapshots at ISO 32000 with my A7R III and it is good that we have the possibility. From my perspective this is far from being an acceptable quality - it is less than half the dynamic range compare to ISO 100 on the A7R IV

--
_____________________________________
A7R IV - one camera to rule them all
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." Douglas Adams

 

[macautio]

- Silent shooting, Superb

- AF performance especially tracking focus

- Much smaller file size. Enough almost everything

- Extra top dial

- Blackout free

- 20 frames/sec.

 

[narainj]

Agree with you on all of those points!

 

[lattesweden]

Thanks for a nice review.

I just wanted to touch on the non ISO invariance issue. DPR found the original A9 to be fairly invariant from about 800 ISO and up. In low light events on high ISO settings I have found that to be true as well.


I guess the A9II is the same since they share the same base sensor.

 

[lattesweden]

Actually I find ISO 8000 ( almost ) useless at all currently existing cameras except you can't work around that.

There is quite a large difference if one shots high ISO in good light or low light.

I shot quite many low light events and I often go up to ISO12800. I have done so on A7RII, A9 and A7III. I can't see much difference between them once scaled to the same output size (I often make images 4K = 3840 pixels on the long side).

I often max my AutoISO to 1600 or 3200 ISO and lift the rest in post.

I use DXO Photolab for noise reduction on the highest ISO images and just run it straight trough in all settings except for Prime noise reduction and lens compensations and output to DNG and use that as a new RAW in Lightroom with the rest of the images.

It has happened that I have made partial noise reduction on an image with higher noise reduction settings on just the most visually offending area.

In the end it is a question of use of the images, taste and what one can accept. Just wanted to give you my way of working, maybe it can help anyone here.
--
Best regards
/Anders
----------------------------------------------------
42 Megapixels is the answer to life, the universe and everything.
Gone in 20 fps.
You don't have to like my pictures, but it would help: http://www.lattermann.com/gallery

 

[Moses]

DP Review has evaluative shots of the A9 but not A9ii.

Anyone know if the noise and detail level of the A9ii is basically identical to the A9 at high iso - say 12,800? Or has there been relevant improvements?


Thanks.

 

[lattesweden]

DP Review has evaluative shots of the A9 but not A9ii.

Anyone know if the noise and detail level of the A9ii is basically identical to the A9 at high iso - say 12,800? Or has there been relevant improvements?

Thanks.

The JPEG engine is improved so those are cleaner from what I have seen in comparisons and reports from pro sports shooters.

The RAW quality I haven't seen if it is better regards to high ISO. It seems the DR at base ISO is a notch improved due to the improved image train.

 

[Moses]

Thank you.

 

[PWPhotography]

Nice review! You state that it takes noise free photos at 8000 ISO but your first photo is noise full?

He probably means "noise free" compared to your A7r IV at that ISO.

I have both A7r IV and A9 which basically has the same sensor of A9 II. Indeed A9 and A9 II high ISO files are quite noticeably cleaner. Guess you can make A7r IV closer by reducing file size and also apply NR with software like Topaz DeNoise AI so need extra processing.

 

[joger]

Actually I find ISO 8000 ( almost ) useless at all currently existing cameras except you can't work around that.

There is quite a large difference if one shots high ISO in good light or low light.

Correct - in case you have less dim situations the noise can be very pleasing and "natural"

I shot quite many low light events and I often go up to ISO12800. I have done so on A7RII, A9 and A7III. I can't see much difference between them once scaled to the same output size (I often make images 4K = 3840 pixels on the long side).

Correct - my experience as well - the interpretation is very easy - in case you use the very same technology level predominately the sensor size comes into play- Only disruptive new technologies will enable that the same sensor size produces much cleaner results.

This is especially valid for the Sony sensors with back illumination where you hardly have gaps between the individual pixels.

Additionally the A9 cameras have a faster read out and processing involved. Which can degrade the results potentially. As we saw in my posted diagram there is hardly any advantage for the A9 II compare to the A7R IV. Which is not saying that the A9 II is a bad camera - it simply has less pixels and is faster and optimize for fast action and sports.

I often max my AutoISO to 1600 or 3200 ISO and lift the rest in post.

Me too - in case it can't be done otherwise i use of course the higher ISO and try to eliminate the noise in post.

I use DXO Photolab for noise reduction on the highest ISO images and just run it straight trough in all settings except for Prime noise reduction and lens compensations and output to DNG and use that as a new RAW in Lightroom with the rest of the images.

Never tried that - good tip!

It has happened that I have made partial noise reduction on an image with higher noise reduction settings on just the most visually offending area.

In the end it is a question of use of the images, taste and what one can accept. Just wanted to give you my way of working, maybe it can help anyone here.

I guess it is key to understand how tools work and what are their limitations. I only wanted to point out that especially at ISO 8000 it is pointless to choose an A9 II over an A7R IV since they are v virtually the same.

There are other reasons to choose one of these cameras.

--
Best regards
/Anders
----------------------------------------------------
42 Megapixels is the answer to life, the universe and everything.
Gone in 20 fps.
You don't have to like my pictures, but it would help: http://www.lattermann.com/gallery

 

[Roentarre]

Nice review! You state that it takes noise free photos at 8000 ISO but your first photo is noise full?

He probably means "noise free" compared to your A7r IV at that ISO.

You mean A7R IV Noise at ISO 800 is pretty bad compared to A9II?

I did feel A7III has better noise performance than A7RIV

 

[lattesweden]

Additionally the A9 cameras have a faster read out and processing involved. Which can degrade the results potentially. As we saw in my posted diagram there is hardly any advantage for the A9 II compare to the A7R IV. Which is not saying that the A9 II is a bad camera - it simply has less pixels and is faster and optimize for fast action and sports.

I use my A9 quite much with the mech shutter and single frame in low light club events, I got it primarily for the AF and there is a difference in how well it works over the other bodys I have used, the A7RII and the A7III in those conditions, though the A7III is better than the A7RII in low light AF, my A9 continues to focus when the A7III gives up.

I guess it is key to understand how tools work and what are their limitations. I only wanted to point out that especially at ISO 8000 it is pointless to choose an A9 II over an A7R IV since they are v virtually the same.

The DXOmark resolution normalized measurement confirms this quite well. Basically all Sony cameras from the A7RII and up measure very similar with only smaller differences.

Here A9 vs A9II vs A7RIV:
https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Com...ony-A7R-IV-versus-Sony-a9-II___1162_1326_1346

I know that the Photons to Photos site at times gets a little different result than DXOmark so there is some wiggle room to read into these measurements.

I have no own experience with the A9II or the A7RIV.
I have good experience with the A7RII and the A9 and fair experience with the A7III.

There are other reasons to choose one of these cameras.

Very true.

I got the A7RII for landscape shooting in 2015, that is FIVE years ago. It is amazing how well it has stood at the top over time. On the DXOmark fullframe list it currently has number six with 98 points. The top FF ones are at 100 points. That sensor is amazing how well it handles both shadow pushing and highlight recovery at base ISO. Also color and tonality gradients in landscapes are very smooth. It is quite a slow camera operational wise, though the AF is quite quick. For single frame shooting it still does the job really well. The A7RIII has the same sensor and has 100 points at DXOmark, they improved some other stuff in the image train. And if I remember correct the A7RIV has much the same image train as the A7RIII but with the new higher res sensor.

The A7III has almost the same sensor qualities as the A7RII in my experience but obviously less resolution. It might be even better in regards to highlight recovery and shadow pulling at base ISO but I haven't used it enough to be sure. It does measures a little bit better DR than the A7RII so that may be the reason. Operational speed and AF is in another league though, the A7III is really a well rounded camera. I wish it was available with a better EVF and screen and also better weather sealing. Maybe the A7IV whenever it comes will give that.

The A9 has trickier highlight recovery. It doesn't clip so well rounded off as the A7RII/A7III does. The A9 clips rather brutal once it clips. But the RAW developer Photo Ninja has a magic way of bringing those cases back when the other RAW developers fails. I use it only for that and save out as a TIFF and continue the edit with those images in LR. The A9 also has less DR at base ISO in the measurements so it might be the reason. The autofocus in the A9 is fantastic and the low lagging non black out e-shutter is really good also for portraits with motion so not just sports. It has a rather irritating lag on the other hand with flash that is longer than the other bodys I have shot with. So not the best flash camera. The A9II has the same base sensor but has improvements in the image train which might be the reason for the slightly higher DR at base ISO. It is also said that the tracking autofocus is a little bit better than on the A9mkI. The A9 sensor is not ISO invariant as the others I have mentioned are. It is rather ISO invariant over 800 ISO though and when I shot it at high ISO I can't see any difference vs the A7RII or A7III with regards to same size scaled images noise levels. Neither can I see any difference in the color handling on high ISO images or any differences between them on shadow or highlight recovery so the DR seems to be the same on higher ISO. DXOmark measurements seems to agree.

--
Best regards
/Anders
----------------------------------------------------
42 Megapixels is the answer to life, the universe and everything.
Gone in 20 fps.
You don't have to like my pictures, but it would help: http://www.lattermann.com/gallery

 

[Max5150]

Do either the A7Riii or A7RIV focus as well as the A7iii in low light? I want to get a high res body for gen photography, but I also shoot a lot of ice hockey - low light and need to keep shutter speed up. No complaints about focus speed w my A7iii.