New A7IV vs Used A9II.. Which one?

[javiair]

I think I am going to make the jump to Sony. Now my question.. which one?

Quick background.. 40% of my shooting is action/sports photography in day and night and outdoor and indoor settings. That would include air shows, motocross, HS football, HS volleyball, and other events. The other 60% is a mix of landscapes, portraits, nature photography, but not one for BIF but want to get into more portrait photography.

So Looking for the best all around camera between the two. A friend of mine is selling their A9II for about $3k and then the new $2500 A7IV.

What scares me about the A9II.. the sensor is the same from the A9I. So its about 5 years old and I dont know much about the high ISO performance. But I know its a GREAT sports camera. But is it a good camera for the other 60%?

What scares me about the A7IV is the ability to shoot sports and action photography. I know it do a great job with the other 60%, but can it do the other 40%? I know that the A7IV is not meant to be a sports camera, but can it do the job if I have the proper settings?

Other options.. A9I and the Canon R6, but the 20MP scares me there..

Thank you for the input..

 

[Tristimulus]

The A9II offers fast scan times in silent mode. The A7IV does not.

That is the main difference if silent mode matters.

 

[HappyMartin]

If you do no video for for the A9II. The sensor is fine.

 

[BlueCosmo5050]

The A7iv is such a nice camera, you should really go with that. There are ways to make the buffer faster if you don't mind shooting compressed. Plus the AF system is so advanced is sticks on like the A1.

I have the A7Riv, and the A7IV, I like the 61 megapixels of the A7RIV but the A7IV is so nice with its AF and features it feels like the perfect all around camera. Its really hard to put it down.

 

[garykohs]

If you shoot any sports with the A9, A9ii, the A1 (or the Canon R3 or Nikon Z9, for that matter), you'll never be happy shooting sports with a camera that has a viewfinder blackout (which is all the rest of them). For your other shooting, that really doesn't matter.

 

[pollup]

I think I am going to make the jump to Sony. Now my question.. which one?

Quick background.. 40% of my shooting is action/sports photography in day and night and outdoor and indoor settings. That would include air shows, motocross, HS football, HS volleyball, and other events.

As you know, the A9ii is much better than the A7iv here. If I had to give a score, I would give the A9ii a 9/10, and the A7iv a 7/10, because it's still decent.

The other 60% is a mix of landscapes, portraits, nature photography, but not one for BIF but want to get into more portrait photography.

The A7iv is better here but again, if I had to give a score: A7iv 9/10, A9ii 8/10, it's still pretty good. The A7iv is better because the DR is a bit better and it has more MP.

Now if you had said "the original A9", then that one would receive a 7/10 because it has a slow mechanical shutter + no anti-flicker + no variable shutter speed, which is important if you want to get rid of the banding with the e-shutter.

So Looking for the best all around camera between the two. A friend of mine is selling their A9II for about $3k and then the new $2500 A7IV.

What scares me about the A9II.. the sensor is the same from the A9I. So its about 5 years old and I dont know much about the high ISO performance. But I know its a GREAT sports camera. But is it a good camera for the other 60%?

5 year old sensor that is only beaten by 3 sensors: the one in the A1, in the Z9 and in the Canon R3, so it's still the 4th best sensor, even if 5+ year old.

What scares me about the A7IV is the ability to shoot sports and action photography. I know it do a great job with the other 60%, but can it do the other 40%? I know that the A7IV is not meant to be a sports camera, but can it do the job if I have the proper settings?

Other options.. A9I and the Canon R6, but the 20MP scares me there..

The R6 has bad rolling shutter, it's even slower than the one in the A7iv, so basically you have to shoot sports with the mechanical shutter. In other words, it's going to receive 7/10 for sports and then 7/10 for the other things.

Thank you for the input..

Anyway, overall in your case, I would score the:

A9ii: 0.9 * 40% + 0.8 * 60% = 84%

A7iv: 0.7 * 40% + 0.9 * 60% = 82%

A9: 0.9 * 40% + 0.7 * 60% = 78%

R6: 0.7 * 40% + 0.7 * 60% = 70%

If you do video, then it's going to be heavily in A7iv favor, like 6/10 vs 9/10.

Now, the 40% and 60% come from what you shoot the most, it would be better to say "what I value the most" and change the percentages accordingly.

 

[liopleurodon]

This is a tough one. The a7 IV is a worthy sports camera (with the caveat that you can't shoot lossless compressed raw at 10fps, you need lossy or jpg) and 33mp > 24 for landscape use. The a9II however has a much faster burst speed due to its stacked sensor with a blackout free EVF. However, if you aren't buying GM glass to keep up with the a9II's burst speeds this advantage isn't as important.

The a7 IV has better ergonomics being on the 4th gen body. The buttons are larger with better feedback, the screen is fully touch enabled, PASM dial is separate from mode (video, stills) dial, grip feels better, etc. The new touch menus are MUCH better as well.

If you're going to shoot any significant amount of video the a7 IV is lightyears ahead of the a9II. It has better bitrates, better bit depth, MUCH better AF, etc.

 

[surfoxy]

Agree this is a tough choice! Went thought the same myself. I really prioritized action over everything else with this camera purchase, and went with the a9ii. Absolutely no regrets, but I may have felt the same with the a7iv. I use GM glass for the most part, and that's a big part of it, I'm getting the full AF and Burst experience with the a9ii.

I do shoot landscape/travel as well, and mostly it's fantastic for that, but if I want to print really large, I can always use gigapixel AI to make the files larger. Doesn't really come up, to be honest. I'm sure at some point I'll have an incredible photo I'll want to make larger, but if I were primarily a landscape shooter I'd not have purchased either of these.

For me it came down to which was more important, AF and burst speed, or resolution and a slightly better interface. Body is pretty much the same. I like the larger body of the a9ii versus the a9, and the AF is supposed to be a bit faster. I haven't had the case to use mechanical shutter yet.

Honestly, I'm not experienced enough with action photos to know if the a7iv would have worked for me, I just came from Fuji and really wanted to prioritize AF and burst, the former which frankly isn't even in the same realm as with the a9ii.

I don't think MP is as big a thing as it's made out to be. I'm not sure 24 vs 33 is THAT big a deal. But I also would say the a7iv AF is incredibly good. I rented them both and went with the a9ii. My shooting priorities are very similar to yours. I don't think there's a bad answer here TBH.

 

[javiair]

Thank you for the replies.. It’s not that easy of a choice. Both solid cameras. And I’m sure both can do the job, just one will do sports better and the other one will be better for subjects like landscapes.

And in about 2 months I’m going to Scotland where Ill be visiting Edinburgh and the Highlands.. I took my D610 to Scotland a few years ago and got good pictures and want to get Great pictures this time around.

Part of me is saying get the A7IV and work around the EVF black out and go 12bit for when I do fast action.

The other half is saying get the A9II and it will still take great pictures of everything else and dont have to work around anything when shooting fast action.

A friend of mine said, get the A9II for $3k by the time you are done paying for the 7IV the taxes will end up being $2800 anyways.

 

[jbuzzinco]

For any significant percentage of action shooting I would (and did) choose the a9M2. Everything about the a9/a9M2 is designed for speed. The blackout free viewfinder experience alone is worth the price of admission. Beyond that, all aspects of autofocus performance with appropriate lenses* will be better.

* You also need to invest in fast glass to take full advantage of the a9 performance.

 

[Adam Palmer]

I'd go with the IV but I don't think we can help. Only you know what is most important to you.

 

[javiair]

I'd go with the IV but I don't think we can help. Only you know what is most important to you.

The good people on here can help.. Sometimes its good to see things from other perspectives, maybe a quality that I missed or was incorrect on. There are other people here with far more experience than what I have and can help. Maybe someone was in the same boat and they either have regrets or no regrets.

Now it really depends on thoughtfulness or the facts of the post. If someone just said “A7IV sucks” then that’s not really helpful. But if a post has something that can help me in decision making then Ill read it and it helps me decide. And since its the internet, someone else in the future can me in the same boat and this will help them.

 

[Adam Palmer]

the a9II is really good at one thing-- speed. The a7IV is pretty good at a lot of things.

--
http://www.adamapalmer.com

 

[garykohs]

Thank you for the replies.. It’s not that easy of a choice. Both solid cameras. And I’m sure both can do the job, just one will do sports better and the other one will be better for subjects like landscapes.

And in about 2 months I’m going to Scotland where Ill be visiting Edinburgh and the Highlands.. I took my D610 to Scotland a few years ago and got good pictures and want to get Great pictures this time around.

Part of me is saying get the A7IV and work around the EVF black out and go 12bit for when I do fast action.

The other half is saying get the A9II and it will still take great pictures of everything else and dont have to work around anything when shooting fast action.

A friend of mine said, get the A9II for $3k by the time you are done paying for the 7IV the taxes will end up being $2800 anyways.

You correctly understand the tradeoff you're facing.

If landscape photography were not one of your concerns, it's a no brainer to get the A9ii. But honestly if that's a major concern then you should be thinking about a good, used A7Riv.

I'm going to recommend going with the A9ii. Get a copy of Topaz Gigapixel AI to use for your landscape shots and I'm betting that you'll be really happy with your kit. Feel free to disagree with this and get the A7iv. I don't think you'll be unhappy in either case.

 

[LenRivers]

If you are shooting sports any camera will do. Just depends how well it does it.

I went from the A7iii to the A9ii and have no complaints

if the A7iv existed as an option when I did this I’d have to go back and really research it. Past the cost difference of them new.



of course you can save longer and get the A1 ,

So to answer this my vote is IF the user a9ii looks good for a used item then that’s my choice.
BUT

I’d really have to ask you how frequently do you do what you do. Are you getting paid for photography or is this just a hobby. That makes the decision helpful for me

What is your end goal of all of this.

 

[Craig Gillette]

I would probably go with the A9ii. But I have a different set of interests, etc. I already have an A7Riv. So, primarily I'd likely put the A9ii on my 200-600 to get the superior focus system, etc. (It's questionable that I'd be good enough actually swinging the camera about to keep up with the better system?)

With sports, especially indoors or outside under the lights, I'd want to explore differences in handling flicker, banding and rolling shutter. Using or not using the mechanical shutter. A9ii blackout free shooting may work for you.

They are both "iv" series bodies (following the A7Riv) although the rear panels are different. Not sure which other controls might be.

I believe the A7iv would be the better video camera? With the A7Riv, the higher res (A7iv vs A9ii) isn't an issue.

 

[javiair]

As of now I am going to go with the A9II, I can get the A9II for the same price as the A7IV I would end up getting the A7IV out the door with Taxes, so for about $2800. Then going to get the 24-70mm F2.8 for another $1000.

So for $3800 I can get an A9II + 24-70mm F2.8 lens. I think that offer is just too good to pass up.

In the end.. I know me and my personality and I would be more frustrated missing the shot than wishing I had more Megapixels.

And my friend suggested that if I wanted more MP then the A7RIII would be a good inexpensive option.

Now..I hope I dont change my mind.. Because I think this is a good deal

 

[whumber]

The R6 has bad rolling shutter, it's even slower than the one in the A7iv, so basically you have to shoot sports with the mechanical shutter. In other words, it's going to receive 7/10 for sports and then 7/10 for the other things.

The R6 has bad rolling shutter in 4K30 but it's actually quite a bit better than the A7IV in full stills mode at 1/60s vs 1/15s for the A7IV.

 

[sportyaccordy]

All these cameras are great so there's nothing to be "scared" of

My pick would be the A7IV, it's just a better all around camera. A9II will be better at sports at the expense of literally everything else, and the A7IV is no slouch there IMO (haven't used either though)

 

[Skip py]

As of now I am going to go with the A9II, I can get the A9II for the same price as the A7IV I would end up getting the A7IV out the door with Taxes, so for about $2800. Then going to get the 24-70mm F2.8 for another $1000.

So for $3800 I can get an A9II + 24-70mm F2.8 lens. I think that offer is just too good to pass up.

In the end.. I know me and my personality and I would be more frustrated missing the shot than wishing I had more Megapixels.

And my friend suggested that if I wanted more MP then the A7RIII would be a good inexpensive option.

Now..I hope I dont change my mind.. Because I think this is a good deal

It seems to be the best option yet, especially if you intend to shoot in silent mode indoor (A9II is a game changer handling flicker, banding and rolling shutter as Craig Gillette pointed out), and an A7RIII as a backup will give you more details for landscape and portaits than the A7IV. For portraits the A9II maybe even better if you're shooting fast pace portaits of kids in their activities with it's faster AF and no blackout viewfinder.

Feel free to share here your feelings, and pictures, in a few months, when you're more familiar with your new camera: that will be interesting for most of us, and even more for those still your case.

Enjoy, Fred