dcstep
Senior Member
I’ve now taken over 20,000 shots with my Sony a1 II, with subjects ranging from deer, coyote, Northern harriers, sanderlings, long-billed curlew, Lone Cypress, Seaside Beach and skimboarding. This is after a year of shooting the a9 III, with similar subjects, plus hummingbirds, kingfishers, kestrel and some other fast moving birds.
I’ve been shooting the a1 II at 30-fps, which uses a “Lossy” RAW file format. DxO doesn’t process those RAW files yet, so my results so far have relied on the excellent highest quality JPEG files. I’m pretty happy with the JPEG files, but miss the color and dynamic range options that RAW will provide. For most animal subjects it’s not a big deal, but I really miss the RAW files’ flexibility for landscape. DxO is showing that support for the RAW files will begin this February. (I’ve tried using other programs in the interim, with past new bodies, and wasn’t happy with the files. I’ll just reprocess anything that I decide to print).
I’m very happy to report that I’m seeing absolutely no difference in the autofocus’ initial acquisition and tracking of all subjects. I feel no need to use the “Automatic” subject selection of the a1 II and usually have it set to either Animal, Bird or Animal/Bird with Eye Detect on, of course. I tend to use three focus areas; Wide Tracking, Center Locked Tracking and Extra Small Spot Tracking, depending on the subject. The Extra Small is usually a bird in a bush. The Center is usually a mammal, like a coyote or white-tail buck and the Wide is for a bird-in-flight.
Here are some shots with the a1 II and a9 III:
The diving Northern harrier was shot with Bird subject mode, with Wide Tracking focus area. I’d been following the bird with Precapture engaged on the a1 II. When hunting harriers tend to fly around 20-mph and then suddenly hover or, as in this case, flip and dive directly down on their prey. ISO 320 (Should have been 500), FE 600mm f/4 GM OSS at f/4, 1/800-sec.) She’s almost down to the ground in this shot, but the camera continues tracking. This file is 9.81MB.
With the perched eagle with the a1 II, I was still using Bird Eye detection and Wide Tracking and the 600mm GM, ISO 500, f/4 and 1/2000-sec. You don’t need to zero in on the bird with a tight auto focus area, since the camera’s AF system will detect the bird eye and lock on. This demonstrates one case where the a1 II’s high resolution is superior, because the bird was not very close and I cropped substantially; howver, the file is still 7.81MB with no upscaling. The a9 III file would have been around half that. Either could be printed quite large, but it’s nice to start with a larger file.
The coyote was shot with Animal Eye detection, with Center Fixed Tracking focus area on the a1 II. The coyote was hunting on snow with relatively high prairie grass sticking through the grass. It’s nice to have the camera track the eye and not constantly grab the grass. 600mm, ISO 100, f/4 and 1/1000-sec. This file is 9.05MB.
The skimboarder was shot while I was primarily concentrating on shooting fast moving birds, so I had Bird Eye detection on with Wide Tracking focus area. The a1 II was set at f/8, 1/3200-sec. and base ISO 500, with the 600mm GM mounted. I think this shows how adaptable the AF is, even when you haven’t selected Human or Auto for Subject Detection. Back with the old a9, that splashing water might have been a problem with Wide Tracking engaged, but it was no bother on the a1 II. BTW, the file is 42.8MB, suitable for a HUGE, HUGE print. I’d probably crop in tight to emphasize the water splash. In a big print the droplets look like they’re jumping off the paper.
View attachment 5ed03feab21145dcab1865be838ddb08.jpg
The white-tail buck portrait is taken before sunrise at ISO 3200 with Animal Eye engaged and Center Fixed Tracking selected for Focus Area. on the a1 II There wasn’t a lot of crop here, resulting in a 17.9MB file, suitable for a huge print without upscaling. Using the 600mm, at f/4 and 1/800-sec. Noise reduction applied using DxO’s minimal level. When DxO supports the RAW file, I could improve on NR, but it’s not a problem anyway, IMHO.
The Columbine flower was shot with the a9 III, with flash at 1/2000-sec. and aperture at f/18, at close range and 182mm focal length. I love how this technique darkens the background, allows low ISO (125 in this case) while giving great Depth Of Field. Few cameras can do this, if any others. This file is 5.78MB, with only a small crop.
The hummingbird was shot with the a9 III at 1/4000-sec., at ISO 1600, f/4 with the 600mm GM. The finished file is 9.24MB. I was able to use Bird Eye detection with Wide Tracking focus area, precapture engaged for .3-sec. (That’s where I settle after some experimentation) and 120-fps. It’s amazing how fast these little boogers move, flitting from flower to flower. This is approaching the flower. I had dozens of shots to chose from, but I preferred the beak-to-flower distance here, along with the wing position. 30 or 60-fps just won’t do for these little guys.
Finally, we have a “traditional” landscape shot, taken with the FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS Macro II mounted on the a1 II, at ISO 100, f/8.0, 1/60-sec. at 70mm focal length. I straightened the horizon a degree or two, which resulted in a slight crop. Even with the crop, the file is 42.8MB. I was in single shot mode, hand held. The RAW file would have allowed a bit more dynamic range than this high rez JPEG, but I like the colors as is. I’ve been shooting the original a1 since its launch and now the a1 II and I believe that their sensor and internal processors produce great files with a nice balance between resolution and dynamic range and, now, with the a1II, speed. Someone that doesn’t need the speed and AF for birds and wildlife should be very happy with the original a1.
Bottom line for me, I’ll primarily use the a1 II for almost all of my wildlife, nature and bird shooting, along with any people, places or things. When shooting the a9 III, I’ve settled in on 60-fps for most birds and wildlife, as a good compromise for subject position selection and buffer capacity. 120-fps will be reserved for hummingbirds, king fishers and a few other really fast birds. With slow birds and most mammals, 30-fps is fast enough for me. I don’t think that I’ll miss selecting between the pose with the coyote’s pays 1-inch off the snow versus 6” off the snow shot (I choose resolution of almost infinite subject selection for “slow” subjects, now that both have equivalent AF. I chose AF over resolution when I had the original a1 and a9 III).
The a1 II’s dual Base ISO of 100 and 500 is close to ideal for landscape AND fast action in one body. For fast action, the a9 III’s base ISO of 250 is not a real world problem, but you sacrifice dynamic range for landscape, people, etc.
The Global Shutter of the a9 III gives it some unique advantages with flash synchronization, lack of banding when shooting indoor events and sports, lack of curtain distortion and, of course, shooting at high frame rates. If you need these things and can only afford one, then the a9 III is for you.
Bottom line, I’m keeping both; however, if I couldn’t afford to do that, I’d keep the a1 II. When shooting birds and wildlife, I carry two bodies, so the a1 II will be primary and the a9 III will be secondary, with a different lens mounted. (Usually the 600mm on the primary and the 70-200mm on the secondary).
Hope this is helpful
--
Dave
I’ve been shooting the a1 II at 30-fps, which uses a “Lossy” RAW file format. DxO doesn’t process those RAW files yet, so my results so far have relied on the excellent highest quality JPEG files. I’m pretty happy with the JPEG files, but miss the color and dynamic range options that RAW will provide. For most animal subjects it’s not a big deal, but I really miss the RAW files’ flexibility for landscape. DxO is showing that support for the RAW files will begin this February. (I’ve tried using other programs in the interim, with past new bodies, and wasn’t happy with the files. I’ll just reprocess anything that I decide to print).
I’m very happy to report that I’m seeing absolutely no difference in the autofocus’ initial acquisition and tracking of all subjects. I feel no need to use the “Automatic” subject selection of the a1 II and usually have it set to either Animal, Bird or Animal/Bird with Eye Detect on, of course. I tend to use three focus areas; Wide Tracking, Center Locked Tracking and Extra Small Spot Tracking, depending on the subject. The Extra Small is usually a bird in a bush. The Center is usually a mammal, like a coyote or white-tail buck and the Wide is for a bird-in-flight.
Here are some shots with the a1 II and a9 III:
The diving Northern harrier was shot with Bird subject mode, with Wide Tracking focus area. I’d been following the bird with Precapture engaged on the a1 II. When hunting harriers tend to fly around 20-mph and then suddenly hover or, as in this case, flip and dive directly down on their prey. ISO 320 (Should have been 500), FE 600mm f/4 GM OSS at f/4, 1/800-sec.) She’s almost down to the ground in this shot, but the camera continues tracking. This file is 9.81MB.
With the perched eagle with the a1 II, I was still using Bird Eye detection and Wide Tracking and the 600mm GM, ISO 500, f/4 and 1/2000-sec. You don’t need to zero in on the bird with a tight auto focus area, since the camera’s AF system will detect the bird eye and lock on. This demonstrates one case where the a1 II’s high resolution is superior, because the bird was not very close and I cropped substantially; howver, the file is still 7.81MB with no upscaling. The a9 III file would have been around half that. Either could be printed quite large, but it’s nice to start with a larger file.
The coyote was shot with Animal Eye detection, with Center Fixed Tracking focus area on the a1 II. The coyote was hunting on snow with relatively high prairie grass sticking through the grass. It’s nice to have the camera track the eye and not constantly grab the grass. 600mm, ISO 100, f/4 and 1/1000-sec. This file is 9.05MB.
The skimboarder was shot while I was primarily concentrating on shooting fast moving birds, so I had Bird Eye detection on with Wide Tracking focus area. The a1 II was set at f/8, 1/3200-sec. and base ISO 500, with the 600mm GM mounted. I think this shows how adaptable the AF is, even when you haven’t selected Human or Auto for Subject Detection. Back with the old a9, that splashing water might have been a problem with Wide Tracking engaged, but it was no bother on the a1 II. BTW, the file is 42.8MB, suitable for a HUGE, HUGE print. I’d probably crop in tight to emphasize the water splash. In a big print the droplets look like they’re jumping off the paper.
View attachment 5ed03feab21145dcab1865be838ddb08.jpg
The white-tail buck portrait is taken before sunrise at ISO 3200 with Animal Eye engaged and Center Fixed Tracking selected for Focus Area. on the a1 II There wasn’t a lot of crop here, resulting in a 17.9MB file, suitable for a huge print without upscaling. Using the 600mm, at f/4 and 1/800-sec. Noise reduction applied using DxO’s minimal level. When DxO supports the RAW file, I could improve on NR, but it’s not a problem anyway, IMHO.
The Columbine flower was shot with the a9 III, with flash at 1/2000-sec. and aperture at f/18, at close range and 182mm focal length. I love how this technique darkens the background, allows low ISO (125 in this case) while giving great Depth Of Field. Few cameras can do this, if any others. This file is 5.78MB, with only a small crop.
The hummingbird was shot with the a9 III at 1/4000-sec., at ISO 1600, f/4 with the 600mm GM. The finished file is 9.24MB. I was able to use Bird Eye detection with Wide Tracking focus area, precapture engaged for .3-sec. (That’s where I settle after some experimentation) and 120-fps. It’s amazing how fast these little boogers move, flitting from flower to flower. This is approaching the flower. I had dozens of shots to chose from, but I preferred the beak-to-flower distance here, along with the wing position. 30 or 60-fps just won’t do for these little guys.
Finally, we have a “traditional” landscape shot, taken with the FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS Macro II mounted on the a1 II, at ISO 100, f/8.0, 1/60-sec. at 70mm focal length. I straightened the horizon a degree or two, which resulted in a slight crop. Even with the crop, the file is 42.8MB. I was in single shot mode, hand held. The RAW file would have allowed a bit more dynamic range than this high rez JPEG, but I like the colors as is. I’ve been shooting the original a1 since its launch and now the a1 II and I believe that their sensor and internal processors produce great files with a nice balance between resolution and dynamic range and, now, with the a1II, speed. Someone that doesn’t need the speed and AF for birds and wildlife should be very happy with the original a1.
Bottom line for me, I’ll primarily use the a1 II for almost all of my wildlife, nature and bird shooting, along with any people, places or things. When shooting the a9 III, I’ve settled in on 60-fps for most birds and wildlife, as a good compromise for subject position selection and buffer capacity. 120-fps will be reserved for hummingbirds, king fishers and a few other really fast birds. With slow birds and most mammals, 30-fps is fast enough for me. I don’t think that I’ll miss selecting between the pose with the coyote’s pays 1-inch off the snow versus 6” off the snow shot (I choose resolution of almost infinite subject selection for “slow” subjects, now that both have equivalent AF. I chose AF over resolution when I had the original a1 and a9 III).
The a1 II’s dual Base ISO of 100 and 500 is close to ideal for landscape AND fast action in one body. For fast action, the a9 III’s base ISO of 250 is not a real world problem, but you sacrifice dynamic range for landscape, people, etc.
The Global Shutter of the a9 III gives it some unique advantages with flash synchronization, lack of banding when shooting indoor events and sports, lack of curtain distortion and, of course, shooting at high frame rates. If you need these things and can only afford one, then the a9 III is for you.
Bottom line, I’m keeping both; however, if I couldn’t afford to do that, I’d keep the a1 II. When shooting birds and wildlife, I carry two bodies, so the a1 II will be primary and the a9 III will be secondary, with a different lens mounted. (Usually the 600mm on the primary and the 70-200mm on the secondary).
Hope this is helpful
--
Dave
