I guess someone can't take a joke lol... I just got canon like month ago btw.
So I haven't updated anything. Didn't really need to either.

@akjos - "I just got canon like month ago btw. So I haven't updated anything."

That's right, because Canon never updates anything. The only what to get any improvements with Canon is by buying a whole new camera, which only happens every 5 years or so.

@MILC man...where are your photos? Let me get this straight....you are such an insecure human being (if you can be called one) that if someone posts something you don't agree with about an inanimate object that has nothing to do with you that you attack them personally? Wow...and you got 4 people to agree with you.

@scokill - let me get this straight... it's o.k. for you to personally insult dpr photographers, but nobody can tell you the same thing that you just told them.

grow up.

I'm commenting on the output of the camera...I don't even know who took them. I'd like to see some of your action images though.

I agree with scokill on this one. He has every right to comment on the photos without being personally attacked.

And MILC man has criticized DPR photos in galleries before, but for those showing off Canon, Nikon etc equipment, brands other than Sony.

@scokill - "I'm commenting on the output of the camera..."

no, you aren't, and you know it... no camera can make an image look "compelling".

that was an attack on the skills of the photographers.

What a stupid comment!

Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself.

"Sony A9 is way too expensive for a 24Mpixels camera."

The A9 flagship body competes with Canon's and Nikon's flagship bodies:

Canon 1DX II, FF, 20.2mp, 14fps, $5,499.00
Nikon D5, FF, FF, 20.8mp, 12fps, $6,469.95
Sony A9, FF, 24.2mp, 20fps, $4,498

As you can see, the A9 outspecs the Canon and Nikon bodies, while greatly undercutting them on price.

If you don't need the 20fps speed that the A9 offers, Sony has the 24mp A7III for $1,998 and still does 10fps. If you're just a landscape photographer who shoots at a slower pace, there's the A7II (24mp, 5fps) which was on sales last month for only $998, but is now back up to $1,398.

@pentaust: The same arguments have been made with all advancements in tech. Who needs AF? Who needs digital? Heck, who needs a camera when you can sketch or paint? And the same arguments are made in every area of tech: who needs synthesizers in music? Who needs auto transmission in cars?

The bottom line is this: the most important part of the equation is always the person. The most important imaging machine is the human brain. But it is part of the human endeavor to improve our tools and make things easier on ourselves. In doing so we stretch what we can do creatively. Because of tech advancements, we can take shots that we never got before.

But ultimately everyone can decide for themselves what they want to use and what feels right to them.

@RobDJW "Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself"

Of what?

single point af for shooting action is a total fail.

it's primitive dslr-think.

But but but...it is a (most abused word here) "GAMECHANGER".
Some U TUBE EXPERTS even claim that you never need to touch your joystick again because this camera can put the focus exactly where I want it. Using magic.
Funny thing is, it even fails this not very demanding test!

MILC man:

Sure I also use face detect sometimes to hit the nearest eye-ball at f1.2, and it is perfect, but when I’m shooting action I don’t trust that type of “magic” tracking, because it just isn’t perfect, plus I like to set AF point where I want to keep my composition and I like control over where AF hits.

And as you clearly can see in the dog pictures etc, even the A9 is very far from perfect. So it might be Stone Age to use single with or without expansion, but it still works better.

On a side note, I notice at least two other pictures of the dog looks like motion blur even when it’s shot at 1/2000s, I see the same thing when I use electronic shutter, I wonder if that’s the case here also. I assume they use electronic since
The mechanical one is only good for 5 fps...

no, single point af does NOT work better, it's a fail.

you people that know nothing about the a9, much less how to shoot sports, make me laugh.

@ProDude
it seems that Sony is promising better highlight gradation. I edited a badly backlit image from the gallery from raw, I think there would be very little to complain:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/neatpicture/31893532577/in/dateposted/
File is very malleable, I would have to edit lots more to get a feel if it is actually better than the older firmware.

@ ProDude: How do you think A9 dynamic range is insufficient for action shooting? You can look at dynamic range at photonstophotos.com and compare with other cameras.

@armandino

Thing is that for that image you PPed, even the EOS R would have been able to produce a usable image. Not going to say claim it would match the sony for IQ since a side by side would need to be done, but these days DR is as you claim generally more than enough for most people.

Strange how everyone somehow expects all cameras now to have a 14.5 EV DR. Next thing you know they will expect the same DR across the whole ISO range :-P

A9 is overpriced compared to the lower spec and much more expensive 20 Mp Nikon D5 and Canon EOS 1D X Mark II? The DSLR cameras don't even use stacked senor.

What shortfalls? Dynamic range is perfectly fine. No less than it’s peers.

@pentaust - "The market price for 24Mp FF cameras is $2000 maximum. The Sony A9 is overpriced compared to other equivalent models."

Canon 1DX II, FF, 20.2mp, 14fps, $5,499.00
Nikon D5, FF, FF, 20.8mp, 12fps, $6,469.95
Sony A9, FF, 24.2mp, 20fps, $4,498

@pentaust: A9 is no ordinary 24 MP camera and cannot be judged on megapixels alone. It is a high speed action shooter of a camera; with ultra fast and accurate AF. It can get you shots that those cheaper cameras cannot.

It would be like saying, I don't know why that Ferrari is so expensive; all it has are 4 tires like all of the other cars like Honda and Toyota.

As such it should be compared with 1DXII and D5, as they serve the same purpose. For what the a9 does it is not overpriced. Personally I just wish it had a more robust body...it doesn't have to be the size of the 1DXII or D5 but something a bit larger and rugged.

@lawny13
A9 and 5DIV/EOSR are likely very similar in DR and all very good even if not class leading. Indeed It just seemed a bit extreme the so called "shortfall" by ProDude. It seems that anything that is not class leading is not adequate. Canon used to be my main system, back at the time DR was indeed a limitation, currently the sensor is just fine, in my opinion the marketing decisions are what are holding it back, at least for what i want from my camera.

Just to beat it up a bit more, while the A9 loses in terms of built quality and somewhat in overall responsiveness when compared to the 1DXII and D5, it does offer critical and most importantly innovative features that for many (definitely for me) are more valuable, such as higher fps and superior AF, silent shooting, IBIS, EVF and portability. The D5 really loses in base iso DR, that would really frustrate me.

@ armandino: How do you know that the close to solid state A9 is less durable than the 1DxII and D5 cameras with ground glass that can be misaligned, focus module that can be misaligned, and a complex mirror box? Have you drop tested them? Field tested them? Any links that support your claim? Or is it just an idea in your head that bigger must be more robust? And the A9 beat them with a solid margin in responsiveness.

@Magnar W
I know as a personal experience that
1) the A9 is relatively delicate when it comes down to wet conditions
2) It is not as responsive as, to say, the 1DX in its operation. And it can get somewhat in the way when shooting sports, or working as an hybrid shooter.
I agree that it is more resilient than it seems due to basically lack of moving parts.

The a9 may be in fact a very durable camera. I don't like to automatically subscribe to the idea that bigger is better. But we don't know; it hasn't been out that long and other Sony cameras have a reputation for not the greatest durability.

What we do know is that Canon and Nikon's pro series bodies, like the 1DXII and D5, are absolute tanks. They have a long track record of holding up flawlessly in the harshest conditions, and being handled rather harshly as well. This is very well documented and there are many stories about users putting them through absolute abuse and they hold up perfectly.

In this case I do think we can say bigger is better. It's like saying an Abrams M1 tank is more durable than a Honda Civic. You can take that to the bank. All one has to do is just hold a 1DXII and an a9 and you will immediately understand.

@Thoughts R Us
I disagree that cameras need to be as big and clunky as the 1DX and D5. Sony can deliver something in the same size as the A9 but built to last like the other two. I do not think Size really matters here. For the most part Sony needs to address weather sealing, lose sharp edges, and make better buttons.

Even with firmware version 1.0, the A9 was shown to track a frisbee thrown toward the camera, with the labeling in clear focus. With version 5.0, I expect it to press the shutter for me at just the right time, and have my coffee ready in the morning. Seriously, if you pick the right options for the right situations, the A9 is amazing. If anything, tracking is too sticky when you want to focus on a different subject. It sticks even if the first subject leaves the edge of the screen and returns. Full-time eye focus will be a boon for everything from portraits, to group ohotos, to events.

yes, these Nikon owners don't have a clue what real af is like.

@Ruekon
well, I guess when your beloved company is left in the dust in technological advancements, all you are left with is bashing the marketing campaign.

Reality is that both the Sony a9 and Nikon high end cameras like the D5 are both amazingly excellent at AF.

Where Nikon excels is in durability and of course have a full stable of super tele lenses. With Nikon you get a proven entity that you know will hold up in all sorts extreme environmental conditions; with the Sony you don't know that. The a9 may hold up over time, but we don't know. We do know that cameras like the Nikon D5 and predecessors will, and that the a9 does not in any way feel as substantial.

the a6400 has better af than the d500... so yeah, you have that; old dslr technology that is not competitive in the age of modern sony milc.

now multiply it by 5x, and maybe you'll understand why the a9 has better af than the d5, especially after this new firmware update.

If you think the only job of a photographer is getting a photo in focus, you’ve got a long way to go, kiddo 😉

Think of it as an automatic transmission in a car. Just because the car is automatically changing gears for you doesn't mean that the driver is no longer needed. Elimination of manual gear changes allows the driver to concentrate on driving the car.

People said the exact same thing that you are saying now, but they said it when AF and AE systems were first being implemented in cameras. Obviously, the human operator is still needed, even though auto focus and auto exposure systems make things a little easier for the operator. It frees up the operator's mental energies so that the operator can concentrate on composition, framing, lighting, engaging with the subject, etc.

In the old days, some people thought that photography "skill" was all about how well and how quickly you could manually focus the camera and manually set the proper exposure. No, that's not what photography is about. But if you want the operator to go back to doing *everything*, then just set the camera to manual!

Probably not so long anymore till a camera has a guide mode which tells you with arrows how to frame your subject better or beeps when it detects an interesting subject nearby 😂

@Relaxed

Person's face facing camera, camera uses Eye AF on eye. Person turns to the side, camera uses Face Detection on face. Person turns facing away from camera, camera uses object tracking on head. Person stops moving, camera switches from AF-C to AF-S. Person turns towards camera and walks forward, camera turns Eye AF and AF-C back on. Etc.

But obviously can’t expose for it, lol. A bit easier to see if it can focus when it’s properly exposed,
Don’t you think?

Viggo - RAWs and JPEGs are available for you to download. The idea of including underexposed images is so that you can use your favourite editing software to see how well the files respond to having the deep shadows pulled.

I don't think so. It's the percentage of successfully focused and well-exposed shots that count. There is no camera that can keep up with the Sony a9.

Right, I would really like to see that! Please send in your D300 to the DPR staff..
Must be nice to make completely unprovable, unverifiable, BS statements like that!

Sony also needs to make adult sized cameras that when shooting with gloves is not a hindrance for professional photographers.

weather-sealed.

Luckily for you "photographers" with giant hands there are other brands available.

@Snapper2013
not a bad idea, just like Nikon and Canon should offer real workhorses that are not necessarily a brick.

What's even more interesting is that you don't know about how the DPR rating system works yet, you have the chick to come here and write about something you don't know about. I would suggest first educate yourself about the system before writing something which has already answered before.

The fact that the ratings system still breeds such confusion means it needs to be rethought out.

A good system should be such that any one can instantly understand and get it; that's one reason why people look at ratings; they want to digest the conclusion in a quick and easy fashion.

The Z7 is a great landscape/studio camera with great ergonomics and all but that, for 2019 standards, can't focus track for sh*t and has issues with banding.
The gold/silver is like a finisher's medal.
I wouldn't hire someone based on how many gold star they got in kindergarten.

I deem the DPR rating to be a standard that continues to move up as cameras improve.

A camera that earned a rating of 88 Gold five years ago may now earn a score of 78 and without a silver or gold seal.

The DPR ratings are heavily weighted on image quality. That the Z 7, one of the best IQ cameras out there, is nearly matched in score by the A9, one of the lower IQ FFs out there, says one of two things:

1. The Z 7's poor AF held its score back tremendously.
2. The A9's incredible AF was enough to make up for its relatively poor IQ.

It could also be somewhere in between, but regardless, the Z 7's poor AF and the A9's poor IQ were what caused them to end up at a similar score. Considering how much weight IQ has in the score, the Z 7's AF is certainly its Achilles heel, bringing the score down so far.

@BBT: I find myself having to actually defend the Sony a9 here, and disagreeing with you!

The a9 IQ is in no way "poor"...even on any relative scale to other cameras. The IQ is no compromise. I would never reject the a9 due to IQ.

I would like to add that the A9 was an incredibly innovative camera, and it is still unmatched in this regard after almost 2 years. The Z7 is a big step in the mirrorless for Nikon, but innovation wise... well... let me think again, oh wait! never mind....
As a fact DPR got a pretty huge backlash on theZ7 89 rating, many readers argued that it seemed quite generous.

My point was that from what I have learned so far, the DPR rating and gold/silver award are not directly linked to each other that is, while they are related but there is on direct relation between the two or or otherwise, there would have been no reason for DPR to evaluate two cameras in two scales. I think I have read some explanations from DPR writers before but I don't have them on to of my head. As some others have mentioned there are factors that influence a camera's award other than its rating such as its status in its own category compared to other cameras of the same category (so an entry level camera may receive a gold award while a far more advanced camera may receive a silver award. Other factors such as the level of innovation at the time of release could have an impact too.

The A9, just like the D5, has generally poor IQ compared to their brands' other FF cameras. Understandable, because high readout speed results in extra noise. Only the Canon 1DX II has near equal IQ to Canon's best, though Canon's IQ in general hasn't been anything to be proud of for at least a decade now...

Canon's IQ is good enough for most pro's and award winning photographers and amateurs to use it more than any other brand for the last decade. These photographers, which again include some of the best on the planet, are proud to use Canon.

I do agree that the IQ of the a9 is more than sufficient. I would never say that that the a9 or D5 IQ is "poor"...they both have excellent IQ. At high ISO the IQ of the D5 is amazing and class leading.

The only images that really test the AF abilities of the camera are the dog in action shots.

They were all shot at F2.8, at focal lengths between 70-200mm, so AF needs to be top notch to get shots like this.

The AF system has to decide on its own exactly which bit of the subject to focus on, and it seems to me to have done an extremely good job. Not perfect, but I doubt if any camera could have done better.

The only relevant question is whether a higher hit rate would be acheived by cameras such as XT3, D500, D5 and 1DXii. My guess is ... probably not.

@AKH
Yes he does. He has a full set of Nikon lenses and bodies. Including the new 600mm F4. His hobby is bird photography, which for years now he recommends the 600mm F4 paired with a D850 or D500 for.
They also extensively use their D850 in the studio and for landscapes.

He's recommended the D850 for years?
How long has the 850 been available?

Sorry, not bagging you, just never found Tony credible.
I'll stick with Chris and Jordan.

@DamianFI

Obviously the D850 since it has been out. And the D500 since it has been out THREE years ago. Stop being so nitpicky

Tony Northrup and his wife run a YouTube business. They are not working photographers. .. If you want to know how the A9 performs in the field, ask a working professional..

I'd take his skin and hair care observations more seriously than his take on cameras. :)

LessMirrored sorry but he officialy declared that A6400 AF changes everything so A9 owners you can thrash your A9, TN has spoken :D

@Strolic Furlan

DId you even watch the video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1TpyRRQBWU

First the quote is
"Sony's new focusing changes EVERYTHING"
So he talks about both the A9 and the A6400. And if you watch the video it will be clear that he talks about the interaction with the AF system that changes everything, not so much any specific camera model...

I have much better ways to spend my time than watching TN ;)

Like misquoting people? ;)

No irony in Sony camp I see... oh and I own two FF Sonys :)

It's funny how some retarded teen-like adults trying to de-credit a Youtuber (TN). At the least, he has honestly tried his best to present his points of view in a rational way for his audience. I much appreciate his efforts. What have you achieved in comparison other than showing your ignorance? You have just embarrassed yourselves! ;)

You talk like an ignorant with regards to color rendering of Sony cameras. Have you ever owned and used one?

Mike, it is another example of this website making statements that could easily be backed up by photographic evidence, if there was any truth to what was written. Other examples include the RX100V where the proof of focus was out of focus shots of a toddler running across the frame,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91RnWmFSi40
When I asked Rishi about it, he wrote he had set the shutter speed too slow!!! Seriously? He didn't think to redo the sequence at a faster shutter speed!!
The XT-3, where the proof of focus was a stationary model
When I questioned Jonas about it he wrote that he took photos of a toddler but didn't post them and has deleted his reply to me.
Now this drivel. That youtube video was equally unconvincing. A woman shaking her head, and some far off, badly lit shots of basketball players. Get real!

Ok. The EyeAF improvements were very clear... This will beat the SH_T out of any other EyeAF on the market today. It already did. Now it's even better. We will know soon enough. Sooner than that Nikon Z firmware update with the AF-S Single AF Eye AF...

I am not disputing that this is the industry leader in terms of tracking. I am not disputing that the new firmware has made improvements.
All I am asking for is some objective analysis of what the camera can, and cannot do. All we get is misleading drivel with no photographic evidence to back it up. Why is it too much to ask, to get truthful, objective, analysis? Too many strings are getting pulled by the industry to mislead us and it is being blatantly done!

Real world tests and maybe also measurements will soon tell if there is a difference, and if the difference matters for real world photography. I agree that the Dpreview gallery is not suited to answer this.

I would assume that the industry is careful not to make false claims, since this might hit back pretty hard.

@Roadrunner123

You are unnecessarily too critical here as DPreview has Bike Test for tracking capabilities. The capability of A9 was demonstrated in its full review here -

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a9-full-review/9

You can see how A9 did with firmware installed during review. And if it is improved now then you can estimate the performance based on that knowledge.

Besides the article is more or less about Sony event inviting reviewers to try out the new firmware and see what it feels like than about making a Bike Test, it is a first impressions review of new beta firmware :-)

@Vit
The bike test? It gets worse, not better. A badly lit photo of a person on a bike wearing glasses with his head tilted down. An absolutely perfect attempt, to obscure any possibility, of anyone, having any idea about the focus of the face of the subject that it was trying to track. To get a good idea we need to see it trying to track a rugby player, an American football player, or a toddler running about in a well let environment so we can get a good view of their face.
The article is about focus, the word focus, or AF is mentioned 4 times in 6 1/2 lines.

@MikeRan

Nice, thanks for sharing. If they get that tracking with birds then... wow.

They already have tracking with birds. The A9 is killer for BIF already. AF wide does a very good job of picking a bird out of the background. This new tracking mode is about the ability to select a specific target out of a number of targets. Many times a bird in flight is the only target. This is child’s play for the A9. I’ve met a number of A9 BIF shooters and they all say the A9 with it’s AF and no blackout is like cheating.

Not bad actually. People are using them with MC-11 and getting reasonable results. Even with the TC. Latest firmware on the adapter and the A9 is important.

Of course the A9 and Sony 400GM with the 2X will blow away anything you can do with your Canon system on any body. With almost the same reach.

Interestiing, might have too see if I can get a loaner.

I don't want to dismiss your second comment out of hand but I'm not so sure about 'blow away' when I'm getting results practically as good as the bare lens with the 1.4x on and that Canon glass on FF (1DXII/5DIV) is a very reliable performer wind, rain, snow and shine,

For BIF, at 800mm you will appreciate no blackout, 20FPS, and edge to edge AF points so the camera can keep the bird in focus even when you can’t keep it centered in the frame.

@MikeRan:
Walk is not providing release dates.
Walk is showing the final results (called pictures) that back up the claim to have the fastest AF tracking in the industry.
These pictures show just that this camera can take pictures.

Blah, Blah, Blah...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1TpyRRQBWU

@MikeRan - Yep. The video is quite informative as to how transformative this new AF improvement is. The new system basically puts an end to switching between AF-S (single shot) and AF-C (continuous), or fiddling with a joystick, or focus-lock-recompose, or even switching between Face AF and Eye AF. It really is quite significant.

Unfortunately it does nothing for those that don’t have the new Sony’s. That’s the only explanation for all the negatiivity in these comments.

Yup. You simply point the camera at the tree, start tracking. And the camera will keep the tree in focus. Even though the tree probably isn’t moving... Seriously. If you can’t figure out how to focus on a tree in a landscape, you are seriously photography challenged.

Of course if the tree is in the foreground you just keep it on wide and the camera will find the tree all by magic. Even if the tree is near the edge of the frame.

@NOWHITELENS - The system is not that hard to understand. You just point the center point at whatever you want the camera to focus on, and the camera locks on to that subject. Wherever the subject moves, or however you recompose the frame, that subject will stay in focus. No need to fiddle with any joystick. As reviewers have stated, the system's AF is very "sticky", meaning that once you tell the camera to lock onto a subject, AF sticks to that subject. As for multiple trees being in focus, that's merely a matter of DOF. So your statement is quite odd and almost childish.

@NOWHITELENS - Why don't we just call you the Anti-Sony Fanatic.

Some people just hate change. It freaks them out. It causes them to act like NOWHITELENS.

The answer is simple: the A9 was only released a year and a half ago, and the FE 400/2.8 was only released last year. The FE 500/4 and FE 600/4 are on the way, but they obviously aren't here yet.

https://www.sonyrumors.co/sony-fe-500mm-f4-fe-600mm-f4-lens-patents-spotted/

It won't be until the FE 400/2.8, FE 500/4, and FE 600/4 are all in the market that courtside pros would begin to switch.

Converting pros doesn't happen overnight. For example, when Canon EOS was first introduced, it took several years before it gained traction amongst courtside pros. The EOS 1 came out in 1989. It wasn't until the EOS 1n in 1994 (5 years later) that Canon started gaining significant ground amongst pros. By then, Canon had a good selection of telephotos to go with the EOS 1n. By the later 1990s, Canon had surpassed Nikon among courtside photogs. People forget that Canon was in Sony's position back in the early 1990s, with skeptics scoffing: "I wonder why aren't pros migrating to Canon en masse?!?"

Golf tournaments strictly forbid photo taken while the player is addressing the ball. The noise is distracting. As soon as exceptions are granted for silent, mirrorless cameras, and those fortunate photographers will get the money shots, the pressure will be on for Canikon shooters to change.

T3 also, lets not forget the news agencies as they are the ones setting the trends by buying by the ton. For example Reuters is Canon (or they all were years back when I shot for them).

More sport photography pros will adopt Sony when they can comfortably hold it without an extra grip, or Before they’re fully grown. Great tech. Bad ergonomics.

@shigzeo
Why would the so-called sport photography pro use Sony without the extra battery grip if they find the grip to be necessary? Strange logic. Also, I think one has to remember that many people shoot with a monopod when they use long lenses for an extended period of time, and frankly grip is less of an issue when a monopod is in the equation since the weight would be on it instead.
We can all appreciate more refinement from Sony, but to say that "bad ergonomics" is why "pros" don't use their cameras is silly

@Matei H - Let's not forget that the world today is a very different place now than how it used to be. Reuters and agencies are not buying cameras "by the ton", nor do they dictate to photographers what cameras to use. Instead, they are laying off staff photographers en masse, instead relying more and more on freelancers and part-time contributors (aka "stringers"):

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/04/technology/04yahoo.html

https://nppa.org/news/sports-illustrated-lays-all-staff-photographers

https://petapixel.com/2014/11/25/thomson-reuters-layoffs-continue-in-its-effort-to-focus-its-photography-department/

https://www.cultofmac.com/229512/chicago-sun-times-lays-off-entire-photo-staff-will-give-reporters-iphoneography-training/

@shigzeo - "More sport photography pros will adopt Sony when they can comfortably hold it without an extra grip"

Your statement is quite ironic considering that Canon's 1DXII and Nikon's D5 don't allow you to even shoot without the "extra grip" because that "extra grip" is permanently attached to the camera! So are you applying the same criteria to the 1DXII and D5? Because if you are, then the 1DXII and D5 are failing because you can't use those cameras "without an extra grip". The A9 allows you to shoot with or without the grip. And many photographers are perfectly comfortable shooting without the grip, which allows them to lighten their load, especially when carrying multiple cameras as working photographers often do.

Professional photographers especially sports photographers want man size cameras not dinky toys. Try using tiny Sony cameras professionally with gloves on. Nuff said!

The point is that the current bodies require grips to be comfortable, whether or not they are necessary in action for sport photography.

The A7/9 bodies are cramped beyond reason. My slim fingers get stuck between the mount and the lens. That’s bad design. Sony are the only designing like that for their high end bodies. Everyone else realises that there is a better ergonomic system and Sony users, who somehow defend this body, will sing a different tune when Sony update their action-oriented cameras to be more comfortable and reliable when shooting action.

@T3:

Nothing I said suggest that pros do not use Sony or that but guys do not use Sony. I said that their bodies are uncomfortable and ergonomically poorly designed. People use things that are well designed and things that are not. They make choices based on what is most important to them.

Sony would snag a lot more users if their bodies were comfortable to hold as is and without a ‘you’re holding it wtont’ Apologetic behind their cameras. I’d own an A7III today. No mirrorless has surprised me as pleasantly as regards responsiveness and no responsive camera has as unpleasantly surprised me in being so uncomfortable to hold.

Agreed, the fast sensor not only opens up many more situations for silent/electronic shutter usage, but is what enables the incredibly fast on-sensor AF system. Sensor readout speed might eventually become the bottleneck in slower sensors by other camera makers.

Hopefully they develop an even faster sensor readout (close to global) soon.

@ LessMirrored19: The A9 sensor is recorded and read out as groups of lines, and the full sensor is read out at about 1/300 sec. This is fast enough to avoid jelly effect. For the A7III and A7rIII, the silent shutter is read out at about 1/13 sec - jelly effect will be visible for moving subjects.

A DSLR shutter uses about 1/250 sec for the shutter slit to pass the full sensor at shutter speeds faster that flash sync speed.

For a full global shutter, all sensor data is recorded and read out at once. You could use flash at any shutter speed. No flash sync speed limit. And no jelly effect.

@ RubberDials: Some say 1/150 sec, others say closer to 1/300 sec. I don't know what is true. The number doesn't matter much, though, since this camera has proved to be just as competent as cameras with mechanical shutter at very fast shutter speed. Actually better. There is no noise, and no viewfinder blackout.

Color Science - the mythical Canon vomit comment backed up interestingly enough, without science.

No science? Did you check the links in the comment before? Or did you just want to be rude...

RAW image have no color. That is added in the de-matrixing process, and even then, completely nondestructively. Color is what you want it to be. Choosing a camera based on how it does JPEGs is short sighted, to say the least.

"Color Science" is a big eye roller just like people who think "bokeh" is a thing. Glass has more affect on image output than in-camera image processing.

https://www.pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/

Despite all the "science", "proofs" and "tests", those shots have poor colors, like all Sony galleries.