Thank you Steve, SLNS, and everyone for your responses! I've been culling through thousands of images still trying to determine how I should proceed. I guess I was hoping to have a more clear decision/revelation about this like I did with the D500 (my first "real" camera). On the first day I took out the D500 rental, I was in love. I'm just not getting that same feeling with the A1 and I do understand I'm outnumbered here. Also, I'm having to balance the whole cost issue. I know you only live once, you can't take your money with you, but it's just not that simple for me. I have to be careful and know that if I do spend that kind of money, I'm going to need to live with that decision for years. Just stating my situation and please know I also understand for folks who feel differently, I'm happy for them and a bit envious.
Steve, as always, your images are gorgeous (even at those high ISOs
). And
thank you for sharing specifics about which AF modes you used. I wish more folks would do that. I also like your approach of using the "appropriate" AF mode and if Eye AF kicks in great, but if it doesn't hopefully you'll still get the shot.
My personal hit rate with Zone in low contrast situations was similar to Wide so in the end in non-low contrast BIF situations (e.g. Purple Martins flying around in a clear sky), I used Wide over Zone. Unfortunately, with low contrast BIF situations (e.g. raptors flying in front of busy backgrounds or skimming above water), neither Wide nor Zone worked as well as the D500's Group in both acquisition and staying locked on. For songbirds, I personally found I had to use Tracking Small/Large and in the end would likely need to use that for large birds in low contrast situations. For me having to use Tracking Small/Large is very similar to the D500's Group AF mode, so ... that's a lot of money for what seems like similar tech or "magic" as some call it (excluding all of the other benefits of the A1/R5 outside of AF). Lastly, I will again say that when the Eye AF kicks in, it is "magic" and I personally found I got more keepers (e.g. simple things like songbirds moving all around while eating at a feeder; much more difficult on my D500).
Note: perhaps I missed it, but in Mark Smith's latest video, he demoed the AF mode he used for BIF on a BAEA, but it would have been helpful if he stated which mode he used.
Reviewing pics - perhaps you're right that somewhere along the line I would get used to reviewing pics via the LCD or EVF, but as I said, I found it almost impossible so not sure I would ever get used to it. For example, even after thinking I had nailed focus in a very difficult situation with Small Spot, because I was unable to review in the field, I found when I looked at the pictures on the computer, I in fact did NOT nail focus. And because I used BBAF, the following pictures were also not tack sharp.
ISO - noisy views -
- I couldn't afford to rent for 3 weeks, but even after using the A1 rentals with the 1-4/2-6 (with/without the 1.4x) for 9 days in various lighting conditions, I guess I'm still trying to determine if some of my "pains" are due to coming from a 20 mp crop-sensor camera vs 50 mp FF vs. dslr to mirrorless? Note re how long I've used mirrorless or watched youtube or read recommended setup blogs: as I mentioned, I've rented several Sony mirrorless cameras over the past 5 years, usually each for a week and I too have watched many of the youtubers mentioned on this thread. And I've also read and re-read several recommendations about setup for bird photography.
- as far as Topaz DeNoise goes, initially I really liked the results, but I actually found that it softened the images too much for my taste (e.g. lost fine feather detail in flying birds views) even when setting the noise removal very low, so I rarely use it now. I prefer my Nikon files with a bit of noise vs. ones processed with Topaz.
- even after reviewing more of the views, the high ISO flight shots (1600) with minimal cropping, are just not usable. Right at this moment, it seems like the A1 images I took can be beautiful in good lighting, but not so much in poor or bad lighting and for $6,500 I was hoping for better ISO performance out of the camera than my D500 (again, perhaps a 20 mp thing vs 50, I don't know).
Oddly, my favorite Sony camera experience (files and usability) was with the A7riv. Talk about gorgeous files! Unfortunately, you really need good lighting, and so I didn't make the switch then.
Thank you all, and Steve, again for listening. I do hope this decision is more clear cut for all of you than it has been for me! What is now also adding to the "angst" is it sounds like the June announcement by Nikon will not be for the Z9 so we will continue in the "vapor" world. Makes you wonder if you should just jump ship, but I was really hoping for that kind of money I would be singing its praises and not longing for a Sony body with my gorgeous Nikon lenses.