i want to play too - my take on this list of weaknesses
- The A1 reduces EVF resolution and reduces EVF refresh with high speed photography in continuous mode.
correct, but there is no scenario where it drops below the z9 EVF speed or resolutionā¦ so not sure itās a weakness
- The EVF is not as bright as the Z9 - relevant for bright outdoor conditions
yes, I think that will have real life implications and have the z9 come closer the the canon R3 HDR view. The A1 is really good but I suspect the z9 and R3 will edge it in very bright environments or high DR scenes.
- The buffer is large, but buffer clearing is slow; this has an especially large impact in backup mode writing to two cards.
I have not experienced that even at 30fps - it will be interesting to do some real life comparison at 20fps which is the max the z9 can do in raw. I am not certain it will come out as you think.
- CFExpress Type A is a little slower and harder to find than Type B used by Canon and Nikon.
Itās partly true; there are fewer options but inventory is plentiful (because they are overpriced) and they are slower than the best cards you can put in the z9. On the other hand the A1 is backwards compatible to SD cards which means that in emergency you can find some replacement cards almost anywhere.
- Limited RAW file options create a very large amount of data with high frame rates. Nikon's High Efficiency RAW is a viable option.
Sony has lossy and non lossy raw just like Nikon. nikon may have two levels of lossy raw but nobody has really assessed the impact on image quality. If itās really a big deal, this is something Sony can choose to fix via software, but I am not sure it will be that big of a deal (time will tell).
- Requires additional grip and battery for extended shooting.
yes but at least itās optional. Nikon needs a second body when you want a light kitā¦ oh wait, it really dosent exist, so not an option.
- Potential for overheating / limited weather sealing with 8k for extended periods prevents 8k 60p (it does have 4k 60p).
True. The A1 canāt shoot 8k for as long or at the same frame rates. Trade off for being half the weight but indeed real. That said, Iāve read many threads that say if you pull the screen away from the body, overheating is not a practical issue (Time limits and fps limits set by Sony do remain though).
- Limited output options for ProRes RAW video (requires Atmos while Z9 does not require an external recorder).
yes indeed. The salient point here is that adding the ninja negates the weight advantage of the A1, the positive counterpart is again flexibility and options. The A1 overall is more modular.
- AF subject identification somewhat limited to eyes but not other subjects (aircraft and vehicles).
for now. Iāll be shocked if it doesnāt come very soon via firmware. Itās actually easier to do than the current level of accuracy with eyes.
- AF struggles with Face/Eye AF for backlit subjects (a problem area for most cameras and an area that will improve).
Indeed but I donāt think itās any different with z9 and R3. Time and direct comparisons will tell.
- Lacks AF Eye Control found in Canon R3.
yes, so do every other camera on earth except the two EOS 3 slowly decaying in my camera collection
- Lack of full size HDMI output found on Z9.
Indeed.
- Fastest shutter speed slower than 1/32,000 sec of Z9.
not true. The A1 maxes out at 1/32000 like the z9. Only the R3 is faster.
- Slowest shutter speed setting less than 900 seconds (15 minutes) for Z9.
Indeed. I sure hope Sony fixes that by firmware.
- Shorter battery life / lower voltage to power lenses and accessories at highest speed
Yes on battery life. Itās all part if that weight trade off argument. But in that size and firm factor the Sony battery is actually much better than other brands (but it canāt match the new Nikon which is much bigger).
i donāt know that I agree on lacking voltage because it is relative only to the voltage needed to get to a specific speed and the new linear motors are delivering greater speed at lower voltage. So in practice the new Sonys are focusing lightning fast and donāt need higher voltage to do so.
- Significantly higher cost (about $1700+) - especially when considering a grip and additional batteries.
Hard to argue with that one
![Smile :) :)]()
but there is a counter to that when you look at what it costs to pull a full native system together due to access to excellent 3rd party lenses. If you want the zoom holly trinity, going Sigma and Tamron will save you over $4K versus Nikon Z or Canon R and be true E mount lenses.
Actually most of the things listed but a few are trade offs not shortcomings, and I bet Sony will address a couple of the shortcomings in the next firmware, possibly even things not listed (120fps 11mp should be feasible on the A1 for example).
The list leaves out a couple of the real bummers of the A1, that back screen is actually not flagship worthyā¦ and that wonāt be fixed by firmware. It also doesnāt do focus stacking but hopefully this will come by firmware, on the other hand it does sensor pixel shift which the z9 doesnāt (for now). Iād rather have stacking myselfā¦
So I really donāt think the z9 leapfrogged the A1, it edges it in a few areas and the A1 edges it in a few others but practically they will likely be functionally identical. The R1 coming out at least 12 months after the z9 and 2 years after the A1 could be a different ball game, weāll see.