Ok everyone don’t spin out of control about beloved Nikon. This isn’t about them. This is a Sony thread about a new camera. 
Sony a9III Poor Sales Performance?
- Thread starter DavidT
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
O
Well-known member
Sony took the lead in Mirror less in a big way, its in the film and video business and has strong vertical integration.
Still photography as we have known it is running up to its use by date and will in the main stream of big life be obsolete.
Video is the future, the internet platforms say it is as does advertising revenue, Smart Phones have ushered this in with Tik Tok Instagram U tube that are driving it home.
The camera industry like Nikon Canon and the rest have all moved to hybrid still video cameras, the future is Video and connectivity, stills will be a niche market and prioroity.
My friend does videos of weddings he is a camera club member and he uses a large Sony Pro video Camera and Canon DSLRS for his phography generally, he says he gets perfect stills from the Video camera, also wild life photgrahers in the out back are taking 30 mb stills from video on a pair of Z9 cameras.
Photography is transitioning to Videography and the whole industry and world is steaming that way.
Only an opinion
EricKlees
Well-known member
Taking pristine stills from video isn't new. It has been a thing ever since 8k video. There are at least a couple well known YouTube "photographers" that rarely ever shoot stills now and post still images cut from 8k video. I know this as I have spoken to them in person.
Sony is also MUCH MUCH more than a camera company. They are known to just buy companies whose industry they want to enter without starting from scratch (hence the purchase of Minolta). They are also the company some have speculated that could be the most likely to just up and leave the camera industry of the big 3 (not that it is likely anytime soon). As they have done this in the past.
As far as the transitioning to videography, yes it is growing but it will be a decade or 2 before actual photography will be dead if ever. People said that about film cameras and film photography and it's making a comeback. Everything that becomes always seems to become new again.
O
Well-known member
Ok everyone don’t spin out of control about beloved Nikon. This isn’t about them. This is a Sony thread about a new camera.
Yes I think its over priced, but its a tool with specific uses or applications, the people that really need it wont car if its $1000 or $1500 overpriced, its a tool fit for a purpose that fits into a system.Ok everyone don’t spin out of control about beloved Nikon. This isn’t about them. This is a Sony thread about a new camera.
The industry is going video and connectivity, if your not in that now or soon as an industry your basically history is the way i would perceive it to be or relegated to a Niche market.
I had the very first A9, 20fps JPEG 10 fps raw LOL and that was to much then LOL.
I like the Sony products but just not the company.
Would i buy a A9III, if i needed it as a special tool all the time yes, if not i would rent as needed like i do now with most of the things i use occasionally.
I'm enamored with their new 300/2.8 and I need a body for it. The other cameras they make are uncomfortable to me (except my FX3 but it's a cine camera).
I'll use it for sports photography, not vid. The Z9 is superb for that. Long runtime, no overheat, 8k, 4k/120, etc.
As far as global shutters, they are far more important to video than stills, but in most instances you give up IQ. The A9iii has the dynamic range of a cropped sensor and doesn't go below ISO 250. Might not matter for stills, but a good 2 stops of DR lower than the A1 and Z9 will make it hard to edit, especially the highlights.
But it's changing. Red just introduced an 8k/120 global shutter camera with 17+ stops of dynamic range. I have to assume that the next Sony Venice will have a similar option. Those are My guess is that within five years the technology will migrate to mirrorles cameras and all flagships will have a global shutter. The issues are heat dissipation and cost.
O
Well-known member
Sony has been
Video and connectivity is the path forward and i think Sony will lead the charge again ?
The Sony 300 2.8 i hear is stunning, then again most any late model 300 F2.8 is in my view.
Only an opinion.
Sony has been wanting to buy RED for a while now as i understand it ?
Video and connectivity is the path forward and i think Sony will lead the charge again ?
The Sony 300 2.8 i hear is stunning, then again most any late model 300 F2.8 is in my view.
Only an opinion.
The A1 has good rolling shutter performance, about 17ms, almost as good as the R5 and Z9. Rule-of-thumb for video is needing less than 10. Again, good for high MP hybrids, not good enough for cinema applications. My FX3 shows about 8ms. That's a 4k sensor.
O
Well-known member
Thank you..............
RikWriter
Well-known member
I am not aware of anyone other than CineD that runs lab tests on these. They report (lower is better):
A1 16.6
R5 15.5
Z9 14.5
For comparison with best-in-class (before global shutter) cine, Sony Venice is at 3ms.
EricKlees
Well-known member
The Canon R5 has horrible rolling shutter. It's sensor is nowhere near as fast it's the A1 or the Z9
I used it in the field and found it was fine, as I did with the A1 and Z9. These tests are consistent with my experience: all three are very good.
andrewluke
Member
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
I guess my thing is, where would you ever come into a situation that a tiny amount of rolling shutter on any of those cameras would even matter? I have shot butterflies, hummingbirds, and even swallows, and noticed absolutely zero rolling shutter I guess I’m sort of confused where this would ever come in to play in the real world.
And please don’t take that as me being argumentative I’m just truly curious, and I definitely respect all your knowledge about video
RikWriter
Well-known member
Not at all! I actually don't care about global shutter, all flagships have great performance associated with fast readout and I don't shoot aviation (propellers) golf (moving club) or baseball (moving bats). Just pointing out that there is a move towards cmos global shutters, Sony is first mover, and we will see those in all flagships once they resolve the tradeoff between megapixels and heat/dynamic range.
My interest in the A9iii is needing a comfortable body for the new 300/2.8. The A1 is an amazing camera, but not comfortable for me.
Sensor readout speed is just one factor contributing to rolling shutter. So the two tests are not contradictory. There are tests that directly measure rolling shutter effect, as performed by CineD.
So in your area of videography, will the global shutter yield and noticeable improvements?
Not at all.
I wish it would’ve been 40 megapixels or so. It would’ve made it a little more appealing to more folks I believe.
I don't think they figured out the heat and dynamic range issues associated with dense global shutters yet.
It’s one of those things many years ago I thought it was great having a 24 megapixel sensor but once you have a 50 megapixel or 60 megapixel sensor, it’s hard to go back lol. It makes it really nice having that extra crop ability.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
does the r5 shoot video in a cropped mode? readout speed as mentioned in the test would be for the full sensor, but times would be faster if it's reading less of the sensor