Who’s buying the Sony a1MK2?

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).

Are you buying the Sony a1MK2

  • Total voters
    118
Member's gallery
I by no means saying that A1 is a pig, just to set that straight. This camera reminds me though, of the analogy of putting lipstick on a pig, lol. The reason I say that, it is essentially the same damn camera I already own in a new housing With a slightly different processor and pre-capture. I truly believe without any doubt 90% of the additions could’ve been made with a firmware update to the existing model
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Mine is still very much on order and I'm excited to get it. I understand the gripes about price as Sony has stuck to the typical Canon and Nikon flagship pricing, whereas both of them have lowered their prices (and in the case of the R5ii and Z8, quite a lot). This said, I don't get the disappointment with the a1ii from a feature upgrade standpoint. It seems to me that in the digital age (and even moreso in the film age), most of the manufacturers' releases were pretty incremental with game changing releases being few and far between. Of all the cameras I've handled or been familiar with in Sonyland, the a7s (low light video), a9 (20fps and tracking) and a1 might be considered lightning strikes.

I'm much less familiar with Nikon and Canon, but I would ask those who are, how many of their releases were lightning strikes? For Canon, I was around for the 5D2 which I think qualifies. The R5 likely also qualifies, but the R5ii seemed to get a similar lackluster reception as the a1ii. Were there other lightning strikes, or were they mostly solid iterations?

From Nikon, in the run up to the Z9, what I heard a lot of was hope for a "D3 moment". In the intervening years there were a lot of other releases. How many of those upgrades brought more to the table than a1 to a1ii or R5 to R5ii?
 
Ltgk20 said:
I'm much less familiar with Nikon and Canon, but I would ask those who are, how many of their releases were lightning strikes? For Canon, I was around for the 5D2 which I think qualifies. The R5 likely also qualifies, but the R5ii seemed to get a similar lackluster reception as the a1ii. Were there other lightning strikes, or were they mostly solid iterations?

From Nikon, in the run up to the Z9, what I heard a lot of was hope for a "D3 moment". In the intervening years there were a lot of other releases. How many of those upgrades brought more to the table than a1 to a1ii or R5 to R5ii?
Click to expand...
It's not often that a new product re-defines an industry (the 'lightning strike') and one might argue the a9 and a1 qualify; final determination is best evaluated though the perspective of history. In the film era the Pentax ES, Olympus OM-1 and Canon AE-1 certainly qualified. Their respective upgrades were almost entirely incremental.

The Z9 & R5 may be seen as lightning strikes within their ecosystems but (taking a cue from VW's ads 50+ years ago*) for the industry as a whole I'd call them a giant leap into the present.

*announcing automatic transmissions in the beetle
 
Member's gallery
Ltgk20 said:
Mine is still very much on order and I'm excited to get it. I understand the gripes about price as Sony has stuck to the typical Canon and Nikon flagship pricing, whereas both of them have lowered their prices (and in the case of the R5ii and Z8, quite a lot). This said, I don't get the disappointment with the a1ii from a feature upgrade standpoint. It seems to me that in the digital age (and even moreso in the film age), most of the manufacturers' releases were pretty incremental with game changing releases being few and far between. Of all the cameras I've handled or been familiar with in Sonyland, the a7s (low light video), a9 (20fps and tracking) and a1 might be considered lightning strikes.

I'm much less familiar with Nikon and Canon, but I would ask those who are, how many of their releases were lightning strikes? For Canon, I was around for the 5D2 which I think qualifies. The R5 likely also qualifies, but the R5ii seemed to get a similar lackluster reception as the a1ii. Were there other lightning strikes, or were they mostly solid iterations?

From Nikon, in the run up to the Z9, what I heard a lot of was hope for a "D3 moment". In the intervening years there were a lot of other releases. How many of those upgrades brought more to the table than a1 to a1ii or R5 to R5ii?
Click to expand...
I only needed one more feature added to the A1II to make it a must buy, no hesitation type of purchase and that was an increase in FPS.
The two things that can make a difference to my photography are higher FPS and pre-capture. I get one of those but not the other.
The subjects I want higher FPS for don't lend themselves to 24MPs. If they did I'd pick up a heavily discounted A9III and keep my A1.

Other than a lack of FPS increase, my biggest annoyance with the A1II release is they couldn't be bothered to bring a single new feature to their flagship release. Everything they added had already been out for years on their less expensive cameras. Why not use the A1 and its high price point to push something new? Why not a new processor that can handle more FPS? A processor that can push data out to an upgraded CFe-A 4.0 card? A processor that could run the EVF at 120Hz in High Quality (claimed by reviewers but since proven false just by reading the user manual and watching Gordon's menu dive video)? Why not the next version of Eye-AF beyond what the AI chip brought to cameras over 2 years ago now (I've used Canon's latest Eye-AF and Sony is far behind)?

Now granted, I can't get more than 30FPS and precapture in a 45MP+ body from any manufacturer. So in that way the A1II is as good as anything out there.
I will buy the A1II next month, as soon as my dealer gets me a discount which is as soon as he has one sitting in the store unsold. A little discount and paying the CAD price which based on the exchange rate they used compared to the USD price is a decent discount (if someone in the US bought from Canada it would be ~$5850USD), will make me feel better about the purchase.

But it is so hard to recommend a new buyer, not already heavily invested in Sony to buy into Sony at this point. Both Nikon and Canon make way more sense from a value perspective. But even they aren't perfect, Nikon has the lenses and an okay camera but only 20FPS, no RAW precapture, Canon has a better camera (and eye AF that is far ahead of Nikon and Sony) with 45MP, 30FPS, Raw precapture but the lenses are meh. If Canon brings out some of those patented lenses OR Nikon does a nice upgrade with Z9II/Z8II then either one could really jump above Sony.
 
Member's gallery
arbitrage said:
I only needed one more feature added to the A1II to make it a must buy, no hesitation type of purchase and that was an increase in FPS.
The two things that can make a difference to my photography are higher FPS and pre-capture. I get one of those but not the other.
The subjects I want higher FPS for don't lend themselves to 24MPs. If they did I'd pick up a heavily discounted A9III and keep my A1.

Other than a lack of FPS increase, my biggest annoyance with the A1II release is they couldn't be bothered to bring a single new feature to their flagship release. Everything they added had already been out for years on their less expensive cameras. Why not use the A1 and its high price point to push something new? Why not a new processor that can handle more FPS? A processor that can push data out to an upgraded CFe-A 4.0 card? A processor that could run the EVF at 120Hz in High Quality (claimed by reviewers but since proven false just by reading the user manual and watching Gordon's menu dive video)? Why not the next version of Eye-AF beyond what the AI chip brought to cameras over 2 years ago now (I've used Canon's latest Eye-AF and Sony is far behind)?

Now granted, I can't get more than 30FPS and precapture in a 45MP+ body from any manufacturer. So in that way the A1II is as good as anything out there.
I will buy the A1II next month, as soon as my dealer gets me a discount which is as soon as he has one sitting in the store unsold. A little discount and paying the CAD price which based on the exchange rate they used compared to the USD price is a decent discount (if someone in the US bought from Canada it would be ~$5850USD), will make me feel better about the purchase.

But it is so hard to recommend a new buyer, not already heavily invested in Sony to buy into Sony at this point. Both Nikon and Canon make way more sense from a value perspective. But even they aren't perfect, Nikon has the lenses and an okay camera but only 20FPS, no RAW precapture, Canon has a better camera (and eye AF that is far ahead of Nikon and Sony) with 45MP, 30FPS, Raw precapture but the lenses are meh. If Canon brings out some of those patented lenses OR Nikon does a nice upgrade with Z9II/Z8II then either one could really jump above Sony.
Click to expand...
Very well said and I couldn’t agree more. For me, even the A7RV was an exciting release. I could finally get a high MP Sony body that does focus stacking that also had the latest AF, newer body style and lots of new features. As someone that does a lot of macro photography, there is no better camera. No matter how many videos I watch or how much I read the specs, the excitement just isn’t there for the A1ii. Perhaps down the road, I will buy one when discounted or mine fails. My wife and I are certainly not ultra wealthy but do well for ourselves. Having said that, it does bother me to lose a few grand on something that’s basically what I already have. I might skip this generation all together and wait for the A1-3. I am extremely content with the three Sony bodies I have now and don’t feel like I’m lacking anything other than pre capture. I might do an A9 loaner from Sony to try the feature so I can get an idea if it’s something I would use.
 
Member's gallery
arbitrage said:
I only needed one more feature added to the A1II to make it a must buy, no hesitation type of purchase and that was an increase in FPS.
The two things that can make a difference to my photography are higher FPS and pre-capture. I get one of those but not the other.
The subjects I want higher FPS for don't lend themselves to 24MPs. If they did I'd pick up a heavily discounted A9III and keep my A1.

Other than a lack of FPS increase, my biggest annoyance with the A1II release is they couldn't be bothered to bring a single new feature to their flagship release. Everything they added had already been out for years on their less expensive cameras. Why not use the A1 and its high price point to push something new? Why not a new processor that can handle more FPS? A processor that can push data out to an upgraded CFe-A 4.0 card? A processor that could run the EVF at 120Hz in High Quality (claimed by reviewers but since proven false just by reading the user manual and watching Gordon's menu dive video)? Why not the next version of Eye-AF beyond what the AI chip brought to cameras over 2 years ago now (I've used Canon's latest Eye-AF and Sony is far behind)?

Now granted, I can't get more than 30FPS and precapture in a 45MP+ body from any manufacturer. So in that way the A1II is as good as anything out there.
I will buy the A1II next month, as soon as my dealer gets me a discount which is as soon as he has one sitting in the store unsold. A little discount and paying the CAD price which based on the exchange rate they used compared to the USD price is a decent discount (if someone in the US bought from Canada it would be ~$5850USD), will make me feel better about the purchase.

But it is so hard to recommend a new buyer, not already heavily invested in Sony to buy into Sony at this point. Both Nikon and Canon make way more sense from a value perspective. But even they aren't perfect, Nikon has the lenses and an okay camera but only 20FPS, no RAW precapture, Canon has a better camera (and eye AF that is far ahead of Nikon and Sony) with 45MP, 30FPS, Raw precapture but the lenses are meh. If Canon brings out some of those patented lenses OR Nikon does a nice upgrade with Z9II/Z8II then either one could really jump above Sony.
Click to expand...
BTW your praise of the Sony 300 GM as well as others has prompted me to try one. I joined the Sony pro program a few weeks back and I’m going to do an evaluation loan on the 300 GM. It should arrive today. I’m hoping it’s good enough that I can replace the 600 GM with it for the weight savings and size. That’s a high bar to cross, but I’m definitely going to keep an open mind. If I do decide to go that route, I would definitely keep my 200–600 in case I want a dedicated 600 mm lens. Definitely excited to get out and try it out!
 
Member's gallery
sh1209 said:
BTW your praise of the Sony 300 GM as well as others has prompted me to try one. I joined the Sony pro program a few weeks back and I’m going to do an evaluation loan on the 300 GM. It should arrive today. I’m hoping it’s good enough that I can replace the 600 GM with it for the weight savings and size. That’s a high bar to cross, but I’m definitely going to keep an open mind. If I do decide to go that route, I would definitely keep my 200–600 in case I want a dedicated 600 mm lens. Definitely excited to get out and try it out!
Click to expand...
I think you will love it. As I've mentioned before, it is probably my favourite lens I've ever owned. Surpassing my past favs of the 400DOII and 500PF. As that implies, I favour high quality yet more compact/lightweight lenses as my ultimate favs. Even though I've always owned and extensively used either a 600 or 500/4 alongside any of these smaller/slower lenses. It was easy to give up my 600GM during the summer but now into the darker winter, I'm using the 600GM maybe 50% of the time just for the f/4 and occasionally (although not that important to me) for the 840/5.6.
 
Member's gallery
Rene said:
Over here in Europe the situation is the same. Luke warm interest according to my dealer who is a large dealer in Sony equipment.

For me this camera offers some features that are important as i do most of my photography from hides, the most important one being pre capture.

The camera “eats batteries” by the way. Dual battery charger is great but omission of a USB cable is poor

I have no issues with the price of the body.
Rene
Click to expand...
Does it eat batteries more than an A1 on 2.x FW? 2.x FW made my battery life noticeably worse than 1.32 and prior.
Have you been using Precapture a lot when seeing the bad battery life or is this even without Precapture and using the camera like one would an A1?
 
Member's gallery
arbitrage said:
I think you will love it. As I've mentioned before, it is probably my favourite lens I've ever owned. Surpassing my past favs of the 400DOII and 500PF. As that implies, I favour high quality yet more compact/lightweight lenses as my ultimate favs. Even though I've always owned and extensively used either a 600 or 500/4 alongside any of these smaller/slower lenses. It was easy to give up my 600GM during the summer but now into the darker winter, I'm using the 600GM maybe 50% of the time just for the f/4 and occasionally (although not that important to me) for the 840/5.6.
Click to expand...

It's such a great lens. 300 is as long as I ever need, and it was eye-opening to use it (rental) with the 9iii. Renting it again in February with the A1ii for a commercial shoot and might add the combo to my bag.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
Are @DavidT and I the only ones left getting a mk2?
Click to expand...
I can’t wait for it to come out! I wouldn’t expect this camera to sell like the first one did. There was nothing in the market like the first one. I suspect when folks like Nikon come out with a Z9s or whatever they call it sales will be much slower as well. To me that’s ok, the a9III is a very niche camera and isn’t something everyone would flock to unless it was say 50MP. We are a very long way away from a 50MP camera doing 120fps.
Having the a9III and knowing what it can do, the ergonomics etc I’m super excited by the a1mk2. It’s an evolution that brings the a1 up to modern times.
 
Member's gallery
Ltgk20 said:
Mine is still very much on order and I'm excited to get it. I understand the gripes about price as Sony has stuck to the typical Canon and Nikon flagship pricing, whereas both of them have lowered their prices (and in the case of the R5ii and Z8, quite a lot). This said, I don't get the disappointment with the a1ii from a feature upgrade standpoint. It seems to me that in the digital age (and even moreso in the film age), most of the manufacturers' releases were pretty incremental with game changing releases being few and far between. Of all the cameras I've handled or been familiar with in Sonyland, the a7s (low light video), a9 (20fps and tracking) and a1 might be considered lightning strikes.

I'm much less familiar with Nikon and Canon, but I would ask those who are, how many of their releases were lightning strikes? For Canon, I was around for the 5D2 which I think qualifies. The R5 likely also qualifies, but the R5ii seemed to get a similar lackluster reception as the a1ii. Were there other lightning strikes, or were they mostly solid iterations?

From Nikon, in the run up to the Z9, what I heard a lot of was hope for a "D3 moment". In the intervening years there were a lot of other releases. How many of those upgrades brought more to the table than a1 to a1ii or R5 to R5ii?
Click to expand...
Bingo. What people have seen in each brand was a move away from dslr to mirrorless and when each brand came out with a 45-50MP camera that was capable everyone ran to buy them. The upgrades are not as exciting as the huge step the first version made. This will continue on for awhile. There are those like me who see the added features as a worthwhile upgrade but I also sold my a1’s to fund the new one so a couple grand for an upgrade isn’t a big deal.
 
Member's gallery
arbitrage said:
I only needed one more feature added to the A1II to make it a must buy, no hesitation type of purchase and that was an increase in FPS.
The two things that can make a difference to my photography are higher FPS and pre-capture. I get one of those but not the other.
The subjects I want higher FPS for don't lend themselves to 24MPs. If they did I'd pick up a heavily discounted A9III and keep my A1.

Other than a lack of FPS increase, my biggest annoyance with the A1II release is they couldn't be bothered to bring a single new feature to their flagship release. Everything they added had already been out for years on their less expensive cameras. Why not use the A1 and its high price point to push something new? Why not a new processor that can handle more FPS? A processor that can push data out to an upgraded CFe-A 4.0 card? A processor that could run the EVF at 120Hz in High Quality (claimed by reviewers but since proven false just by reading the user manual and watching Gordon's menu dive video)? Why not the next version of Eye-AF beyond what the AI chip brought to cameras over 2 years ago now (I've used Canon's latest Eye-AF and Sony is far behind)?

Now granted, I can't get more than 30FPS and precapture in a 45MP+ body from any manufacturer. So in that way the A1II is as good as anything out there.
I will buy the A1II next month, as soon as my dealer gets me a discount which is as soon as he has one sitting in the store unsold. A little discount and paying the CAD price which based on the exchange rate they used compared to the USD price is a decent discount (if someone in the US bought from Canada it would be ~$5850USD), will make me feel better about the purchase.

But it is so hard to recommend a new buyer, not already heavily invested in Sony to buy into Sony at this point. Both Nikon and Canon make way more sense from a value perspective. But even they aren't perfect, Nikon has the lenses and an okay camera but only 20FPS, no RAW precapture, Canon has a better camera (and eye AF that is far ahead of Nikon and Sony) with 45MP, 30FPS, Raw precapture but the lenses are meh. If Canon brings out some of those patented lenses OR Nikon does a nice upgrade with Z9II/Z8II then either one could really jump above Sony.
Click to expand...
Sony is still a recommendation in my view point because of a few things. First they are more customizable than anything from Canon or Nikon. Their design language in bodies and lenses is lighter and faster. They will very likely continue to be ahead by years of anyone else in sensors. They have the largest lens selection in native mount and again are smaller and lighter than their competitors. They have open after market support for lenses which opens up more opportunity for those on a budget and some unique lenses.
 
arbitrage said:
I think you will love it. As I've mentioned before, it is probably my favourite lens I've ever owned. Surpassing my past favs of the 400DOII and 500PF. As that implies, I favour high quality yet more compact/lightweight lenses as my ultimate favs. Even though I've always owned and extensively used either a 600 or 500/4 alongside any of these smaller/slower lenses. It was easy to give up my 600GM during the summer but now into the darker winter, I'm using the 600GM maybe 50% of the time just for the f/4 and occasionally (although not that important to me) for the 840/5.6.
Click to expand...
Same for myself; the 300 GM is another reason to recommend the Sony system.

The 300 with 2xTC hasn't entirely replaced the 600 but for walk-around and for the MFD it's easily my all-time favorite. I use the 600 when the weight/bulk or MFD aren't a problem, where the f/4 aperture would be handy, or the rare occasion when I want something longer than 600mm, most often with the 1.4x TC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top