Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Mirrorless Cameras => Topic started by: shadowblade on January 26, 2021, 10:41:55 am
-
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/press-release-groundbreaking-sony-alpha-1-camera-marks-a-new-era-in-professional-imaging/ (https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/press-release-groundbreaking-sony-alpha-1-camera-marks-a-new-era-in-professional-imaging/)
The whole thing reads like a big 'up yours' to Canon's R5. Although the very name R5, and the fact that it functions largely like a mirrorless 5D, suggests that an R1 is in the works - I'd want to see Canon's response. I'd expect Canon to bring out quad-pixel AF, among other things.
If the A7r series is like the Canon 5D2 12 years ago, and the A9 is like the 1D3 action body of the same generation, the A1 seems to be like a modern-day 1Ds body, covering the action and high-resolution roles at the same time.
Of particular interest to me:
- 50MP with top-tier AF (30fps isn't much use for most of what I shoot). As a primary body and one-camera solution, it can do the job of both the A9 and the A7r series.
- Eye AF for birds. Finally. Dogs and cats were a great start, but this seems to expand it to many other animals. I hope this also means reptiles, given their similarities, (and, cladistically speaking, birds are reptiles).
- 1/400s sync speed. Not a global shutter yet, but this can only be a good thing for shooting wildlife with fill flash. Even if you're shooting at 1/1000 or 1/2000, the faster sync speed means that HSS can now give you twice as much light (or use half as much power) for a faster recycle time and frame rate.
- Flash photography with electronic shutter (presumably EFCS as well as ES). This really simplifies and reduces the number of different setups you need - no need to have one or more mechanical shutter modes on the dial just for flash. (All the same, I still hope you can assign more than three custom modes)
- 120 AF calculations per second - twice as fast as the A9. I'm not sure how this translates to real-world performance, but it can only be a good thing.
- Lossless compressed RAW
Probably won't buy it yet, though - until international borders open and I can go on big trips covering wildlife, landscapes, cities and culture, I don't exactly need a new camera that's top-tier for both landscapes and action at the same time, and the A7r3 and A9 combination will work fine. But, unless something more suitable comes up (or unless testing reveals some unexpected failures, e.g. a deficiency in low-ISO DR) this will probably replace my A7r3 and become my main landscape and action body, with an A9 as a second body with lens attached (not much time to change lenses when shooting action), except for dedicated landscape trips, where I'd probably dust off the A7r3 and bring that as a backup.
-
Amazing specs! Amazing job by Sony’s engineers.
I am glad I sold my a9II a few weeks ago before it lost more value. Although frankly speaking I was using it very little relative to my other equipment these past months.
I’ll probably get the A1 though, it’s too much of a good thing for these rare but tough action situations.
The question for me remains the lenses. I see very few native ones that I find appealing each time I review the portfolio. I thought the 35mm f1.4 would be it, but although there are many things to like about it, it's getting average reviews in Japan from Sony shooters I know and trust due to significant LoCA... :(
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I wonder how many shots you can do with one battery... will need a vertical battery grip.
I guess this is Sony's Olympic camera; more tele-lenses will follow.
Don't think Nikon not Canon can improve on this camera, Sony has got the better sensors...
BTW i would like to have spider-eye-AF...
-
BTW i would like to have spider-eye-AF...
For that, you'd probably need a whole extra row of buttons just to choose which eye...
-
Competitor to Canon and Nikon pro-cameras, which are DSLR. This will be an interesting question: will the next pro camera from Canon and Nikon be DSLR or MILC? I think for the Olympics, they will still do with current 1Ds and D5. Their MILC lens park is still scarce for sports.
-
Competitor to Canon and Nikon pro-cameras, which are DSLR. This will be an interesting question: will the next pro camera from Canon and Nikon be DSLR or MILC? I think for the Olympics, they will still do with current 1Ds and D5. Their MILC lens park is still scarce for sports.
The 120-300mm f2.8 and 200-400mm f4 with built-in TC are probably indeed more valuable than 30 images per second or eye AF.
The a9II wasn’t at D6 level tracking wise, it remains to be seen how good the a1 will be.
Besides, at its price tye a1 isn’t an easy buy if you also factor in super teles.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I'm glad to see losslessly compressed raw, finally. But since I seem to upgrade every other body, it won't be until a7r6 is released that I get to take advantage of it!
-
and we can start a post on the new fuji GFX 100s! 100mp has got 4000€ cheaper... 500 less than the sony A1
-
and we can start a post on the new fuji GFX 100s! 100mp has got 4000€ cheaper... 500 less than the sony A1
Wow!
-
and we can start a post on the new fuji GFX 100s! 100mp has got 4000€ cheaper... 500 less than the sony A1
The A1 and GFX100s are two night and day cameras...so comparing them in any way is pointless.
-
The A1 and GFX100s are two night and day cameras...so comparing them in any way is pointless.
They are chalk and cheese.
Given historical medium format digital pricing the GFX100S is unbelievable bang for buck.
-
The A1 and GFX100s are two night and day cameras...so comparing them in any way is pointless.
Right, i only compared the price ...
Now there is an interesting read on Sansmirror by Thom Hogan.
Sony is the only camera and mobile phone maker of the common camera brands and now they combine it the two into a digital hub to distribute the photos/videos with 5G.
Now that is something the other companies cannot develop without external help and very important for sport photographers...etc.
and it can serve as a video monitor (/ recorder?).
https://www.sony.com/electronics/professional-smartphones/xperia-pro
-
Funny how the thread starts with gushing about the new camera and completely disregarding the price, which is encroaching on the medium format territory. $6,500 for a 35mm camera!? $4,000 for a Canon R5!? Seems to me that the major manufacturers have realized the camera industry is dying as a mass-market endeavour, and that their only salvation is in the niche customers: pros and dentists.
-
..Seems to me that the major manufacturers have realized the camera industry is dying as a mass-market endeavour, and that their only salvation is in the niche customers: pros and dentists.
In my work as a architectural photographer i have met several dentists - expensive villa owners that earn lots of money by staring daily in many mouths..
They seem to compensate with buying the best of the best, including the houses with indoor swimming pools...
-
This camera does the job of both an A7r-series and A9-series at the same time. A7r resolution with A9 AF and speed. It can replace both cameras (obviously, you'd still keep a backup, but that would apply regardless of what your main camera was). It's also cheaper than buying the A9 and A7r4 separately. Expensive? Sure. But probably not unreasonably so, considering what it replaces. And the price will likely come down once Canon launches a competitor.
At this point, my stable includes an A7r3, an A7r and two A9s. On most trips, I will have two three camera bodies - two A9s and an A7r3 for wildlife/action-heavy trips (since there's always scenery to shoot at high resolution), an A7r3 and an A7r for dedicated landscape trips, an A7r3 and an A9 for most general trips.
The A1 will likely replace the A7r and one of the A9s. I'd then bring the A1 and the A7r3 on landscape-heavy trips, and the A1 and A9 for action-heavy trips. Wouldn't ever need to bring three bodies, and I'd always have both high-resolution and high-speed/fast AF options available, which isn't currently the case. Eventually, in another one or two generations, the A7r3 and remaining A9 could be replaced by an A1ii or A1iii, with the A1 then becoming the backup camera, the stable being reduced to two cameras, and both cameras being able to cover for each other in every respect.
-
Funny how the thread starts with gushing about the new camera and completely disregarding the price, which is encroaching on the medium format territory. $6,500 for a 35mm camera!? $4,000 for a Canon R5!? Seems to me that the major manufacturers have realized the camera industry is dying as a mass-market endeavour, and that their only salvation is in the niche customers: pros and dentists.
Historically the 1dx and d5 camera ones sold for these prices without any eye blinks.
-
Historically the 1dx and d5 camera ones sold for these prices without any eye blinks.
Higher in fact. All 3 versions of the Canon 1DS before the 1Dx were $8k MSRP and sold for that (ie they were not immediately discounted).
-
Higher in fact. All 3 versions of the Canon 1DS before the 1Dx were $8k MSRP and sold for that (ie they were not immediately discounted).
Indeed, and so did the D4, D5, D6 and D3x.
Sony's pricing is reasonable considering the level of performance their claim.
And frankly, if they have improved the color filtering as I assume they did, odds are that this is literally the last camera anyone would ever need. That has to be factored in when looking at the price. This isn't a camera that will need to be upgraded in 1, 2 or 5 years.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Indeed, and so did the D4, D5, D6 and D3x.
Sony's pricing is reasonable considering the level of performance their claim.
...... This isn't a camera that will need to be upgraded in 1, 2 or 5 years.
Cheers,
Bernard
That is my plan :) no upgrades, I'm on a strict no-gas diet
Lastly on price we should remember that spending $8k 10-15 years ago (1ds-2002, 1ds2-2004, 1ds3-2007) is like spending $10-11k today according to an on-line inflation calculator, and for a much more featured and capable camera. A real bargain ... 8)
-
... Lastly on price we should remember that spending $8k 10-15 years ago (1ds-2002, 1ds2-2004, 1ds3-2007) is like spending $10-11k today...
I don't think comparing early digital cameras' prices with today's models is meaningful. Some of first Kodak digital cameras in the '90s (on Canon or Nikon bodies) were going initially for $20K+.
-
I don't expect the price to stay at the current level, either.
Right now, it has no real competition - there is no camera out there, SLR or mirrorless, that can match it for both resolution and speed/AF simultaneously. Many can do one or the other, but not both.
But Canon isn't going to take this lying down. They will release a competitor, probably within the next year. Quad-pixel AF is in the wings. The Olympics this year may or may not go ahead, but there will be a soccer World Cup next year, providing incentive to release a similar camera, as well as a few mirrorless superteles. We don't know what the A1's weather sealing and construction will be like, but it's a safe bet that the sealing on Canon's top-of-the-line model will be solid and the mechanical parts reliable
With the release of these cameras, slowing development in SLRs and existing action SLRs starting to get older and wear out, there will be many end-users considering their future direction on the hardware front and a move into mirrorless, and the decision on which lens/accessory ecosystem to buy into is one of the biggest decisions, with the potential to influence sales and brand loyalty for the next 20 years Canon knows this from their own experience with digital SLRs, where they got an early market share advantage, then kept it, even when their cameras no longer technically kept up. Sony surely knows this, too, from watching Canon's experience with DSLRs, and from their own experience getting early points in the mirrorless game. If Canon can release an equivalent body for 5000-5500 USD, it could create a real price incentive for customers to move in Canon's direction, and put huge pressure on Sony to reduce the price of the A1, not for profits now, but for market share down the track. And, of course, it means that Sony needs to get the weather sealing, mechanical reliability and firmware/UI right. You can afford to have an A7-series body that isn't as sealed as a 5D or D850, if it has other advantages. But you can't afford this with the A1, when you have a competitor you know is going to get it right and are targeting customers who will care about these things.
-
I don't think comparing early digital cameras' prices with today's models is meaningful. Some of first Kodak digital cameras in the '90s (on Canon or Nikon bodies) were going initially for $20K+.
I would agree - as soon as a competitor to the A1 exists.
The D850 and A7r4 brought the price of high-resolution cameras with solid AF systems down to 'normal' levels. Previously, the price of such cameras was stratospheric - you could have resolution or AF at a reasonable price, but, if you wanted both, you were looking at extreme prices for the 1Ds3 or D3x.
The A1 is a step above these cameras AF-wise, and also has 8k video. As long as it has no competitor, its price will remain high. Once Canon brings out an R1, though, competition will bring prices down, and there may be added pressure from a future A7r5, with high resolution and an AF system even better than the A7r4 (not A1 level, but probably approaching original A9 level)
-
I don't think comparing early digital cameras' prices with today's models is meaningful. Some of first Kodak digital cameras in the '90s (on Canon or Nikon bodies) were going initially for $20K+.
I deliberately left the early (exorbitant) CCD cameras out and just listed full frame CMOS bodies which I think is reasonable. YMMV of course ...
-
I don't expect the price to stay at the current level, either.
Right now, it has no real competition - there is no camera out there, SLR or mirrorless, that can match it for both resolution and speed/AF simultaneously. Many can do one or the other, but not both.
But Canon isn't going to take this lying down. They will release a competitor, probably within the next year. Quad-pixel AF is in the wings. The Olympics this year may or may not go ahead, but there will be a soccer World Cup next year, providing incentive to release a similar camera, as well as a few mirrorless superteles. We don't know what the A1's weather sealing and construction will be like, but it's a safe bet that the sealing on Canon's top-of-the-line model will be solid and the mechanical parts reliable
With the release of these cameras, slowing development in SLRs and existing action SLRs starting to get older and wear out, there will be many end-users considering their future direction on the hardware front and a move into mirrorless, and the decision on which lens/accessory ecosystem to buy into is one of the biggest decisions, with the potential to influence sales and brand loyalty for the next 20 years Canon knows this from their own experience with digital SLRs, where they got an early market share advantage, then kept it, even when their cameras no longer technically kept up. Sony surely knows this, too, from watching Canon's experience with DSLRs, and from their own experience getting early points in the mirrorless game. If Canon can release an equivalent body for 5000-5500 USD, it could create a real price incentive for customers to move in Canon's direction, and put huge pressure on Sony to reduce the price of the A1, not for profits now, but for market share down the track. And, of course, it means that Sony needs to get the weather sealing, mechanical reliability and firmware/UI right. You can afford to have an A7-series body that isn't as sealed as a 5D or D850, if it has other advantages. But you can't afford this with the A1, when you have a competitor you know is going to get it right and are targeting customers who will care about these things.
With a decreasing market the camera business is in, prices will go up, not down. That's just how markets work. I highly doubt Canon's flagship will be in the $5,000 range...more like $7,000.
As far as the A1 being tough enough...AP has selected Sony as their provider and I'm sure AP had a huge influence on the A1 camera.
-
With a decreasing market the camera business is in, prices will go up, not down. That's just how markets work. I highly doubt Canon's flagship will be in the $5,000 range...more like $7,000.
As far as the A1 being tough enough...AP has selected Sony as their provider and I'm sure AP had a huge influence on the A1 camera.
It's not the high-end market that's decreasing. It's the low-end market that's collapsing. Essentially, consumers are segregating into two camps - 'I need proper gear' vs 'Phone cameras are good enough' - with little in between.
The high end has always been low-volume, high price. If anything, volume at the high end (A7r/A9/D850/5D/R5) has increased, as some of those who were previously in the middle joined the 'I need proper gear' camp, even as the majority joined the iPhone camp.
Also, this isn't a 'business as usual' time for the camera market. Canon and Nikon are just getting into the high-end mirrorless game, with neither having a mirrorless answer to the A1 (among SLRs, the D850 probably comes closest). There is market share up for grabs, and, even at the high end, buyers who are not yet locked into a particular lens/accessory ecosystem are still price-sensitive. Existing SLR market share counts for nothing, since buyers will need new lenses to make the most of the new cameras anyway. Canon will want to gain as much market share as possible - they were top dog during the DSLR era, and won't like going back to second fiddle. Sony will want to maintain their market position. 'Business as usual' is for when market shares are more or less stable, when Canon users are locked into their systems and Sony users into theirs, when a new Sony A1iii body isn't really competing for the same buyers as a new Canon R1iii or Nikon Z9ii. Right now, it's a race for market share, not profit on camera bodies. And camera bodies aren't a hugely profitable business anyway - it's the lenses that make money.
-
It's not the high-end market that's decreasing. It's the low-end market that's collapsing. Essentially, consumers are segregating into two camps - 'I need proper gear' vs 'Phone cameras are good enough' - with little in between.
The high end has always been low-volume, high price. If anything, volume at the high end (A7r/A9/D850/5D/R5) has increased, as some of those who were previously in the middle joined the 'I need proper gear' camp, even as the majority joined the iPhone camp.
Also, this isn't a 'business as usual' time for the camera market. Canon and Nikon are just getting into the high-end mirrorless game, with neither having a mirrorless answer to the A1 (among SLRs, the D850 probably comes closest). There is market share up for grabs, and, even at the high end, buyers who are not yet locked into a particular lens/accessory ecosystem are still price-sensitive. Existing SLR market share counts for nothing, since buyers will need new lenses to make the most of the new cameras anyway. Canon will want to gain as much market share as possible - they were top dog during the DSLR era, and won't like going back to second fiddle. Sony will want to maintain their market position. 'Business as usual' is for when market shares are more or less stable, when Canon users are locked into their systems and Sony users into theirs, when a new Sony A1iii body isn't really competing for the same buyers as a new Canon R1iii or Nikon Z9ii. Right now, it's a race for market share, not profit on camera bodies. And camera bodies aren't a hugely profitable business anyway - it's the lenses that make money.
But for manufactures like Canon, they've taken a big hit on revenues which much of was brought in by the low end cameras. With decreasing unit sales, the only way to keep the revenue high is to increase prices. You'll be seeing camera and lens prices going up...they have no choice. Simple economics at play.
I don't believe it's a race for market share...just look at the über expensive glass Canon has been releasing. Do you really think $3,000 28-70 lens is designed to attract market share? How about a $2,300 50 1.2 lens? A $2,600 85 1.2. Notice the price of all these lenses...
-
I don't think comparing early digital cameras' prices with today's models is meaningful. Some of first Kodak digital cameras in the '90s (on Canon or Nikon bodies) were going initially for $20K+.
You're paying for the class of device though, it's no accident that the A1 is priced in exactly the same region as a D6 or 1D.
I don't see anything especially noteworthy about the price of the A1.
-
You're paying for the class of device though, it's no accident that the A1 is priced in exactly the same region as a D6 or 1D.
I don't see anything especially noteworthy about the price of the A1.
You are right.
I never really paid attention to those cameras, as I always saw them as niche, specialty tools for professional sport photographers.
-
I really don't see a problem with the A1 pricing.
It'll be bought by those who need it, for example sports photographers and those who need to capture their kids irises at a zillion frames a second, etc, etc.
-
I really don't see a problem with the A1 pricing.
It'll be bought by those who need it, for example sports photographers...
For instance:
-
I really don't see a problem with the A1 pricing.
It'll be bought by those who need it, for example sports photographers and those who need to capture their kids irises at a zillion frames a second, etc, etc.
Exactly.
Besides the value delivered per $ is impressive.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I really don't see a problem with the A1 pricing.
It'll be bought by those who need it, for example sports photographers and those who need to capture their kids irises at a zillion frames a second, etc, etc.
And it will be bought by those who don't need it, but want it, for whatever reason, rational or irrational.
-
Besides the value delivered per $ is impressive.
Kind of depends on how you measure value for what is offered.
-
Kind of depends on how you measure value for what is offered.
Indeed.
I guess I was referring to the range of situations in which the camera will be proficient at capturing images matching the intent of the photographer.
But I agree with you. The value will be poor if the range of situations your intent generates is well within the scope much cheaper cameras can handle well. And many photographers producing creative photography will be not see enough value.
Then there is more symbolic value resulting from the satisfaction of owning one of the best cameras on the market.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
And it will be bought by those who don't need it, but want it, for whatever reason, rational or irrational.
Like all sports cars and many high end trucks driving around the city. So what!
-
Like all sports cars and many high end trucks driving around the city. So what!
I want!
-
Like all sports cars and many high end trucks driving around the city. So what!
When Klaben said "It'll be bought by those who need it...", I drew the inference that he thought it would not be bought by those who did not need it. Which is why I said a lot of people who don't need it, but want it, will buy it. I apologize if I drew the wrong inference.
-
I remember i was angry at some person with money that bought a camera as a luxury item, while I, the photographer, could not afford it.
( in that case please buy a Gold Edition Leica- i will not care)
-
When Klaben said "It'll be bought by those who need it...", I drew the inference that he thought it would not be bought by those who did not need it. Which is why I said a lot of people who don't need it, but want it, will buy it. I apologize if I drew the wrong inference.
Far from it, I was, I thought, subtly hinting otherwise.
;)
-
Jeremy, please forgive the lack of description of the link below, but to do so would kind of ruin the point. GFX 100S related.
https://youtu.be/z35eiJ8eFmE
;)
-
When Klaben said "It'll be bought by those who need it...", I drew the inference that he thought it would not be bought by those who did not need it. Which is why I said a lot of people who don't need it, but want it, will buy it. I apologize if I drew the wrong inference.
Define "need".
I don't need an A1, as my camera is not the main factor which limits my photography (and I'm planning to move from Canon to Sony this year anyway). However, if I could persuade myself that I'd benefit from it sufficiently to fork out the money, I'd buy one. I like toys.
Jeremy
-
I'll eventually get it. I already have both the A7R4 and A9 + the 600GM so the A1 seems like a good way combine everything.