http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-bomb-rumor-first-a9-specs-dual-xqd-card-slot-unlimited-raw-burst/SonyAlphaRumors gave it their SR5 credibility score, which isn't often wrong.
I wonder what this implies in terms of the camera's final design. Unlimited RAW burst has to mean at least one, if not more, of the following things:
- Super-fast write speed (doesn't matter how big the buffer is - if the write speed is slower than the shooting speed, then the buffer will eventually fill up and the burst isn't unlimited)
- Low resolution
- Low frame rate
- Extensive image compression
No doubt XQD is fast. But how fast?
If the A9 uses the rumoured 80MP sensor, would it be restricted to 5fps or less, or would it be capable of 10fps or higher? If, on the other hand, the A9 is an action-oriented, 24MP sensor, it could shoot a lot faster. But which one makes sense for Sony to make?
Certainly, the A7r line has been the most successful for Sony. But how much of that is made up of dissatisfied Canon shooters using Metabones adapters to gain access to a better sensor? And how much of that would translate to sales of an A9r, given that those willing to use adapters, almost by definition, don't care too much about AF, at least when image quality remains an overriding concern? High-performance AF systems tend to imply suitability for action photography, which tends to favour high frame rate and, consequently, a lower resolution in order to support the frame rate.
On the flip side, Sony's recent GM lenses are designed for both fast AF and 100MP resolutions, and almost scream for a high-resolution, top-level body to take advantage of both. And a fast-focusing, high-resolution body would be immensely useful for sports and wildlife, where cropping remains an everyday necessity, while pixel binning can allow for smaller files while still taking advantage of every pixel on the sensor. Moreover, while the A9's AF is almost certain to be fast and accurate, will it be a match for the 1Dx2 and D5, or at least come close enough that it doesn't matter which one you choose? If not, then it may be hard for the new body to attract buyers away from the Canon/Nikon action bodies, and the high-resolution option (competing with the 5Ds, 5D4 and D810) makes more sense again.
Or there's the hybrid option - a very fast buffer and hardware/firmware-based mRAW and sRAW conversion, capable of saving 80MP files to XQD at 5fps or 20MP pixel-binned files at 10-15fps. Certainly, such a hybrid would be a long shot, but nothing else would quite say 'F U' to Canon and put Sony in a prime position like a camera that managed to beat both the 1Dx2 and 5Ds at the same time - and we know Sony has been seeking that prime position ever since they made their first foray into digital interchangeable-lens cameras.
Perhaps there will be multiple versions of the A9 - at least an A9r and an A9s, since those who buy higher-end equipment tend to require them for more specialised purposes, rather than a one-tool-fits-all approach (the D810 is probably the closest to that we have at the moment). That would be the sensible thing - 24-36MP and >10fps for the action shooters and 70-80MP for the high-resolution shooters, with similar performance in every other respect (ISO, AF, etc.). Complementary, top-level bodies, focusing on different areas, like the D810/D4s, 5Ds/1Dx and old 5D2/1D3 combos. Cater for all applications, with the only difference between them being the sensor and the firmware, and many people will end up buying one of each.
Any thoughts?
