Nikon D850: Announcement of an Announcement of Development

[Jim Kasson]

To cut a long story short, the a7x line falls below the equivalent Nikon/Canon higher end bodies in some important physical features (double memory slot, more rugged design,...). The a9 line is designed to cover these.

Why would Sony not charge 5,000+ US$ if they were to release a 60+ mp body in the coming months? My view is that they will do this as a top of the line product features a non compromised feature set, and that means an a9r.

My view isn't that Sony will release their high res body both in a9 and a7 versions, you'll have to get the a9 to get the best sensor.

And, back to the original point (this thread is about the D850 and Nikon releases actually), I believe that Nikon will also release a body above the D850 that will feature a slower shooting experience with a very high res sensor also.

After working with the a9 for a couple of months, the user interface of the a7RII has become increasingly painful for me to use. I think Sony needs to fix that in the next go-round.

After working with the GFX for a bit longer than that, I am convinced that Nikon needs an answer. However, I don't think the long pole in the tent is the bodies, but the respective manufacturers' lenses. The Fuji lenses, with the exception of one, are superb, and the exception is merely very good. To get the best out of the D810 in many focal length ranges, you need to use third-party lenses. I would think Nikon would be uncomfortable with that situation. We have heard rumblings about Nikon employing some of the techniques used for their industrial lenses in the future. Presumably, that means more repeatable and precise assembly. That could be the lever that Nikon uses to up its game in F-mount lenses.

Jim

[BernardLanguillier]

After working with the GFX for a bit longer than that, I am convinced that Nikon needs an answer. However, I don't think the long pole in the tent is the bodies, but the respective manufacturers' lenses. The Fuji lenses, with the exception of one, are superb, and the exception is merely very good. To get the best out of the D810 in many focal length ranges, you need to use third-party lenses. I would think Nikon would be uncomfortable with that situation. We have heard rumblings about Nikon employing some of the techniques used for their industrial lenses in the future. Presumably, that means more repeatable and precise assembly. That could be the lever that Nikon uses to up its game in F-mount lenses.

Jim,

May I ask what Nikon lenses you are referring to here?

My view, based on ownership and extended usage, is that all their recent releases (105mm f1.4, 19mm T/S, 70-200 f2.8, 28mm f1.4) are outstanding. I have sold my Otus 28mm and 85mm because they were not significantly better than the Nikon 28mm and 105mm.

Overall I feel that their lenses, both in terms of technical excellence and look, are their best asset nwadays.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Jim Kasson]

Jim,

May I ask what Nikon lenses you are referring to here?

My view, based on ownership and extended usage, is that all their recent releases (105mm f1.4, 19mm T/S, 70-200 f2.8, 28mm f1.4) are outstanding. I have sold my Otus 28mm and 85mm because they were not significantly better than the Nikon 28mm and 105mm.

Overall I feel that their lenses, both in terms of technical excellence and look, are their best asset nwadays.

I've only used the 105 and the new 70-200, but I agree that they are great lenses by historical standards.  I have heard great things about the 19 T/S, but I can't use it on an a7RII, so I haven't bought it. I have the old, cultish, 28/1.4, and that's good enough for me. However, the Fuji 110/2, 23/4, 120/4, and 32-64/4 are in another zip code, when used on the GFX. By the way, I don't think the 105/1.4 needs to be any sharper than it is; I consider it a (wonderful) special-purpose lens. The new 70-200 is a marvel, and there is certainly no GFX equivalent (and how many would buy a 100-280/4 GFX zoom?), so maybe that's as good as such a lens can be.

But you make a good point. Maybe Nikon has already stepped up its game, and because their lens line is so extensive, it's going to take a long time to play out.

Jim

[shadowblade]

We'll see, I don't share your views. I am pretty sure that Sony will release an a9r and that it will be significantly differentiated from the a7rIII.

Cheers,
Bernard

so why Canon or Nikon are not releasing 2nd lines in 1D* or D* series (with more mp) and Sony all of a sudden shall when Sony still have smaller market than either C&N ? big boys do not see market for 2 high mp lines (something on top of D8** / 5Ds|r) and Sony out of nowhere shall see it ... slap 2 SD slots and AF joystick in addition to higher mp sensor and get A7R3 ... and for economy purposes Sony might simply reuse A9 body for A7 3, A7S3, A7R3 (may be w/o 2nd SD slot for A7 3)... that will be more logical and savvy

The reason is that the A7r2 is not the equal of the 5Ds or D810.

The D810 has better AF than the D3x (if not quite up to the contemporary D4s), while the 5Ds has an AF system that matches the 5D3. The D850 has apparently improved the AF even further (using the D5 system, although how well it performs compared to the D5 remains to be seen); Canon will almost certainly try to match this.

Meanwhile, the A7r2 isn't much more than a digital back - a fantastic sensor (and sensor stabilisation system) attached to not much of a camera. It is, in most ways, a unique system with bo equivalent in other manufacturers' lineups - no-one else matches a high-resolution, high-performance sensor with a bare-bones camera. Sensor aside, the A9 has much more in common with the D810 and 5Ds than the A7r2 does; even in terms of data bandwidth, 20fps at 24MP is a similar bandwidth to the D850's purported 10fps at 46MP. With a 70MP sensor, an A9r could get to 6-7fps, for a frame rate somewhere between the D810 and D850.

So, an A9r, with the A9's AF system, a similar data bandwidth and a high-resolution sensor would be far closer in concept and capability to the D810 and 5Ds (which, after all, are spiritual successors to the D3x and 1Ds3). If Sony only launches one high-resolution body, it will likely be more like a high-resolution, low-speed A9 than an A7r2 with a better sensor but few other features, regardless of what the final name is. If it retains an A9-level AF system while the D850 doesn't match the D5/D500, that would put it in a slightly higher tier and allow it to command a price premium; if not, it would probably have to be close to the D850 in price, which is unlikely to be too far from the launch price of the A9.

I think Sony is likely to launch two high-resolution bodies. They will want to introduce a high-performance version, which they were previously incapable of, but also keep a no-frills line for the users which made the A7 line such a success in the first place - those who don't care about anything other than the sensor. Without a budget version, they would lose too many users. I agree that there will be a significant difference between the A9r and A7r3, but doubt that the sensor will be the difference. The A9r will be a more D850/5Ds2-type camera, aimed at combining high performance with a top-tier sensor. The A7r3 will be a bare-bones model with the same sensor, continuing on from the A7r and A7r2. In effect, it would be a bit like the 1Ds3 vs 5D2 comparison from ten years ago. With two models, it may even be that they do not compete directly with the Nikon and Canon models, but bracket it at the high end (with the A9r) and low end (with the A7r3).

Just because the A9 matches D5 and 1Dx2 performance doesn't mean that the A7 line is meant to match the 5D and D810 lines. That would be a false equivalence. The A9 is equally a match for the 5D4 - after all, its price point is between that of the 5D4 and 1Dx2, and is proving to be popular with the same wedding and event photographers who used the 5D3/5D4 and D750. The A7 line, meanwhile, is a line of budget cameras more akin to the 6D and D610 lines. Sony started there (since mirrorless wasn't ready for anything else at the time) but is unlikely to remain there now that their mirrorless technology is more mature - they won't leave their flagship high-resolution sensor with substandard AF and other features not competitive with the high-resolution bodies of Canon and Nikon. The alternative would be a repositioning of the A7 line to be a higher-performance line, similar to the 5D4, but that would probably leave the A7iii uncomfortably close to the A9 performance- and price-wise. So leaving the A7 line as a budget option and using the A9 line as a performance option, with sensors being common, is probably a more likely scenario.

[BernardLanguillier]

Just because the A9 matches D5 and 1Dx2 performance...

Does it?

For a start, the D5 and 1Dx2 are not equivalent in AF performance, the D5 is significantly ahead in terms of tracking.

Cheers,
Bernard

[shadowblade]

Does it?

Cheers,
Bernard

Seems to, by most accounts. At least with the lenses currently available, in comparison with the 1Dx2 and D5 using the Canon or Nikon equivalent lenses. Obviously there are no comparisons for sports and wildlife using long telephoto primes, as there are no long telephoto primes available for E-mount, or any long telephotos at all until a few days ago. But it seems to work just as well as the D5 or 1Dx2 for fast action using the 70-200, or for low-light events, live music, weddings, etc. And it's well ahead of the 5D4, D750 and D810 in that regard.

Not that top-tier AF is the sole purview of flagship action cameras any more, either - the D500 performs similarly to the D5 and shares the same AF system. As will the D850, apparently. It probably makes sense and works out cheaper to put the same, top-tier AF system in your flagship action, high-resolution and crop bodies than to make a different one for each body.

[shadowblade]

For a start, the D5 and 1Dx2 are not equivalent in AF performance, the D5 is significantly ahead in terms of tracking.

Similar ballpark, though. Both are well ahead of anything else in their own lineup (apart from the D500, which shares the D5 AF system), and well ahead of both the 1Dx and D4s. They represent the top tier of AF systems available today, and the A9 belongs equally among them, at least for the lenses currently available for it. I can't say how it will perform tracking eagles or hyenas with a 400mm or 500mm prime yet (performance may differ at different focal lengths), but, up to 200mm at least (and reportedly with the 100-400 as well, although I haven't seen a copy of that lens yet) it's just as fast and accurate (if not more so, given the CDAF fine-tuning and eye focus for appropriate subjects) as its Canon/Nikon counterparts. Certainly, the launch of the 400mm prime later this year will be quite revealing - does the A9 hold up at longer focal lengths, with more weight of glass to move, or does it fall short there?

[davidgp]

I think Sony is likely to launch two high-resolution bodies. They will want to introduce a high-performance version, which they were previously incapable of, but also keep a no-frills line for the users which made the A7 line such a success in the first place - those who don't care about anything other than the sensor. Without a budget version, they would lose too many users. I agree that there will be a significant difference between the A9r and A7r3, but doubt that the sensor will be the difference. The A9r will be a more D850/5Ds2-type camera, aimed at combining high performance with a top-tier sensor. The A7r3 will be a bare-bones model with the same sensor, continuing on from the A7r and A7r2. In effect, it would be a bit like the 1Ds3 vs 5D2 comparison from ten years ago. With two models, it may even be that they do not compete directly with the Nikon and Canon models, but bracket it at the high end (with the A9r) and low end (with the

Umm... I don't general agree with this point of view, but the latests rumors of a new A7 III by the end of the year are going against me, so probably I'm wrong...

In the latests years Sony has a "tradition" of putting new models out in the market while keeping the old ones in a lower price. You can now go to Amazon and get an RX100 II, RX100 III, RX100 IV and RX100 V... or an A6000, A6300, and A6500.

So, right now you have in the market:

- A7 (~1000€), A7r (~1400€), A7s (~1400€)
- A7 II (~1500€), A7r II (~2900€), A7s II (~2900€)
- A9 (~5000€)

I see sense for Sony to release the A9r and A9s and push a bit down the price of the II line and maybe the A9 itself... and Sony will have three categories.

Now, the A7 III rumors do not fit in this picture of mine... but it makes sense to release it now... A7 II does not have by far a good AF like de Canon 5D III or Nikon D750... putting a new A7 there, with new body and new AF system will make sense.

[scyth]

To cut a long story short, the a7x line falls below the equivalent Nikon/Canon higher end bodies in some important physical features (double memory slot, more rugged design,...). The a9 line is designed to cover these.

and you are making an error assuming that A9 body design means A9R in Sony world... it won't - it will be A7R3...

Why would Sony not charge 5,000+ US$ if they were to release a 60+ mp body in the coming months? My view is that they will do this as a top of the line product features a non compromised feature set, and that means an a9r.

they simply release A7R3 which will cost some more $$$ vs A7R2, just like D850 is expected to cost more ...

My view isn't that Sony will release their high res body both in a9 and a7 versions, you'll have to get the a9 to get the best sensor.

my view is that economy of scale means that Sony simply reuse A9 body for all cameras... the difference will be only in sensor.

[scyth]

The reason is that the A7r2 is not the equal of the 5Ds or D810.

and vise versa ... all those camera lines are highest mp / not PJ cameras ... in that sense within each stable they occupy the same role

The D810 has better AF than the D3x (if not quite up to the contemporary D4s), while the 5Ds has an AF system that matches the 5D3. The D850 has apparently improved the AF even further (using the D5 system, although how well it performs compared to the D5 remains to be seen); Canon will almost certainly try to match this.

and what it has to do with A7R2 within Sony ecosystem ? A7R2 has better AF than A7R - thing do progress in dSLM world at its own pace

Meanwhile, the A7r2 isn't much more than a digital back - a fantastic sensor (and sensor stabilisation system) attached to not much of a camera. It is, in most ways, a unique system with bo equivalent in other manufacturers' lineups - no-one else matches a high-resolution, high-performance sensor with a bare-bones camera.

you continue to miss the point that A7R2 is way better camera than A7R (body, IS, EFCS, sensor, AF, etc = much, much more progress than D810 plug was vs D8**) and A7R3 will be better still ... it is not about Sony cameras being better cameras than C & N - it is about segmentation that each manufacturer makes... A7R3 will improve if possible on A7R2 AF

Sensor aside, the A9 has much more in common with the D810 and 5Ds than the A7r2 does; even in terms of data bandwidth, 20fps at 24MP is a similar bandwidth to the D850's purported 10fps at 46MP. With a 70MP sensor, an A9r could get to 6-7fps, for a frame rate somewhere between the D810 and D850.

you can't put sensor aside - in Sony stable sensor defines the segment and AF performance ... A9 is aimed at action/PJ segment and no matter what u say Sony was not aiming to compete with 24mp camera vs 5Ds|r or D8*** lines  ...

So, an A9r, with the A9's AF system,

there is no A9's AF system, dear... it is dSLM, not dSLR... what AF can is defined by sensor capabilities...  A7R3 will have CDAF/PDAF on sensor capabale only to the extent that high MP sensor of that generation from Sony allows - all based on how fast readout will be possible and how effectively sensel size decrease will be compensated

If Sony only launches one high-resolution body, it will likely be more like a high-resolution, low-speed A9 than an A7r2 with a better sensor but few other features,

there will be one high mp body, it will bear A7R3 logo on A9 body ... a hint - unlike 1D* or D* series - there is no vertical grip integrated in A9

regardless of what the final name is.

it will be A7R3

I think

you don't

[shadowblade]

and you are making an error assuming that A9 body design means A9R in Sony world... it won't - it will be A7R3...

they simply release A7R3 which will cost some more $$$ vs A7R2, just like D850 is expected to cost more ...


my view is that economy of scale means that Sony simply reuse A9 body for all cameras... the difference will be only in sensor.

You are arguing over names, not capabilities.

Does it really make a difference whether a camera is called the A9r vs A7r3, or D850 vs D820, or 5Ds2 vs Super Rebel? Names can change on the whim of the marketing department. The substance is in the capabilities of the bodies, not what they're called, and you seem to be arguing that, regardless of what it's called, the new high-resolution Sony body will have similar capabilities (AF, dual slots, data throughput, EVF lag, construction, batteries, etc.) as the A9, rather than the A7r2. So, regardless of what it's called, it's basically an A9r - a high-resolution, but slower-shooting version of the A9.

[shadowblade]

and vise versa ... all those camera lines are highest mp / not PJ cameras ... in that sense within each stable they occupy the same role

That doesn't mean they are equal in capability or can command the same price.

In the absence of anything better, the 7D2 fills the same role in Canon's range as the D500 does in Nikon's. That doesn't make a 7D2 the equal of a D500 in any way.

and what it has to do with A7R2 within Sony ecosystem ? A7R2 has better AF than A7R - thing do progress in dSLM world at its own pace

Yet its AF is still outdone by a lowly 6D or D610, at least as far as speed is concerned. Accurate, yes. But slow, and not up to the standard of an entry-level full-frame SLR.

you continue to miss the point that A7R2 is way better camera than A7R (body, IS, EFCS, sensor, AF, etc = much, much more progress than D810 plug was vs D8**) and A7R3 will be better still ... it is not about Sony cameras being better cameras than C & N - it is about segmentation that each manufacturer makes... A7R3 will improve if possible on A7R2 AF

That's because the A7r2 has some way to go before it even meets minimum acceptable standard for an entry-level full-frame camera, in terms of non-sensor performance.

But Sony defined its market segmentation with the announcement of the A9. They called it the 'A9', not the 'A7 3'. If the A7 line was meant to embody the pinnacle of Sony camera performance, they would have called it an A7 - after all, it took the A7 2's place as Sony's premier mid-resolution, general-purpose camera. But they didn't - they created a new A9 line and left the A7

you can't put sensor aside - in Sony stable sensor defines the segment and AF performance ... A9 is aimed at action/PJ segment and no matter what u say Sony was not aiming to compete with 24mp camera vs 5Ds|r or D8*** lines  ...

By that argument, the A7, A7r and A7s are all aimed at the same segment. This is obviously not the case.

The A9 is aimed at action and speed. In this, it competes directly with the 5D4, 1Dx2 and D5 - other cameras optimised for the same roles and which could equally be considered by someone looking for a camera to fill that role. (I never said the A9 competes with the 5Ds, etc. and other resolution-oriented bodies - I mentioned the 5D4). That doesn't preclude the A9r being aimed at resolution and image quality, while retaining the A9's AF, build, battery, dual slot and other non-sensor capability, in exactly the same way the A7r2 is essentially a high-resolution, slower-shooting version of the A7 2. It would, therefore, compete directly with the high-resolution flagships of Canon and Nikon, both of which also have solid AF, build quality, dual slots, etc., in addition to their respective manufacturers' highest-resolution sensor.

Two different tiers, with the members of each tier differing chiefly in sensor resolution and frame rate, and the two tiers differing in non-IQ factors.

there is no A9's AF system, dear... it is dSLM, not dSLR... what AF can is defined by sensor capabilities...  A7R3 will have CDAF/PDAF on sensor capabale only to the extent that high MP sensor of that generation from Sony allows - all based on how fast readout will be possible and how effectively sensel size decrease will be compensated

AF performance is just as dependent, if not more so, on processor performance than what's on the AF sensor itself (in this case, the AF sensor is on the same piece of silicon as the imaging sensor). That's why the D4s focuses so much faster than the  D810, despite sharing the same AF sensor - the D4s has a dedicated AF processor, whereas the D810 does not.

there will be one high mp body, it will bear A7R3 logo on A9 body ... a hint - unlike 1D* or D* series - there is no vertical grip integrated in A9

it will be A7R3
you don't

And what makes you certain of this? Unless you have secret insight or access to Sony that no-one else has.

The 'A7r3' you've described has less in common with the A7r2 than the A9. You said it yourself. It's basically an A9 with a different sensor, and a price point more similar to the A9 series than the A7 series. So what makes you think it will be called A7r3 rather than A9r? Even from a marketing standpoint, discounting performance capabilities, the name 'A9r' would carry more weight than 'A7r3', provided the camera could, in any way, justify that name.

[shadowblade]

It's looking more and more like the D850 is a 'super 5D4' than anything else - a general-purpose body designed to shoot everything, rather than a D810- or 5Ds-type body designed for non-action work.

With 46MP and 8-10fps, if it retains the AF capabilities of the D5 or D500, it could well be the ideal camera body for wildlife and field sports - even more so than the D5. More than fast enough to capture the moment, yet with much more resolution available for cropping. The D5 might be better in the darkest environments, but may not have any advantage in the critical ISO 400-6400 range.

As for its competitors, Canon may be able to match it with a 5Ds2 (depending on the emphasis on resolution vs speed) or a 5D5 (if it boosts resolution sufficiently - 30MP to 46MP may seem like a lot, but, in relative terms, it's less than 5D to 5D2). Sony seems less likely to, given that they have a speed-oriented A9 with 24MP (twice as fast, but half the resolution) and a likely high-resolution body with 60-80MP, but without the frame rate. 20fps may be good for bragging rights, but, in most situations, 10fps and double the resolution is probably more useful.

[BernardLanguillier]

Glad to see you agree with my analysis of the D850 positioning.

Sony will have to answer, this is the camera 90% of photographers will want.

My view is that Sony will call their answer a7rIII.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Paul2660]

One apparent disappointment from some is the fact that Nikon has continued to only use the snap bridge technology instead of traditional wifi.

Snap bridge seems to be proprietary and thus 3rd party apps for iPhone or android can't work.  There is an interesting post on Nikon rumors in regards to this from a few days ago. Written by Gunther Wegner in regards to time-lapse control.

https://nikonrumors.com/2017/08/06/an-open-letter-to-nikon-by-gunther-wegner-timelapse-photography-with-nikon-cameras-and-our-problems-with-snapbridge.aspx/

Paul Caldwell

[BJL]

On the idea that the D850 could be more of an allrounder by offering a higher frame rate: LiveView has the potential to offer high frame rates in less expensive bodies, by avoiding the mechanical challenges of flipping the mirror at high rates while steadying it in-between to allow AF. Any speculation on whether Nikon (or Canon) will try this?

[shadowblade]

Glad to see you agree with my analysis of the D850 positioning.

Sony will have to answer, this is the camera 90% of photographers will want.

My view is that Sony will call their answer a7rIII.

Cheers,
Bernard

50MP, 10fps and top-tier AF (1Dx2, D5/D500 or A9-level capability) is probably around the sweet spot for an action body. In fact, if the 46MP, 10fps and D5 AF module rumours are correct, the only reason no-one's calling it an action camera is because the D5 exists and shoots faster. But, provided AF capability is the same, 46MP and 10fps is going to be far more valuable than 20MP and 14fps for most action photography - wildlife and field sports are often focal length limited, making increased pixel density valuable for cropping, while the ability to crop for composition also comes in useful when shooting moving subjects with primes and not being able to zoom or move to change the composition (e.g. head vs upper body vs whole body shots). And the ability to shoot marginally-usable shots at ISO 102400 (or completely useless shots at ISO 3.2 million) is mostly meaningless bragging rights when the vast majority of shots take place at ISO 400-6400, or maybe ISO 12800 at a stretch.

This would make the Canon 5D5 a more likely competitor (beefed up to 45-50MP and with an AF system equal to Canon's best of the day), relegating the 5Ds2 to competing with Sony's 60-80MP body. The alternatives would either mean that the 5Ds2 becomes a 'super 5D', with the 5D4/5D5 being relegated to a lower line, or Canon ignores the D850 entirely, leaving the 1Dx as a fast-shooting but low-resolution body, the 5D line as a slightly higher-resolution body that still lacks the cropability of the D850 and the 5Ds2 becoming a high-resolution body to compete with Sony's, but without the frame rate to make it useful as an action camera, ceding the wildlife and field sports ground to Nikon without a competitive replacement.

Of course, if it can't match the D5 or D500 AF-wise, this all goes out the window.

As for the Sony competitor:

Sony has a 60-80MP sensor in the pipeline. This will almost certainly go into the flagship high-resolution model - Sony intends to own the high-resolution, non-action game. But this camera cannot also have the 8-10fps capability to be an action body, unless it's priced well above the D850/D5/A9/1Dx2/5Ds2, in which case it would lose on price. Even if it had the A9's AF system (and there's really no reason it shouldn't have the best AF Sony can produce), if it shot at 5fps it still wouldn't be a primary action body. It would work well as a second action body (while serving as a primary non-action camera in a two-body kit) and for 'sniping'-type action shots (tracking a target, then triggering the shutter at the right moment); as a primary action body, it wouldn't be embarrassingly unusable (like, say, a D3x, A7r2 or 5D2) but would fall well short of other bodies out there.

The A9's capabilities are well known - it shoots faster than anything else out there that isn't a video camera, and, unlike a video camera, retains full AF tracking while doing so. It shoots faster than necessary most of the time and lacks the cropability of the D850; on the other hand, it's going toe-to-toe with the 1Dx2 and D5 for sports (likely more so after Sony releases a few long telephotos) and has found an interested audience in event and wedding photographers.

Between these two systems, there really isn't anything that covers wildlife and field sports to the same degree as the rumoured D850 specs - the high-resolution body has the resolution but doesn't shoot fast enough, while the A9 has too low a resolution for significant cropping. So there's probably room for something there - again, in the 45-54MP, 10fps range. 45MP cropped by 1.5x would give you 20MP, while 54MP would give you 24MP - similar to the crop-sensor options out there, with more flexibility. Regarding the AF system, it would actually make more sense to put the A9 system (or whatever the top AF system of the day happens to be) into this model rather than into the top-resolution model, since this one is more likely to be used for fast action. Naturally, it would be better to have all three models share the same, top-tier AF system, but if one of them has to have a weaker system (for market segmentation or whatever other reason) it should be the ultra-high-resolution version, rather than this one.

I find it improbable that Sony will find room for four different full-frame lineups. The high-resolution (60-80MP) and resolution-action (45-54MP, 8-10fps) versions seem fairly mandatory, given the competition and Sony's known development of high-resolution sensors (and its own advertising - GM lenses 'capable of handling up to 100MP'), while the A9 has only recently been released and has the unique cachet of being faster than anything else out there.

But Sony also has the A7s line, designed for high-ISO shooting, which either means shooting in the dark or freezing the action of fast-moving subjects. The thing is, with the A7s' AF system, it can't track fast-moving subjects very well, even if it can freeze their action well, and lacks the frame rate to effectively shoot fast subjects - it may be able to freeze the action at ISO 25600, but that doesn't mean it's going to freeze the moment you actually want.

Could it be that the A7s-line sensor is dead, replaced by the A9 with its 24MP sensor, high frame rate and shoot-in-the-dark AF capability? After all, the ability to shoot noise-free shots in the dark is pretty useless without the ability to focus quickly and accurately in the same darkness, the A9's sensor is just about as good with regards to high-ISO detail, and the 12MP sensor hasn't been updated since the first A7s was released.

If so, this would leave the A9 as the high speed/low light camera, a 60-80MP, slow-shooting camera as the resolution king and something in-between, in the 45-54MP range, as the general action camera. Pick and choose your models as required for the job. For a two-body kit, I could personally use a 70-80MP body as my main landscape body (and providing useful backup for wildlife and action), together with a 45-54MP action body for cropable wildlife shots (and retaining sufficient resolution to provide useful backup for landscapes).

[Jim Kasson]

Sony has a 60-80MP sensor in the pipeline.

References? Has this sensor been in Sony presentations like the 100 MP 33x44mm one or the 150 MP 40x54mm one?

Jim

[BJL]

References? Has this sensor been in Sony presentations like the 100 MP 33x44mm one or the 150 MP 40x54mm one?

It all seems to come from two posts at http://www.sonyalpharumors.com then quoted by numerous other sites, possibly giving the illusion that "many sources are saying ..."
- First in April 2016, the 70-80MP version: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-first-a7riii-rumors-7080-megapixel-and-improved-ibis/
- Then in June 2017, a downward revision to "around 60MP": http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-first-60-reliable-info-a7riii-says-around-60-70-megapixels/

[Jim Kasson]

It all seems to come from two posts at http://www.sonyalpharumors.com then quoted by numerous other sites, possibly giving the illusion that "many sources are saying ..."
- First in April 2016, the 70-80MP version: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-first-a7riii-rumors-7080-megapixel-and-improved-ibis/
- Then in June 2017, a downward revision to "around 60MP": http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-first-60-reliable-info-a7riii-says-around-60-70-megapixels/

If that's all there is, that's pretty thin gruel. Not like the PowerPoints for the larger sensors at all. But then again, they have to be sold to camera manufacturers, at least for now.

Jim