Sony A7mk3

Nobody knows except those who can't talk. The A9 was announced in April. In September, there was a $500 bonus if you traded another Sony FF camera for the A9 (my A7ii was my trade-in). The A7Rii was discounted $300 in that time frame frame. I'm guessing something new late November or early December. Will it be an updated version of the A7? More likely another high-resolution camera like an A7Riii or an A9R.

There are so many great features on the A9 besides raw speed that I think the A7 days are numbered. Despite the relatively low (24 MP) resolution of the A9, my A7Rii is likely to occupy second place even after the newness wears off. The difference in resolution between 24 and 42 MP is only 1.3x. Canon can update the 5D 'til the cows come home without making much of a splash. It's a great camera, but there's not much left to improve in the operation of a DSLR.

A9 bon-bons: Nearly 5x the battery life (2.25x the capacity, 40% the power drain); Cold start in just over one second, near instant wake-up; Couples with smart phone via Bluetooth to embed GPS data in images; Focus tracking good enough to follow a bee in a flower bed; 93% AF coverage, compared to 24% for a Nikon D5.

The A9 is astounding, but the A7 has more DR. I would in fact choose the A7 over the A9 simply because the A9's features would not improve my photographs.

A new A7 is certainly coming. Sony wants to be #1 and the only way to win is shove the incumbents out of the way. So you can expect an A7 III in the near future.

Ed, there's nothing low - relatively or not - about 24Mpx! ;-)

Hopefully the a9's control layout will become the norm for Sony's future high-end bodies. I moved over from Canon to the a9, finding the a9's layout very intuitive and now much prefer it to my 5D4. When I tried earlier Sony bodies, it was tough to make quick exposure changes.

The control layout of the A9 is arguably the best feature, but one highly advertised. There are two concentric knobs on the top left, one for AF mode and the other for shutter mode. I shoot a lot of bracketed HDR landscapes, and BRK is now at my fingertips. The actual BRK configuration is done in the menu, but that's not something changed a lot. I'm trying a 5 shot bracket in 1 stop increments. At 20 fps, it takes only 1/4 second to implement. A tripod is helpful but not necessary.

The difference between dynamic range for the A9 and A7Rii is 13 stops v 13.2 stops - hardly a game changer. Somehow the A9 puts a bump in the DR curve at ISO 3200, which is a good value for photography in room or theater light. The A9 is designed for speed, to beat the big boys at their own game. An A9R would address a different market, for landscapes, portraits and product photography. The A7Rii was a generational improvement over the A7ii (which sat idle in my bag for nearly 2 years). I would expect no less from an A9R.

There is a huge difference between 24 and 42 MP. At the higher resolution, you get a sense of texture from details too small to be resolved by your eye, whether it is a dusting of snow on a black sand beach, or the cuddly fur of an Icelandic horse.

Nobody knows except those who can't talk. The A9 was announced in April. In September, there was a $500 bonus if you traded another Sony FF camera for the A9 (my A7ii was my trade-in). The A7Rii was discounted $300 in that time frame frame. I'm guessing something new late November or early December. Will it be an updated version of the A7? More likely another high-resolution camera like an A7Riii or an A9R.

 

There are so many great features on the A9 besides raw speed that I think the A7 days are numbered. Despite the relatively low (24 MP) resolution of the A9, my A7Rii is likely to occupy second place even after the newness wears off. The difference in resolution between 24 and 42 MP is only 1.3x. Canon can update the 5D 'til the cows come home without making much of a splash. It's a great camera, but there's not much left to improve in the operation of a DSLR.

 

A9 bon-bons: Nearly 5x the battery life (2.25x the capacity, 40% the power drain); Cold start in just over one second, near instant wake-up; Couples with smart phone via Bluetooth to embed GPS data in images; Focus tracking good enough to follow a bee in a flower bed; 93% AF coverage, compared to 24% for a Nikon D5.

Yeah ED, A9 does look tempting especially with improved battery life, because that's a real pain otherwise. I'd kinda like a A7mklll idea just because I have fairly simple requirements for my cameras, and would rather not spend more than I need to. I've concluded that I will not buy another dslr though, even though the Nikon D850 looks incredible it's dinosaur tech at this point.

I certainly recommend the A9 if it fits your needs and budget, but there are other more appropriate possibilities in the current and future lineup. Based on Sony's recent history, I think a new A9 model will be introduced shortly than an updated A7ii. That said, there are several key features, not found in the A7ii which might be added within that form factor.

• Electronic silent shutter
  
• Back Illuminated Sensor
  
• Higher resolution (currently 24 MP)
  
• More AF sensor coverage (currently 166?)
  
• High resolution electronic viewfinder
  
• External power via USB port
  
• Quieter mechanical shutter
  
• Higher ISO
  
• Unlimited video clip length (currently 29 minutes in A7 and A9 models)
  
• Touch screen menu
  
• Quicker cold startup (now about 5 seconds, 1 second in the A9)
  

Other features like dual card slots, larger battery and top panel controls will probably remain the domain of the A9 and its successors.

The difference between dynamic range for the A9 and A7Rii is 13 stops v 13.2 stops

[...]

There is a huge difference between 24 and 42 MP.

The A7 has almost a stop over the A9 - but then again, it depends on whose metrics you are using. DxOMark:

A7: 14.2 stops

A7rII: 13.9 stops

A9: 13.3 stops

As for resolution, 42Mpx is not even a 50% improvement over 24. It's a lot, but not a massive difference. However, if the 42Mpx sensor does not have an optical low-pass filter, then the effective difference becomes more. To double the resolution of a 24Mpx sensor, all other things being equal, you would need 96Mpx.

And of course it depends on the quality of the photosites and lenses. Based on what I have seen, the Leica Q is about equivalent to the Nikon D810 and superior to the Sony RX1rII, despite having the lowest nominal resolution of the three.

As for resolution, 42Mpx is not even a 50% improvement over 24.

In theory, it's only 1.3x the resolution. In practice, the difference is immediately obvious, even in an 8x12" print. In particular the A7Rii does not have an anti-aliasing filter, which boosts the resolution by about 50%. Image stabilization alone is not able to make best use of the A7Rii resolution. It takes a heavy tripod, IS = off, careful focusing, electronic first shutter and a cable (electric USB) release. A mid length portrait at 24 MP yields sharp lashes. At 42 MP, patterns in the iris are clearly visible.

Does the A9 have an anti-aliasing filter? According to a Sony rep I spoke with, it does not. According to various pundits on the internet, it does (or ought to). Sony is officially silent on this matter in their public releases. DPReview has a comparison site (their "studio shot") in which the A9 and A7ii appear to have the same results. However the A9 was tested with a Sony 85/1.8 and the A7ii with a Sony 55/1.8. That said, I have never experienced Moire with any of the above - A7ii, A7Rii or A9