Cascadilla
Well-known
Equipment choices have always been like this--if you wait a few months or more then technology will have improved (however slightly) and better results can be more easily achieved. The important questions remain: what do you want to photograph and how good technically does the final image have to be to satisfy you? Would Cartier-Bresson's work be any more meaningful if it were sharper and less grainy? I don't think so, though others may differ. While I welcome some technological progress, I think it is too easy to assume that throwing another few thousand dollars at equipment will automatically make for more interesting photographs. I have seen far too much evidence to the contrary.
JohnGellings
Well-known
Better results technically speaking.
Yes
Well, his images are linked to a specific time, using limited equipment, in which what he was able to do was seen as extraordinary despite the technical limitations. If he was photographing today, his images would certainly be technically different but what remains is he understood composition and content.
Of course it will not unless you are making a huge leap in equipment which could help the technical output or maybe your desire to use the equipment. It´ll never help you frame a subject in a way that balances or provide content.
Benjamin Marks
Mentor
All other things being equal, I want one. But I also want a Leica M-11, a Nikon Z9, A Hassie digital back, and one of those Fuji medium format whatchamacallit's. Or put another way, I am always around $20-30K from where I'd like to be in my imaging gear. It was ever thus. Only in the 1980's and 90's it was a $10K gap and included a Zone VI 4x5 camera, a Hasselblad 501 C/M, a Leica M6, and a Nikon F3 HP. Once you have given into desire of things, there is always something over the horizon on the "If I won the lottery" list. I like that Sony has upped the ante in terms of imaging chip design. I think we all eventually benefit from that.
cboy
Well-known
I'm hoping to try out the a9 III to see if it as good as what is hyped, which to me is the lag free, blackout free experience in shooting.
I sense this will be a new era of continuous shooting that's basically like video capture and choosing the shot after the fact. The ultimate version of rapid fire shooting so it suits more any fast action. Much like multi shot mode in some cameras like lumix but less clunky and blackout free.
Maybe some will consider as cheating since you'll now never miss the decisive moment. Some others won't like it as they're sharp shooters . A downside is scrubbing through hundreds of images.lol
I'm hoping as the global sensors roll out cameras will inevitably be cheaper and smaller since there no physical mechanical shutter need and hence one less point of failure. Basically it'll ba sensor in a box with an evf.
I sense this will be a new era of continuous shooting that's basically like video capture and choosing the shot after the fact. The ultimate version of rapid fire shooting so it suits more any fast action. Much like multi shot mode in some cameras like lumix but less clunky and blackout free.
Maybe some will consider as cheating since you'll now never miss the decisive moment. Some others won't like it as they're sharp shooters . A downside is scrubbing through hundreds of images.lol
I'm hoping as the global sensors roll out cameras will inevitably be cheaper and smaller since there no physical mechanical shutter need and hence one less point of failure. Basically it'll ba sensor in a box with an evf.
Retro-Grouch
Well-known
Of course, the degree of skill required to create an image is no measure of its worth or success. But for some of us old grouches, not working commercially, the exercise of our skills is also a pleasure in itself (a shout out to my 70 year old Rolleiflex, here!). I don't think I would enjoy using this camera much for a video style of capture with a choice of the "perfect" frame after the fact. Of course, it doesn't have to be used that way, but the very presence of that feature will encourage its use. It's a great technical achievement, but not a camera for me. YMMV, as always.
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
It surprises me the number of people complaining about the price they've set.
What's a new Leica go for these days?
It's not 'cheap' in the sense of the word but when you think about the technology that'll be at your fingertips when one is in your hand it boggles the mind that they've done it so inexpensively.
What's a new Leica go for these days?
It's not 'cheap' in the sense of the word but when you think about the technology that'll be at your fingertips when one is in your hand it boggles the mind that they've done it so inexpensively.
boojum
Mentor
There will always be people who will spit in your soup. That is just part of life. I look at it as one helluva piece of engineering. Pixii had the global shutter a while ago. I read here they no longer do. That would mean the A1571 still does but the A2572 does not. I know I get banding/interference when shooting at faster that 1/60 in LED light on my A2572. I do not know if this means the global shutter is there or not. But back to the A9 III, it is a great piece of work. It shows the way. SONY has always been like this. Their Trinitron blew all the other color TV's away. They seem to be into R&D more than the boutique but well-crafted gear that some companies, like Leica, pump out. SONY is not perfect and sometimes I am more pleased with the colors from other cameras. But if I want a camera which will take the photo it has been the SONY, even my 20+ year old one.
So while others may crab about price the solution is easy. Don't buy one. This is a niche camera but it is a new direction and it may well change the camera market. I'd be surprised if SONY were the only company that has been working on this. They just got to market first.
And unabashed Francophile that I am, Pixii got there first. Chapeau, Pixii!
Archiver
Mentor
As this camera is geared for hybrid content shooters who work in sports, and is priced in the pro body leagues, it will get the kind of uptake that such bodies attract.
For me, the tech in the A9 III would be very, very useful, although the financial investment to acquire an entirely new system is a big entry barrier, not to mention that what I currently use (Panasonic S5 and G9) is adequate for my present needs, but not optimal. The A9 III body alone will retail for AUD $10,500, which is less than a new M10 or M11 body, but way more than a Panasonic S5 II X. For the price of an A9 III, one could buy a Panasonic S5 II X brand new, plus a Sigma 14-28, 24-70, 85mm f1.5, Panasonic 70-200 f4 if good deals can be had or buying secondhand.
I hope that in another few years, global shutter tech will be available in the L mount ecosystem, preferably with a Panasonic S variant. Global shutter along with improved phase detection AF would make the Panasonic S line close to perfect for me. As I'm not in a hurry for optimal, I am happy with adequate and mostly satisfactory, haha.
For me, the tech in the A9 III would be very, very useful, although the financial investment to acquire an entirely new system is a big entry barrier, not to mention that what I currently use (Panasonic S5 and G9) is adequate for my present needs, but not optimal. The A9 III body alone will retail for AUD $10,500, which is less than a new M10 or M11 body, but way more than a Panasonic S5 II X. For the price of an A9 III, one could buy a Panasonic S5 II X brand new, plus a Sigma 14-28, 24-70, 85mm f1.5, Panasonic 70-200 f4 if good deals can be had or buying secondhand.
I hope that in another few years, global shutter tech will be available in the L mount ecosystem, preferably with a Panasonic S variant. Global shutter along with improved phase detection AF would make the Panasonic S line close to perfect for me. As I'm not in a hurry for optimal, I am happy with adequate and mostly satisfactory, haha.
JeffS7444
Well-known
Sounds amazing, but not every groundbreaking product needs to be directed squarely at me: The A7-series is still a pretty good place to be, IMO.
joe bosak
Well-known
So, fewer moving parts. They must have cracked faster sensor readout. It allows faster flash sync. Still a 30 second limit. Another step in the evolution of sensors. Well done Sony. With no mechanical shutter will it make digital cameras cheaper, more reliable, longer lasting? Will it change how images look - no rolling shutter, better frame freezing (though we'll still have motion blur)?