I believe the timing of A9III announcement was carefully calculated to force Canon to release R1 production specs. Then Sony will probably hit Canon's R1 hard with A1 II.
I had the a9 II and traded for the a1 and have been very happy with the wildlife abilities it provided. I will see what the firmware updates bring. I do like the pre-burst capture on the a9 III, and the shutter speed is ridiculous. So I will wait and see how the resolution comes out. The a1 is very good, but the comes with the 50 megapixels and the ability to crop much closer.
Insightful as always. As primarily an event and portrait photographer that does a little video, the global shutter does give me more freedom, but would my images really be improved by it? Flickerless shooting and HSS are less than perfect workaround solutions for the traditional shutter, and certainly have their limitations, but do they really get in the way that significantly? I've been asking myself this since the A9III was announced. As a Fujifilm shooter, it doesn't justify switching kits, but if a global shutter appeared in a hypothetical Fujifilm X-H3/H3S, I'd be in line to pick it real fast
Thanks Hugh, I always enjoy your conjecture on new technology. For sure Sony are to be commended for pushing sensor tech, stacked and now a global shutter. Improvements in ergonomics sound great too and are welcome but, like most, I'll wait until I can handle a production model before I really know how good that is. Initially I was uber excited. But, logically, we should remember it's just gen 1, not here until Spring '24 and in most real world use cases, probably irrelevant or at least overkill for most photographers most of the time. Resolving occasional banding is certainly a win. Elimination of rolling shutter prob less so to those who already have a fast scan (eg FX3, a1) but a real step change for standard sensor speed readouts (eg a7iv). I like sports, miss my old a9, so might consider buying one, but on sensor performance I seldom needed 20fps on my a9 and suspect I will only find very occasional value with 120FPS in stills (downtime in post reviewing miniscule differences). IQ is suspect from what I hear - no real crop options vs say the a1. A higher base ISO probably mitigating against top quality and dynamic range too. Ubiquity might well reduce the 'wow' impact too when many will be able to find/shoot the 'decisive moment ' in more sports and wildlife pics more of the time. Initially I was excited by fast sync speed with flash and a possibility/ability to 'overpower the sun'? I reckon it needs circa 500-600 Ws flash power and ideally a leaf shutter to expose a foreground subject so it 'pops' from a dark (underexposed) background. Theoretically it might now be possible with modest strobes....? However any real flash power requires a longish relative shutter speed (prob sub 1/1000) to capture the main burn duration. So it's unlikely to be valuable much beyond a 1/2000 or 1/4000 effective shutter and probably no better than 1/1000 in real world use. So a9iii is probably a lot of hype, but it's a good step forward and is clearly worthy of further investigation and testing once production models are available.
In a couple of years, Lightroom will offer the ability to ADD 'rolling shutter effect' to images for that classic look, just like they provide the means to add film grain to digital photos. You heard it here first, folks.
I think the A9III and its global shutter probably point the way to the future, but I don't think the technology is fully baked as far as outcome is concerned. For example, the Nikon Z9 or Z8 already have little trouble freezing a golf swing or a batter's bat, with their ultra-fast 4ms stacked sensors. Plus, they enjoy the versatility of having more resolution, greater dynamic range...and the ability to provide 45MP at ISO 64 for ultra-high image quality. Also, how many consumer strobes on the market output sufficient power for a camera shooting at 1/80,000 sec? The biggest real-world benefit to the A9III, as I see it, is eliminating banding from LED lights, etc. Otherwise, I don't think the global shutter technology is quite ready for primetime yet...for most shooters. A 24MP camera with ISO 250-25,600 in 2023 that costs $6000 is a tough nut. A Z8 is a far superior all-rounder, IMO.
Thought provoking as usual Hugh. I think you (and most others) have missed what may be most impactful about global shutter technology in the long run. It makes it possible for dedicated cameras to implement the computational photography features we see in smartphones. For example: handheld focus stacking, mult noise reduction, autoselecting the least shaky frame of a burst in low light at slow shutter speed, and many others that I’m not thinking of or nobody has thought of. As always, features that are exciting to me may be meh to you (and vice versa). In the long run I expect the introduction of global shutters will make mechanical shutters as common as rotary dial telephones. Nonetheless, gear will never be as valuable as a rich imagination coupled with the skills to realize that imagination.
There are some definite advantages to what's being offered, though there are also disadvantages from second and third order effects. A big question is going to be who would benefit the most from this. There isn't going to be a huge need with the average consumer, and enthusiasts are going to have to think hard with the price tag. Personally, I'd have a use for this as a photographer in the firearms and dog sports (obedience and bite work). This would make it significantly easier to capture things like a shooter sprinting from the start position to engage the first target array, firearm mid cycle, the very moment a bullet leaves the barrel with the muzzle flash around it, the second a bullet impacts a target, when the dog takes off after a helper, the dog mid stride at a dead sprint, that moment when the dog impacts for a bite, freezing a dog jumping and clearing an obstacle, etc. Even better when I'm doing work indoors for some events and don't have to worry about the flicker and banding at higher shutter speeds to catch fast moving action, and can utilize cheaper and more weather resistant lights for lowlight shots outdoors. But... that's assuming I can afford the camera AND native Sony lenses. It's possible, but that's still a heavy investment. And that's assuming that other things such as heat management, battery life, and reliability are good. It'll also be interesting to see how well workflow considerations such as read/write speeds, buffer rates, connectivity methods, and file formats are going to be handled. And... much of that is already possible, albeit more challenging. But the chances of missing /that/ moment has the potential to be significantly reduced. One other question is how well will it perform with video work? That side of things also has some unique possibilities, and ones that I'm excited to see. I don't think this camera will be an absolute necessity for the majority of photographers, but it will be a definite help if one can afford it, maximize its capabilities, are already in the Sony native lens ecosystem (related to affording and maximizing the camera), and the design delivers on its promises. Will it be a necessity for me? At the moment, no. I simply don't do enough client work to justify it. Yet. Am I still excited and want it? Absolutely. To the point where I may rent one for certain shoots, and gradually save up for it.
I think the speed will make sense once the processing catches up. If the camera can combine images of a moving camera bigger (live) combined images become a reality. Or waving your camera about to capture your favorite holiday spot in 3D, guided by your camera to wave it a bit more in a certain way or from a different spot or angle.
As a current sony a1 user with a a7R IV as a back up. I find the a9 III very enticing. I shoot mostly wildlife with some sports, it may be just the ticket, or not.
As a wildlife photographer who was looking forward to a rumoured A9iii from my Sony A7R3, I was very disappointed with what the A9iii turned into and at that price. I am currently looking for a used A1 instead. I wonder what limitations you encounter while using your A1 for wildlife, that you think the A9iii would solve? Are you willing to cut your sensor resolution in half, with cropping in mind? Thanks
Awesome to see global shutter Hugh. Frankly I am more excited by the prospects that they make it available to their OEM partners. Fast scan technology should be really easy to mass produce as the production process ramps up. Even though this is releasing as a beachhead technology I see the iterative developments coming pretty fast.
I would say that the A9iii is incredibly important -- the floodgates have been opened, and other manufacturers are now compelled to invest heavily in global shutter research -- consumers are always after the 'next big thing' (especially unimportant megapixels). A global shutter is a true revolution, and is very useful, and desirable, to say the least. The first global shutter cameras will be very expensive (research and development isn't cheap) but it won't be long before that tech will filter down into consumer cameras. Well done to Sony!
As a videographer, I don’t visit your dissertations too often, but when I do it is always enlightening and you are a joy to listen to. Balanced arguments (?hold that thought) that make one think about what you are saying. The A9 brought me back here with its potential for my world, and curious to hear what you had to say from a street photographers standpoint. I have now heard - and thank you.
Sony’s announcement of this first global shutter camera is as earth shattering to the photography industry as the first DSLR was. I am excited to see where this takes us.
If my friend at Roberts camera in Indy is right 99 % of time when he gets insider knowledge , he said Canons new R 1 has such a fast new processers have a nearly zero banding problems , he predicted 6 months ago the global on a new Sony would be announced later this year
Its like this, I wanted to be able to shoot HS football with a decent fast AF, I bought a Z6ii it claimed to shoot 12-14 frames per second..to bad the AF couldnt keep up, bought a new D850 got the 9 fps option upgrade now this is getting fun I was getting a really good return percentage, sold the Z6ii, But I did really like the EVF in the mirrorless so I bought the camera I was always waiting for the Z8, the camera checked every need I had.....Ive had to cull images shot at 30 fps..got over that real quick.. getting everything I needed at 10 -15 frames per second....I guess I'm lazy I will never make myself go the alot of bursts of 20-30fps again.......120 fps? na I dont need or want but I'm sure there is a niche" group that would demand it?...I would rather see 16 bit possibilty than 120 frames per second, but thats me..
You got me at the moment that a tennis racquet makes contact with a ball, especially from one of the greatest tennis players in history, a potentially unique and time bound event.
Regarding general questions of what is wrong with what we already have, I think with this particular technological jump, it is so advanced that it's hard for us to imagine why we need it because we are so used to what exists. Even if technology makes a huge jump, humans can only change so quickly. Like imagine if next year, a $2000 iPhone 16 pro X Max Ultra drops that has 10x the battery life. What would we do with that? Battery life already lasts a day, which no one has an issue with. How many people would buy that over the regular iPhone 16? But a few years later, people may realize that having a phone with that kind of battery life means you can you can go camping for 5x as long carrying the same weight. Or you can have a perpetually connected video call and remotely spend a whole afternoon together rather than just a short video conversation. Or you could go travel and passively vlog your entire experience, meaning you no longer need take yourself out of the experience to plan and set up your vlog shots. I think this Global Shutter jump is so large, that it will take a while for us to see it's real value.
Whilst there is no doubt that having more frames to choose from, (especially in action, in whatever form) that a more pleasing frame is possible. For some genres that is vitally important. For others not so much, as always, content is king. Would I have got better shots in the Arctic when my 3fps Pentax *istD got one shot of a polar bear cub in flight jumping from one iceberg to another, hell yes, would it have made my experience better, most likely not. I am sure there will come a time when my eye glasses will record what I see so that I can play back the best events of the day and print those special images or more likely have them digitally displayed around my living area. Can't wait. Seriously, I appreciate the advances in technology that can overcome previous limitations and provide new possibilities, however, for me, as a photographic artist that does not intend to produce images that the eye sees but rather my vision of what I see, then these advances have less value.
I think what really matters is not so much about what the general population is missing today for the entertainment but who, in professional competing world, will have the consistent edge over others. I think that competing criteria probably just went up a notch with A9 III launching.
This tech will appear in future in higher resolution cameras as well once the processing power, overheating etc. issues are resolved that are bound to be there. Great achievement from Sony no doubt, but the real world needs for all this may be quite limited, but there are those who will want this camera asap just to see what it can do...I'm not one of them as I simply don't need the speed. Resolution, now is another thing ;) and agree completely that the ergonomics could be better still as could the menu system, too. Thanks for the vid, Hugh!
Amazing Cam, special with flashes, possibilities like never before. But, … dont‘t expect too much firmware upgrades, as soon Sony releases a cam it‘s orphaned.
The promise of this camera is not the camera improved abilities but the going grey editing of the images it tracks and exposes. Scenario’s of 60-100 frames to edit just for selection is going to take time - lots of it. So make that jug of coffee, settle down and get bored by the image you have taken for looking at such small changes. I remember when cine News was a two reel event, feature film was a 16 reel event and a nature event 100 reels (plus). And if these were all raw images well we have yet to discover. I will not be buying one.
There used to be a certain magic working a Friday night high school football game in a dungeon with tri x pushed to 6400, manual focus, using intuition and instinct better than continuous motor drive to get that split nano second shot, and acufine heated to them temp of Venus, then printing one or two with the negs still wet, only to to have the layout guys turn a horizontal into a vertical. Ah, glory days.
I have been in electronics/PC/camera/video/tech PR writing since before the internet (well the internet your mom is on at least) and i do not understand Sony's logic in releasing the PR dogs a year out on a very expensive to the prosumer market. It gives the Chinese, the established Japanese and Korean camera companies a huge head start in competing with them or helping to disable the supply lines to release it in a larger scope. Just for early PR for a market that will be the first through the wall and letting the others walk through it without harm. SLOW CLAP SONY
Now the Zf, now the Zf 😊. Cmon, you KNOW all these people are lusting for it heading into Christmas, just wondering, so much more than some new XYZ some zoom some speed some elements lens. OK, it would be a present to myself, but stillllll......
@@3BMEP please give attention to the pixel shift feature and how well it works, as well as the handling and feel and intuitive operation without climbing through menus (an extension of the photographer) and not the other way around, and the feel/ ergonomics with larger lenses, as I naturally expect you would. I held one next to an R6 Mk2 and what a dif, but no 3rd party with Canon (argghhh) and maybe you just get used to it. I always had FM'S and FE'S.
Hold this thought: Sony is making global shutter for sony only. All others get only non global shutters. Then Sony is gonna have a commercial advantage of a minimum of 10 years.
Perhaps, I'll get an 80,000 frames per second high speed camera and bring it to the games. Maybe 160,000 frames per second, that would be twice as good right? Absolutely freeze every moment with no visual clues for the eye to decode , the rate at which events happened. These technologies have been around for years, but you don't see sports photographers using them on the field. Wouldn't they be better? I'll stick with my Z9.
Well Hugh, Have to see what the Global Shutter limitations are if any, could be it may no work for higher megapixel sensors above 24mp ?. Looking forward when they release the sensors to Nikon, Fujifilm cameras. The prospect for me is the non banding and flickering for lights in Stage and Theatre, productions. Regards Nigel Rand - UK Nikon Z9 - Z8.
In your hypothetical scenario, your pro shooters will be shooting jpg, not raw as deadlines typically dictate. That said, you can already get 120fps jpgs with pre-release capture with the Z9 - at 45mp and 11mp files are fine for most sports use. I know from personal experience what an advantage this provides. However, I would not want to wrangle with hundreds of raw files to find the one perfect shot. Sports shooters don't typically need RAW.
My question is, do you really need to own a 3 1/2 thousand dollar camera to capture your kids baseball game on Saturday? Yes you're only gonna get 20 frames a second with standard cameras. Let's call them non-global shutter cameras but if you can't get a photo with 20 frames a second you're just no good. This is gonna make people seem like geniuses with the camera yet. They are just pressing a button and then having to sit through and go through every single file that they shot which is going to be 400 photos to capture that one image I just don't see the point of that I really don'I don't see why you would do that why you would sit there for an hour and a half to go through every single photo and then go oh my gosh this is the one and then post it........hmmm it doesn't improve image quality it doesn't improve composition. It doesn't improve much else but allow you to capture more frames per second. I'm kinda like 20 frames a second enough already if you can't shoot a photo at 20 frames a second go and take up another hobby... Yeah and 24 megapixels is not enough in my opinion, but that's just me. I love my megapixels because it gives me flexibility in the image to do what I like with it.
Come on man, none of us can or have the time to look through thousands of photos to find the perfect shot. This is only a specification camera like most others from Sony. The world will go undisturbed beyond this kamaera. By the way, nobody cares about pictures anymore.
Most people wouldn't shoot at 120 fps, 60 fps, 30 fps, or even 20 fps in most situations, but it sure is nice to have the ability, especially when combined with pre-burst to dramatically increase your chances of capturing the decisive moment in situations with fast movement.
How, exactly, does this ruin the art of photography? Landscapes, still lifes, portraits, architecture, etc. will remain largely unchanged (except for unlimited flash shutter speeds for some portraits). Sports and action and critter photogs will, of course, benefit the most, but you still need to know what you're doing. What exact frame rate do you think destroys the art of photography? 24 fps? 30? 60? 10? 1?🤔 This actually expands what's possible in the art of photography.
I don't know if Sports photogs benefit the most. Too much reliance is put on the camera and not the photographer. Look at the old Sports Illustrated photographers with their 5fps and manual focus. Their stuff is still better than 99.9999% you see today, because they MADE the image rather than just owned $10K of point and shoot equipment. The ease of button pushing has diminished the art because most think they are artists because they can push a button without ever thinking through the process.
The same with NFL Films. Who makes anything remotely close to NFL Films these days. Those guys were artists. Now they pay some technician 1/2 the price with 1/4 the skill.
I like your comments about actual value of the result but it's hard for me to focus on what you are saying because the your video is distractive. For me it's too sharp, too clear and hurts the eyes. Sorry to say that but the picture in this case takes away from the message, for me at least.
Sony's GS has high base ISO, smaller dynamic range??, more noise at higher ISO. These are the questions that must be answered. Most flagship cameras from Nikon and Canon have already addressed these issues so why deal with another unknown. Will you capture that one shot that may or may not set the world on buzz?? For $6k that's a lot hope for a camera that will be obsolete in a year or two... Is the GS a gimmick or will it really transform photography as we know it... Will all this hype turn into a pumpkin or a swan??
I come here for the dulcet tones of Hugh, thank you sir.
Thanks for explaining the Global Shutter! I'm a stills guy. For me this is not relevant, but knowledge is always helpful!
- Thanks Hugh!
I believe the timing of A9III announcement was carefully calculated to force Canon to release R1 production specs. Then Sony will probably hit Canon's R1 hard with A1 II.
That's funny! And next generation Canon camera body will be R1.9, then R1.8, so on.@zikunzeng5871
I had the a9 II and traded for the a1 and have been very happy with the wildlife abilities it provided. I will see what the firmware updates bring. I do like the pre-burst capture on the a9 III, and the shutter speed is ridiculous. So I will wait and see how the resolution comes out. The a1 is very good, but the comes with the 50 megapixels and the ability to crop much closer.
Insightful as always. As primarily an event and portrait photographer that does a little video, the global shutter does give me more freedom, but would my images really be improved by it? Flickerless shooting and HSS are less than perfect workaround solutions for the traditional shutter, and certainly have their limitations, but do they really get in the way that significantly? I've been asking myself this since the A9III was announced. As a Fujifilm shooter, it doesn't justify switching kits, but if a global shutter appeared in a hypothetical Fujifilm X-H3/H3S, I'd be in line to pick it real fast
Love this review food for thought thanks for your insight!
Thanks Hugh, I always enjoy your conjecture on new technology. For sure Sony are to be commended for pushing sensor tech, stacked and now a global shutter. Improvements in ergonomics sound great too and are welcome but, like most, I'll wait until I can handle a production model before I really know how good that is.
Initially I was uber excited. But, logically, we should remember it's just gen 1, not here until Spring '24 and in most real world use cases, probably irrelevant or at least overkill for most photographers most of the time.
Resolving occasional banding is certainly a win. Elimination of rolling shutter prob less so to those who already have a fast scan (eg FX3, a1) but a real step change for standard sensor speed readouts (eg a7iv).
I like sports, miss my old a9, so might consider buying one, but on sensor performance I seldom needed 20fps on my a9 and suspect I will only find very occasional value with 120FPS in stills (downtime in post reviewing miniscule differences).
IQ is suspect from what I hear - no real crop options vs say the a1. A higher base ISO probably mitigating against top quality and dynamic range too.
Ubiquity might well reduce the 'wow' impact too when many will be able to find/shoot the 'decisive moment ' in more sports and wildlife pics more of the time.
Initially I was excited by fast sync speed with flash and a possibility/ability to 'overpower the sun'? I reckon it needs circa 500-600 Ws flash power and ideally a leaf shutter to expose a foreground subject so it 'pops' from a dark (underexposed) background. Theoretically it might now be possible with modest strobes....? However any real flash power requires a longish relative shutter speed (prob sub 1/1000) to capture the main burn duration. So it's unlikely to be valuable much beyond a 1/2000 or 1/4000 effective shutter and probably no better than 1/1000 in real world use.
So a9iii is probably a lot of hype, but it's a good step forward and is clearly worthy of further investigation and testing once production models are available.
In a couple of years, Lightroom will offer the ability to ADD 'rolling shutter effect' to images for that classic look, just like they provide the means to add film grain to digital photos. You heard it here first, folks.
I’m glad to see you back Hugh!
I think the A9III and its global shutter probably point the way to the future, but I don't think the technology is fully baked as far as outcome is concerned. For example, the Nikon Z9 or Z8 already have little trouble freezing a golf swing or a batter's bat, with their ultra-fast 4ms stacked sensors. Plus, they enjoy the versatility of having more resolution, greater dynamic range...and the ability to provide 45MP at ISO 64 for ultra-high image quality. Also, how many consumer strobes on the market output sufficient power for a camera shooting at 1/80,000 sec? The biggest real-world benefit to the A9III, as I see it, is eliminating banding from LED lights, etc. Otherwise, I don't think the global shutter technology is quite ready for primetime yet...for most shooters. A 24MP camera with ISO 250-25,600 in 2023 that costs $6000 is a tough nut. A Z8 is a far superior all-rounder, IMO.
Thought provoking as usual Hugh.
I think you (and most others) have missed what may be most impactful about global shutter technology in the long run. It makes it possible for dedicated cameras to implement the computational photography features we see in smartphones. For example: handheld focus stacking, mult noise reduction, autoselecting the least shaky frame of a burst in low light at slow shutter speed, and many others that I’m not thinking of or nobody has thought of.
As always, features that are exciting to me may be meh to you (and vice versa). In the long run I expect the introduction of global shutters will make mechanical shutters as common as rotary dial telephones.
Nonetheless, gear will never be as valuable as a rich imagination coupled with the skills to realize that imagination.
This guy gets it.
There are some definite advantages to what's being offered, though there are also disadvantages from second and third order effects.
A big question is going to be who would benefit the most from this. There isn't going to be a huge need with the average consumer, and enthusiasts are going to have to think hard with the price tag.
Personally, I'd have a use for this as a photographer in the firearms and dog sports (obedience and bite work). This would make it significantly easier to capture things like a shooter sprinting from the start position to engage the first target array, firearm mid cycle, the very moment a bullet leaves the barrel with the muzzle flash around it, the second a bullet impacts a target, when the dog takes off after a helper, the dog mid stride at a dead sprint, that moment when the dog impacts for a bite, freezing a dog jumping and clearing an obstacle, etc. Even better when I'm doing work indoors for some events and don't have to worry about the flicker and banding at higher shutter speeds to catch fast moving action, and can utilize cheaper and more weather resistant lights for lowlight shots outdoors.
But... that's assuming I can afford the camera AND native Sony lenses. It's possible, but that's still a heavy investment. And that's assuming that other things such as heat management, battery life, and reliability are good. It'll also be interesting to see how well workflow considerations such as read/write speeds, buffer rates, connectivity methods, and file formats are going to be handled.
And... much of that is already possible, albeit more challenging. But the chances of missing /that/ moment has the potential to be significantly reduced.
One other question is how well will it perform with video work? That side of things also has some unique possibilities, and ones that I'm excited to see.
I don't think this camera will be an absolute necessity for the majority of photographers, but it will be a definite help if one can afford it, maximize its capabilities, are already in the Sony native lens ecosystem (related to affording and maximizing the camera), and the design delivers on its promises.
Will it be a necessity for me? At the moment, no. I simply don't do enough client work to justify it. Yet. Am I still excited and want it? Absolutely. To the point where I may rent one for certain shoots, and gradually save up for it.
Thanks for such a thoughtful contribution!
@@3BMEP And thank you for making great content. I really appreciate the way you do things since it feels like a thoughtful discussion vs a hype train.
OK Hugh,how does it compare to the A1 & then would you ever change an A1 to a Hasselblad X2D? Thanks for your great content.
I think the speed will make sense once the processing catches up. If the camera can combine images of a moving camera bigger (live) combined images become a reality. Or waving your camera about to capture your favorite holiday spot in 3D, guided by your camera to wave it a bit more in a certain way or from a different spot or angle.
As a current sony a1 user with a a7R IV as a back up. I find the a9 III very enticing. I shoot mostly wildlife with some sports, it may be just the ticket, or not.
As a wildlife photographer who was looking forward to a rumoured A9iii from my Sony A7R3, I was very disappointed with what the A9iii turned into and at that price. I am currently looking for a used A1 instead. I wonder what limitations you encounter while using your A1 for wildlife, that you think the A9iii would solve? Are you willing to cut your sensor resolution in half, with cropping in mind? Thanks
Awesome to see global shutter Hugh. Frankly I am more excited by the prospects that they make it available to their OEM partners. Fast scan technology should be really easy to mass produce as the production process ramps up. Even though this is releasing as a beachhead technology I see the iterative developments coming pretty fast.
Hey, Ted!
Hello Mr Brownstone!
I would say that the A9iii is incredibly important -- the floodgates have been opened, and other manufacturers are now compelled to invest heavily in global shutter research -- consumers are always after the 'next big thing' (especially unimportant megapixels). A global shutter is a true revolution, and is very useful, and desirable, to say the least. The first global shutter cameras will be very expensive (research and development isn't cheap) but it won't be long before that tech will filter down into consumer cameras. Well done to Sony!
Once again, Hugh, your review is the smartest yet. Thank you.
Thank you, Frank! 😊🖖🏻
As a videographer, I don’t visit your dissertations too often, but when I do it is always enlightening and you are a joy to listen to. Balanced arguments (?hold that thought) that make one think about what you are saying. The A9 brought me back here with its potential for my world, and curious to hear what you had to say from a street photographers standpoint. I have now heard - and thank you.
Sony’s announcement of this first global shutter camera is as earth shattering to the photography industry as the first DSLR was. I am excited to see where this takes us.
Hay, “Hold that thought”.
You hit it. No banding is The winning benefit.
The A9III is definitely the most amazing camera to come out.
Great camera!!!!!
If my friend at Roberts camera in Indy is right 99 % of time when he gets insider knowledge , he said Canons new R 1 has such a fast new processers have a nearly zero banding problems , he predicted 6 months ago the global on a new Sony would be announced later this year
Its like this, I wanted to be able to shoot HS football with a decent fast AF, I bought a Z6ii it claimed to shoot 12-14 frames per second..to bad the AF couldnt keep up, bought a new D850 got the 9 fps option upgrade now this is getting fun I was getting a really good return percentage, sold the Z6ii, But I did really like the EVF in the mirrorless so I bought the camera I was always waiting for the Z8, the camera checked every need I had.....Ive had to cull images shot at 30 fps..got over that real quick.. getting everything I needed at 10 -15 frames per second....I guess I'm lazy I will never make myself go the alot of bursts of 20-30fps again.......120 fps? na I dont need or want but I'm sure there is a niche" group that would demand it?...I would rather see 16 bit possibilty than 120 frames per second, but thats me..
I understand. 😊🖖🏻
You got me at the moment that a tennis racquet makes contact with a ball, especially from one of the greatest tennis players in history, a potentially unique and time bound event.
Regarding general questions of what is wrong with what we already have, I think with this particular technological jump, it is so advanced that it's hard for us to imagine why we need it because we are so used to what exists. Even if technology makes a huge jump, humans can only change so quickly.
Like imagine if next year, a $2000 iPhone 16 pro X Max Ultra drops that has 10x the battery life. What would we do with that? Battery life already lasts a day, which no one has an issue with. How many people would buy that over the regular iPhone 16?
But a few years later, people may realize that having a phone with that kind of battery life means you can you can go camping for 5x as long carrying the same weight. Or you can have a perpetually connected video call and remotely spend a whole afternoon together rather than just a short video conversation. Or you could go travel and passively vlog your entire experience, meaning you no longer need take yourself out of the experience to plan and set up your vlog shots.
I think this Global Shutter jump is so large, that it will take a while for us to see it's real value.
Good points! 👍🏻
@@3BMEP Thank you! And thank you for your always cohesive and insightful commentary on all things camera and street photography!!
Omg those poles are bent. Throw out the bath water. lol. 😂. Good video Hugh. Happy Turkey Day brother.
Whilst there is no doubt that having more frames to choose from, (especially in action, in whatever form) that a more pleasing frame is possible. For some genres that is vitally important. For others not so much, as always, content is king. Would I have got better shots in the Arctic when my 3fps Pentax *istD got one shot of a polar bear cub in flight jumping from one iceberg to another, hell yes, would it have made my experience better, most likely not. I am sure there will come a time when my eye glasses will record what I see so that I can play back the best events of the day and print those special images or more likely have them digitally displayed around my living area. Can't wait.
Seriously, I appreciate the advances in technology that can overcome previous limitations and provide new possibilities, however, for me, as a photographic artist that does not intend to produce images that the eye sees but rather my vision of what I see, then these advances have less value.
Happy Thanksgiving Hugh!!!! not interested in Sony but had to come give you a Like!!!
Thanks, man - back at you!
great video! are you doing everything in black and white now?🥰
Mostly have now for years. Just playing a bit more with the video, yes. 😎
I think what really matters is not so much about what the general population is missing today for the entertainment but who, in professional competing world, will have the consistent edge over others. I think that competing criteria probably just went up a notch with A9 III launching.
This tech will appear in future in higher resolution cameras as well once the processing power, overheating etc. issues are resolved that are bound to be there. Great achievement from Sony no doubt, but the real world needs for all this may be quite limited, but there are those who will want this camera asap just to see what it can do...I'm not one of them as I simply don't need the speed. Resolution, now is another thing ;) and agree completely that the ergonomics could be better still as could the menu system, too. Thanks for the vid, Hugh!
My pleasure!
It will be dulling when every sports photo captures the perfect moment.
Amazing Cam, special with flashes, possibilities like never before. But, … dont‘t expect too much firmware upgrades, as soon Sony releases a cam it‘s orphaned.
The promise of this camera is not the camera improved abilities but the going grey editing of the images it tracks and exposes. Scenario’s of 60-100 frames to edit just for selection is going to take time - lots of it. So make that jug of coffee, settle down and get bored by the image you have taken for looking at such small changes. I remember when cine News was a two reel event, feature film was a 16 reel event and a nature event 100 reels (plus). And if these were all raw images well we have yet to discover. I will not be buying one.
Hugh, what effect will that have on all our photography., a bit scary I think. Not like AI wasn't enough!!! Scary video Hugh.
Don't get caught up in clever Marketing hype, $3000 extra to get a golf stick straight.Shoot 4k 120fps to evaluate sport training sequence.
Global shutter opens up the possibility of 'actual' handheld pixel shift.
There used to be a certain magic working a Friday night high school football game in a dungeon with tri x pushed to 6400, manual focus, using intuition and instinct better than continuous motor drive to get that split nano second shot, and acufine heated to them temp of Venus, then printing one or two with the negs still wet, only to to have the layout guys turn a horizontal into a vertical.
Ah, glory days.
😉💯
Big like 🤟
😎👊🏻
A breakdown of wardrobe, background consistency or plot continuity is much more common and disturbing than a warped propeller.... IMHO.
I have been in electronics/PC/camera/video/tech PR writing since before the internet (well the internet your mom is on at least) and i do not understand Sony's logic in releasing the PR dogs a year out on a very expensive to the prosumer market. It gives the Chinese, the established Japanese and Korean camera companies a huge head start in competing with them or helping to disable the supply lines to release it in a larger scope. Just for early PR for a market that will be the first through the wall and letting the others walk through it without harm. SLOW CLAP SONY
Now the Zf, now the Zf 😊. Cmon, you KNOW all these people are lusting for it heading into Christmas, just wondering, so much more than some new XYZ some zoom some speed some elements lens.
OK, it would be a present to myself, but stillllll......
Have it in hand. Stay tuned!
@@3BMEP please give attention to the pixel shift feature and how well it works, as well as the handling and feel and intuitive operation without climbing through menus (an extension of the photographer) and not the other way around, and the feel/ ergonomics with larger lenses, as I naturally expect you would.
I held one next to an R6 Mk2 and what a dif, but no 3rd party with Canon (argghhh) and maybe you just get used to it. I always had FM'S and FE'S.
Nikon will just buy the sensor from Sony for the ZX (10).
Global shutter..a solution to a problem I don’t have.
Hold this thought: Sony is making global shutter for sony only. All others get only non global shutters. Then Sony is gonna have a commercial advantage of a minimum of 10 years.
Perhaps, I'll get an 80,000 frames per second high speed camera and bring it to the games. Maybe 160,000 frames per second, that would be twice as good right? Absolutely freeze every moment with no visual clues for the eye to decode , the rate at which events happened. These technologies have been around for years, but you don't see sports photographers using them on the field. Wouldn't they be better? I'll stick with my Z9.
Well Hugh,
Have to see what the Global Shutter limitations are if any,
could be it may no work for higher megapixel sensors above 24mp ?.
Looking forward when they release the sensors to Nikon, Fujifilm cameras.
The prospect for me is the non banding and flickering for lights in Stage and Theatre,
productions.
Regards Nigel Rand - UK
Nikon Z9 - Z8.
In your hypothetical scenario, your pro shooters will be shooting jpg, not raw as deadlines typically dictate. That said, you can already get 120fps jpgs with pre-release capture with the Z9 - at 45mp and 11mp files are fine for most sports use. I know from personal experience what an advantage this provides. However, I would not want to wrangle with hundreds of raw files to find the one perfect shot. Sports shooters don't typically need RAW.
Good point!👍🏻
. . . banana 🤣🤣🍌
My question is, do you really need to own a 3 1/2 thousand dollar camera to capture your kids baseball game on Saturday? Yes you're only gonna get 20 frames a second with standard cameras. Let's call them non-global shutter cameras but if you can't get a photo with 20 frames a second you're just no good. This is gonna make people seem like geniuses with the camera yet. They are just pressing a button and then having to sit through and go through every single file that they shot which is going to be 400 photos to capture that one image I just don't see the point of that I really don'I don't see why you would do that why you would sit there for an hour and a half to go through every single photo and then go oh my gosh this is the one and then post it........hmmm it doesn't improve image quality it doesn't improve composition. It doesn't improve much else but allow you to capture more frames per second. I'm kinda like 20 frames a second enough already if you can't shoot a photo at 20 frames a second go and take up another hobby... Yeah and 24 megapixels is not enough in my opinion, but that's just me. I love my megapixels because it gives me flexibility in the image to do what I like with it.
Come on man, none of us can or have the time to look through thousands of photos to find the perfect shot. This is only a specification camera like most others from Sony. The world will go undisturbed beyond this kamaera. By the way, nobody cares about pictures anymore.
You aren’t obligated to spray and pray…
Apparently trolls have monkey faces. Makes sense.
Most people wouldn't shoot at 120 fps, 60 fps, 30 fps, or even 20 fps in most situations, but it sure is nice to have the ability, especially when combined with pre-burst to dramatically increase your chances of capturing the decisive moment in situations with fast movement.
Sorry that’s not photography thats videography and completely ruined the art of photography
… no, that’s not true. it’s just another kind of photography. and the pictures look great.
Totally true
How, exactly, does this ruin the art of photography? Landscapes, still lifes, portraits, architecture, etc. will remain largely unchanged (except for unlimited flash shutter speeds for some portraits). Sports and action and critter photogs will, of course, benefit the most, but you still need to know what you're doing. What exact frame rate do you think destroys the art of photography? 24 fps? 30? 60? 10? 1?🤔 This actually expands what's possible in the art of photography.
I don't know if Sports photogs benefit the most. Too much reliance is put on the camera and not the photographer.
Look at the old Sports Illustrated photographers with their 5fps and manual focus. Their stuff is still better than 99.9999% you see today, because they MADE the image rather than just owned $10K of point and shoot equipment. The ease of button pushing has diminished the art because most think they are artists because they can push a button without ever thinking through the process.
The same with NFL Films. Who makes anything remotely close to NFL Films these days. Those guys were artists.
Now they pay some technician 1/2 the price with 1/4 the skill.
I like your comments about actual value of the result but it's hard for me to focus on what you are saying because the your video is distractive. For me it's too sharp, too clear and hurts the eyes. Sorry to say that but the picture in this case takes away from the message, for me at least.
Sony's GS has high base ISO, smaller dynamic range??, more noise at higher ISO. These are the questions that must be answered.
Most flagship cameras from Nikon and Canon have already addressed these issues so why deal with another unknown. Will you capture that one shot that may or may not set the world on buzz?? For $6k that's a lot hope for a camera that will be obsolete in a year or two...
Is the GS a gimmick or will it really transform photography as we know it...
Will all this hype turn into a pumpkin or a swan??