Sorry, but a camera that costs 7,499 Euros should have guaranteed firmware updates for a few years that keep it ahead of all the cheaper cameras that come later. If a new A7 camera comes out next year for less than a third of the price of the A1 II and it has some new software features, the A1 II should get them as well. iOS and Android updates also come for free. You paid for those updates when you purchased the phone.
What are you talking about? We already pay for the firmware updates. I pay for the camera. And for that money I expect to get regular firmware updates which max out the hardware's capabilities. The people who implement those updates don't do it for free. They're paid with the money we pay for the camera. And some people simply think that they don't get enough firmware updates for the price they pay. Simple as that.
I totally agree. I have a Garmin Fenix 3 which was released in 2015 and I still get firmware updates. It annoys me that sony and other manufactures didn't release an update for the 29min video recording limit once the the EU changed their import duty tax laws around classification of still and video cameras.
@@zigzagger7893 a1 was also shipped crippled. do you remember in the first several month after announcement, a1 does not focus on eyes accurately? that was fixed in firmware update.
I think the fear of having to pay for firmware updates is justified. Otherwise, manufacturers could put half-finished cameras on the shelves, and you'd end up paying extra to get the full features that you should have received with the camera in the first place. Just like how gaming companies handle their DLCs and season passes.
Unfortunealey though those firmware updates are made possible by software engineers working hours paid. So it's really tough and I see both sides. Unless the company is factoring those costs into the price of the camera at launch, in which case it would actually make sense why only X amounts of firmware updates are made sometimes. Eventually a company would be upside down on their camera sales if they just pushed out software after software update.
Most guys put out flawed cameras that they update more than Sony does. Sony generally make great cameras from the onset and most updates are just a cherry on top !!
@@sequoi_If not hardware issue, free firmware update may extend the lifespan of products and sell more units with less development and marketing cost. Profit made can be paid to software engineers.
I got an A1, and judging by what I learned from Sony's treatment and camera releases, is you just need to wait a little longer for an A7v or something that'll come out a few months later with most of the cool features and improvements, and save a ton of money, cause Sony CLEARLY doesn't give a shit about A1 users
@@stretch90 no, but similar or better of the following for a fraction of the cost: articulating screen, dynamic range, video specs, AF technology, plus a few new features that the A1ii won't get in a firmware update any time soon! Plus, if your A1's board is faulty as part of a faulty batch that they're aware of, they'll just tell you to either pay a grand for a new one after the warranty is over, or piss off... It's your money, you do you! I've been a Sony shooter for 6 years now, multiple bodies, the A1 is great, but the way the handled firmware updates and customer care is horrible...I'm not dropping another ton of money on a flagship again for the next consumer camera do nearly match it in the relevant stuff
The Z9 wasn't a buggy camera when it was released. I found it to be outstanding. The firmware updates made it even better and Nikon certainly deserves credit for all the additional work they put in over the years to make it better.
@aliendroneservices6621 I don't know. I don't make decisions for her. 😅 But there is nothing amazing that the A1 or A1 Ii does that the z8 doesn't. Of course there are tiny differences and people are bought into systems already. But the A1 Ii is overpriced compared to it's direct competition nonetheless.
Obviously is not literally a firmware update. But even Tony’s video admits many of the improvements it offers could have been done via firmware update.
@angelamaloney4871 I get what your saying and I agree. The true hardware changes are nice but apart from the AF they are mostly creature comforts, such as the lcd and the body changes. Not something that influences the end result of shooting the camera. It certainly isn't worth the price for an upgrade from an A1 mark I in my opinion.
So you say that the z9 was released “broken” and the a1 “underperformed.” Inquiring minds wonder what the difference between the two is. They sound pretty similar. They both had issues at release. Most cameras do. That’s why I usually wait at least six months before upgrading.
@@angelamaloney4871 There’s some good comparisons for wildlife out there. Steve Perry has a very good one, he owns and uses both. Nikon has a really good lens selection in telephoto minus the 300 2.8 on Sony which is a sweet lens which works well with teleconverters.
Different subject, Tony when you next talk to Sony please ask them to add a firmware update so that if you are shooting to both cards that if you rate a photo it should mark that rating on both cards. It's rare but I had the main card go out on me during a Beach Volleyball tournament. None of my ratings were on the second card. It should be a simple fix.
I own an original A1 and am very sceptical about the new one. As a wildlife photographer, I am still thinking about upgrading. I don't see a huge difference between the two. For now happy with what I have.
I have an A1 and it definitely works well. I will be getting the A1ii mainly for the pre-capture, but the boost button, improved AF and additional focus point settings plus the better body and rear screen all help.
Video Animal/Bird Eye Auto focus chould have come to the flagship. Sony didn't give it and crippled their flagship, while giving that to lesser camera models.
Next time put the book in a comic bag - have it graded. The value will be better for resale. That signature might lower the value though. Just kidding!
To the average owner of the A1 like myself, I don't feel compelled to fork over 6.5k for minor upgrades. I bought the A7R5 camera for the specific specs the A1 did not have and it has been my workhorse camera for my portrait shoots and any fast-paced action shoots I use my A1. Paying for updates is insane because it will only erode consumer confidence in the brand as inferior to a gimmicky future model and no one likes to feel cheated. I would say spend the money on the A9III for its advanced features and then you will have a complete diversity of tech-specific for different shooting needs instead of relying on updates.
I agree if you shoot portraits there would seem to be less need to get the A1ii. However if you shoot wildlife and sports it’s a different matter as the improvements over the A1 seem mainly aimed at these types of photography. I have the A1 but will definitely be getting the A1ii as I do mainly wildlife and landscapes plus occasionally sports.
I have no issue paying for updates as long as they remain fair. Which admittedly isn't a given. But if the main reason pushing one to a new camera is software, it is only fair to pay for that upgrade if it is done via firmware. Also reduces the waste involved in replacing hardware. Yes, you can sell the old one and it may be reused, but on average the amount of hardware being replaced for software reasons is significant.
While I agree with your statement, the only thing I will say to be fair to Sony, is that you did pay for an update! the A7RV was an update to the A7RIV in the same ways the A1 Mark II is to the A1 Mark I. The only reason you didn't notice it, is because you probably didn't buy the A7RIV. This is the same for the Canon R5 vs the Canon R5 Mark II if you've owned the Mark I you don't see that big of a need to upgrade unless you need video features or shoot sports/wildlife. outside of that, the mark 1 is completely capable of doing almost everything the mark 2 is doing. The only things people will argue is the 30FPS on the photography side and stacked sensor as being clear indications that the R5 Mark II is superior, but... it's honestly not when you take into account for mechanical shutter eliminates the vast majority of issues people complained about. So Sony and Canon and Nikon have all pretty much done this for all mirrorless cameras and it's been effective for their business model for people who always have to have the fastest and greatest things. I just added that bit in there about Canon to give reference that other companies are doing the same things.
ok ok. first off, it's fun to make it into a video. It's really cool that you guys actually listen and respond to comments in such a proactive way and have really built an awesome community for photography. I'll admit that yes, you covered some good points and the release of the A1ii may have triggered and brought up some deeper emotions that I recall from the last few years of A1 ownership. I have since cooled down a bit and learned more about the camera and am excited to see what people do with it. And yes, technically we did get some firmware updates for the A1 over it's life (hope they are not done since they are still selling it) and obviously the screen and hardware can't be covered in a firmware update, but I'm really glad that some of the points you brought up at least made it into the video because there are some basic fixes that are still past due. All in, the A1 is still an absolutely fantastic camera right out of the box and I am sure the A1ii will be the same. Cheers!
Math glitch at 3:15. Fullframe is 125% bigger - it is 225% of the smaller sensor which means 125% bigger. GFX is 45% bigger = 145% of the fullfram sensor. You can not compare 45% with 225%. You have to either compare 45% with 125% or compare 145% with 225%
@@marchonore I'm sending it off next week and if they come back with a $1k bill for something THEY broke, I'm going to reach out to my Sony rep. If it is not properly resolved, I'll likely be done with Sony. The Nikon Z AF is sub-par so that leaves Canon by default. Tired of the poor build quality on in this stuff. They are on their 3-4th gen of cameras and they still have not figured it out. Very frustrating.
Hi Tony, I’ve ordered the new a1 II and will keep my old a1 as my new 2nd body. The only think I miss for the new a1 II is 8k 60p. Anything else is a great update especially when it comes to the AF performance.
Substantially faster and better AF is not something you can achieve with only firmware (unless the old firmware was badly written) - normally it goes hand in hand with a higher computing power demand. So a new body is needed, with a new, more efficient, computing chip generation - providing more computing power without draining the battery faster.
I'm wating for R7 MII. That would be my dream (goto) camera: stacked sensor, better evf, few more buttons (e.g. zooming in playback mode), I don't mind a bigger body as well. But I'm afraid it will be delayed a lot, R6 MIII will be out much sooner.
An R7 Mark II with stacked sensor will still have the problems with nearly nonexistant RF-S lens lineup, especially in the tele range, where APS-C would bring a huge size, cost and weight advantage.
@@Lofote yes, you're right, but please Canon, do the next step to the right direction. We don't need more entry level APS-C camera, just a (semi-)pro crop body, without a hefty price tag (somewhere between R7 and R6 M2 price).
@@asadasss263 ef lens Adapters are great for people that already own ef lenses or ef-s. But i dont advice buying them new for mirrorless bodies. Of course if money is an issue it is an option to buy ef glass used, but otherwise you should always go with native mount glass.
Biggest problem with the A1 is lack of innovation. A1 mark 2 is just the bare minimum to justify its release. The best tech sony currently has in other cameras, put in a single body. Cool, but that only makes the A1 the best sony not the best camera on the market. But it is the most expensive camera on the market. And these innovations do not have to be gamechangers or revolutions. Just take it a step further and put everything not only from sony, but what others have. Where is 8k60, where is internal raw, where is open gate, etc etc. The presentation was sad and awkward, as they did not even have any numbers that were bigger than 3 years ago. Same old sensor, same speed, and they had to resort putting extra piece of rubber and a charger to get a reaction from the audience. Pathetic. Paid firmware updates can only be a thing if they allow deep specialization. And I mean DEEP. Like buying a special codec that your production house uses or adding some kinf of cutting edge format which you need to test, something like that. You cant charge (or expect praise just for having) for a goddman overlay or some semi special feature like focus stacking or subject recongition. These are basic features in a high end ultra pro body like A1. Lack of innovation sucks and there is no counterargument for that. If you are content with the same stuff while paying price of a car every 3 years, good for you. Im not.
It's 4 years, not 3, and trade-in value reduces the cost of the upgrade. And Sony did reduce the *_real_* price of the new version vs. old by way of inflation (the nominal price is the same). If you get $3k trade-in value, the upgrade is $3,500. Divide that into 4 years, and the upgrade cost per year is $875, or about $2.40 per day. The average new car in the US is $48k.
@@aliendroneservices6621 how is that relevant? This is the dumbest sony apologist comment in a while. First of all trade in is irrelevant and inflation does not work that way. And by your own logic new car upgrade is not 48k. In any case I could not care less about new car prices in the freedom land. Where im from it will cost 7k euro, which is in the range what most people are willing to spend to get a simple used car to get around in. And not for 3 or 4 years. Go do your justification mental gymnastics on the sad launch vod, maybe youll find more fanboys there.
It does not have to have "innovation", it just needs to update the body to current hardware. In my opinion this should really be happening every year or two. The way they did it with the RX100 is ideal for example. As new hardware upgrades become available the body would be updated although outwardly remaining the same.
I would be very happy if A1 would have another firmware update with single length pre-capture of 0.3 seconds and video wildlife eye auto focus. In fact, I would pay for such firmware update with these reasonable cost. If Sony has flatly decided not to support the flagship camera
Sony A1 Was so great that everybody wants something big extra super hyper new in Sony A1 II but what they need to do to satisfy that people ? I think A1 II is amazing and probably the best camera ever.
A1II was the biggest disappointed. They could make the ultimate hybrid camera, but now. Just like typical Sony, you should choose photo or video. Jared Polin was recording his video and A1II overheated after 20 min in 8K, witch is worse than R6 and R5. And in A1II 4K isn't oversampled, so quality of video will be really mid. I can't belive that R5II in 2/3 price and Z8 in 1/2 proce of A1II are better hybrid cameras.
just fyi. 8k is 33mpixels. does r6 have 33mpixels? but i agree that a1m2 should be much better. at least give it higher framerate or superframerate with some compromise so the speed boost button makes sense
@@shichaosun3298 The JPEG's do work fine for a lot of subjects, just not in lower light as the noise reduction eats detail, but good light? Go for the 30FPS JPEGS. Z8 is still nearly a grand cheaper than the R5ii and it'll shoot 20FPS raw basically forever in HE RAW, the buffer is very very good. You can also shoot 8k60 and pull NRAW stills at 38mp if needed. Canons problem is good luck with weather sealed glass, you'll dearly pay for it and third party glass is cricket sounds. Plus we're about a year out from a Z9ii and Z8ii which will follow and likely surpass the R5ii and A1ii for specs. So the gap won't last long.
It all depends on what someone expects. I don't need video in the camera at all, but I want the best camera for stills and A1 II will give me that. Amazing AF and speed and great image quality, new body, precapture. Its amazing camera for me.
@@Remmerboy I'm comparing R6 to A1II because R6 and R5 was really famous of terrible overheating. And now A1II is even worse. 20 minutes is unusable. So now really cheap R8 gives better video quality than Sony flagship. Isn't it hilarius?
Every year or two there is a new camera upgrade which is minimal at best. That is why it is better to buy the best lens as possible, such as the Canon L series or the Sony G Master series. These up-scale lens will provide optimal performance for years. Better glass will always give the best photos, regardless of the camera. Professional photographers will mostly upgrade their camera before their L or G series lens. Personally, I bought L series lens 4 years ago paired with the Canon R, then I upgraded to the R6. Great lens will stay relevant for years.
Yup, I had a lens from 2009 and it worked okay on my R5, then I upgraded to the RF version and it's a lot sharper, faster, lighter, more balanced, etc..., but that 15 year old lens was a workhorse!
Yep, as the old saying goes. There's also a point of "good enough" that many never seem to realize. A normal good camera like an R6 or an A73 or some such will do the cast majority of your photography, so will a decent lens or two. Lot of pros say that if you've got more than 3 lenses, you're probably not using all of them. Factor in weight as well for likelihood of actually carrying it with you, like a good enough F4 zoom or 24-70 instead of an F2-2.8 35-150mm or whatever it is.
@@mikafoxx2717 that's true and that's also funny... I just sold all my other lenses and only have 3 lenses now. I figured that if I needed any other ones, I can rent them. 😂
I understand where people are coming from, but the Nikon Z9 was released out-of-the-box with a lot of limitations. And the reason it got all those great firmware updates is because they never bothered to develop it to where it was supposed to be, on release. It made it look like Nikon was more inclined to aid with amazing firmware when all it showed was that it was released with only a fraction of its functionality. I think the truth is somewhere in between. As an A1 user I was frustrated with lesser cameras having more functionality. The delay in breathing compensation was inexcusable.
What stops me from extracting Firmware from mk II and make free Firmware upgrade for mk I users and upload it on darknet? Maybe this would change the attitude of Sony? About rolling shutter: this can be fixed in Post. So not a big deal
I don’t think there’s an example of a camera adding raw pre capture as a firmware update. All of the raw pre capture bodies I’m aware of launched with them. That implies to me that it requires hardware support.
Interesting question: does premature require new HW? My first thought is a big NO. You only have to go from a first in first out buffer for your pictures to a cyclic buffer. BUT: what about overheating issues when you are continuously shooting raw in full resolution and the battery drain? Any other ideas why premature requires a more powerful HW?
@@Tugela60 Probably not. The memory used for the shooting picture buffer has a size of about 70 raw pictures on the Z8 if I remember correctly. One cold easily use one half of the assigned memory for a precapture ring buffer so that at least a duration of one second for the precapture function with 20 frames per second wouldn't be a problem backward and forward from the point in time when you press the shutter button. I'd be happy to use such a function with these limitations (and implement the data structure modifications needed for that purpose ;-).
Not paying for updates to fix bugs....looking at you ON1 Photo Raw......but true enhancements that save me buying a new body I'd consider. The trap may be that manufacturers actually leave features out to justify charging for the firmware "upgrade"......and what next.....subscription for features.....any manufacturer who tries that won't even be considered by me.!!
I have two A1s and 95% of my photography is action/wildlife, so I plan to upgrade one of them and go from there. In addition to getting all the new hardware and software of the A1 II, I get a fresh, new camera body that hasn't been covered in mud, banged around on rocky mountain trails, coated with salty ocean mist, etc., etc. I have friends who shoot R5s and Z9s, and I watch them shoot and look at their results, and I am confident that I have the best camera for what I do. The A1 II will assure that further into the future. That's easily worth the upgrade cost for me.
Firmware development should not be as much expensive, couple of devs should be able to do it and should be covered by camera sales easily. Second option would be to open source it so we can do it by ourselves.
My theory is that the Fuji will soon have a new sensor with much faster readout speeds. Sony took five years to update their previous 44x33mm sensor. The current sensor came out exactly five years ago. If they keep to the same upgrade cycle, a new 44x33mm sensor should be out rather soon. Potentially with much higher readout speeds?
Sony medium format global shutter sensor already exist ( IMX661, 128mp) and it should be updated wih the new Pregius S technology soon I guess, maybe a variation around that one ?
Canon newbie-convert here. I've been using my R7 strictly for automotive-type action photography. I do like the results of the mechanical shutter for super complex shots. I've seen the mirrorless rolling shutter effect and it's not pretty. But it's easy to work around. If I did video it would be a deal breaker. I'm excited to see whtat the Mark2 brings to the market. I've actually found more ease-of-use out of my R6M2 for the same situation. It just seems to be more forgiving on less-than-perfect non-L lens, and is amazing on the L-lens. Quite frankly I think Canon really needs to hold the line below $1500 on the M2. The lens selection is still poor, and most folks I've run into with the R7 are only using one or two RF lens tops. Most are sporting an EF converter and/or a 0.71x converter to use it as their all around camera. Not everyone that wants to keep up to date can afford anything other than a 2yr old body, a converter and a handful of sigma EF lens.
I've used my R7 and my experience is much the same. I've taken it to Disneyland and it did great with an adapted Sigma 30MM f/1.4, but honestly almost any camera would do fine in that situation with that piece of glass on it. The advantage is that 32MP sensor and the processor which can handle higher ISO than older DSLRs. It's been a useful camera, and I can't really imagine a scenario where it's a better choice than the R6 Mark II for just a few hundred dollars more, even if you're giving up some megapixels. You get that extra stop of light. The next version would have to be pretty amazing for me to bother to upgrade.
I am a current a1 user and excited about the upgrades in the a1 II. For the work I do, the improvements will help me capture more peak action moments, with pre-capture and ai autofocus. Plus. I am excited about the new body design, including grip and flip out screen. It is horrible trying to shoot a vertical photo holding the camera over my head with the current a1 flip screen. And something no one is talking about: I will keep my camera set to 30fps and use the "turbo" button to actually use a slower fps when I switch to getting a candid portrait in between the action.
I sell A1 .... 3000$ only body and get A1ii ... And I'm happy with it the same way I got the A1 for the first time .... And about update.... I don't think A1 will get update for next 4 years ok I talked lot ... Thanks for video I agree with you 99%
I don't know why, but none of the reviews are mentioning the addition of in-built ND to the A1 II. Not only is this a bonus for video and landscape photography, it reduces the need for HSS in many cases.
Open gate, shutter angle, anamorphic mode, waveform, 8k60p, 4k120p both uncropped and in super35, 2K240p in full frame, 32bit audio, faster burst in super35 mode, in-camera pixel shift, in-camera focus stacking, better cooling...
I expected substantially more than the bare minimum to excuse calling α1 II a new model. While groundbreaking, offering 50 MP images at up to 30 fps, the α1 was notably restrained, too, even in 2021-its monitor already crappy and its lack of precapture already stingy-which paradox is α1 II's most compelling basis, largely offset by reuse of α1's aging processor. Mainly just getting α9 III's body and an "AI" chip-a Sony standard since one debuted in α7R V during 2023-does not evoke Sony's new flagship, excelling at all use cases, until 2028. Reusing α1's image sensor, fine, but reusing α1's processor, why? It is Bionz XR, which debuted in α7S III, with a 12 MP image sensor, during 2020, and was reused in "the basic model" α7 IV, with a 24 MP image sensor, during 2021. Perhaps the only new feat remarkable that Sony beat out of this tired processor, even with an "AI" chip in the mix, for α1 II is automatic switching among subject types-human, animal, automobile, and so on-a feat most remarkable for ending the yearslong riddle of why Sony, unlike its major rivals, requires manual switching. By contrast, last year, instead of launching a new series, α3, for specialist niches warranting a global shutter's compromises to image quality and affordability, Sony deemed 120 fps essential for α9 III, whose 6000 USD price killed the α9 series' identity as photocentric action cameras at low cost, 4500 USD. Reportedly, when asked why α1 II, holding at 6500 USD, cannot do at least 40 fps, a Sony agent answered merely that its processor cannot produce 40 raw files _while_ finding focus 120 times per second [Duade Paton, "Sony A1 II hands-on review"-section "FPS", 19 Nov 2024, YT ID: tAx68qwj5cI]. And yet Sony failed to infer that this elderly processor is overused and overworked in α1 II? Even in α1 II, functions that composite images continue to require the user to export the files and go do the compositing out of camera. Far worse, full-frame raw stills at 30 fps, exclusive to the "compressed" format, lossy, remain always full resolution, 50 MP, often impracticably or even cripplingly overwhelming. The entire resolution menu-large/L as 50 MP, medium/M as 21 MP, and small/S as 12 MP, all exclusively "lossless compressed" formats-remains maximally 20 fps. Meanwhile, this mindless set of raw sizes, α1's, sticks users between a rock and a hard place. Today's breadth of use cases needs either five sizes-like XL as 50 MP, L as 36 MP, M as 24 MP, S as 18 MP, and XS as 12 MP-or a wise three like L as 50 MP, M as 33 MP, and S as 21 MP. Innovations and luxuries-like an inbuilt flash transmitter open to third parties, an OLED monitor ultrabright for direct sunlight, and electronic ND filters-were not even required. Simply basing the exposure tools on a raw histogram, not only on a JPEG histogram, would've been a major advance in a camera, although B&H sells such desktop software, RawDigger, for only $20. Photo mode could've at last gotten the advanced color space, ProPhoto RGB. Movie mode could've gotten a pair of standard filmmaking tools-waveform and vectorscope displays-without killing off Sony's cinema series. I expected CFexpress protocol 4.0 and USB-C at 20 Gbps, doubling write speed and transfer speed. Perhaps α7R VI will debut them in 2026, and then α1 III can catch up in 2028.
When the A9III came out, I bought it in Februar, to get the missing features of my A1 and a GS. I knew already then, that SONY will most likely use the same sensor and add the AI chip in the A1II, following the pattern of previous cameras. This is why I never buy a camera with the same sensor as an upgrade. By 2027, we will get the A1III with a new GS sensor. Until then, I am more than covered with the A1 A9III combo.
Sony has pretty reliably followed that pattern of mk1=major improvement, mk2=refinement, mk3=new major improvement...etc. It's weird people have realized this by now. Even their APS-C follows the same pattern.
Your comment about paying for an update feels like an idea borrowed from car manufacturers, particularly the Germans, who charge ‘extra’ for every little thing. It’s a racket. And cameras are becoming increasingly expensive Tony. More than $6000 £6000 for the Sony A1 Mk2 is a serious outlay for enthusiasts. You might say it’s a camera designed for professionals. Fair enough. But any half decent mirrorless camera is at least $1700 £1700 these days and when you add lenses and kit…it’s a big expense. And the rapidity in which they are replaced, almost every year , makes it impossible for amateurs to keep up. If you buy an iPhone or a Pixel phone, they come with guaranteed updates for at least 7 or 8 years. That’s what camera manufacturers are up against and they are struggling to compete. If they want to remain relevant, and appeal to a mass market rather than a hard core niche, they need to take care of their customers and do a lot better with after sales than they do at the moment.
I think it's about balance. I'm not opposed to paying for software upgrades, but they have to be AMAZING and USEFUL upgrades. For instance, if I could pay $50 and turn my R7 (or any of the lower-end APS-C cameras) into a Google Pixel with a camera attached then that would be really useful. Here's what I'm picturing: your camera gets a new operating system that makes it function like an Android (or an iPhone if you prefer) where menus are a bit simplified, and you can hook to a mobile network or wifi and upload the photo you just took to Instagram or other social media, just like you can with your phone. Except that you have a much better sensor and lens than any phone really has. That's the sort of upgrade that would be worth paying for, even if it was $100. Now, can the existing processor and memory on a camera handle that? I don't know, but if it can then I think that would be an amazing retrofit. But if we're talking about fixing bugs or tweaking existing features? No, those should remain free.
As someone with a German vehicle, this is only partially true! I can tell you that yes, for features on the application, that is something that is paid for, but all other updates you can just walk into a dealership and they do it free of charge. But most automotive manufacturers charge for features in applications, It's just the amount that's charged and the features you want.
Bruh, you complain about pricess of professional cameras, why is the point, WHY as you describied "enthusiast" have to pay 7k$ for a camera? Do you guys even sleep, or you halucinate?? xD PEOPLE CAN'T SPEND THIS AMOUNT OF THE CAR, OR COMPUTER, and we talk about a camera. Man.. For enthusiast you have A6700 for 1,2k$ and have fun.
As an amateur you don't need to "keep up", that's just nonsense. I still use a sony a7iii. Years old now but it's still absolutely fine for me. And whenever I do decide to replace it, I'm sure I'll be wowed with whatever I buy. And I'll have years of enjoyment with that one too, even though it will be superseded by the next cameras. That's just how it is. Really, what is there to complain about?
@@jeremywilson8192 After A7III, bigger upgrade would be A6700, the same price, ISO not much worse, maybe one stop, but a lot of features and AI focusing + 4k60/4k120. And that's still a KEEP UP for a hobbyst.
I completely disagree with charging for Firmware, especially for these high price cameras. The amount you pay for them, the company should be serving you the firmware with a large pizza, and thanking their lucky stars that you spent that kind of money on their cameras in the first place.
Anyone who thinks the Sony A1 could be made into an A1 II with firmware should be saving their money and looking further down the product line for a camera they understand. Essentially the A1 II is the A1 sensor and processor chips in the much updated A9 III body. As Tony said, this adds the AI subject recognition chip, the excellent (and larger) 4-way tilt screen, a new stabiliser mechanism, the stills/video/S&Q switch, tripling the custom memory locations and a host of other ergonomic hardware features. To put it in perspective, take the time to watch Mark Galler's video on the A1 II and its comparison to other high end cameras. I have had the A1 since day one and it has been great, especially with the last firmware update. I will be spending the money to upgrade to an A1 II though, and I am sure I won't regret it.
I had an R7 before and got rid of it in favor of the R6 MkII. I loved the image quality on the R& but the miss rate with the focus was a deal breaker besides not being able to shoot with the mechanical shutter without sensor shake causing blurred images. If they improve the R7 MkII with the stacked sensor I will be making that purchase. I would really like them to offer a battery grip as well. I have larger hands and love the feel of the smaller mirrorless cameras with a grip attached.
Sony used to ship firmware updates that could be be paid for for the FS5 and FS7. Sony Venice also has paid license you can "unlock" with paying a fee too. Maybe it's time for cameras to have that too. Come to think of it. Sony used to have a strange app store of sorts for the A7s Mark I and others of the first generation. You could pay 10 bucks for a intervalometer for example. Maybe time for a comeback.
My only bummer with A1ii was that it missed CF Express B 4.0. those new card speeds would have dramatically increased buffer size but I assume the spec was locked in before the cards were available.
the problem is they start adding 1 feature every update taking you to pay 5 times instead of one. The best is to set a base of features included and upgrades on those features being free, but new features being charged while an upgrade on other features doesnt mean to pay if you dont choose to have the new feature. Yes, take my advice, i know a lot of people is reading this
Pre-capture is likely a hardware problem. It requires memory. If the memory was not in the earlier model, then it cannot be added. And there are other possible hidden changes. It might use a "finer" chip production process which reduces power consumption. Again, new chips = new parts = new camera model. Also, unless Sony confirms parts are exactly the same, hardware that seems the same might not be. Has Sony said the shutter has not changed? It might be a more reliable shutter due to a changes in design or materials.
camera producer started to complain that people are going toward phones or "old" and "cheap" version of cameras, but sometimes they forgot that not everybody has $6000-$7000 to spend just for a small upgrade. Yes I would like all those features, and yes, I would spend some money to upgrade a firmware (if the firmware is for new features, not to fix a bug!!!) instead of change again the camera body. My Canon R5 could be improved more with the firmware, but Canon did not want it, instead they wanted to release the R5 mk2... ok, at this point I changed completely my system and went with Nikon, which I got some improvements with some firmware release
Software developer are not working for free. They are employed by Sony to carry out their work and work correctly in the first place. They receive a salary every month to do that so what are you talking about?
The Canon R7 M2 will be probably my next camera for wildlife, I now use a R7, and there are some limitations, but if you know how to use the camera it can produce great picture's. Good thing for the R7 M2, there is enough room for improvement, rolling shutter, dynamic range, AF, pre-capture, buffer.
Have you ever heard of anamorphic format? Well, you can use all the area of a medium format sensor like this to squeeze an anamorphic image onto it. You can also shoot the entire frame with normal lenses and that gives you freedom to reframe, so your points are not spot on!
I think what Tony is missing here is that with the right lens you could theoretically get IMax aspect ratios. It's not exact (1.33 instead of 1.43) but maybe they can crop in a little? It seems to me that's what they're going for. I'm not big on video so I defer to more experienced voices if I'm off base here.
@swistedfilms Imax is not just about the format but also about the resolution. Does it get 12k? I don't know the specs... You can also adapt 35mm lenses with a great sense of 3D rendering, like Shogun film for example. When you use the entire lens projection circle, everything looks cooler, more vignetting, more distortion, more aberrations. Some folks are after that look, me included.
If the A1 had the flippy screen, I would just get the A1, hands down. The pre-capture and the body and all that are nice to haves, but that screen is such a game changer for me I would even pay to have it retrofitted to the A1!
I would actually argue the body is the best upgrade to the a1ii for me. That is assuming you shoot hand held most of or a decent amount of the time. But of course this is soooo subjective given what works for ones hand might not for another.
breathing compensation was added 3 *years* after the A1 release, or 2 and a half years after people started asking for it since it came standard with the less expensive a7iv. Sony only did that because of years of anger by its customer base. There's no reason to suspect they'd do it any differently currently, so people are right to be hesitant with the a7v being half a year out.
Many of us, non pro photogs, don't use Lr because of the subscription thing. I would really enjoy your doing a video on non subscription based photo editors. Please! :-)
I actually think the biggest reason we mainly see LR tutorials is actually because most non-pros just default to Lightroom. I personally favor Capture One and the Affinity suite.
@@Kurtiscott yeah I mean if you’re well versed in photoshop it’s a pain to learn a new system. And in truth PS has some features that Affinty doesn’t offer YET. However for stills editing and exposure blending, stacking etc affinity is just as good. Even for more creative work it keeps up and doesn’t rob you monthly for the opportunity to continue using it.
I think the A1 II is aimed at non-A1 users. Pros/businesses are not about cutting edge tech (cutting edge processes maybe, but constantly chasing the latest specs is not financially sound usually). They aren't trying to get A1 users to upgrade, they are trying to get RIII/RIV users to upgrade or APS-C users or other brand users. The only pros that would see a "need" to upgrade would be wildlife photographers, especially those doing video (like the Northrups). It's a solid incremental release and Sony, whether people have noticed or not, seems to have a tick-tock release cycle where the odd releases are major improvements and the even releases are incremental (A7s3, RV, etc). Even the A6500, 6600, 6700 followed this pattern.
The big annoyance with the A1 for me is that Sony didn't bring features like animal eye-AF in video and focus bracketing, when they did to the Sony A7C and A7IV (respectively). Older, cheaper cameras, neither of which have the "AI" chip and in the A7C's case only has 1/8th of the cpu power. The only reason that they kept those features off the A1 was because they knew there wouldn't be much else for the A1II otherwise. Other cheaper cameras had precapture for many years before the A1 as well. The only "real" thing the A1ii needed from hardware was that flippy screen and the shape update.
I am a large format photographer. I dont have to pay for firmware updates, new camera bodies, etc. I have been using the same camera and lenses for 40+ years. Two different worlds, obviously, but I have no need for a Sony A1 anything. The camera I am currently using on a project is a 1906 Graflex. None of us will be here in 118 years and none of these cameras that people are using today will be either. We live in interesting times.
Unlike most people, I hate new form factor changes that force me to waste money on a new grip and a new expensive RRS L-Bracket that they may not even be available for half a year, (they still do not support the A9III). Get the shape right and do not change it ever. Also, delays in DxO support on new bodies. In many ways, new cameras are an expensive pain.
I think paid firmware update to add precapture would be great, the only real question would be how much would they charge? Overall a1 ii is over priced when you can get 90% of the functionality with a much cheaper camera I.e. R5 ii
I am happy with my z9. Nikon is at lease trying hard to give me what it can with firmware. The moment I feel it not, I will switch to the next and not defend it
I agree for Sony A1 updates except for the menu layout. If they did it correctly they could have updated the layout on several bodies without a lot of cost...
My Nikon Z8 was $4000 and not $295. For that price, I expect upgrades without a charge. Microsoft does the with Windows and that costs a heck of a lot less than my Z8. That would definitely be a dealbreaker for me.
A truly pro-level Canon R7 Mark II, designed to be the mirrorless successor to the Canon 7D Mark-II, would be a very exciting addition to the Canon line-up, and would sell very well. There is a huge market for a camera to fill this niche. The excellent Fuji X-H2 and X-H2S are the nearest to the idea of a pro-level crop sensor camera.
Kinds of missing the point. The argument that the A1II is a firmware update is highlighting that it isn’t much of an upgrade. Whether or not they needed new hardware, a new floppy screen and pre capture do nothing to the quality of the image/video. Compare the A1II to the R5mii/Z8 and let me know if the image is worth $3k more.
I would like to know what are the predicted rates of SD card failures. Why do they fail? How long to they last as storage media? How often do I have to rewrite to preserve images? in the computer? on the card? in a solid state hard drive?
To say that Sony’s decision not to update their flagship camera is solely because consumers aren’t willing to pay for new firmware is ludicrous. This is getting dangerously close to shilltuber territory.
Or maybe they would have bought the old a1 if the firmware updates that could have been added were. As an ex a7siii owner the limited firmware updates got old. Then the zve1 came out a ton less, new chip and all the benifits of the a7siii. I can tell you the a7siv is going to be the zve1 with the a9 body
To me, the complaints of not giving enough firmware updates for the Sony A1 camera is senseless because it was an already finished product ahead of Canon and Nikon. Canon and Nikon brought out cameras that were unfinished because they needed to give their diehard customers something to compete against Sony. The Sony A1 was cram packed and most likely didn't have enough internal high-speed memory for a pre-capture upgrade. Sony customers have forgotten, Sony forced Canon and Nikon into the mirrorless camera market and Sony has forced Canon and Nikon into making much better products. Yes, the Sony A1 is expensive but it is without a doubt one of the greatest cameras available even 4 years later. I bought a Sony A7R4 and when I had some pictures ruined from the rolling shutter effect, I decided to purchase a Sony A1 Camera. The Sony A1 had much better focus and unperceivable rolling shutter. The Sony A1 was a huge improvement over the A7R4 and well worth the extra money, period
Hi guys, love your channel and have learned so much, thank you. I do have an R7 and love it. Would be interested in the R7 Mark 2. PS just ordered you new book. Thanks again Dan in Portland, OR
Wow, I’m honestly surprised by your stance on paid firmware upgrades being a good idea. In this video, you even mentioned offering free updates to your book as a way to provide added value to your customers-which is great! Now, imagine if we had to pay for every new feature added to our cameras. Companies could release products with essential features deliberately withheld, just so they could charge us later to unlock them. If planned obsolescence is already an issue, imagine the chaos of planned upgrades. Even worse, what if they introduced a subscription service just to access features we’ve already paid for in our cameras? That would take the frustration to a whole new level.
I'm sure the A1 is fine. I'm sure the a2 is fine. As a long time DSLR shooter, I don't know what the huge advantage in modern AF means to me. Not having any problem getting things in focus. I don't shoot people who are hiding their eyes from the camera. Amazingly enough, I get birds in focus without having specialized algorithms assisting me. One of the real drawbacks of these advanced cameras is that I would no longer get the ego gratification of grabbing the challenging shot. The camera did it! The main advantage I see are the better quality Z lenses.
An SLR shooter could use the same logic. DSLRs do have specialized algorithms to help us focus. How far back do you want to go? I suppose the ultimate challenge would be to get a bird in focus using a pinhole camera.
@tomchandler5034 slippery logic. Focus with my dslrs is in my hands. The af of these flagship mirrorless cameras is a quantum level different than that of a DSLR. Takes it out of my hands. There's no way the AF of my d500 would hold focus on a model's eye as she is turning around and covering her face and uncovering it randomly as she runs towards me. That is mirrorless AF, a different species of AF.
@@lsaideOK Not really. Do you manually focus when shooting birds? If not, you’re using specialized algorithms in the DSLR. They might not be as advanced as the mirrorless cameras but you are using them. Yes, mirrorless AF is leaps ahead but that’s not my point. DSLRs are computers that take pictures.
@tomchandler5034 I think you're overstating the case. If I'm using 3D autofocus then kind of. But I found that feature to be very unreliable. I use AFC on single point. So my focus stays on that exact spot unless I move it myself. If the subject, let's say the bird's eye, moves off that point, the camera doesn't move it around to follow. I take a picture of something else. A branch, a wing tip, the background. If my camera has some intelligence, then it's one of a low order. Especially compared to mirrorless where single point AF is a thing of the past.
@@lsaideOK Perhaps I am. I don't use 3D tracking when shooting birds either. I use AFC +d9 focus points; this is specially helpful when birds are in flight. A single autofocus point is too small of an area for me to keep the bird on target. It's impressive that you use AFC and single point. That wouldn't work for me unless the bird is stationary. Mirrorless has its merits. Some of my most used features are silent shooting; focus peaking through the viewfinder; and of course the amazing autofocus capabilities. But even then, the autofocus is not perfect and sometimes I still rely on single-point focus. Macrophotography on mirrorless is pretty much a manual procedure still. I've heard photographers make the case that mirrorless lets you focus more on composition rather than the mechanics of taking a picture. But as a gearhead myself, I respect enjoying the mechanics of it as much as the composition itself.
Tony, no amount of argument will get you out this. If things can be improved by firmware, it should be done through the firmware. If the feature needs a hardware, then ship the hardware. Nikon should get the credit for fixing broken things and that is how things should be. And we should (as we did) bash companies for shipping broken products. The whole “programmers cost” doesn’t make sense. Since it is factored into the camera’s cost at shipping, including the depreciation value from manufacturing side.
Paying for software updates/upgrades is a good thing, as thing for free can't be good as there is no accountability for free stuff. As long as camera manufactures don't go the "rent" software feature route, like what car manufacturers try to do - are doing.
Not everything can be fixed with firmware. It’s like expecting an Intel 486 computer to magically run Windows 11. The hardware is the limitation no matter how advanced the software potentially is.
If not hardware limitations, free firmware update may extend the lifespan of products and sell more units with less development and marketing cost. Profit made can be paid to software engineers. Every one wins.
Firmware updates are done in the computer world for free. They mostly fix bugs. New additions to a unit via firmware update will make us the customers think twice before looking around for a competitor that came with new features. If they give firmware updates with new features they will keep selling the same product for a longer time and delay the new product(hardware) development. I feel cheated that I did not get the pre-capture feature via an update. Even considering moving back to Canon.
About the Fuji cinema camera...it has to support the PL mount. That will quickly open up lens choices specifically for cinema use. Perhaps with the cooling possibilities with the larger body they can probably "hot rod" the sensor for higher readout speed and give it better processing hardware to match. Hope it would actually work for them. And for the Sony firmware updates. You paid a good chunk of cash for a camera...they better make it well worth the hardware, much as how expensive they are compared to the competition. This isn't like the broadcast, Cinema Line or CineAlta cameras where you pay for software licenses to unlock stuff - and are actually used in a professional business sense - unlike these cameras where anyone who can pay can buy and own. Sony specifically "handicaps" video on the stills/hybrid cameras. People complaining about the video options on the "ILCE" cameras - look at the "ILME" cameras, lo and behold, video capabilites they want. I can understand why they do it (considering their place in the film-making sector) but the average person will be stumped.
I think Sony stated that the hardware in the original A1 cannot support pre-capture. Although no computer expert, sounds realistic to me as requires holding a lot of data in memory. For the A1ii not changing enough and is too expensive. If it adds nothing for your uses, and not worth the cost to you, then just stay with your old camera. Companies have no obligation to give firmware updates for nothing. If the camera does not do what you want as originally bought, then just don’t buy. It is amazing that people are not happy with an upgrade (and no one has argued it is not better than the original) at the same price. Yes is more expensive than competitors, but every company has the right to charge the price they think will sell. Every consumer has the choice if to buy or not. And yes I am sure future lower cameras will get new features not in the A1ii - that happens with evolving technology be it cameras or cars. The latest cheapest Tesla now has features the top of the line cars did not have 4 years ago.
Although A 1 II has a dedicated AI chip, it uses the same old Bionz XR processor (it was released back in 2020). My guess the reason that A1II doesn't have 8К 60P, Sub-sampled 4k or faster FPS is a hardware limitation - the old Bionz XR can't handle that. Therefore i don't expect it to be fixed via firmware updates. A 1 mark III with a new Bionz XR processor will have it all, and hopefully it will finally be able for in-camera pixel shift and focus stacking. As for a A1 Mark II - it is a very good camera, one of the best, but it should cost less.
Regarding the Eterna: There are pro cinematographers out there who want the “look” which comes with the wider sensor. Enough that at least one of the rental houses has prototyped their own rehoused GFX100 II to serve the market. Are there enough of these folks to make the Eterna worth producing? I have no idea but it is an interesting first try on Fuji’s part for the large crew projects. But for me? I see no particular use.
Sony owner & user. I don't feel Sony supports its customers well via firmware upgrades. Bug fixes should always be free, I'd be content if they added new features that could be done via firmware only & made a reasonable charge for them. Question then becomes what is a new feature vs a bug fix - eg, initial poor AF performance then being significantly improved via firmware - not really a bug or a new feature. How much would a reasonable charge be for firmware adding new features though? For me, it rather depends on the significance of the new feature However, I do not feel the A1 ii is a scam which could be done via firmware alone. There are some very significant chnages that are hardware only. Even the pre-Capture feature, I'm far from sure that it could have been done in firmware alone.
It's unclear just how much space, and how that code is allocated through the EPROM blocks. Some of the changes, and the risks of changes as module expand past their blocks, may not have been practical. Hopefully the new EPROM has ample space for changes. Sony might benefit from a more agile SDLC with more frequent small releases that are easier to test, and they have to have a better roll back process. I will be upgrading from the A1 to the A1ii after it's been in the field for a while.
Fujifilm makes awesome Cinema lenses, so they might know thing or two about filmmaking. I Don't think they are going to release a cinema camera with all the video problems of the GFX. The Eterna should be an awesome camera for the super niche market of high end films. Also, I agree and Like your take on The Sony a1II and the Firmware "issue"
For all camera systems... things like waveforms, autofocus subject tracking (eye AF), precapture, shutter sounds, encryption / anti theft features. You only have to look at smartphones to realize what is capable for software additions. Japan has never really favoured software development, so they fall behind when compared to a western company like Google or Apple. Imagine android software integrated with canon, Nikon, or Sony cameras. Could be something really special!
For my needs, the new Sony A1 Mark II feels more like a refresh than a major upgrade. The addition of Pre-Capture is the only standout improvement for me. For current owners, the $2500 upgrade cost seems steep given the incremental changes. I was hoping for a higher resolution option, a new macro lens, a new fisheye, and a compact GM 28-60 for underwater photography. A more affordable 500mm f/5.6 lens would have been a nice addition too. But then again, it’s Sony - they have their own thing going no one really seems to understand 😅
400 mm f4.5, 500 mm f4.5, 600 mm f5.6, 800 mm f8.0 would be also great to add as an option. And answering to other people below, YES I know 300 mm f2.8 with x2.0 is 600 mm f5.6, but you won't make 300 mm f2.8 as 1200 mm f11, and 800 mm f8.0 because it still would be lighter than 800 mm f6.3 pf from Nikon - sginificantly.
Tony, let`s hope that Sony give us an update on the A7RV, so we will have pre capture and also the Auto in the detection of peple, animals, etc. Canon has the last mentioned feature since the R5 Mark 1 !!!!
I have the A7R4 and it would be easy to give us focus stacking as in the A7R5 but none seen. Their attitude is you want them then pay more and buy a new camera.
Sorry, but a camera that costs 7,499 Euros should have guaranteed firmware updates for a few years that keep it ahead of all the cheaper cameras that come later. If a new A7 camera comes out next year for less than a third of the price of the A1 II and it has some new software features, the A1 II should get them as well. iOS and Android updates also come for free. You paid for those updates when you purchased the phone.
The A1 II could have been an email. 😆
hahaha
@@TonyAndChelsea this is true! and that's why the only A1 I use from here on out, goes on my steaks! Yeah, you heard me! I put A1 on my steaks!
Sad but true
What are you talking about? We already pay for the firmware updates. I pay for the camera. And for that money I expect to get regular firmware updates which max out the hardware's capabilities. The people who implement those updates don't do it for free. They're paid with the money we pay for the camera. And some people simply think that they don't get enough firmware updates for the price they pay. Simple as that.
Facts
But you're happy to laud Nikon for an update of the Z9 that was shipped crippled ??
I totally agree. I have a Garmin Fenix 3 which was released in 2015 and I still get firmware updates. It annoys me that sony and other manufactures didn't release an update for the 29min video recording limit once the the EU changed their import duty tax laws around classification of still and video cameras.
@@zigzagger7893 a1 was also shipped crippled. do you remember in the first several month after announcement, a1 does not focus on eyes accurately? that was fixed in firmware update.
Probably because their pockets are being lined. I have noticed this channel losing what it once was!
I think the fear of having to pay for firmware updates is justified. Otherwise, manufacturers could put half-finished cameras on the shelves, and you'd end up paying extra to get the full features that you should have received with the camera in the first place. Just like how gaming companies handle their DLCs and season passes.
Unfortunealey though those firmware updates are made possible by software engineers working hours paid. So it's really tough and I see both sides. Unless the company is factoring those costs into the price of the camera at launch, in which case it would actually make sense why only X amounts of firmware updates are made sometimes. Eventually a company would be upside down on their camera sales if they just pushed out software after software update.
Most guys put out flawed cameras that they update more than Sony does. Sony generally make great cameras from the onset and most updates are just a cherry on top !!
@@sequoi_If not hardware issue, free firmware update may extend the lifespan of products and sell more units with less development and marketing cost. Profit made can be paid to software engineers.
The paid firmware will only apply to new functionality, and not bug fixes.
@ agreed that is key
I got an A1, and judging by what I learned from Sony's treatment and camera releases, is you just need to wait a little longer for an A7v or something that'll come out a few months later with most of the cool features and improvements, and save a ton of money, cause Sony CLEARLY doesn't give a shit about A1 users
Totally agree with you
So the A7V will have a stacked sensor, precapture and do 30fps?
@@stretch90 no, but similar or better of the following for a fraction of the cost: articulating screen, dynamic range, video specs, AF technology, plus a few new features that the A1ii won't get in a firmware update any time soon!
Plus, if your A1's board is faulty as part of a faulty batch that they're aware of, they'll just tell you to either pay a grand for a new one after the warranty is over, or piss off...
It's your money, you do you! I've been a Sony shooter for 6 years now, multiple bodies, the A1 is great, but the way the handled firmware updates and customer care is horrible...I'm not dropping another ton of money on a flagship again for the next consumer camera do nearly match it in the relevant stuff
The Z9 wasn't a buggy camera when it was released. I found it to be outstanding. The firmware updates made it even better and Nikon certainly deserves credit for all the additional work they put in over the years to make it better.
The A1 ii is not a firmware update but it is about 2k overpriced for what it is, only keeping pace with the z8 and r5 mark ii.
@@arianvangend2536 Chelsea's main camera used to be the Nikon D850. If the Z8 is superior to the original a1, why isn't her main camera now the Z8?
@aliendroneservices6621 I don't know. I don't make decisions for her. 😅
But there is nothing amazing that the A1 or A1 Ii does that the z8 doesn't. Of course there are tiny differences and people are bought into systems already.
But the A1 Ii is overpriced compared to it's direct competition nonetheless.
@@aliendroneservices6621 The Z8 and lenses like the 50mm f1.2 are really large and _heavy_. I guess not too many women use it.
Obviously is not literally a firmware update. But even Tony’s video admits many of the improvements it offers could have been done via firmware update.
@angelamaloney4871 I get what your saying and I agree. The true hardware changes are nice but apart from the AF they are mostly creature comforts, such as the lcd and the body changes. Not something that influences the end result of shooting the camera.
It certainly isn't worth the price for an upgrade from an A1 mark I in my opinion.
How about focus bracketing..could that have been added to the A1 mark 1 through a software update or does it require the AI chip?
So you say that the z9 was released “broken” and the a1 “underperformed.” Inquiring minds wonder what the difference between the two is. They sound pretty similar. They both had issues at release. Most cameras do. That’s why I usually wait at least six months before upgrading.
@@angelamaloney4871 There’s some good comparisons for wildlife out there. Steve Perry has a very good one, he owns and uses both. Nikon has a really good lens selection in telephoto minus the 300 2.8 on Sony which is a sweet lens which works well with teleconverters.
Different subject, Tony when you next talk to Sony please ask them to add a firmware update so that if you are shooting to both cards that if you rate a photo it should mark that rating on both cards. It's rare but I had the main card go out on me during a Beach Volleyball tournament. None of my ratings were on the second card. It should be a simple fix.
I own an original A1 and am very sceptical about the new one. As a wildlife photographer, I am still thinking about upgrading. I don't see a huge difference between the two. For now happy with what I have.
Skip a refresh cycle, A1's still a fantastic camera.
I have an A1 and it definitely works well. I will be getting the A1ii mainly for the pre-capture, but the boost button, improved AF and additional focus point settings plus the better body and rear screen all help.
Video Animal/Bird Eye Auto focus chould have come to the flagship. Sony didn't give it and crippled their flagship, while giving that to lesser camera models.
I got the signed Lightroom book before but the signatures lasted about a day. You should sign these on the inside so the ink doesn't just wipe away.
the books aren't dishwasher proof.
Oh no! I've never heard of that happening. Sorry about that!!
Next time put the book in a comic bag - have it graded. The value will be better for resale. That signature might lower the value though. Just kidding!
To the average owner of the A1 like myself, I don't feel compelled to fork over 6.5k for minor upgrades. I bought the A7R5 camera for the specific specs the A1 did not have and it has been my workhorse camera for my portrait shoots and any fast-paced action shoots I use my A1. Paying for updates is insane because it will only erode consumer confidence in the brand as inferior to a gimmicky future model and no one likes to feel cheated. I would say spend the money on the A9III for its advanced features and then you will have a complete diversity of tech-specific for different shooting needs instead of relying on updates.
I agree if you shoot portraits there would seem to be less need to get the A1ii. However if you shoot wildlife and sports it’s a different matter as the improvements over the A1 seem mainly aimed at these types of photography. I have the A1 but will definitely be getting the A1ii as I do mainly wildlife and landscapes plus occasionally sports.
I have no issue paying for updates as long as they remain fair. Which admittedly isn't a given. But if the main reason pushing one to a new camera is software, it is only fair to pay for that upgrade if it is done via firmware. Also reduces the waste involved in replacing hardware. Yes, you can sell the old one and it may be reused, but on average the amount of hardware being replaced for software reasons is significant.
While I agree with your statement, the only thing I will say to be fair to Sony, is that you did pay for an update! the A7RV was an update to the A7RIV in the same ways the A1 Mark II is to the A1 Mark I. The only reason you didn't notice it, is because you probably didn't buy the A7RIV. This is the same for the Canon R5 vs the Canon R5 Mark II if you've owned the Mark I you don't see that big of a need to upgrade unless you need video features or shoot sports/wildlife. outside of that, the mark 1 is completely capable of doing almost everything the mark 2 is doing. The only things people will argue is the 30FPS on the photography side and stacked sensor as being clear indications that the R5 Mark II is superior, but... it's honestly not when you take into account for mechanical shutter eliminates the vast majority of issues people complained about. So Sony and Canon and Nikon have all pretty much done this for all mirrorless cameras and it's been effective for their business model for people who always have to have the fastest and greatest things.
I just added that bit in there about Canon to give reference that other companies are doing the same things.
ok ok. first off, it's fun to make it into a video. It's really cool that you guys actually listen and respond to comments in such a proactive way and have really built an awesome community for photography. I'll admit that yes, you covered some good points and the release of the A1ii may have triggered and brought up some deeper emotions that I recall from the last few years of A1 ownership. I have since cooled down a bit and learned more about the camera and am excited to see what people do with it. And yes, technically we did get some firmware updates for the A1 over it's life (hope they are not done since they are still selling it) and obviously the screen and hardware can't be covered in a firmware update, but I'm really glad that some of the points you brought up at least made it into the video because there are some basic fixes that are still past due.
All in, the A1 is still an absolutely fantastic camera right out of the box and I am sure the A1ii will be the same. Cheers!
Math glitch at 3:15. Fullframe is 125% bigger - it is 225% of the smaller sensor which means 125% bigger. GFX is 45% bigger = 145% of the fullfram sensor. You can not compare 45% with 225%. You have to either compare 45% with 125% or compare 145% with 225%
Yea, that a1 firmware update v2 made a bunch of Sony a1 bluetooth modules fail and Sony refused to cover the repair that their firmware update broke.
Yes, exactly. Mine was one of them. Banditry. Just appalling behaviour.
@@marchonore I'm sending it off next week and if they come back with a $1k bill for something THEY broke, I'm going to reach out to my Sony rep. If it is not properly resolved, I'll likely be done with Sony. The Nikon Z AF is sub-par so that leaves Canon by default. Tired of the poor build quality on in this stuff. They are on their 3-4th gen of cameras and they still have not figured it out. Very frustrating.
Hi Tony, I’ve ordered the new a1 II and will keep my old a1 as my new 2nd body. The only think I miss for the new a1 II is 8k 60p. Anything else is a great update especially when it comes to the AF performance.
Substantially faster and better AF is not something you can achieve with only firmware (unless the old firmware was badly written) - normally it goes hand in hand with a higher computing power demand. So a new body is needed, with a new, more efficient, computing chip generation - providing more computing power without draining the battery faster.
I'm wating for R7 MII. That would be my dream (goto) camera: stacked sensor, better evf, few more buttons (e.g. zooming in playback mode), I don't mind a bigger body as well. But I'm afraid it will be delayed a lot, R6 MIII will be out much sooner.
An R7 Mark II with stacked sensor will still have the problems with nearly nonexistant RF-S lens lineup, especially in the tele range, where APS-C would bring a huge size, cost and weight advantage.
@@Lofote yes, you're right, but please Canon, do the next step to the right direction. We don't need more entry level APS-C camera, just a (semi-)pro crop body, without a hefty price tag (somewhere between R7 and R6 M2 price).
go with ef lens
@@asadasss263 ef lens Adapters are great for people that already own ef lenses or ef-s. But i dont advice buying them new for mirrorless bodies. Of course if money is an issue it is an option to buy ef glass used, but otherwise you should always go with native mount glass.
boy u need one lens for birding ...rf 100 500 or 200 800 , rest doesnt matter
@@rafam8359 And there is an RF-S 100 500 or 200 800?
Biggest problem with the A1 is lack of innovation. A1 mark 2 is just the bare minimum to justify its release. The best tech sony currently has in other cameras, put in a single body. Cool, but that only makes the A1 the best sony not the best camera on the market. But it is the most expensive camera on the market.
And these innovations do not have to be gamechangers or revolutions. Just take it a step further and put everything not only from sony, but what others have. Where is 8k60, where is internal raw, where is open gate, etc etc. The presentation was sad and awkward, as they did not even have any numbers that were bigger than 3 years ago. Same old sensor, same speed, and they had to resort putting extra piece of rubber and a charger to get a reaction from the audience. Pathetic.
Paid firmware updates can only be a thing if they allow deep specialization. And I mean DEEP. Like buying a special codec that your production house uses or adding some kinf of cutting edge format which you need to test, something like that. You cant charge (or expect praise just for having) for a goddman overlay or some semi special feature like focus stacking or subject recongition. These are basic features in a high end ultra pro body like A1.
Lack of innovation sucks and there is no counterargument for that. If you are content with the same stuff while paying price of a car every 3 years, good for you. Im not.
It's 4 years, not 3, and trade-in value reduces the cost of the upgrade. And Sony did reduce the *_real_* price of the new version vs. old by way of inflation (the nominal price is the same).
If you get $3k trade-in value, the upgrade is $3,500. Divide that into 4 years, and the upgrade cost per year is $875, or about $2.40 per day.
The average new car in the US is $48k.
@@aliendroneservices6621 how is that relevant?
This is the dumbest sony apologist comment in a while. First of all trade in is irrelevant and inflation does not work that way. And by your own logic new car upgrade is not 48k.
In any case I could not care less about new car prices in the freedom land. Where im from it will cost 7k euro, which is in the range what most people are willing to spend to get a simple used car to get around in. And not for 3 or 4 years.
Go do your justification mental gymnastics on the sad launch vod, maybe youll find more fanboys there.
It does not have to have "innovation", it just needs to update the body to current hardware. In my opinion this should really be happening every year or two. The way they did it with the RX100 is ideal for example. As new hardware upgrades become available the body would be updated although outwardly remaining the same.
@@Tugela60 If there is no "innovation" there is no concept of "current harware". Do you guys even think a second before writing these comments?
I would be very happy if A1 would have another firmware update with single length pre-capture of 0.3 seconds and video wildlife eye auto focus. In fact, I would pay for such firmware update with these reasonable cost. If Sony has flatly decided not to support the flagship camera
Sony A1 Was so great that everybody wants something big extra super hyper new in Sony A1 II but what they need to do to satisfy that people ?
I think A1 II is amazing and probably the best camera ever.
Until the next update soon after Xmas.
@@manikarnika7750 Sony firmware roulette, you go first…..
A1II was the biggest disappointed. They could make the ultimate hybrid camera, but now. Just like typical Sony, you should choose photo or video. Jared Polin was recording his video and A1II overheated after 20 min in 8K, witch is worse than R6 and R5. And in A1II 4K isn't oversampled, so quality of video will be really mid. I can't belive that R5II in 2/3 price and Z8 in 1/2 proce of A1II are better hybrid cameras.
r52 is better (14 bit lossless compressed raw photo at 30fps). z8 is not (20fps raw photo).
just fyi. 8k is 33mpixels. does r6 have 33mpixels?
but i agree that a1m2 should be much better. at least give it higher framerate or superframerate with some compromise so the speed boost button makes sense
@@shichaosun3298 The JPEG's do work fine for a lot of subjects, just not in lower light as the noise reduction eats detail, but good light? Go for the 30FPS JPEGS. Z8 is still nearly a grand cheaper than the R5ii and it'll shoot 20FPS raw basically forever in HE RAW, the buffer is very very good. You can also shoot 8k60 and pull NRAW stills at 38mp if needed. Canons problem is good luck with weather sealed glass, you'll dearly pay for it and third party glass is cricket sounds. Plus we're about a year out from a Z9ii and Z8ii which will follow and likely surpass the R5ii and A1ii for specs. So the gap won't last long.
It all depends on what someone expects. I don't need video in the camera at all, but I want the best camera for stills and A1 II will give me that. Amazing AF and speed and great image quality, new body, precapture. Its amazing camera for me.
@@Remmerboy I'm comparing R6 to A1II because R6 and R5 was really famous of terrible overheating. And now A1II is even worse. 20 minutes is unusable. So now really cheap R8 gives better video quality than Sony flagship. Isn't it hilarius?
Paid firmware? nonsense.
Every year or two there is a new camera upgrade which is minimal at best. That is why it is better to buy the best lens as possible, such as the Canon L series or the Sony G Master series. These up-scale lens will provide optimal performance for years. Better glass will always give the best photos, regardless of the camera. Professional photographers will mostly upgrade their camera before their L or G series lens. Personally, I bought L series lens 4 years ago paired with the Canon R, then I upgraded to the R6. Great lens will stay relevant for years.
Yup, I had a lens from 2009 and it worked okay on my R5, then I upgraded to the RF version and it's a lot sharper, faster, lighter, more balanced, etc..., but that 15 year old lens was a workhorse!
Yep, as the old saying goes.
There's also a point of "good enough" that many never seem to realize. A normal good camera like an R6 or an A73 or some such will do the cast majority of your photography, so will a decent lens or two. Lot of pros say that if you've got more than 3 lenses, you're probably not using all of them. Factor in weight as well for likelihood of actually carrying it with you, like a good enough F4 zoom or 24-70 instead of an F2-2.8 35-150mm or whatever it is.
@@mikafoxx2717 that's true and that's also funny... I just sold all my other lenses and only have 3 lenses now. I figured that if I needed any other ones, I can rent them. 😂
I understand where people are coming from, but the Nikon Z9 was released out-of-the-box with a lot of limitations. And the reason it got all those great firmware updates is because they never bothered to develop it to where it was supposed to be, on release. It made it look like Nikon was more inclined to aid with amazing firmware when all it showed was that it was released with only a fraction of its functionality.
I think the truth is somewhere in between. As an A1 user I was frustrated with lesser cameras having more functionality. The delay in breathing compensation was inexcusable.
What stops me from extracting Firmware from mk II and make free Firmware upgrade for mk I users and upload it on darknet? Maybe this would change the attitude of Sony?
About rolling shutter: this can be fixed in Post. So not a big deal
I don’t think there’s an example of a camera adding raw pre capture as a firmware update. All of the raw pre capture bodies I’m aware of launched with them. That implies to me that it requires hardware support.
Interesting question: does premature require new HW? My first thought is a big NO. You only have to go from a first in first out buffer for your pictures to a cyclic buffer. BUT: what about overheating issues when you are continuously shooting raw in full resolution and the battery drain? Any other ideas why premature requires a more powerful HW?
@@AndySchurrMost likely the size and type of memory.
@@Tugela60 Probably not. The memory used for the shooting picture buffer has a size of about 70 raw pictures on the Z8 if I remember correctly. One cold easily use one half of the assigned memory for a precapture ring buffer so that at least a duration of one second for the precapture function with 20 frames per second wouldn't be a problem backward and forward from the point in time when you press the shutter button. I'd be happy to use such a function with these limitations (and implement the data structure modifications needed for that purpose ;-).
Not paying for updates to fix bugs....looking at you ON1 Photo Raw......but true enhancements that save me buying a new body I'd consider. The trap may be that manufacturers actually leave features out to justify charging for the firmware "upgrade"......and what next.....subscription for features.....any manufacturer who tries that won't even be considered by me.!!
I have two A1s and 95% of my photography is action/wildlife, so I plan to upgrade one of them and go from there. In addition to getting all the new hardware and software of the A1 II, I get a fresh, new camera body that hasn't been covered in mud, banged around on rocky mountain trails, coated with salty ocean mist, etc., etc.
I have friends who shoot R5s and Z9s, and I watch them shoot and look at their results, and I am confident that I have the best camera for what I do. The A1 II will assure that further into the future. That's easily worth the upgrade cost for me.
Firmware development should not be as much expensive, couple of devs should be able to do it and should be covered by camera sales easily. Second option would be to open source it so we can do it by ourselves.
My theory is that the Fuji will soon have a new sensor with much faster readout speeds. Sony took five years to update their previous 44x33mm sensor. The current sensor came out exactly five years ago. If they keep to the same upgrade cycle, a new 44x33mm sensor should be out rather soon. Potentially with much higher readout speeds?
Sony medium format global shutter sensor already exist ( IMX661, 128mp) and it should be updated wih the new Pregius S technology soon I guess, maybe a variation around that one ?
@@Kliffot There you have it. Upcoming Fuji MF video cameras could have one of those sensors.
Canon newbie-convert here. I've been using my R7 strictly for automotive-type action photography. I do like the results of the mechanical shutter for super complex shots. I've seen the mirrorless rolling shutter effect and it's not pretty. But it's easy to work around. If I did video it would be a deal breaker. I'm excited to see whtat the Mark2 brings to the market. I've actually found more ease-of-use out of my R6M2 for the same situation. It just seems to be more forgiving on less-than-perfect non-L lens, and is amazing on the L-lens.
Quite frankly I think Canon really needs to hold the line below $1500 on the M2. The lens selection is still poor, and most folks I've run into with the R7 are only using one or two RF lens tops. Most are sporting an EF converter and/or a 0.71x converter to use it as their all around camera. Not everyone that wants to keep up to date can afford anything other than a 2yr old body, a converter and a handful of sigma EF lens.
I've used my R7 and my experience is much the same. I've taken it to Disneyland and it did great with an adapted Sigma 30MM f/1.4, but honestly almost any camera would do fine in that situation with that piece of glass on it. The advantage is that 32MP sensor and the processor which can handle higher ISO than older DSLRs. It's been a useful camera, and I can't really imagine a scenario where it's a better choice than the R6 Mark II for just a few hundred dollars more, even if you're giving up some megapixels. You get that extra stop of light. The next version would have to be pretty amazing for me to bother to upgrade.
I am a current a1 user and excited about the upgrades in the a1 II. For the work I do, the improvements will help me capture more peak action moments, with pre-capture and ai autofocus. Plus. I am excited about the new body design, including grip and flip out screen. It is horrible trying to shoot a vertical photo holding the camera over my head with the current a1 flip screen. And something no one is talking about: I will keep my camera set to 30fps and use the "turbo" button to actually use a slower fps when I switch to getting a candid portrait in between the action.
I sell A1 .... 3000$ only body and get A1ii ... And I'm happy with it the same way I got the A1 for the first time .... And about update.... I don't think A1 will get update for next 4 years ok I talked lot ... Thanks for video I agree with you 99%
I don't know why, but none of the reviews are mentioning the addition of in-built ND to the A1 II. Not only is this a bonus for video and landscape photography, it reduces the need for HSS in many cases.
The original A1 is already such a good camera...what did people really expect with A1 mkII?
Medium format, 8K 60FPS, 12 bit RAW
Open gate, shutter angle, anamorphic mode, waveform, 8k60p, 4k120p both uncropped and in super35, 2K240p in full frame, 32bit audio, faster burst in super35 mode, in-camera pixel shift, in-camera focus stacking, better cooling...
I expected substantially more than the bare minimum to excuse calling α1 II a new model. While groundbreaking, offering 50 MP images at up to 30 fps, the α1 was notably restrained, too, even in 2021-its monitor already crappy and its lack of precapture already stingy-which paradox is α1 II's most compelling basis, largely offset by reuse of α1's aging processor. Mainly just getting α9 III's body and an "AI" chip-a Sony standard since one debuted in α7R V during 2023-does not evoke Sony's new flagship, excelling at all use cases, until 2028.
Reusing α1's image sensor, fine, but reusing α1's processor, why? It is Bionz XR, which debuted in α7S III, with a 12 MP image sensor, during 2020, and was reused in "the basic model" α7 IV, with a 24 MP image sensor, during 2021. Perhaps the only new feat remarkable that Sony beat out of this tired processor, even with an "AI" chip in the mix, for α1 II is automatic switching among subject types-human, animal, automobile, and so on-a feat most remarkable for ending the yearslong riddle of why Sony, unlike its major rivals, requires manual switching.
By contrast, last year, instead of launching a new series, α3, for specialist niches warranting a global shutter's compromises to image quality and affordability, Sony deemed 120 fps essential for α9 III, whose 6000 USD price killed the α9 series' identity as photocentric action cameras at low cost, 4500 USD. Reportedly, when asked why α1 II, holding at 6500 USD, cannot do at least 40 fps, a Sony agent answered merely that its processor cannot produce 40 raw files _while_ finding focus 120 times per second [Duade Paton, "Sony A1 II hands-on review"-section "FPS", 19 Nov 2024, YT ID: tAx68qwj5cI]. And yet Sony failed to infer that this elderly processor is overused and overworked in α1 II?
Even in α1 II, functions that composite images continue to require the user to export the files and go do the compositing out of camera. Far worse, full-frame raw stills at 30 fps, exclusive to the "compressed" format, lossy, remain always full resolution, 50 MP, often impracticably or even cripplingly overwhelming. The entire resolution menu-large/L as 50 MP, medium/M as 21 MP, and small/S as 12 MP, all exclusively "lossless compressed" formats-remains maximally 20 fps. Meanwhile, this mindless set of raw sizes, α1's, sticks users between a rock and a hard place. Today's breadth of use cases needs either five sizes-like XL as 50 MP, L as 36 MP, M as 24 MP, S as 18 MP, and XS as 12 MP-or a wise three like L as 50 MP, M as 33 MP, and S as 21 MP.
Innovations and luxuries-like an inbuilt flash transmitter open to third parties, an OLED monitor ultrabright for direct sunlight, and electronic ND filters-were not even required. Simply basing the exposure tools on a raw histogram, not only on a JPEG histogram, would've been a major advance in a camera, although B&H sells such desktop software, RawDigger, for only $20. Photo mode could've at last gotten the advanced color space, ProPhoto RGB. Movie mode could've gotten a pair of standard filmmaking tools-waveform and vectorscope displays-without killing off Sony's cinema series. I expected CFexpress protocol 4.0 and USB-C at 20 Gbps, doubling write speed and transfer speed. Perhaps α7R VI will debut them in 2026, and then α1 III can catch up in 2028.
When the A9III came out, I bought it in Februar, to get the missing features of my A1 and a GS. I knew already then, that SONY will most likely use the same sensor and add the AI chip in the A1II, following the pattern of previous cameras. This is why I never buy a camera with the same sensor as an upgrade. By 2027, we will get the A1III with a new GS sensor. Until then, I am more than covered with the A1 A9III combo.
Sony has pretty reliably followed that pattern of mk1=major improvement, mk2=refinement, mk3=new major improvement...etc. It's weird people have realized this by now. Even their APS-C follows the same pattern.
Your comment about paying for an update feels like an idea borrowed from car manufacturers, particularly the Germans, who charge ‘extra’ for every little thing. It’s a racket. And cameras are becoming increasingly expensive Tony. More than $6000 £6000 for the Sony A1 Mk2 is a serious outlay for enthusiasts. You might say it’s a camera designed for professionals. Fair enough. But any half decent mirrorless camera is at least $1700 £1700 these days and when you add lenses and kit…it’s a big expense. And the rapidity in which they are replaced, almost every year , makes it impossible for amateurs to keep up. If you buy an iPhone or a Pixel phone, they come with guaranteed updates for at least 7 or 8 years. That’s what camera manufacturers are up against and they are struggling to compete. If they want to remain relevant, and appeal to a mass market rather than a hard core niche, they need to take care of their customers and do a lot better with after sales than they do at the moment.
I think it's about balance. I'm not opposed to paying for software upgrades, but they have to be AMAZING and USEFUL upgrades. For instance, if I could pay $50 and turn my R7 (or any of the lower-end APS-C cameras) into a Google Pixel with a camera attached then that would be really useful. Here's what I'm picturing: your camera gets a new operating system that makes it function like an Android (or an iPhone if you prefer) where menus are a bit simplified, and you can hook to a mobile network or wifi and upload the photo you just took to Instagram or other social media, just like you can with your phone. Except that you have a much better sensor and lens than any phone really has. That's the sort of upgrade that would be worth paying for, even if it was $100. Now, can the existing processor and memory on a camera handle that? I don't know, but if it can then I think that would be an amazing retrofit.
But if we're talking about fixing bugs or tweaking existing features? No, those should remain free.
As someone with a German vehicle, this is only partially true! I can tell you that yes, for features on the application, that is something that is paid for, but all other updates you can just walk into a dealership and they do it free of charge. But most automotive manufacturers charge for features in applications, It's just the amount that's charged and the features you want.
Bruh, you complain about pricess of professional cameras, why is the point, WHY as you describied "enthusiast" have to pay 7k$ for a camera? Do you guys even sleep, or you halucinate?? xD PEOPLE CAN'T SPEND THIS AMOUNT OF THE CAR, OR COMPUTER, and we talk about a camera. Man.. For enthusiast you have A6700 for 1,2k$ and have fun.
As an amateur you don't need to "keep up", that's just nonsense. I still use a sony a7iii. Years old now but it's still absolutely fine for me. And whenever I do decide to replace it, I'm sure I'll be wowed with whatever I buy. And I'll have years of enjoyment with that one too, even though it will be superseded by the next cameras. That's just how it is. Really, what is there to complain about?
@@jeremywilson8192 After A7III, bigger upgrade would be A6700, the same price, ISO not much worse, maybe one stop, but a lot of features and AI focusing + 4k60/4k120. And that's still a KEEP UP for a hobbyst.
I completely disagree with charging for Firmware, especially for these high price cameras. The amount you pay for them, the company should be serving you the firmware with a large pizza, and thanking their lucky stars that you spent that kind of money on their cameras in the first place.
It might seem that way to you as a consumer, but this is a professional product, and as professional products go it is an entry level product.
Although i don't like it, they should fix only the bugs, they are not apple to afford free software forever.
Anyone who thinks the Sony A1 could be made into an A1 II with firmware should be saving their money and looking further down the product line for a camera they understand. Essentially the A1 II is the A1 sensor and processor chips in the much updated A9 III body. As Tony said, this adds the AI subject recognition chip, the excellent (and larger) 4-way tilt screen, a new stabiliser mechanism, the stills/video/S&Q switch, tripling the custom memory locations and a host of other ergonomic hardware features. To put it in perspective, take the time to watch Mark Galler's video on the A1 II and its comparison to other high end cameras.
I have had the A1 since day one and it has been great, especially with the last firmware update. I will be spending the money to upgrade to an A1 II though, and I am sure I won't regret it.
I had an R7 before and got rid of it in favor of the R6 MkII. I loved the image quality on the R& but the miss rate with the focus was a deal breaker besides not being able to shoot with the mechanical shutter without sensor shake causing blurred images. If they improve the R7 MkII with the stacked sensor I will be making that purchase. I would really like them to offer a battery grip as well. I have larger hands and love the feel of the smaller mirrorless cameras with a grip attached.
Sony used to ship firmware updates that could be be paid for for the FS5 and FS7. Sony Venice also has paid license you can "unlock" with paying a fee too. Maybe it's time for cameras to have that too.
Come to think of it. Sony used to have a strange app store of sorts for the A7s Mark I and others of the first generation. You could pay 10 bucks for a intervalometer for example. Maybe time for a comeback.
A1 mark 2 on order still a need for speed with the A9III however . 60fps would have been amazing 👌
A9iii with the Global Shutter and $500 less and same A1ii body... That's what I am getting - thanks for making it easy to decide.
Global shutter does have some drawbacks, depending on what you're shooting... Like higher base ISO.
tbh if fuji could add new film simulations in my x-t3 with paid firmware, I wouldn't mind that
but AF fixes and such should be free
My only bummer with A1ii was that it missed CF Express B 4.0. those new card speeds would have dramatically increased buffer size but I assume the spec was locked in before the cards were available.
the problem is they start adding 1 feature every update taking you to pay 5 times instead of one. The best is to set a base of features included and upgrades on those features being free, but new features being charged while an upgrade on other features doesnt mean to pay if you dont choose to have the new feature. Yes, take my advice, i know a lot of people is reading this
Pre-capture is likely a hardware problem. It requires memory. If the memory was not in the earlier model, then it cannot be added. And there are other possible hidden changes. It might use a "finer" chip production process which reduces power consumption. Again, new chips = new parts = new camera model. Also, unless Sony confirms parts are exactly the same, hardware that seems the same might not be. Has Sony said the shutter has not changed? It might be a more reliable shutter due to a changes in design or materials.
camera producer started to complain that people are going toward phones or "old" and "cheap" version of cameras, but sometimes they forgot that not everybody has $6000-$7000 to spend just for a small upgrade. Yes I would like all those features, and yes, I would spend some money to upgrade a firmware (if the firmware is for new features, not to fix a bug!!!) instead of change again the camera body. My Canon R5 could be improved more with the firmware, but Canon did not want it, instead they wanted to release the R5 mk2... ok, at this point I changed completely my system and went with Nikon, which I got some improvements with some firmware release
Software developer are not working for free. They are employed by Sony to carry out their work and work correctly in the first place. They receive a salary every month to do that so what are you talking about?
The Canon R7 M2 will be probably my next camera for wildlife, I now use a R7, and there are some limitations, but if you know how to use the camera it can produce great picture's. Good thing for the R7 M2, there is enough room for improvement, rolling shutter, dynamic range, AF, pre-capture, buffer.
Would love an R7ii with a stacked sensor, but it better also be able to take a battery grip. A much larger buffer would be pretty cool too.
Can you Please review the New Pentax & Leica cameras?
Have you ever heard of anamorphic format? Well, you can use all the area of a medium format sensor like this to squeeze an anamorphic image onto it. You can also shoot the entire frame with normal lenses and that gives you freedom to reframe, so your points are not spot on!
I think what Tony is missing here is that with the right lens you could theoretically get IMax aspect ratios. It's not exact (1.33 instead of 1.43) but maybe they can crop in a little? It seems to me that's what they're going for. I'm not big on video so I defer to more experienced voices if I'm off base here.
@swistedfilms Imax is not just about the format but also about the resolution. Does it get 12k? I don't know the specs...
You can also adapt 35mm lenses with a great sense of 3D rendering, like Shogun film for example. When you use the entire lens projection circle, everything looks cooler, more vignetting, more distortion, more aberrations. Some folks are after that look, me included.
If the A1 had the flippy screen, I would just get the A1, hands down. The pre-capture and the body and all that are nice to haves, but that screen is such a game changer for me I would even pay to have it retrofitted to the A1!
I would actually argue the body is the best upgrade to the a1ii for me. That is assuming you shoot hand held most of or a decent amount of the time. But of course this is soooo subjective given what works for ones hand might not for another.
breathing compensation was added 3 *years* after the A1 release, or 2 and a half years after people started asking for it since it came standard with the less expensive a7iv. Sony only did that because of years of anger by its customer base. There's no reason to suspect they'd do it any differently currently, so people are right to be hesitant with the a7v being half a year out.
Many of us, non pro photogs, don't use Lr because of the subscription thing. I would really enjoy your doing a video on non subscription based photo editors. Please! :-)
I actually think the biggest reason we mainly see LR tutorials is actually because most non-pros just default to Lightroom. I personally favor Capture One and the Affinity suite.
Tony does not seem to be a fan of the Affinity suite. Personally, it’s worked well both for my professional and personal pipelines.
Adobe is dead. It’s just the last death cramps we see now. Installing spyware on people computers, not the biggest party trick.
@@Kurtiscott yeah I mean if you’re well versed in photoshop it’s a pain to learn a new system. And in truth PS has some features that Affinty doesn’t offer YET. However for stills editing and exposure blending, stacking etc affinity is just as good. Even for more creative work it keeps up and doesn’t rob you monthly for the opportunity to continue using it.
I think the A1 II is aimed at non-A1 users. Pros/businesses are not about cutting edge tech (cutting edge processes maybe, but constantly chasing the latest specs is not financially sound usually). They aren't trying to get A1 users to upgrade, they are trying to get RIII/RIV users to upgrade or APS-C users or other brand users. The only pros that would see a "need" to upgrade would be wildlife photographers, especially those doing video (like the Northrups). It's a solid incremental release and Sony, whether people have noticed or not, seems to have a tick-tock release cycle where the odd releases are major improvements and the even releases are incremental (A7s3, RV, etc). Even the A6500, 6600, 6700 followed this pattern.
I would happily pay you for an "Introduction to Luminar Neo." Because Adobe is no longer getting my patronage.
The big annoyance with the A1 for me is that Sony didn't bring features like animal eye-AF in video and focus bracketing, when they did to the Sony A7C and A7IV (respectively). Older, cheaper cameras, neither of which have the "AI" chip and in the A7C's case only has 1/8th of the cpu power. The only reason that they kept those features off the A1 was because they knew there wouldn't be much else for the A1II otherwise. Other cheaper cameras had precapture for many years before the A1 as well. The only "real" thing the A1ii needed from hardware was that flippy screen and the shape update.
I am a large format photographer. I dont have to pay for firmware updates, new camera bodies, etc. I have been using the same camera and lenses for 40+ years. Two different worlds, obviously, but I have no need for a Sony A1 anything. The camera I am currently using on a project is a 1906 Graflex. None of us will be here in 118 years and none of these cameras that people are using today will be either. We live in interesting times.
Unlike most people, I hate new form factor changes that force me to waste money on a new grip and a new expensive RRS L-Bracket that they may not even be available for half a year, (they still do not support the A9III). Get the shape right and do not change it ever. Also, delays in DxO support on new bodies. In many ways, new cameras are an expensive pain.
Subscription firmware updates? No thanks Sony!
I think paid firmware update to add precapture would be great, the only real question would be how much would they charge? Overall a1 ii is over priced when you can get 90% of the functionality with a much cheaper camera I.e. R5 ii
I am happy with my z9. Nikon is at lease trying hard to give me what it can with firmware. The moment I feel it not, I will switch to the next and not defend it
I agree for Sony A1 updates except for the menu layout. If they did it correctly they could have updated the layout on several bodies without a lot of cost...
My Nikon Z8 was $4000 and not $295. For that price, I expect upgrades without a charge. Microsoft does the with Windows and that costs a heck of a lot less than my Z8. That would definitely be a dealbreaker for me.
A truly pro-level Canon R7 Mark II, designed to be the mirrorless successor to the Canon 7D Mark-II, would be a very exciting addition to the Canon line-up, and would sell very well. There is a huge market for a camera to fill this niche. The excellent Fuji X-H2 and X-H2S are the nearest to the idea of a pro-level crop sensor camera.
Kinds of missing the point. The argument that the A1II is a firmware update is highlighting that it isn’t much of an upgrade. Whether or not they needed new hardware, a new floppy screen and pre capture do nothing to the quality of the image/video.
Compare the A1II to the R5mii/Z8 and let me know if the image is worth $3k more.
I would like to know what are the predicted rates of SD card failures. Why do they fail? How long to they last as storage media? How often do I have to rewrite to preserve images? in the computer? on the card? in a solid state hard drive?
Anamorphic lenses could be used with that Fuji cinema camera to make the most of the larger sensor
The manufacturers should get the firmware right in the first place. And if not, fix and improve the product with the updates.
To say that Sony’s decision not to update their flagship camera is solely because consumers aren’t willing to pay for new firmware is ludicrous. This is getting dangerously close to shilltuber territory.
Or maybe they would have bought the old a1 if the firmware updates that could have been added were. As an ex a7siii owner the limited firmware updates got old. Then the zve1 came out a ton less, new chip and all the benifits of the a7siii. I can tell you the a7siv is going to be the zve1 with the a9 body
Very interested in upgrading from A7Rv to A1 II but I need to figure out the cash flow. Is Northrup Bank & Trust a thing?
To me, the complaints of not giving enough firmware updates for the Sony A1 camera is senseless because it was an already finished product ahead of Canon and Nikon. Canon and Nikon brought out cameras that were unfinished because they needed to give their diehard customers something to compete against Sony. The Sony A1 was cram packed and most likely didn't have enough internal high-speed memory for a pre-capture upgrade. Sony customers have forgotten, Sony forced Canon and Nikon into the mirrorless camera market and Sony has forced Canon and Nikon into making much better products. Yes, the Sony A1 is expensive but it is without a doubt one of the greatest cameras available even 4 years later. I bought a Sony A7R4 and when I had some pictures ruined from the rolling shutter effect, I decided to purchase a Sony A1 Camera. The Sony A1 had much better focus and unperceivable rolling shutter. The Sony A1 was a huge improvement over the A7R4 and well worth the extra money, period
Hi guys, love your channel and have learned so much, thank you. I do have an R7 and love it. Would be interested in the R7 Mark 2. PS just ordered you new book. Thanks again Dan in Portland, OR
Wow, I’m honestly surprised by your stance on paid firmware upgrades being a good idea. In this video, you even mentioned offering free updates to your book as a way to provide added value to your customers-which is great! Now, imagine if we had to pay for every new feature added to our cameras. Companies could release products with essential features deliberately withheld, just so they could charge us later to unlock them. If planned obsolescence is already an issue, imagine the chaos of planned upgrades. Even worse, what if they introduced a subscription service just to access features we’ve already paid for in our cameras? That would take the frustration to a whole new level.
I'm sure the A1 is fine. I'm sure the a2 is fine. As a long time DSLR shooter, I don't know what the huge advantage in modern AF means to me. Not having any problem getting things in focus. I don't shoot people who are hiding their eyes from the camera. Amazingly enough, I get birds in focus without having specialized algorithms assisting me. One of the real drawbacks of these advanced cameras is that I would no longer get the ego gratification of grabbing the challenging shot. The camera did it! The main advantage I see are the better quality Z lenses.
An SLR shooter could use the same logic. DSLRs do have specialized algorithms to help us focus. How far back do you want to go? I suppose the ultimate challenge would be to get a bird in focus using a pinhole camera.
@tomchandler5034 slippery logic. Focus with my dslrs is in my hands. The af of these flagship mirrorless cameras is a quantum level different than that of a DSLR. Takes it out of my hands. There's no way the AF of my d500 would hold focus on a model's eye as she is turning around and covering her face and uncovering it randomly as she runs towards me. That is mirrorless AF, a different species of AF.
@@lsaideOK Not really. Do you manually focus when shooting birds? If not, you’re using specialized algorithms in the DSLR. They might not be as advanced as the mirrorless cameras but you are using them. Yes, mirrorless AF is leaps ahead but that’s not my point. DSLRs are computers that take pictures.
@tomchandler5034 I think you're overstating the case. If I'm using 3D autofocus then kind of. But I found that feature to be very unreliable. I use AFC on single point. So my focus stays on that exact spot unless I move it myself. If the subject, let's say the bird's eye, moves off that point, the camera doesn't move it around to follow. I take a picture of something else. A branch, a wing tip, the background. If my camera has some intelligence, then it's one of a low order. Especially compared to mirrorless where single point AF is a thing of the past.
@@lsaideOK Perhaps I am. I don't use 3D tracking when shooting birds either. I use AFC +d9 focus points; this is specially helpful when birds are in flight. A single autofocus point is too small of an area for me to keep the bird on target. It's impressive that you use AFC and single point. That wouldn't work for me unless the bird is stationary. Mirrorless has its merits. Some of my most used features are silent shooting; focus peaking through the viewfinder; and of course the amazing autofocus capabilities. But even then, the autofocus is not perfect and sometimes I still rely on single-point focus. Macrophotography on mirrorless is pretty much a manual procedure still.
I've heard photographers make the case that mirrorless lets you focus more on composition rather than the mechanics of taking a picture. But as a gearhead myself, I respect enjoying the mechanics of it as much as the composition itself.
Tony, no amount of argument will get you out this. If things can be improved by firmware, it should be done through the firmware. If the feature needs a hardware, then ship the hardware. Nikon should get the credit for fixing broken things and that is how things should be. And we should (as we did) bash companies for shipping broken products.
The whole “programmers cost” doesn’t make sense. Since it is factored into the camera’s cost at shipping, including the depreciation value from manufacturing side.
Paying for software updates/upgrades is a good thing, as thing for free can't be good as there is no accountability for free stuff.
As long as camera manufactures don't go the "rent" software feature route, like what car manufacturers try to do - are doing.
Not everything can be fixed with firmware. It’s like expecting an Intel 486 computer to magically run Windows 11. The hardware is the limitation no matter how advanced the software potentially is.
If not hardware limitations, free firmware update may extend the lifespan of products and sell more units with less development and marketing cost. Profit made can be paid to software engineers. Every one wins.
Firmware updates are done in the computer world for free. They mostly fix bugs. New additions to a unit via firmware update will make us the customers think twice before looking around for a competitor that came with new features. If they give firmware updates with new features they will keep selling the same product for a longer time and delay the new product(hardware) development. I feel cheated that I did not get the pre-capture feature via an update. Even considering moving back to Canon.
About the Fuji cinema camera...it has to support the PL mount. That will quickly open up lens choices specifically for cinema use. Perhaps with the cooling possibilities with the larger body they can probably "hot rod" the sensor for higher readout speed and give it better processing hardware to match. Hope it would actually work for them.
And for the Sony firmware updates. You paid a good chunk of cash for a camera...they better make it well worth the hardware, much as how expensive they are compared to the competition. This isn't like the broadcast, Cinema Line or CineAlta cameras where you pay for software licenses to unlock stuff - and are actually used in a professional business sense - unlike these cameras where anyone who can pay can buy and own.
Sony specifically "handicaps" video on the stills/hybrid cameras. People complaining about the video options on the "ILCE" cameras - look at the "ILME" cameras, lo and behold, video capabilites they want. I can understand why they do it (considering their place in the film-making sector) but the average person will be stumped.
I think Sony stated that the hardware in the original A1 cannot support pre-capture. Although no computer expert, sounds realistic to me as requires holding a lot of data in memory. For the A1ii not changing enough and is too expensive. If it adds nothing for your uses, and not worth the cost to you, then just stay with your old camera. Companies have no obligation to give firmware updates for nothing. If the camera does not do what you want as originally bought, then just don’t buy. It is amazing that people are not happy with an upgrade (and no one has argued it is not better than the original) at the same price. Yes is more expensive than competitors, but every company has the right to charge the price they think will sell. Every consumer has the choice if to buy or not. And yes I am sure future lower cameras will get new features not in the A1ii - that happens with evolving technology be it cameras or cars. The latest cheapest Tesla now has features the top of the line cars did not have 4 years ago.
Although A 1 II has a dedicated AI chip, it uses the same old Bionz XR processor (it was released back in 2020). My guess the reason that A1II doesn't have 8К 60P, Sub-sampled 4k or faster FPS is a hardware limitation - the old Bionz XR can't handle that. Therefore i don't expect it to be fixed via firmware updates. A 1 mark III with a new Bionz XR processor will have it all, and hopefully it will finally be able for in-camera pixel shift and focus stacking. As for a A1 Mark II - it is a very good camera, one of the best, but it should cost less.
Do you have a Photoshop book that teaches how to retouch portraits that goes into dodge & burn & frequency separation?
That screen alone worth the upgrade imo. I got the A7Rv instead of the a1 because of the screen
Regarding the Eterna: There are pro cinematographers out there who want the “look” which comes with the wider sensor. Enough that at least one of the rental houses has prototyped their own rehoused GFX100 II to serve the market. Are there enough of these folks to make the Eterna worth producing? I have no idea but it is an interesting first try on Fuji’s part for the large crew projects. But for me? I see no particular use.
Sony owner & user.
I don't feel Sony supports its customers well via firmware upgrades.
Bug fixes should always be free, I'd be content if they added new features that could be done via firmware only & made a reasonable charge for them. Question then becomes what is a new feature vs a bug fix - eg, initial poor AF performance then being significantly improved via firmware - not really a bug or a new feature.
How much would a reasonable charge be for firmware adding new features though? For me, it rather depends on the significance of the new feature
However, I do not feel the A1 ii is a scam which could be done via firmware alone. There are some very significant chnages that are hardware only. Even the pre-Capture feature, I'm far from sure that it could have been done in firmware alone.
It's unclear just how much space, and how that code is allocated through the EPROM blocks. Some of the changes, and the risks of changes as module expand past their blocks, may not have been practical. Hopefully the new EPROM has ample space for changes. Sony might benefit from a more agile SDLC with more frequent small releases that are easier to test, and they have to have a better roll back process. I will be upgrading from the A1 to the A1ii after it's been in the field for a while.
Fujifilm makes awesome Cinema lenses, so they might know thing or two about filmmaking. I Don't think they are going to release a cinema camera with all the video problems of the GFX. The Eterna should be an awesome camera for the super niche market of high end films. Also, I agree and Like your take on The Sony a1II and the Firmware "issue"
i'm happy to pay for firmware any day of the week, provided they have features I actually want.
Can you think of any features that you might want updated or added that would warrant paying for them?
For all camera systems... things like waveforms, autofocus subject tracking (eye AF), precapture, shutter sounds, encryption / anti theft features. You only have to look at smartphones to realize what is capable for software additions. Japan has never really favoured software development, so they fall behind when compared to a western company like Google or Apple. Imagine android software integrated with canon, Nikon, or Sony cameras. Could be something really special!
Oh and a big one for me is highlight peaking / zebras in photo mode... I'm looking at you Nikon!
For my needs, the new Sony A1 Mark II feels more like a refresh than a major upgrade. The addition of Pre-Capture is the only standout improvement for me. For current owners, the $2500 upgrade cost seems steep given the incremental changes. I was hoping for a higher resolution option, a new macro lens, a new fisheye, and a compact GM 28-60 for underwater photography. A more affordable 500mm f/5.6 lens would have been a nice addition too. But then again, it’s Sony - they have their own thing going no one really seems to understand 😅
400 mm f4.5, 500 mm f4.5, 600 mm f5.6, 800 mm f8.0 would be also great to add as an option. And answering to other people below, YES I know 300 mm f2.8 with x2.0 is 600 mm f5.6, but you won't make 300 mm f2.8 as 1200 mm f11, and 800 mm f8.0 because it still would be lighter than 800 mm f6.3 pf from Nikon - sginificantly.
Tony, let`s hope that Sony give us an update on the A7RV, so we will have pre capture and also the Auto in the detection of peple, animals, etc. Canon has the last mentioned feature since the R5 Mark 1 !!!!
I have the A7R4 and it would be easy to give us focus stacking as in the A7R5 but none seen. Their attitude is you want them then pay more and buy a new camera.