Il fatto che la coppia abbia usato curiosamente l'85 ed il 70-200 fa pensare che avendo osservato delle prestazioni non conformi ne abbiano voluto cogliere la notizia per fare SHOCK (Renzi n.d.r.).
Solo che bigjim l'ha usato anche con il 600 e da quel che si legge questi problemi non sembrerebbero esserci.
Io in ogni caso trovo assurdo che non abbia evidenziato i problemi con il 70-200 o non abbia aggiornato il fw; poi....se tutto quel che gira sia vero, frutto di esaltazioni o altro lo vedrò.
“ I have seen a few reviews that mention the camera sometimes jumps between the bird's eye and shoulder when pointed at a static bird on a perch, and I did experience a little of this particularly when photographing a dark bird with dark eyes and especially while using extreme focal length (particularly the 200-600 with the 2X installed), but the overall performance is what is important to me, and it is exceptional: noticeably better than the already impressive a9 and a9II. I do expect that there will be a fair number of people complaining about this feature (bird eye auto-focus), as we should have reasonable expectations: if a crow or raven is gliding towards me at a high altitude, I wouldn't expect the camera to be able to see, let alone lock onto its eyes - smile.
I immediately set the camera to compressed RAW to be able to achieve the full 30 FPS capture rate and the resulting +/- 57MB files are better than anything that I have seen: More details, less noise, richer color, and more dynamic range. I was unable to see any difference between images made using the electronic shutter and those made using the mechanical shutter. I want to be crystal clear that I won't be able to extract the most out of the RAW files until Adobe or Capture One releases an update to their RAW conversion software. Sony's Imaging Edge Software is the only way I can see the files, and I have always been able to squeeze so much more from either Adobe or Capture One (perhaps due to my lack of understanding of the software, rather than software shortfall, I dunno). So I do expect to be even more impressed as these software updates are released.
I had planned to release my mini-review earlier this week but wanted to hold out and see if anyone found any weaknesses that I could debunk here. I am glad I waited because a lot of attention went to a review video that states that the camera is not capable of shooting 30FPS. It turns out that they used the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 GM lens which needs a firmware update to achieve the full 30FPS that will be released sometime soon. I tested the a1 with my workhorse lenses (and teleconverters) and can confirm that the following lenses and teleconverters are all capable of capturing 30FPS in COMPRESSED RAW (The capture rate is slower using uncompressed RAW):
Sony 600/4 GM
Sony 600/4 GM with 1.4X
Sony 600/4 with 2X
Sony 200-600
Sony 200-600 with 1.4X
Sony 200-600 with 2X
An interesting find was how well the affordable 200-600mm worked with both the 1.4X and 2X, and it was able to maintain the 30FPS capture rate with the 2X in APS-C mode which resulted in a 23-24MB file during my tests. The 200-600 is a great and affordable lens that costs about 20% of the prime 600/4 GM, so there are trade-offs. The AF acquisition and tracking speed are slowed down and the image quality is slightly degraded when the 2X is used, but it still offers remarkably good results. It is not likely I would use the 1,800mm for birds in flight because there would be too much atmospheric compression degrading the image quality, but I do see using this combination extremely close for incredible close-up details at the minimum focusing distance of the combination. „
JuzaPhoto contiene link affiliati Amazon ed Ebay e riceve una commissione in caso di acquisto attraverso link affiliati.
