p.4 #1 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Memo to RoamingScott, Z9 sensor is BSI like all stacked sensors. Nothing other than size I see in the A1 that outperforms the Z9 except an on paper higher res EVF that drops resolution as soon as you touch the AF button. Cameras are so equally matched it's pointless exercise to worry about differences. I am just as happy to use a Z9 sized body as an A1 sized body. No I don't care one bit about 30fps RAW or JPG. Both sensational cameras.
Put it this way I'll actually be buying both these cameras. Maybe if Sony offered PF lenses I could just stick with them, but it'll be a very long time at best before that happens. With Nikon's road map showing more 2 more PF lenses and a brilliant 400 f/2.8 with built-in 1.4x TC coming, I'm happy to pick and choose the best glass from each camp. My next lens is the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 II however, amazing they got it down to 1kg with no compromises unlike Canon.
p.4 #2 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
NonDecaf wrote:
OK I looked it up and Z9 is 1340g with cards/battery, A1 is 1219g with grip/cards/battery. A difference of 121 grams is not what I would call "heavy". Yes, ergonomics is a personal matter. I don't like skinny cameras because I can't comfortably hold them, especially with heavy lenses, or when I am holding it in one hand. Sony has been successively increasing the grip and camera size every generation, they just need to continue doing that
E mount may be open, but I believe no third-party lenses can do 30fps. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think this limitation is imposed by Sony. I'm sure non-sports/action shooters don't care about this, but we're comparing the A1 so its probably relevant here.
When I'm changing lenses on my A1 it takes a while for the shutter to come down (when you switch it off), and on the Z9 its instant. Same when turning the camera on - its instant on the Z9. Anything I can do to save time in my workflow is valuable to me. Some people leave the camera on, but the exposed sensor is somewhat of a dust magnet, and its best to have it covered between lens changes....Show more →
I mean, it is super weird that you added a grip randomly to the A1. I will never, ever use a grip. I don't often do portraits and there is no performance gain from batteries. So, 700 vs 1350. Astronomically more. The bulk increase is also off the charts, which impacts traveling with the camera(not to mention terrible handling imo).
I have the A1 and I shoot a bit of everything. I can assure you that in a market that is dominated by enthusiasts, as pros continue to dwindle, having 4x the native lenses to choose from is important. Not only that, aren't you stuck with only 30 fps in jpegs on the z9 or have the specs changed?
p.4 #4 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
chez wrote:
Just hang a 1.3 pound weight onto your camera and walk around with that camera / weight hanging off your shoulder / neck / wrist for a few days. That might give you some insight.
I don't need to do that 'for a few days', I shot with pro bodies for years, day in, day out. Far more comfortable in the hand, better ergonomics. Even traveled and hiked with them for weeks/months on end.
To each their own. I'm big, my hands are big. Feel free to tell everyone they're wrong, time and again.
p.4 #5 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
shadow9d9 wrote:
I mean, it is super weird that you added a grip randomly to the A1. I will never, ever use a grip. I don't often do portraits and there is no performance gain from batteries. So, 700 vs 1350. Astronomically more. The bulk increase is also off the charts, which impacts traveling with the camera(not to mention terrible handling imo).
I have the A1 and I shoot a bit of everything. I can assure you that in a market that is dominated by enthusiasts, as pros continue to dwindle, having 4x the native lenses to choose from is important. Not only that, aren't you stuck with only 30 fps in jpegs on the z9 or have the specs changed?
There isn't anything "super weird" except you not realizing that many of us prefer using cameras with grips, and that is what I will be using as a point of comparison - for my use. For people who hate grips, the Z9 or R3 is not even on their radar, so no point even comparing it.
The fact is that Sony (like Canon/Nikon/Fuji/Panasonic) continues investing time and money making grips for so many of their cameras. Heck, there are plenty of third-party companies making grips. Seems to me like there is plenty of demand for these grips
p.4 #6 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Yep, everybody will choose the camera that fits their preferences best. Argue specs all day long, at least there is some basis for objective comparisons. Form factor, weight, and ergonomics, are purely subjective. To try and push a position based on the superiority of your personal preference is hubris. Just state what your preferences are and reasoning so that it may be helpful to another with similar needs.
I will start with mine.
For me, I am an all around shooter. I want the most agile and configurable camera system I can put together. I have arrived at the Sony a1 as the best solution for me.
High resolution sensor can be shot with excellent IQ in FF or APSC.
AF system offers many options that allow me to get superb results whether shooting the fastest action or MF on a tripod.
Same with color and the whole exposure triangle components of Aperture, Shutter Speed, and ISO.
Supports a wide range of file formats in both stills and video.
Highly customizable menu and physical control systems. Giving me the ability to easily, and instantly configure the camera to different optimizations in response to conditions and subject.
The widest selection of native lenses both OEM and third party available in the market. Plus excellent support for adapting non native lenses.
The base camera form factor is small, light, and flexible as well.
I shoot it bare when I want the smallest lightest form factor.
I add an "L" bracket when I want a slightly bigger form factor that is easily and comfortable to use hand held, on monopod, or on a tripod.
I add the OEM battery grip when I will be shooting big glass hand held, or subjects that will often be composed in portrait orientation.
As you can see, the a1 provides the highest levels of performance, functionality, configuration, and form factor flexibility currently available. To me that is my preference. That is why I shoot the a1.
Sony was the first, and also the only camera company on the market that offered these advantages when I first purchased the a9 some years ago. The a1 was a huge step forward in these attributes. The most amazing thing is that if these are your criteria too, Sony still is the only camera company that can offer you that complete package today. With both Nikon and Canon choosing to enter the high performance stacked sensor mirrorless market in a large, heavy form factor, it looks like it will remain that way for a while.
If the larger form factor cameras are your preference, and you don't want flexibility in that, then both Nikon, and Canon, will have offerings that may be better for you soon. It looks like all my criteria up until the form factor may be met to an acceptable degree by the Z9. So it now comes down to form factor as the primary preference. I would never argue against such a choice. My choice is only superior for me and my preferences.
p.4 #7 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
RoamingScott wrote:
To say that Nikon showed balls by getting rid of the mechanical shutter is very weird and shows a lot of brand bias. There is no advantage to having fewer options (same with the size argument). Also the A1 doesnt have heat issues, so that was a very goofy statement on their part calling the Z9 size an advantage.
Your statement is actually the goofy one?
It DOES take a brave willingness for risk to put out a camera without a mechanical shutter....do you see any other body with no mechanical shutter? Is it brand bias to point out something one brand does differently than another...nope...it's called objectivity...not bias. Notice the article points out Sony put the AF in small bodies...I notice you don't seem to be claiming brand bias there but only when a feature pertains to Nikon. That's "goofy"...or worse.
"There is no advantage to having fewer options"
Again...a goofy statement....there is an advantage to not having a mechanical shutter...as in..fewer shutter options....there's one less thing to break and electronic shutters typically don't have anything that will fail....and with no mechanical shutter there's obviously a lower dependency on mechanic parts for repairs....(think current situation that is dead obvious to all on this planet that you haven't thought of....one single necessary part that can't be sourced can stop a repair or production for who knows how long...and the future is not bright with this administration handling policies in ways that obviously aren't pro-America at their core...so companies have to think of how politics can affect their parts supply and plan their product feature sets and parts availability likelihood accordingly)....
Nikon has smaller bodies....the Z series in case you haven't googled in years..... the Z 9 is a flagship, just like Canon's R3 and upcoming R1 and all the subsequent full size models as well...and that tech from full size Z 9 will trickle down to the smaller bodied Z6 and Z7 and new models later...as camera technology has done for decades of the same pattern over and over....
The only thing "goofy" is not noticing the obvious and being able to interpret it objectively and based on well reasoned consideration of bigger picture matters.
p.4 #8 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
chez wrote:
Just hang a 1.3 pound weight onto your camera and walk around with that camera / weight hanging off your shoulder / neck / wrist for a few days. That might give you some insight.
Uh huh. Name one situation other than poorly planned tourism that this situation has played out in your life.
If you're carrying gear for days it goes in a backpack, waist pack, or both, or in trunk of car....don't know of anyone hanging a camera off their neck all day for days with no relief.
"I can't fathom how the Z9 at almost twice the weight of the A1 feeling more ergonomic after lugging it for a day or two"
Might want to google the definition of "ergonomic"....it has nothing to do with weight...has to do with comfort of grip.....ergonomics is about how well a human hand or body physically meshes with a created physical product....a car seat can be very ergonomic....or a better example might be the steering wheel....and again...has nothing to do with the weight of the steering wheel, or the seat, or the car itself.
p.4 #9 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Maxxus46 wrote:
Heavy and large camera for sure...but I guess some DSLR diehards want that. I do not, owned a Canon 1dx Mkii at one point and hated the size and weight . Also it's funny how some assume because it's bigger it must be tougher... But thats actually opposite in the engineering world. Large areas within a magnesium frame are open to more flex and vibration unless structural reinforcement points are added, which adds more weight. Also not uncommon for a large DSLR to get dropped on the ground from waste level and stop functioning all together (heavier it is the harder the impact!). So completely false Narratives. I know the A1 feels very well made, robust even and will stand up to any full sized DSLR in durability yet is very compact in comparison. ...Show more →
Please don't pretend you know the engineering world.
Did your brilliant mind even think for one second that all the decisions to use magnesium and the design itself by companies like Canon, Pentax, Nikon, Sony (their DSLR's) ALL came about by drum rolll....engineers
"I know the A1 feels very well made, robust even and will stand up to any full sized DSLR in durability"
You would know right? From all your years in the field doing stress tests and real world comparisons of impact testing?
"Also it's funny how some assume because it's bigger it must be tougher... But thats actually opposite in the engineering world. "
Opposite would mean smaller is tougher.... uh huh....smaller amounts of material are tougher than large amounts of material....that's why cars are made out of the thinnest forms of steel and aluminum and not thicker forms of steel and aluminum.....or wait....
p.4 #11 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
chez wrote:
Just hang a 1.3 pound weight onto your camera and walk around with that camera / weight hanging off your shoulder / neck / wrist for a few days. That might give you some insight.
p.4 #12 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
LocoPhoto wrote:
Your statement is actually the goofy one?
It DOES take a brave willingness for risk to put out a camera without a mechanical shutter....do you see any other body with no mechanical shutter?
I wouldn't call it goofy. Just factually incorrect. Yes there a other cameras that are mechanical shutterless. In fact more cameras are made today without a mechanical shutter than with one. Pretty much every smart phone camera, point and shoot cameras, security cameras, industrial cameras. In fact mechanical shutters are pretty much limited to the relatively small production of ICL cameras. But even in ICL cameras not having a mechanical shutter is not new nor unique to Nikon. One example is the Sigma camera line.
Nikon may be first to do it in an integrated grip ICL camera. But that is not a huge nor brave thing to do considering. It does sound like an accountant contribution as much as an engineering one. It absolutely does force capability compromise in some areas as well. Flash sync speed limitation being the most mentioned one.
Less expensive, yes. Less maintenence, probably yes. Brave, not so much.
p.4 #13 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
1bwana1 wrote:
I wouldn't call it goofy. Just factually incorrect. Yes there a other cameras that are mechanical shutterless. In fact more cameras are made today without a mechanical shutter than with one. Pretty much every smart phone camera, point and shoot cameras, security cameras, industrial cameras. In fact mechanical shutters are pretty much limited to the relatively small production of ICL cameras. But even in ICL cameras not having a mechanical shutter is not new nor unique to Nikon. One example is the Sigma camera line.
Nikon may be first to do it in an integrated grip ICL camera. But that is not a huge nor brave thing to do considering. It does sound like an accountant contribution as much as an engineering one. It absolutely does force capability compromise in some areas as well. Flash sync speed limitation being the most mentioned one.
Less expensive, yes. Less maintenence, probably yes. Brave, not so much....Show more →
Exactly! It's only meaningful if that means global shutter / super fast readout speed. The flash sync at 1/200s (with shutter, whatever that means according to official Nikon specs) shows that readout speed is probably in the same ballpark (albeit a bit faster) as A1 so nothing groundbreaking...
It's mostly a cost-cutting measure.
p.4 #14 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
True, the claimed difference in sensor scan speed even if real is not big enough to provide any increases in performance or capability. It is not what enabled Nikon to delete the mechanical imaging shutter. That capability has been around in similar camera form factors (ICL) since the Sony released the a9 4 years ago.
Nov 08, 2021 at 05:47 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #15 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
1bwana1 wrote:
True, the claimed difference in sensor scan speed even if real is not big enough to provide any increases in performance or capability. It is not what enabled Nikon to delete the mechanical imaging shutter. That capability has been around in similar camera form factors (ICL) since the Sony released the a9 4 years ago.
To be clear the difference between the A1 and Z9 is not meaningful, but the difference between both the A1 and Z9 and the A9(II) is meaningful in that the A1 and Z9 can do flash sync of 1/200 and the A9 (II) cannot. That capability has only been around since the A1 and does not date back 4 years. Please quit saying the capability to delete the mechanical shutter has been around for 4 years. The A9(II) is a great camera but it would have made no sense for Sony to delete the mechanical shutter on that camera. Sony even recommended always using the mechanical shutter with flash. Following that recommendation the A9(II) without mechanical shutter would have been a camera that couldn't use flash.
p.4 #16 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Memo to RoamingScott, Z9 sensor is BSI like all stacked sensors. Nothing other than size I see in the A1 that outperforms the Z9 except an on paper higher res EVF that drops resolution as soon as you touch the AF button. Cameras are so equally matched it's pointless exercise to worry about differences. I am just as happy to use a Z9 sized body as an A1 sized body. No I don't care one bit about 30fps RAW or JPG. Both sensational cameras.
Put it this way I'll actually be buying both these cameras. Maybe if Sony offered PF lenses I could just stick with them, but it'll be a very long time at best before that happens. With Nikon's road map showing more 2 more PF lenses and a brilliant 400 f/2.8 with built-in 1.4x TC coming, I'm happy to pick and choose the best glass from each camp. My next lens is the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 II however, amazing they got it down to 1kg with no compromises unlike Canon....Show more →
Nikon, like Canon has one giant advantage over Sony and that is sports lenses and the availability of used sports lenses. Just checked the buy and sell forum and Nikon 400 2.8's are bought and sold regularly. And Nikon offers a 120-300 2.8 which is a brilliant focal length for sports shooters. I think they also have a 500f4 that is readily available. Sony has a 400 that is very expensive with no cheaper earlier version to offer those who can't afford the $11k+ for a 400. Sony doesn't have a native E mount 300. I know of zero Sony sports shooters (granted, I only know a small handful of Sony sports shooters) who would or have bought the Sony A mount 300. Yes, Sony also has the 600 f4 but I don't know of any sports shooters who prefer that focal length. I take that back, we do have one local Canon guy who shoots football with his 600. But again, those are rare and again, Sony doesn't yet have a good used market for 600s.
Look, I love the A1 and mated with the 400 2.8 GM, it's a great combination. But if Canon can produce an very good, competitive R1, I'd be tempted to go back to Canon just for the lenses. And if I can be tempted, I know that means lots of Canon guys would have zero reason to look at Sony. I think the same will hold for Nikon guys now with the Z9.
We can argue/discuss the features and ergonomics of the A1, R3 and Z9 all day long, but for most, if not all, of my sports shooting friends, it comes down to the lenses they already own or can reasonably purchase. All of these bodies can produce excellent images. No doubt.
p.4 #17 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Steve Spencer wrote:
To be clear the difference between the A1 and Z9 is not meaningful, but the difference between both the A1 and Z9 and the A9(II) is meaningful in that the A1 and Z9 can do flash sync of 1/200 and the A9 (II) cannot. That capability has only been around since the A1 and does not date back 4 years. Please quit saying the capability to delete the mechanical shutter has been around for 4 years. The A9(II) is a great camera but it would have made no sense for Sony to delete the mechanical shutter on that camera. Sony even recommended always using the mechanical shutter with flash. Following that recommendation the A9(II) without mechanical shutter would have been a camera that couldn't use flash....Show more →
You are obviously right, but I think you might have missed the main point, which is that the lack of mechanical shutter is not a feature (especially when A1 has been present on the market for close to 9 months now) .
I know it's marketing gimmick but it's irritating. It's like saying that A1's lack of full mechanical shutter is a "feature"...
p.4 #18 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
Dave Sanders wrote:
I don't need to do that 'for a few days', I shot with pro bodies for years, day in, day out. Far more comfortable in the hand, better ergonomics. Even traveled and hiked with them for weeks/months on end.
To each their own. I'm big, my hands are big. Feel free to tell everyone they're wrong, time and again.
Feel free to tell everyone that a big heavy bulky camera is more ergonomic and comfortable to drag along than a compact light camera. Too each their own...but heavy and big does not make it ergonomically better after a 12 hour day in your hands.
p.4 #19 · "Nikon Z9 vs Sony A1 The 10 main differences"
LocoPhoto wrote:
Uh huh. Name one situation other than poorly planned tourism that this situation has played out in your life.
If you're carrying gear for days it goes in a backpack, waist pack, or both, or in trunk of car....don't know of anyone hanging a camera off their neck all day for days with no relief.
"I can't fathom how the Z9 at almost twice the weight of the A1 feeling more ergonomic after lugging it for a day or two"
Might want to google the definition of "ergonomic"....it has nothing to do with weight...has to do with comfort of grip.....ergonomics is about how well a human hand or body physically meshes with a created physical product....a car seat can be very ergonomic....or a better example might be the steering wheel....and again...has nothing to do with the weight of the steering wheel, or the seat, or the car itself.
You and I have different views of travel. My travels are focused on photography and spend my days walking the markets or alleys and documenting the culture...with a camera in my hand the entire time. Yes, I might stop for something to eat, but I have consistent 12 hour days, sometimes more, out looking and taking photos. What I have in my pack is other gear, but I'm always ready to take images.
I disagree with you. Weight does influence how ergonomic a camera is as muscle fatigue greatly affects your comfort.
