The Sony A73/A7R3/A7S3/A9 Thread

Rojin said:
I guess it depends on how you use the camera, I use both in the same way and get very similar battery performance. Perhaps the A9 edges it but it's not a massive difference.
Click to expand...
I have no idea how you use your camera, but everyone I have seen in professional reviews and user feedback going from an Fuji to an A7RIII/A7III have seen a huge improvement in battery life. The Z battery is known for being a performer and this runs true in my real life usage in the same photographical situations I used my X-T2 in. It is almost double the capacity but my A7R3 seems to only sip from it. Lasts ages.
 
Last edited:
So I can swap my 5dmark2 for this camera for free but will still have to fork out for lenses.
But I looked at the prices and it makes me want to cry compared to the cost of canon L stuff.

and now im not sure if I should switch..
 
Richdog said:
I have no idea how you use your camera, but everyone I have seen in professional reviews and user feedback going from an Fuji to an A7RIII/A7III have seen a huge improvement in battery life. The Z battery is known for being a performer and this runs true in my real life usage in the same photographical situations I used my X-T2 in. It is almost double the capacity but my A7R3 seems to only sip from it. Lasts ages.
Click to expand...

I'd agree when you are talking about performance improvements over previous Sony bodies, but Fuji already performed better than those anyway. I use boost on my X-T2 as well, mainly shooting action and using the A9 the same way I have seen very little difference in performance. I can only assume there is a difference between A9 and the A7RIII/A7III as I don't see what you are describing at all.
 
DeathStorm said:
Assuming you're doing landscapes it should be pretty easy with an adapter and all the existing wide angles available, only major penalty of the adapter is AF consistency which isn't a problem here.
Click to expand...

I've seen very soft edges on shots with adapted wide angle lenses, there must be something with the way Sony design FE mount wide angles that's different to DSLR lenses.

The_Abyss said:
Is anyone else also waiting for the Tamron 28-75? I know that there was high demand, but getting a delivery date out of Wex or a stock date from anyone else is next to impossible. Same with the new Sigma Art range (have the 20mm 1.4 on order, along with the Tamron).
Click to expand...

I've seen a couple of reviews for the 28-75 mention the fact the lens fails to confirm AF and has to be dismounted and remounted for it to behave again. I'd probably wait for that to be fixed.
 
iamtheoneneo said:
So I can swap my 5dmark2 for this camera for free but will still have to fork out for lenses.
But I looked at the prices and it makes me want to cry compared to the cost of canon L stuff.

and now im not sure if I should switch..
Click to expand...

If you can swap a 5D2 for a Sony A7III I'd just do it, even if you just sell on there's money to be made there!
 
Rojin said:
I'd agree when you are talking about performance improvements over previous Sony bodies, but Fuji already performed better than those anyway. I use boost on my X-T2 as well, mainly shooting action and using the A9 the same way I have seen very little difference in performance. I can only assume there is a difference between A9 and the A7RIII/A7III as I don't see what you are describing at all.
Click to expand...
Doesn't sound normal. Couple of random examples:

Example 1 https://twitter.com/tonynorthrup/status/855103932716244992?lang=en

Tony Northrup on Twitter: "Sony a9 battery life: 2 hours of shooting, 4500 shots, 66% battery left #SonyA9 #SonyAlpha"
Click to expand...

Example 2 https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4283161

I just completed a series of shots with the a9 over 3 days:

  • Electronic shutter (1/400 - 1/2500 seconds)
  • Continuous AF, medium spot
  • Continuous high drive speed (20 fps)
  • Sony 100-400 G lens
  • Sony 1.4x TC
  • OSS and IBIS off
  • EVF, standard
I made about 7500 exposures. The battery was fully charged at the beginning. At the end, it was down to 42%. I did not chimp.

Pretty impressive.
Click to expand...

Plenty more if you google.
 
Richdog said:
Doesn't sound normal. Couple of random examples:

Example 1 https://twitter.com/tonynorthrup/status/855103932716244992?lang=en



Example 2 https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4283161



Plenty more if you google.
Click to expand...

20fps mentioned, I can machine gun the X-T2 and get thousands per battery as well. It doesn't mean much. Couple of hours and the battery is down to 66% sound about the same as mine, so not much different. I don't machine gun, which gives a false sense of longevity. My X-T2 has the same amount of battery over the same period. I'll use high fps in bursts, so could have a 1000 shots or so in the same period.
 
Rojin said:
20fps mentioned, I can machine gun the X-T2 and get thousands per battery as well. It doesn't mean much. Couple of hours and the battery is down to 66% sound about the same as mine, so not much different. I don't machine gun, which gives a false sense of longevity. My X-T2 has the same amount of battery over the same period. I'll use high fps in bursts, so could have a 1000 shots or so in the same period.
Click to expand...
Rojin lets not go back and forth about this too much. The new Sony batteries ARE almost double the size of the Fuji and everyone I have seen on the interwebs seems to be getting great to phenomenal battery life out of them on 3rd gen Sony cameras. If you from your testing and real-life use are not then I cannot really know what the reasons behind that are. However, the evidence for the vast majority of users seems to show otherwise.
 
Reported disappointing ca on that 35mm plus not as sharp as it could be. That plus the cost and weight made me decide it wasn't worth it over the f2.8 but I know you like your bokeh ;)
 
Richdog said:
Rojin lets not go back and forth about this too much. The new Sony batteries ARE almost double the size of the Fuji and everyone I have seen on the interwebs seems to be getting great to phenomenal battery life out of them on 3rd gen Sony cameras. If you from your testing and real-life use are not then I cannot really know what the reasons behind that are. However, the evidence for the vast majority of users seems to show otherwise.
Click to expand...

I did already say that I get similar performance to one of the sources you quote, is just that the Fuji isn't that much worse in actual use. Certainly not the 3x you quoted earlier in my own experience.

Edit: removed overly argumentative twaddle.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
I shot a FULL day wedding, over 5k images on 2 batteries.

Anyhow….CZ 35/1.4 arrived.

0k0tMXo.jpg
Click to expand...

Nice.

I've shot full day motorsports\airshows on 3 batteries with the X-T2, ~4k shots. Not as good, but not 3x worse either. I've said the A9 is a bit better, but just not nowhere near the 3x better mentioned on here earlier.
 
Rojin said:
Nice.

I've shot full day motorsports\airshows on 3 batteries with the X-T2, ~4k shots. Not as good, but not 3x worse either. I've said the A9 is a bit better, but just not nowhere near the 3x better mentioned on here earlier.
Click to expand...

12hours 13mins (between time stamp on 1st and last photo), camera was off for only 20mins the whole day, so LCD or EVF was on between shots.

Completely flat on 1 battery.
14% left on the 2nd.
5251 shots total.
 
Canon LP-E6, Sony FZ100 and the Sony FW50 side by side. I had to carry 3 FW50s with me and that was using an a6000. God knows how bad it would be on an a7R2 etc. Now I am happy going out for the day with a single FZ100.

Qz6ZxOMl.jpg

DBuRwqRl.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom