Mike Wingate
Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Looks a great camera, back to reality. A new GX9 looks appealing and it takes my lenses, but, oh! Is a new model just around the corner.?
Sony A1 announced
- Thread starter exakta
- Start date
As someone who has photography as a hobby I'm glad that cameras like the A1 exist. I often marvel at some of the technological accomplishments of the human race. Is this camera for me? No. Does that make it any less of an accomplishment? No. Will I criticise it or those that choose to buy it? No. We are all free to make our own personal purchasing decisions. Just be happy for the fact that things like this exist and that some people will enjoy using them.
I just don't understand all of the vitriol on other sites, you know where I mean, and generally avoid them.
I just don't understand all of the vitriol on other sites, you know where I mean, and generally avoid them.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2018
- Messages
- 4,018
- Real Name
- Richard
Nice. I mean, if you are going to have all those megapixels, you may as well get a bigger sensor. It's pretty good value. The Hasselblad 100mp back is 24K, but then you need a camera body as well
Mike Wingate
Mu-43 Hall of Famer
It is like waiting for a bus, nothing for ages, then they all arrive. If other manufactures can deliver mega pixel cameras, where are the new m43 cameras from Panasonic?
People are complaining about nothing. I just got a pre-order invitation from B&H, and it's not $6500.00, it's only $6498.00. So...
As I shoot with both M4/3 and Sony FF, I find this new A1 to be great for the industry, but at the price they are asking it is not worth it to me, as it is for a very specialized group of photographers, just as is the new Olympus 150-400 f4.5 Pro lens. The highly touted 30FPS is well...no big deal to us EM1.3 owners as we can do 60FPS and 15FPS with the mechanical shutter, where the A1's mechanical shutter is limited to 10 FPS. 
What the announcement of this $6,500 USD camera has done is drive down the used prices for the Sony A7RIII, A7RIV and A9, all which are beautiful cameras and are now more affordable for the rest of us. 5 months ago I bought a like new 1,400 shutter click A7RIII (42MP) for $1,840. Today over at FM dot com there are 4 for sale at $1,600+/-, the A7RIV (61MP) is going for $2,400 to $2,500, as is the A9.
For any M4/3 shooters wanting to dip their toes into the Sony FF bodies, buying a lightly used A7RIII is a great buy right now. (It's a full a magnesium body with a 500,000 life shutter, so additional shutter clicks are fine.) I had the A7III, the 24MP version but there is no real IQ difference at all from the M4/3 20MP sensor. I upgraded to the RIII because of the 42MP, where there is an IQ difference, plus for the in-camera 1.5x crop ability to put out a 18.5MP raw file. My Zeiss Batis 135mm becomes a 202mm lens with just the push of a button and my 100-400 GM becomes a 150-600mm lens with no f-stop loss. Below is a photo of my 2 cameras with a 35mm (eq.) lens mounted and there really is no size or weight difference between them. The new A1 is the same size as my A7RIII but has a 2nd multifunction dial added on the top left deck. All the cameras mentioned here use the same ZF-100 battery which I usually get 600 plus photos from, and except for the original A9, all can be charged via USB-C. A big advantage to the Sony system is there are quite a few lens manufactures producing both AF and MF lenses, many with compact sizes and far less $$ than Sony charges for the same. Plus many of the MF lens have electronic contacts so data is transferred to the EXIF file and MF peaking and auto magnify make it easy to focus the MF lens.
Look, I love my EM1.3 and lenses, there are many advantages to it, but size and weight is really no longer as much as a difference as it used to be. My Sony kit with 5 high end primes (4 Zeiss and the Sony 20mm f1.8) is only 10 pounds including the Mindshift sling bag. With the Olympus Pro primes the weight would be about the same, but of course the small Olympus f1.8 compact primes would be less, but so might be the IQ.
What the announcement of this $6,500 USD camera has done is drive down the used prices for the Sony A7RIII, A7RIV and A9, all which are beautiful cameras and are now more affordable for the rest of us. 5 months ago I bought a like new 1,400 shutter click A7RIII (42MP) for $1,840. Today over at FM dot com there are 4 for sale at $1,600+/-, the A7RIV (61MP) is going for $2,400 to $2,500, as is the A9.For any M4/3 shooters wanting to dip their toes into the Sony FF bodies, buying a lightly used A7RIII is a great buy right now. (It's a full a magnesium body with a 500,000 life shutter, so additional shutter clicks are fine.) I had the A7III, the 24MP version but there is no real IQ difference at all from the M4/3 20MP sensor. I upgraded to the RIII because of the 42MP, where there is an IQ difference, plus for the in-camera 1.5x crop ability to put out a 18.5MP raw file. My Zeiss Batis 135mm becomes a 202mm lens with just the push of a button and my 100-400 GM becomes a 150-600mm lens with no f-stop loss. Below is a photo of my 2 cameras with a 35mm (eq.) lens mounted and there really is no size or weight difference between them. The new A1 is the same size as my A7RIII but has a 2nd multifunction dial added on the top left deck. All the cameras mentioned here use the same ZF-100 battery which I usually get 600 plus photos from, and except for the original A9, all can be charged via USB-C. A big advantage to the Sony system is there are quite a few lens manufactures producing both AF and MF lenses, many with compact sizes and far less $$ than Sony charges for the same. Plus many of the MF lens have electronic contacts so data is transferred to the EXIF file and MF peaking and auto magnify make it easy to focus the MF lens.
Look, I love my EM1.3 and lenses, there are many advantages to it, but size and weight is really no longer as much as a difference as it used to be. My Sony kit with 5 high end primes (4 Zeiss and the Sony 20mm f1.8) is only 10 pounds including the Mindshift sling bag. With the Olympus Pro primes the weight would be about the same, but of course the small Olympus f1.8 compact primes would be less, but so might be the IQ.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Last edited:
Damn, the A1 features 1/200 sec e-shutter. I hope that the next gen OMD will get to 1/500 sec. Or even better. Anyway with the Fuji X-E4 intro today and aggressive price tag ($800) M4/3 is in real push now. No wonder the PEN F II is not happening.
Do you know something the rest of us don’t? I mean I suppose that’s probable, but you sound very definitive in your statement.
I'm not sure what PEN FII was rumoured to have but this X-E4 can't even match Panny GX9 specs and yet it's more expensive. It's funny how DPR managed to list only entry level APS-C models like Z50 (which is not a rangefinder style camera) as competitors and happily ignore MFT entirely. Even G9 is sold at practically the same price.
X-E4 does not even have IBIS which makes it pretty much DOA in 2021 as a street and travel camera when compared to said GX9 which has dual-IS, feature that is supported by almost all >25mm panny lenses. It's irrelevant if X-E4 has few pixels more and marginally better DR when all your run-and-gun camera can deliver are shaken, not stirred images.
All Fuji consumer models suffer from the very same handicap as MFT - even Fuji APS-C is not FF which will pretty soon be the only format where the camera sensor monopoly known as Sony will bother to develop new sensors. Not least because it's also a very convenient way to get rid of smaller competitors who did not jump into FF bandwagon.
The other new model GFX-100S is on the other hand a very interesting camera. They managed to squeeze a 102MP Medium format sensor with IBIS into a traditional camera body that is about the same size as largest FF models and it's even cheaper than Sony A1. Anyone not interested in serious videography is forced to have a closer look at Fuji in this price category ... until their sole sensor supplier - Sony - decides to pull the plug on this business as well.
Last edited:
PakkyT
Mu-43 Hall of Famer
That might be a fun one to rent for a weekend with a basic lens just to see what kind of photos you could get out of it.
Yes wider angle primes and mirrorless FF is not bad. It is the long lenses (primes and zooms) that get to be the monsters. But a mirrorless full frame with the old basic nifty-50 and an "event-35" should be roughly on par size & weight size with the E-M1.x with its wider to short telephoto primes. I could probably by happy with just that if I was ever forced out of m43 and was looking for something else.
John M Flores
Super Moderator
I wish my life and work were interesting enough to warrant this camera. Alas.
Yeah - but that argument only really applies if you stick to primes and under about 100mm focal length. Throw in a 70-200 f2.8 (or even f4) and things change very quickly.
Paul, first off my intention was not meant to be argumentative but more as informative, as I am a 8 year M4/3 vet with now 2-1/2 years experience with Sony FF. I was giving information on my Sony Portrait kit which is all primes. I agree with you about the Sony’s zooms, many are big and old school designs coming from DSLR designs. I don’t own what is considered the standard Pro kit of f2.8 zooms of 24-70 and 70-200 for Sony for this reason. Do have the 3 Pro f2.8 zooms from Olympus though.
There are some smaller FF mirrorless small zooms of recent. Tamron has 3 zooms with constant f2.8 for Sony that are lightweight and smaller in size, though they have slightly different zoom ranges. I have the 17-28mm and it is slightly smaller and 115g lighter than my Oly 7-14mm f2.8 Pro, and it can accept 67mm filters, which is a big PITA and very expensive to do with the 7-14 Pro. Recently Canon has come out with significantly smaller 24-70 and 70-200 designs for their mirrorless bodies and has or will have in both f2.8 and f4 eventually. Maybe some day Sony will follow suit, as Sony has started to update older Zeiss prime designs that were first released for Sony, with their own updated and smaller G and GM lens designs. But for the most part, you are right, the zooms are bigger and heavier with FF mirrorless.
The one zoom I can make a direct comparison to is the 100-400; I have had the Sony 100-400 f4.5-5.6 GM zoom for a little over a year, and just about 2 months ago I got the new Olympus 100-400 f5.6-6.3. The 2 are almost identical in size the Oly is 0.7mm longer, but the Sony, due to more glass, being 1/3 stop faster and having dual, direct drive motors, is 5mm wider and 260g more in weight. The Olympus becomes a 200-800mm of course on the M4/3 bodies, but the Sony becomes a 150-600mm on my A7RIII with the APSC crop of 1.5x. If I really need the reach I can add the 1.4x TC which makes the Sony a 210-840mm lens with crop, though I lose a stop. And the Oly 100-400 takes TC’s too so it wins the reach category and it is rated for weather resistance, where the Sony is just stated to be WR. But as far as AF speed and accuracy, tracking, lens OIS and being (slightly) sharper, the Sony is a higher quality lens, and it should be, it cost $800 USD more. Think 300mm f4 Pro quality. And the Sony eye detect works with this lens, where with my Olympus eye detect does not work at longer distances, the one fault of an otherwise excellent eye detect AF. I will keep both lenses, the Olympus mostly for wildlife and any seaborne events, and the Sony for airshows and travel/events where the 400mm, or 600mm with APSC crop, is more than enough.
And because we all luv camera porn, here is my prime portrait setup for both systems. Olympus EM1.3 w/17mm f1.8, Sigma 30mm f1.4, Nocticron 42.5 f1.2 and Oly 75mm f1.8. Sony A7RIII w/35mm ZA f2.8, 55mm ZA f1.8, Batis 85mm f1.8 and Batis 135mm f2.8. The difference in size is nil and weight is less than 1 pound.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Last edited:
I agree. "Vitriol" is far too strong. Light hearted ribbing maybe. Some jealousy (as John Flores mentioned - I wish my life and pictures were interesting enough to afford this). I don't see anyone saying it's stupid or bad. I think overall, it's "I can't afford this" but very little "it's overpriced." People know what it is. It's just out of reach for most.
Last edited:
If they offered me one, I would sell it, because it doesn't appeal to me at all. That new Fuji camera on the other hand... looks like a pleasant shooting experience, which is more interesting to me than cold, hard specs. (Otherwise I wouldn't be using an Olympus camera.)
RickinAust
Mu-43 Veteran
In Australia a camera store has it for pre order for $9,999.95. Phew, I thought it's be like $10K 
It's probably worth the price, for some people, but not for me.
It's probably worth the price, for some people, but not for me.
My first thought exactly and honestly if I had to chose between either this new Sony or one of the Leica M rangefinders, I'd actually rather get a Leica. But that's just me, I'm pretty sure the Sony will not only serve gearheads but also professionals right. However such prices are well out of my range, I could buy a whole MFT system, a whole Fuji-X system or actually a mix of both with that kind of money.A1 or Leica? Tough call
Yeah, that price isn't unheard of for Sony though. Look at the office of the 600mm f4.And to think that people were complaining about the price of the 150-400 Pro
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemojiCopyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
