I worked for a global electronics company. Top executives demanded that divisions use each other's technology. They wanted to force the issue. At the top, this seems to make sense. But it doesn't always work when you look into the details. While we were all glad to take from each other what made sense for our products, it often didn't. And of course, there is a certain amount of 'Not invented here'. Also, once you become dependent on another division's technology, you are stuck with their schedules and all the other baggage that goes with it. It's often not practical.
A9III with GLOBAL shutter
- Thread starter ahalpert
- Start date
I worked for a global electronics company. Top executives demanded that divisions use each other's technology. They wanted to force the issue. At the top, this seems to make sense. But it doesn't always work when you look into the details. While we were all glad to take from each other what made sense for our products, it often didn't. And of course, there is a certain amount of 'Not invented here'. Also, once you become dependent on another division's technology, you are stuck with their schedules and all the other baggage that goes with it. It's often not practical.
scorsesefan
Veteran
Planning on going to the Sony Creators event again this year, so I'll ask again about new C cameras, but they're usually pretty tight lipped...
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I had wanted to buy the successor to the A7SIII or FX3 this year to have a 4th mirrorless camera for multicamera shoots but my thinking based on rumors and firmware updates is that they'll be a while coming. So I got the A9III instead to get the improved IBIS as well as variable shutter control (which inexplicably never came to the a7s/fx3). Global shutter is a bonus.
I don't believe that the A9III is a stop behind the A7SIII in DR. The A7SIII has NR that you can't turn off which probably inflates its reading by a stop. They're probably on par if you apply noise reduction to the A9III (which may be possible in camera?)
Either way, I rarely use the full dynamic range on the A7SIII. I must admit that the shadow detail does look better on my A7IV than on my A7SIII due to the better DR. But... I think I'm going to be fine! And now I get better IBIS, 4k120 with no crop (or a more detailed 4k60), variable shutter, a higher low (albeit not dual) base ISO. It'll be good. Let's see if I regret it.
And I bought it used for $5200 shipped. So if I want to trade it in for the FX3mk2 whenever that comes, I won't lose as much on the resale as I would if I had bought a new A9III.
cyvideo
Veteran
Abe. The A9III is an amazing camera. Most modern cameras are in the amazing class these days. But to date, no global shutter camera can match a rolling shutter sensor if we are comparing apples with apples sensor spec wise other than the shutter. Just download the various ISO sample files of the A7Siii and the A9iii and even the A9ii it's predecessor, or any other camera listed. Just compare the noise levels between those three cameras at any given ISO. Even at the A9iii second base ISO of 25600 the rolling shutter cameras exhibit considerably less noise. This is something we saw back when the Sony F5 and F55 came out. The global shutter F55 took both a DR and noise hit over the rolling shutter in the F5.
This whole article is worth a read for those interested in the topic.
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/6717086661/sony-a9-iii-image-quality-dynamic-range-analysis
As is CineD's
https://www.cined.com/sony-alpha-9-iii-lab-test-dynamic-range-and-latitude/
Attachments
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Iso 25600? Why would that be our benchmark? That iso is borderline unusable for me on the a7siii which has the high base iso of 12800 to help it out.
The dpreview article you linked says "our measurements show that it is comparable with cameras when operating at ISO 250"
So basically if I consider the performance of the a7iv when I increase the ISO by a stop and a third, that's what you'll get with the a9iii. For sure, that's worse. But I have zero problem pushing the a7iv that far.
The a7siii has noise reduction you can't turn off. And I've read that it adds about a stop of read noise due to the pointless quad Bayer sensor in the a7siii.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
My first impressions from noodling around with it at home are pretty much what one would expect. It feels like a noisy camera although the noise is very consistent throughout and doesn't particularly bother me aesthetically. IBIS seems improved. The hand grip is really nice, not that I'll ever use it.
Here's a chart from photons to photos comparing photography dynamic range of a7siii and a9iii. Some interesting observations:
You can get equal or superior DR on both cameras by going a stop below native ISO. Cleaner shadows at the expense of highlight clipping, I would imagine.
A7Siii has a stop more DR at base ISO than a9iii at base iso.
Matching the base ISO of the A9iii (what would be 2000 in log mode unlike the photo mode readings on the chart), the a9iii is slightly ahead of the a7siii but pretty much on par.
At what would be ISO 6400, the A9iii gets a little DR boost and is on par with its performance at ISO 4000. At that point, it has a stop more DR than the A7SIII and stays that way until the high base ISO on a7siii of 12800. After that, the two cameras are matched for DR and stay that way through the rest of the range.
That last part is sort of hard for me to believe because I'm used to seeing great results from the a7siii at 12800. But maybe it's just from all the noise reduction in video mode...
But basically it looks like the best performance of the a9iii matches the performance of the a7siii at ISO 1600 in log mode. Not amazing, but usable.
Here's a chart from photons to photos comparing photography dynamic range of a7siii and a9iii. Some interesting observations:
You can get equal or superior DR on both cameras by going a stop below native ISO. Cleaner shadows at the expense of highlight clipping, I would imagine.
A7Siii has a stop more DR at base ISO than a9iii at base iso.
Matching the base ISO of the A9iii (what would be 2000 in log mode unlike the photo mode readings on the chart), the a9iii is slightly ahead of the a7siii but pretty much on par.
At what would be ISO 6400, the A9iii gets a little DR boost and is on par with its performance at ISO 4000. At that point, it has a stop more DR than the A7SIII and stays that way until the high base ISO on a7siii of 12800. After that, the two cameras are matched for DR and stay that way through the rest of the range.
That last part is sort of hard for me to believe because I'm used to seeing great results from the a7siii at 12800. But maybe it's just from all the noise reduction in video mode...
But basically it looks like the best performance of the a9iii matches the performance of the a7siii at ISO 1600 in log mode. Not amazing, but usable.
cyvideo
Veteran
As your observations point out, there is very little to separate the two cameras on paper and as you have also experienced in real life. Where your A9iii will excel above all other cameras that don't have global shutters is when shooting a red carpet ceremony or parts of a wedding ceremony when dozens of flashguns are going off almost continuously. No dreaded 'flash banding'. That's where a global shutter on CMOS performs like the FT CCD sensor. We never had flash banding issues prior to the widespread uptake of CMOS sensors. And it goes without saying on high speed motion, the global shutter is king. Especially at higher shutter speeds.
Chris Young
Chris Young