Sony a9 III Review - Why doesn't this cost MORE than A1?!
The a9iii leads the Alpha range in SO MANY ways - and has their latest Sensor technology... shouldn't this cost more than the A1 - or shouldn't the A1 cheaper?
Check out my Sony Alpha Setup Guide: geni.us/Sonyalpha
Grab the free guide to Portraiture: geni.us/portraiture
a9iii at B&H Photo: bhpho.to/40rwjvs
SAMPLE RAW FILES: learn.mattgranger.com/courses...
PRIVACY and DISCLOSURE:
* Matt Granger is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com
* Matt Granger is a participant in the B&H Photo Video affiliate program that provides an advertising commission if you purchase through our links.
* If you purchase something from our affiliate links will get a small commission with no extra cost to you.
* You can read my complete Ethics and Conduct statement: mattgranger.com/ethics
TIMELINE
00:00 Welcome
00:20 The New Generation
01:10 The Body
02:19 Screen
03:05 THE SPEED
03:45 Festival
04:12 Video
05:07 Best of the Best
06:30 AF & Dynamic Range
07:00 Speed Limitations
08:50 Bird Photography
09:18 The Sensor
10:30 Image Quality
11:40 Better than expected
13:00 Pricing
14:13 NICHE Camera
SAMPLE RAW FILES: learn.mattgranger.com/courses/a9iii Check out my Sony Alpha Setup Guide: geni.us/Sonyalpha Grab the free guide to Portraiture: geni.us/portraiture a9iii at B&H Photo: bhpho.to/40rwjvs
I sell my a7iii, to get a9iii or a7rv, What do you recommend ?
Well done review. There was one other niche you can add to your list: indoor concert / venue shooters. I shoot some theater dance work, and while I don't need 120FPS (30 is plenty for most leaps and technical work), that global shutter would accomplish several things for me: 1. It eliminates the dratted flickering and strobing of the lights, which is getting worse and worse as theaters use more and more LEDs for everything from spots to dazzling and shifting multicolor light beams (shakes fist at sky over white balance issues). But that in turn gets me... 2. Higher shutter speeds even on single frames. The flicker right now means I have to keep my shutter speed low enough (and what that is shifts from scene to scene) to minimize banding and strobing (the anti-flicker compensation in the older Alphas is good, but not perfect, and requires constant futzing), and that makes for blurry dance shots (or at least less crisp ones). And that means... 3. I can actually shoot in Shutter Priority. Right now I often have to be fully manual to adjust for flicker and lighting changes from scene to scene, and that distracts from paying attention to the scenes. I'll gladly deal with 24MP instead of something higher if that means my keeper rate is better and my action shots are crisper - can't fix blur even at 50MP.
Totally agree with this point. I also shoot live theatre shows and just last month I was dealing with a combo of LED and Projectors for said show The a1 did fine, but there were a few fast scenes I basically had to choose between in-even light or a LOT of blur, yey!
I feel like the biggest deal with the a9iii is the RAW precapture. That's fantastic. Now if they'd have done it at 45Mp and skipped the 120fps, i feel theyd have won more folks. Very few need or want 120, but soooo many want hugh res precapture
Totally aggree !!! (Concerning MP, even 35MP would have been a 'trade back' I was going to accept.)
Correct. Pre capture in RAW is the number one feature that’s missing from the Z9/8 and Sony a1, a7r5. I’ve used the jpeg version but that’s not part of my normal work flow - I.e. not good enough Nikon.
@@refuztosay9454 Is it reasonable to think that "all" cameras could be retrofitted with (now lacking) Pre-capture - simply trough firmware update ?
That is a pellet the kingfisher coughed up ,not a rock and it is digested fish or invertebrates that it is previously caught that it is unable to pass through much like owls with pellets ,bones and fish scales.
Maybe to you it's a pellet but to that bird, it was a bolder.. It's all a matter of perspective.
@@MrJacks1959 The technical term is pellet all kingfishers have the ability to do this ,it is parts of a fish they can not digest if you have not noticed a kingfisher does not have the ability to use a knife and fork so has to swallow fish whole.
Well Done Matt!!! Fair & Comprehensive Man!! Your work continues to be stellar!!
Thanks mate.
As a part-time birder, 24 MP isn't enough. As a part-time landscape shooter, a base ISO of 250 is much too high. The A9 III is definitely a sports camera above all else, and for that it's great.
Quick question, why is 250 too much for landscape? If it's an exposure thing, you can crank the shutter speed (or just use ND filters?). If it's noise, this thing can fire off 30 frames in less than a second, take those into photoshop and do median merge, and you basically have a noise free image.
@@Photo-Jay you get a cleaner image at ISO 100 than at 250. Your suggestions are just extra work. I would use an ND filter to lengthen the exposure if necessary but not to compensate for a high ISO. Yes, I've used over 100 when wind requires a higher shutter speed to freeze leaf motion. But I generally prefer 100, as do most landscape photographers.
totally agree about the niche! I am primarily a Corporate and docu style videographer that dables in sports and only shoot photos 15% of the time. But that 15% of the time means I need to own rather than rent. Realistically the A7iv is the correctly priced camera for me as a backup to my fx6, fx3 combo...but I'm going to try the a9iii because I'm always taking photos against led walls at events, don't need a large megapixel count and like to film/photo motocross, golfing, soccer and baseball. It's a bit expensive for my work but it falls into a hobby and personal side so I'm willing to try.
For me as a wildlife photographer the Pre-capture is the main attraction of the A9iii over the A1, while 24mp v 50mp is the main thing against the A9iii. The Global shutter is fine, but I have never noticed rolling shutter with the A1. Personally I think 30fps is quite enough in most situations and the A9iii then gives a generous 12 seconds of continuous shooting before buffering. So with some hesitation I did get the A9iii to add to my A1, and find it great - most times out I get images I would have missed previously thanks to the pre-capture, while I have got over the lower mp by upscaling in Topaz Photo AI whenever I heavily crop an A9iii image.
Awesome. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks Matt… great review as always and 100% agree with your comments re: a niche camera for selected segment of the market.
Thanks for watching!
Great review! I appreciate that, in the end, you mention other options we might prefer, base upon what we're shooting.
Excellent video, Matt. Very informative!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you so much Matt for all your amazing work!
As an owner of the A9 III and A1, I have to say: this was a review that I can agree with in almost all aspects. very good, Matt. 👍 A little bit about flash photography, which is one of the most important features for me as a journalist. And I personally don't see the CF Express Type A cards as a big problem.
Thanks for the review and It's definitely an interesting camera between it's siblings. I often look at A9 as the test camera for A1 and this A9 III for me is a test model for A1 II that is to come with "WOW", "DONE THE IMPOSIBLE", "AMAZING", "THE ONE... AGAIN" commands to follow. The differences between "IT CAN" and "IT NEEDS TO" plays into my decisions when choosing a camera. Yes, A9III can shoot 1/32,000s flash sync speed & 120fps with recapture (no anti-flicker support) but do I normally needs to shoot portraits with strobes over 1/400s or 1/500s APS-C like on an A1, using strobes shooting in sports events at 1/1000s+ if it the evens even allow flash or forgo the high megapixel cropping option and carry a very long and heavy telephoto lens with 1.4x 2.0x extenders for wild life photography (most likely be a second body) and will have to spend the hassle to sell it again when the A1 II is released in the future because I may have money to burn or enjoy heavy debt or just lack of patient to wait for A1 II? Not for me at least. But, It is definitely a niche camera and still is an engineering marvel in every way as a photography tool and maybe a good collector's item for "The World's First Consumer Full Frame Camera with Global Shutter Sensor"... until the love ones have to give it away or sell it to someone when one is gone...
Thanks Matt, will you be coming out with a setup guide for the a9iii? I've been shooting with it now for a few weeks, and I'm not 100% confident in my settings.
Hi mate. Yes check out the link in bio. Covers the a9iii
Very good review Matt!
Glad you enjoyed it
Why doesn't the a1 cost less? I think that's the answer. Z8 is $3900, so a1 should be say $4500
@@BroskisnowskiTrue. Nikon has very few hardcore die hard will defend Nikon with their life fan boys who are keeping them afloat. It’s only a matter of time.
@@lewcehjitl3282your right only a matter of time , surprises are coming even if you won’t like it 😅
@@lewcehjitl3282 Nikon has the second largest marketshare behind Canon in the entire world, I am pretty sure Nikon has some tough competition to fight, while you netizen live in a dream bubble, the real world out there things are VERY different, its not about Sony, Fuji or whatever else, its Nikon and Canon, like its always been, Sony marketshare is actually shrinking pretty awful since Canon launched their mirrorless cameras, why people buy Canon so much? I have no idea, for Nikon there is at least an argument to be had.
Agreed. The R3 and the Z9 have had price drops recently as well. I'm a little surprised Sony hasn't dropped the A1 at little bit too.
I agree. I feel Sony should drop the price of the A1. I have seen the z8 in action and for 4k it’s a great camera! Now the A1 is still $6500! Ridiculous. And who wants used. Not me. I don’t see Sony announcing the A1 Mark II anytime soon and this A9 3 is so tempting! Only thing with switching to the z8 is getting all the lenses. Too tough of a decision.
Matt, credit where credit is due. I agree with your review. Apart from its resolution, it is currently the most powerful camera in the SONY line up. As for 3rd party lenses, I don't understand SONY eitiher, why they limit them to 15 frames. Regarding the term niche. It is often interpreted as "useful just for the niche", whereas in the context of cameras, this is not true. To me, it covers the niche and everything else as well. As long as one defines the term, as you did, I am fine.
It's not just the 3rd party lenses - some of SONY's own lenses also are capped at less fps. That's due to those lenses not having SONY's latest superfast linear motors, which means they may not acquire focus fast enough.
@@adamadamis yes, I have 15 lenses, of which some are 6-10 years old. Cant expect them to be fast enough. The newer ones are fast enough. If you are not sure, consult SONY's lens list.
Great review, I highly suspect the a1 mark II to very much be an a9III but with the original Alpha 1 sensor (less than 120fps burst but still a bit more than the original a1), which will likely be a spectacular camera...I'm glad Sony finally started to make the ergonomics on their cameras decent too. Though I do wish they had the courage to make the camera a bit taller because the uneven strap lugs irk me.
Great video Matt! I was wondering what is the base ISO for SLOG-3 video?
2000
thanks!@@Jyle42085
Cheers so much I agree 😊❤
Niche camera, bought it. Love it. Good video, says the good things and downsides of it, but understand it doesnt matter for the users of it this "minimal" downsides.
Matt thank you for this video, I am planning to buy a new Sony alpha camera for wildlife and bird photography. Which one will be good fit A1 or A9iii my concerns are resolution factor during cropping the image that all I am worried about. Kindly assist 😊😊
A1 is much higher resolution
Hey for everyone wondering about the niche. This is meant for guys like me who shoot surf action from the water. That barrel only happens for a second most times but it feels like an eternity and thats where capturing the moment is super important.
For low light use, would you go A9II or A9III? Also nice well balanced review.
I had the orginal a9, and now have the a9III. I've been testing it at Universals Mardi Gras parade which takes place in the evening and has some very challenging lighting. I was worried that the III might not handle low light well, but to my surprise it's performing better than I expected.
Excellent review sir- thanks for avoiding extreme love/hate clickbait style of discussion about gear.
I try to stay honest and true.
Such a great video!
Glad you liked it!!
Having bought the A1 last July (2023) I too felt burned 😡 too… as my first Sony (switching from Nikon) I thought I was gyp’d… but, the more I learned about the specs, I’m pleased paying $500 more for double pixels (mainly for cropping) and I’m seeing this as a niche used for fast moving subjects. With my FX3 I feel I can my 90% video and 10% (high quality) stills for lobby photos. Just thinking if I should get this… or another FX3 for my usual three (3) camera body shoots.. 🤔 It’s “niche” because I would only use it to video fights, or dance in my studio productions… and still shoot (90%) on my A1 and FX3 I may use this for 120fps Strobe SPX but, at that rate, I might as well just rent this… 🧐
Great review Matt. I would agree, it is a niche camera or at least some of the functionality is fairly niche (extreme frame rate). However on the other hand the is plenty of many stream improvements that would benefit most photographers. eg a useful high res EVF, better AF and better ergonomics.
Both hopeful and worried about what this means for the A1 mk2. Hopeful because if this is the niche, the flagship is going to be incredible. Worried becuase...oof how much will it cost!?
Good point. My concern was that if we loose half the photosite area to electronics - what impact will it have on image quality of a higher res (smaller site) sensor. No doubt it will improve with each new gen of Global shutter tech.
Great review 👏🏻 is this camera over kill for a wedding photographer?
Whatever works for you, your budget and style.
White dress, black tux, who needs dynamic range...
to me it is overkill for a wedding photographer...
@@MrModikoe Yes, when many wedding photographers would choose the A7IV or R6II. Unless they are expecting the bride to run away from the alter and want to avoid any rolling shutter while they photograph that.
@@UnconventionalReasoning 😁😁
just an amazing review Matt
It makes sense the A9III (and a few more cameras) is better in many areas the A1 was released 27 Jan 2021 its 12 mar 2024 now. No doubt when the a1 will be updated it will get all the new features started in cameras like the ZV-E1, A7R5 and A9III plus probably a few more. This is also the issue i have with the whole Sony A1 firmware discussion its not that i mind new firmware but the real upgrade we want for the A1M1 is the A1M2 because of the better grip, AI chip, LCD design, better EVF etc etc we want all this and a little more. Now many will yell (who probably don't own a A1) but it cost so much more to replace the A1M1 with the A1M2 ..... yes but if my guess is correct the A1M2 will be announced nov24 and shipping jan25 thats 4 years after its release i and many A1 owners will be ready for new hardware. Same with the A9III in 4 years i am sure it will lack many other upgrades in hardware sony has done by then and A9III owners really want the A9IV ... such is how it works even if many people don't want to admit it.
@15:00 Nope, I think you defined that slightly off in your binary. Those who shoot wildlife; let's say birds can be further divided into those that shoot static birds, and those that want them moving. Crop with your A1 for the former, but not so much of a help is the A1 for the latter --- here lies the A9iii's purpose. It solves the moving bird issue by identifying bird, then following bird. Cropping OTOH is solved by getting closer to said bird, which one should be doing anyways.
I shoot both, and prefer more MP
Very balanced review. I def agree it's niche too
Completely agree with your summerybb
CineD has proven that the dynamic range in video mode is actually better than every other sony mirrorless camera up to this point by having 9 stops of latitude making it comparable to the Red V raptor. So if you're into video this camera is definitely Sony's best image you can get (and I know because I have one, an an A1, A7rv and a7siii.) This is gonna be a great sensor for a future fx camera.
I actually have an A1, Siii, and Rv. Would you sell or trade any of those 3 for the 9iii if I do 80% video work? The high FPS I really don’t care but as a video camera, I feel like it may just replace my Rv as I already have high resolution and 8k covered by the A1. Or move on from the A1 or Siii???
But how do you take a photo at 1/80000 I've just got mine and can't get it to work
AF-S - single shot only.
Single shot, manual mode, rotate your rear left dial... all the way.
@@mattgranger Ah, so You cannot set the shutter to 1/80000 if the aperture is wide open
The A9 III had to be priced to leave room above it for an A1 II. To the best of my recollection, the last $8K USD camera was the Nikon D3X, and it was a disaster. Sony might have decided they need to stay away from that price level for the A1-II.
We also have to take into account the Canon R1's pricing. Considering the R3 launched at the same price as the A1, it leaves a LOT of room for Canon to up the pricing of a top tier FF camera.
Actually I no longer know what I'm waiting for. : The A1 m2 merely for its fully articulated monitor, hopefully, lol, or waiting for the A9 IV with 40 mio pixel ! (Had it come as is, but with 33+ MP - I was delaying the moove - I would have taken it over the A7RV to gain more practical AF to my A7R3)
I'm a wildlife shooter that wants the high speed, pre-shot buffering, better autofocus and flash sync speed the A9 III offers. I'm typically close enough to my subjects that cropping is not a big deal. 24 MP is plenty. I have a higher MP A7 series camera for any static shots I want to take.
Awesome! Ideal camera for your needs 👍🏼
Owned and traded it. Megapixels of my a1 far outweighs the burst rate. Great camera but as a wildlife photographer it just didn’t work for me.
I wish that Sony would've released this camera as a new series, α3, and released a conventional upgrade of the α9 series.
Sony a9 III or Hasselblad X2D 100C ?
I can't imagine many people are selecting from these two options... they may kind of share an appeal in flash sync, they are SO different in every other regard.
In Sweden the A9iii actually does cost more than the A1
Hope you are ok Matt.
?? I am great thanks.
Hopefully most sensors are global in a few years
photography is such an expensive hobby lol... this camera seems like a dream and I would love love love to own this beast but as a hobby I just cant justify 6k for a camera especially without a lens. Guess I will have to wait 3-5 years for this to either drop significantly in price or this feature set to make it to a more affordable system.
It is not that cheap, because you are first forced into Sony lenses and second due to the buffering you need at least an A7IV to whip out when need to shoot video while the A9III is buffering. When S1R was released the camera was not fast enough for CFExp B and now the Sony is faster than the card type the engineers have put in it. Just to keep the buyers wanting more. Enough rough edges, so that you can keep the demand up for the next generation.
Except that neither of those issues seem likely to be fixed in next gen
OLED SCREEN still missing
Anyone who doesn't get that the a9III is a niche product is just wrong fanboy or not. What is not niche is the globalshutter concept so sony put it in this one because it could the A9II with its limited megapixels was niche anyway. Its the perfect camera to see what the switch to a new tech and all its effects (and downsides that need to evolve) will do and give people and other hardware makers (like flash makers) so time to get used to the new platform.
Matt, I respect you and admire your work here, but I have a genuine problem with KZheadrs inflating the value of products and giving these companies all the wrong ideas. Several people (including you now) say things like "oh this should cost more". Why?! Even for a professional, these products already are expensive enough. Technology will not trickle down to affordable product lines if experts like yourself keep giving companies the feeling that the new features are too precious to be inexpensive.
Mate, you give me too much credit - I am not influencing Sony's product development or pricing. Please listen to the words I use in video. I explain it is better than the A1 in almost every way - and has a newer tech sensor. You can read between the lines surely? Perhaps this is under priced? Or the A1 is over priced.... but the balance seems off.
Everything is getting more expensive lately. Also, with phones having taken away a large segment of the low-tier sales, you expect camera companies to raise the prices to still stay relevant.
Nikon has bought the Red .now very soon Nikon will come up with their own global shutter
Maybe. Red don't make sensors. If Nikon wanted to buy one, they already could have. But *maybe* this gets them access to options that RED has exclusive rights to... not sure.
It's not a certainty. The process is complex, and RED's current partners cannot meet Nikon's immediate production demands. Moreover, Nikon faces the challenge of designing a sensor that fits into their Z series cameras. Transitioning from design to mass production is a lengthy process, involving design finalization, engineering verification, and pilot production runs. This phase alone could span a year, especially for microprocessors as production scales up. On a positive note, Sony Sensors cannot indefinitely leverage their position for financial gain by withholding advanced sensors from Nikon. Eventually, Nikon might develop a GS sensor with RED's assistance and shift manufacturing to TowerJazz, DALSA, or even Samsung, which would be less favorable for Sony. Should Samsung re-enter the sensor manufacturing market-where they previously excelled-they have the potential to contest Sony's market leadership.
Nikon doesn't make their own sensors. They use Sony's technology. That's why the Z9's sensor is almost identical to the A1's. Expect Nikon to get Sony's global shutter in a year, or maybe a few, depending on how much Sony wants to keep this tech to themselves.
@@BlueBomberTurbo Now Nikon has Red..and I don't think they will take the global shutter from sony..and with global shutter you have to compromise your image quality and there is still not a huge difference..only good thing about sony a9 3 is it is the fastest
@Broskisnowski but still no one is buying a9 3..but let's see what happens but according to the report Nikon's market share is increasing
Probably Sony are taking a leaf from Nikon's book when it comes to pricing.
No I mean within their range, not just the raw pricing. Watch the video through and let me know your thoughts!
Yeah as a sports photographer the idea of 120 fps is amazing but not enough to switch from Canon to Sony.
Of course! I am always amazed when people switch brands due to one new camera or lens release... its a big upheaval.
@@mattgranger of course, if it was 1,000 fps with a bottomless buffer. Then I’ll be a hypocrite.
It's not that the A9 III is inexpensive relative to the A1 but that the A1 and most cameras are overpriced to begin with.
Two sides of the same coin
Thanks for the review, Matt, It was worth the wait. All the choices are a bit overwhelming but here is a funny thing in photography at least with me: I’ve become a bit disillusioned because of AI and the ability to just type out the image you want online and presto. Think latest photoshop content fill, mid journey, etc. What that leaves me with is the process of taking a picture and I get way more satisfaction out of using a completely manual lens because it at least requires some organic skill to get a good result. That being the case, all the FPS, autofocus, becomes kinda ‘meah’. Resolution, dynamic range, ibis for me and for what I shoot are more important.
@mattgranger very nice review. Still don't get why Sony is crippling the performance of 3rd party lenses with their cameras. Why having opened the door to 3rd party lenses manufacturers for then crippling the perf'.. I'll never get that, except if 3rd party lenses and Sony lenses have the same results at rendering which would give an artificial lead (by software) to the latter
Maybe... to be able to sell more Sony lenses even thought they do hold 15% share on Tamron?!
They don't have linear motors that can match the AF. Most likely A1 and A9 owners would prefer a GM lens anyway. For most uses, 15fps is fast enough.
Many can't even do 15fps right. Sony's been known to hold back performance, even on their own cameras/lenses, to ensure what the cameras CAN do is reliable.
Haha. Defiantly excuses away any limitation is a telltale sign
Higher ISO is not as much an issue anymore with all the denoising tools out there. Several years ago I basically stopped shooting below ISO 400 because Topaz DeNoise at that time was able to turn that into ISO 100 with no issues and the tool has improved a lot over the last few years.
Global shutter, stacked would benefit from Sony's new 2-layer transistor technology found in newer Sony phone sensors. 2-layer transistor means nearly 2x dynamic ranger and ISO performance and even more light/color as pixels are somehow "stacked".
You got it completely wrong when it comes to stacked two layer smartphone sensor. Things that work for smartphone size sensor not necessarily work as good as full frame.
@@avinashrai11141 Well, current BSI came first on phones by Sony as well.
The limit for 3 party is only 15, no 20-30
On a9iii, I’m sure I got higher.
better to count it
Yes. I did.
Price is really the only thing that makes this camera Niche since most folks can't afford it. For the majority of camera brands, Out of camera IQ really has NOT improved for many years now so it's not like the a9iii had to worry about that to begin with. In fact, I would argue that out of camera IQ has in fact degraded for some of the newer higher MP cameras. Hence the current massive appeal of post processing software. It should be cheaper to do cropped Global sensors but since most brands are dependent on Sony other then Canon, we have yet to see that from Nikon, Panasonic, and or Fuji. A cropped Global Sensor would have less data to handle and everything about buffering becomes less of a problem. Plus wildlife shooters get the added reach of Cropped Camera. Try crop mode on a 25MP FF sensor, it is basically useless for image taking.
I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on my closing statement about the Niche label, as it refers to Sonys other cameras.
If I was just getting started with my first camera system there is one aspect of this and all other Sony cameras that would preclude me from buying into their ecosystem - the memory card. At some point Sony is going to have to change to a CF type B because when a Canon or Nikon introduces their global shutter camera it won’t be limited by the write speed of the card media. You’ve also pointed out another major issue in the limitations of the 3rd party lenses. For those who don’t know about this and buy into the hype of this camera and expect it to deliver the same capabilities they will be disappointed. I just hope those who seriously consider purchasing this camera watch your video first. Thanks for such a thorough review!
We will see. Remember how long Sony cameras continued to support memory stick!!
Spot on. It doesn’t cost more because it's nothing exceptional.
For Canon and Nikon following Sony's technological camera body's leadership is the standard way of being. Almost all big advances have been pioneered by Sony. There is no surprise here, Sony is more than nothing a technology and customer electronics company building cameras. This is fantastic for them, as mirrorless cameras are basically computers, once all of them eliminate the shutter, the last bit of precision manufacturing that Canon and Nikon built in Japan for som many years will no longer needed. The A9 III is a glimpse into the future, with one exception Nikon is the one leading with out of the box firmware upgrades, like auto-capture with subject detection.
SONY is more than that. They merged with two photography giants some years ago, Konica and Minolta, so those became part of what is now SONY. Especially Minolta was very advanced technologically - see Autofocus for SLRs and the first IBIS in DSLRs. At the time they merged, SONY themselves were quite innovative with digital cameras.
I know global shutter isn't the same as the very fast Z9 readout, however what is the advantage of it? Maybe if you do a lot of flash stuff. Other than that it all seems like disadvantages or unnecessary stuff like 120fps, which would be a BIG hinderance for wildlife photography if you fill up the buffer in 1 second. I'd much rather have 10-20fps sustained. Maybe in the future these global shutters will censors will be great, but right now I'm not sure I'd want one.
It is instant. So flash sync, no rolling shutter etc are the benefits. And you do not HAVE to shoot at 120fps. You can choose 10/20/30/60 etc...
Indoor concert, dance, and other such events are plagued by flickering and banding from modern LED lights. Yes other cameras have anti-flicker corrections, but they're not perfect, and require frequent correction. This sensor solves that issue entirely. I don't need the high frame rate for that sort of shooting (not even for dance), but not having to constantly correct for strobing and flickering is worth the time savings and higher keeper rate.
No worries about banding like on the Z9. No matter how fast a rolling shutter is, it will still be susceptible to banding. Even fine tuning the shutter speed has its limitations depending on what shutter speed you actually need to prevent motion blur. A9 III can shoot in any light at any speed and never encounter banding. Ever.
@@mattgranger I got a photo out the window of one Shinkansen of another going in the opposite direction with my D90 years ago. I'd love to get the same shot again with my Z9 and compare the rolling shutter difference. My worst buffer experience was also with my D90 when I was in Alaska and a whale swam towards us and under the boat. I was so excited I blocked up my buffer as it approached and missed all the best shots.. lesson learned.
Isn't the whole point of Sony cameras that they are niche cameras? The R range is for Landscapes and portraits. The S range is for low-light and video. The 9 series is for Sports, the 7 is for general photography and video, and the 1 series is for Portraits.
You could argue that sure - they have segmented really well to fit certain niches. I guess then I would say the a9iii is the most niche to date.
Those are assigning somewhat artificial market segments. The A7, A7R, and A1 cameras can do basically everything well at three different price points. The original A9 had one job to do: match the Canon 1DXmkII and Nikon D5, so yes, that was niche right from the start. The A7S series were niche only if one considers being video-centric niche, and they have the slowest rollout pace.
@@UnconventionalReasoningThe last real all-around camera from Sony was the A99ii. It had the 42mpx sensor of A7R2 with 12fps shooting capabilities and 4k30p (and delivered in 2016). Since then all the variants of Sony E FF have been specialized items. The R can't burst above 10fps because Sony is intentionally crippling the thing. R series could easily shoot at 15fps but in that case it would lower the sells for the 9 series. The A7 series is the average bone, Sony did well by cranking up the resolution a bit. Thanks Matt for reminding that Sony is intentionally crippling the capabilities of their cameras for 3rd party lens manufacturer. Lots of buyers are buying those cameras having 3rd party lenses in mind but forget the most important part.
It IS a niche camera. A9iii is really only for people shooting lots of flash or LED boards in sports stadiums. It's for very specific uses. For everyone else the tradeoff is not worth it. You are just paying 6k for apsc image quality, spending hours scrolling through thousands of the same images in lightroom, and bragging rights. Everything else in the Sony lineup are not that niche, maybe except for the A7S line. You have less money, you buy A7iv. You have more money, you buy A7R5. Money no object, you go straight for A1 for being jack of all trades.
Why is Matt Granger Reviewing a camera that isn't for a professional use?
Why is @johnPepp making comments that show he either didn’t watch, or comprehend, the previous video?
🤦♂️
ISO performance is totally overblown by the media. You only shoot at ISO100 in the studio, no one on the real world shoots ISO100. Most of the time you're pushing high shutter speeds to freeze the action and depending on the lens you have, you're probably always above ISO800 anyway. Is it expensive? F ya, only for pros.
But for landscape, more than 90 percent images are captured at base Iso. For hardcore wildlife, shooting above 12800 is very common, where this camera struggles. Sony a9iii is very advance camera dedicated mostly to sports photographers and flash photos, other than that it has very serious drawbacks. Just compared sony a9iii with other 24mp Sony or Nikon full frame camera and you will notice how bad is image quality compared to those sensors.
Flash lit portraits, landscape, usually shot at base iso. And I try personally to keep it as low as possible at all times.
When I'm shooting active wildlife, I'm nowhere near ISO 100. On my A9, I'm shooting at 640. I don't use the A9 for landscapes. I have an a7 R series for that. What's funny are the wildlife shooters complaining about no ISO 100 and then complaining about low light shooting.
@@evenhandedcommentor6102 yes,both are important. No one shoot at fixed ISO setting. ISO-200 isnt the big problem, problem is noise and dynamic range at each ISO value compared to other 24mp full frame sensors. A9iii is incredible for sports and nothing can beat it.
@@avinashrai11141 The reports I've seen say the A9 III is not that different in noise and dynamic range when shot at the same ISO as other cameras. The issue is that the A9 III cannot be shot at 100 ISO or 50,120 ISO. If that's where you want to shoot, you do need a different camera. I'm not shooting wildlife at ISO 100 as I shoot active animals. I'm not shooting in the near dark, so I don't even shoot at 12,800. I believe the bigger issue for some wildlife photographers is the smaller megapixel count means cropping is less effective on a 24 MP camera. I don't crop much, so I'm not concerned.
LOL, 7500 euro camera, needs to cost more? Sure make it 75 000 euros, there you go. In fact I am dumbfounded by Sony strategy to overprice their cameras so much when they are bleeding against Canon and Nikon, specially Canon which seem to sell millions of bodies based on their name alone, Canon R3 is inferior by specs but people eating it up like no tomorrow.
Reading between the lines, you could interpret what I’m saying (why is the a9iii cheaper than the a1?), as meaning - the a1 price should be lower…
Those huge lines on your face. What Diet are you on?
ummmm, diet, exercise and old age?
@@mattgranger love that you are exercising!!! You aren’t actually old though Matt. I don’t know what diet you are on but I hope your health and wellbeing continues. Bless ya brother
What a ridiculous comment!
Why’s that?
Maybe because „it is not a professional camera“
If you are referring to my earlier video - watch it again :) I never suggest that. In fact i said the opposite.
Sony is trash 🗑️ also who wants to have to most common/generic camera nothing special
🥱
But Sony still doesn't make professional cameras?
Please watch the video again, put your anger aside, and actually listen to what I said. I DID NOT say they don't make pro cameras - in fact I said that suggesting that would be a stupid proposition... I choose my words carefully in videos - but I cannot force you to comprehend it...
To be honest, I think the a9 III is too expansive, because image quality really sucks. I can say this, because I own one beside my beloved a1.
The A1 would be my choice for a high speed Sony too! Great balance.
It doesn't suck at all. Learn to use it.
@@gnrslash1987 but it’s maximum on the level of the 2.000$ a7 IV if not below, regardless how much you are able to “learn” (how to use it).
@@holgerkrieg3587 Why do you own it?
@@holgerkrieg3587 so image quality on a7iv sucks? I disagree.
I am sad to see a Nikonist review Sony.
You Sony fans are a different breed…
Stupid title, you like to spend more money??
Stupid comment - watch the video.
Be careful when you select harsh words, if you are not right, like in this case, the harsh words apply to you.
It's just a click bait title. Every youtuber needs them to get views. Not a huge deal really. If it bothers you this much you will have a hard time with the Internet. Matt makes some great points in the video - title aside.
You're kidding right? £6100 UK is already overpriced.
Compare it to the A1. Specs, tech & design features vs price
@@mattgranger I am. £6500 UK for the a1 was overpriced 🙂 The z9 price is about right.
Do you think the a1 is worth more than the a9iii in 2024?
@@mattgranger Well there's 3 years tech difference to take into account plus the a1 is now £5850 UK, so slightly cheaper than the a9iii. a1 has sensor benefits (resolution, dynamic range) but that's about it. My complaint is only the launch prices, and some disagreement with you regarding a9iii possibly being underpriced. As I said previously, I think Nikon pitched z9/8 correctly price wise.
We would all love things to be cheaper. My point is solely related to the prices today, and how they sit within the line up. Specifically A1 vs A9iii
Stupid title
Disagree