Ok so who will buy either of the new Sony releases either the a9iii or 300 gm 2.8 or are these irrelevant to you?

[spudhead]

I am Still taking in the new Sony releases, not sure the a9iii has any thing I was hoping for, but having had the 300.2.8 a-mount mount for some years it might be tempting but so is a used 400 2.8, the problem with the 300 2.8 is Sony teleconverters are not great at the moment 1.4 is decent but 2x is not great but they should both be better on high quality glass.
post up thoughts all welcome

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I don't even know if that lens hood would fit in my spare room, so it's probably a no from me...

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Neither for me. The camera has zero interest and the 300 2.8, while desirable, is far too much money for me. They will sell loads, great sports lens.
I will also say that that camera needs those super fast and mega expensive cards, another thing to put it out of reach. It far too specialised IMO.

 

[Tim Mayo]

The A9III is not so appealing right now, if it was 50MP then maybe. I would love that pre capture feature though! I might hire one at some point just to play. I think the 300 F2.8 would be great for shooting our little garden birds but too short for anything else. Unfortunately I have other projects I need to invest money in right now so I'll have to restrain my GAS!

 

[AlphaWorld]

I have pre-ordered the 300mm f/2.8 GM already. I already wanted it, but was fearful it would be too heavy for me. It turned out to be substantially lighter weight than expected, so placing the pre-order was easy.

The 300 GM appears to come with an interesting bag - sort of conical. Not a hard case like a Pelikan like the bigger super-tiles.

Still contemplating the A9III. I think it's an opportunity to learn about the big new player in town.

Have the rest of you considered that you heard some people saying with much gravitas that the next A9 had to have lots of pixels to compete with the Z9 and Z8, when the obvious competitor for those is the A1. The competitor to the A9 is the R3. Maybe those people convinced themselves because what they wanted was a camera with those properties, and a price-tag like the A9, because they didn't want to pay for an A1. Wishful thinking.

I'm able to afford both at the moment, and I think getting experience with a global shutter will give me an understanding of future global shutter bodies. It was working with an A9II that made me understand the value of the left shoulder dials, even though the A9II wasn't really what I want.

BTW: Brownie may be happy to hear that the A9 III gets a new feature: the left shoulder dial can be overridden - not possible on earlier bodies.

 

[spudhead]

So what are the prices for the UK on these anyone know yet?

 

[Tim Mayo]

So what are the prices for the UK on these anyone know yet?

The A9 III is £6,099.00 at Park Cameras and the 300 GM £5,799.00.

 

[Unframed Dave]

No and no.

I have no requirement for 120 fps and I prefer the cropability 50mp gives.

I'd love the 300 2.8 and the weight is appealing but again for my needs it's the wrong thing.

Neither are really aimed at the majority of us. They are the perfect combo for a paid sports photographer.

Nor will I update my firmware. The fixes I've heard so far don't affect me at all and I've been reading that if you use third party batteries, you lose the power remaining display in the viewfinder. Bugger that!

 

[spudhead]

The A9 III is £6,099.00 at Park Cameras and the 300 GM £5,799.00.

The a-mount 300 g mk2 was £6,500 so I guess that a bit better than expected, I might stick on the a91 a bit longer and get the glass I love primes, it should be good with the 1.4 but not sure about 2x

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

I will sell my 70mm-200 GMII, along with my A9II and/or possibly my 400mm, and buy the 300 GM as well as the A9III.

The Precapture, Global sensor distortion control and C5-120 FPS of the A9 III all fit into my wheelhouse, photographically speaking,
the 300 GM with a TCx1.4 and added lightness are attractive and having used a Nikon 300mmx2.8 to great effect for many years
the 300 GM again fits well into my shooting preferences.........

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

The A9 III is £6,099.00 at Park Cameras and the 300 GM £5,799.00.

That's a crazy price for the A9. As Dave says, paid photographer gear

 

[spudhead]

That's a crazy price for the A9. As Dave says, paid photographer gear

As we know Kev UK treasure Island they call us, ripped once again

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

As we know Kev UK treasure Island they call us, ripped once again

Yep, every time. No need at all.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

Neither for me, but you all knew I'm cheap LOL!

But truly, I think that despite the technical achievement, Sony missed the mark in limiting it to 24MP. We can argue all we want about how many MP you need to print a fine photo, but MP count is as much a marketing tool as it is a specification. For proof I count Timothy & Brownie's comments where they want more MP and are deterred from spending $6k on a new 24MP camera.

I just hope the professional sports photographers buy enough A9III bodies so Sony keeps making the push to use global shutters. They could benefit from putting them in just about every camera they produce. It would be so great if they have a global shutter in the next camera I hope to buy in about 3-5 years (A7V/A7CIII with global shutter and 36mp in 4 years maybe?).

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Neither for me, but you all knew I'm cheap LOL!

But truly, I think that despite the technical achievement, Sony missed the mark in limiting it to 24MP. We can argue all we want about how many MP you need to print a fine photo, but MP count is as much a marketing tool as it is a specification. For proof I count Timothy & Brownie's comments where they want more MP and are deterred from spending $6k on a new 24MP camera.

I just hope the professional sports photographers buy enough A9III bodies so Sony keeps making the push to use global shutters. They could benefit from putting them in just about every camera they produce. It would be so great if they have a global shutter in the next camera I hope to buy in about 3-5 years (A7V/A7CIII with global shutter and 36mp in 4 years maybe?).

You aren't cheap, just smart I'd say...

 

[iamdlewis]

I am excited for the A9iii in what it means for the A1ii but the 24mp (or even if it was 36) is just not enough. I do not do enough to justify a 300 f2.8 even if it was a $2000 lens.

BTW: Brownie may be happy to hear that the A9 III gets a new feature: the left shoulder dial can be overridden - not possible on earlier bodies.

I hope you mean the FPS dial because that would be awesome. I know they said the C5 button will change the FPS but I didn't hear that it would be an always things.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Well said Tim. Lets see if the Galer fan boys bother.

 

[spudhead]

It is crazy the people that express an interest in the a9iii have probably not even come close to extracting the best they can from the Sony bodies they already have. the a9iii will be a great camera but at 24mp technique, and quality and reach of glass will be a must.

 

[iamdlewis]

I also fail to see how this camera aligns with a working pro. If you're making your living with a camera and the one you're using does the job, what would be the catalyst to spend $6k?

I know the speed has been the big talk and many here are only focused on that 120fps number but the real star of the show is the global shutter. That shutter removes the worry about banding and allows for flash syncs at any speed. This means that anyone that spends a great deal of time shooting indoors will have fewer worries and more options. So this is going to be a great camera for any wedding or portrait photographer. I don't know how much time dealing with lighting issues takes up or how many images are lost or not captured but I am sure it is more than 0. I don't know if this is going to be enough for many but I am sure it will be enough for some.

Obviously the professional services like AP or whatever the sports ones are will be the majority of the buyers. There is nothing wrong with that as there are companies that make products specifically for these types of markets all over the business world. If Sony feels that this is the group that needs to be the real-world testbed for some of these new features that is really just going to be better for all of us.

Of course this could be like the phones Sony release in that those are not really for the general public and are really just a demonstration platform for their technology in selling to other manufactures.

 

[spudhead]

US cost please on these a9iii and 300 gm 2.8?

 

[spudhead]

$6k and $6k.

As I said the a9iii would be more in the Uk

 

[spudhead]

Is that because of the VAT? I would have to add 6% sales tax to that, so another $360 each.

Our price is all in Tim, the lens is about or a little less than expected, but the camera price is similar to the A1 at release which was 6.5k, I could buy both but that is sort of what Sony want us to do, would I get better shots with the a9iii not sure I will, With the 300 gm on any Sony body I think yes even on the old a9

 

[Landshark99]

Yes the A9 is a niche camera but it is also a halo camera, being the first with a global shutter will be a great test bed for the tech. Pro photographers in Sports, News, Fashion, Industrial, Wildlife and some Wedding jobs will find the camera offers some real advantages over what is already out there. It is not just frame rate, the lacking of banding in mixed light, the amazing flash sync. I think it was never intended for the amateur market, just like the big primes. Also for most of those uses, the mp count is more than fine. Not everyone has a real need for 61 mp.
I am skipping the camera for me but if I was still working on the assignments I used to do,I would be buying one for the flash sync alone, the ability to balance flash with daylight like it does would be great.
I did place a pre-order for the 300m F2.8, I have until Feb 2024 to decide if I really want to spend the money. besides wide lenses the 300m F2.8 has always been a favorite, and now that the 100-400 is gone, we will see.

 

[RogerSmith]

I am a no on the A9III, a very long shot on the 300 2.8. Have an A1 and love it, crop frequently, don't need hyper burst mode. With the 300, I would use it with a TC so often it boils down to really wanting a 600 f/4. But even that is a maybe, even if $ was no issue. I like my kit, the versatility of travel with a 200-600 and a 70-200 f/2.8 and having nearly every situation covered. I've shot a bunch of Sony bodies and man I feel like the A1 and 200-600 just work together like Jordan and Pippen.

 

[Roland]

I don’t see a need for the 300mm since I love my 200-600mm and the features on A9iii are not the ones I was hoping for. I would have considered it, if Sony would focused on better tracking and better eye detection since speed and no global shutter was never a problem on the A9ii for me.

 

[Landshark99]

I've shot a bunch of Sony bodies and man I feel like the A1 and 200-600 just work together like Jordan and Pippen.

Maybe in the past but not the way they are getting along now

 

[Merlinator]

I'll stick with my A1's for the moment. The only thing it's missing for me is pre-capture. I'll wait for the A12 before I consider upgrading. As for the 300mm, I already have the 70-200 2.8 and the 400 2.8 so I would probably have to sell one to get the 300. Not sure what I will do next.

 

[spudhead]

If a global shutter, 1/80,000 shutter speed, and unlimited flash sync aren't important to you, you're further ahead with an A1. That's the direction I'm heading.

I was looking at Sony and Minolta 400 and 600 on eBay last night. $3k-ish.

As you know I have the 400 but would never buy the 600, played with one a couple of times and it is a big heavy lump

 

[RogerSmith]

Maybe in the past but not the way they are getting along now

Good point Landshark! I meant the old days, on the court, winning titles!

 

[iamdlewis]

I don't disagree with that, but again: Working photographers already know how to handle flash photography and banding. Most wedding photographers aren't rich. If what they have is already working and the choices equal feeding your family or spending $6k on the latest gadget, then why would they? My comments aren't so much the advantage these new features bring, but the practicality of a working photographer upgrading just because.

Yes, it's all convenient and neato. It's also unnecessary. Sony's sole purpose in this release is to put Canon and Nikon on notice and return them to playing catch up while the photography world oohs and ahhs over it.

There is one feature I wish more cameras had, and that's the pre capture. Previously peculiar to Olympus/OM, (their 'pro-capture').

Why is it always the absolute extremes? Why can't it be a wedding photographer that lives in an apartment by herself that costs 2k a month and drives a 3 series? Why is the choice food or gear? Let's be honest here if the choice is get something or get food maybe the better choice is get a different job.

Yes a chunk of this is going to be for selling the tech to other companies and showing off what they can do but that isn't unusual in the tech industry. Technology is "unnecessary" before it is widely adopted. If working photographers only kept what works they would only move from their first gear once it no longer worked, which would be an extremely rare case. No working photographer is going to change gear just because some new gear came out, they are going to consider what they do, what the new gear does and if that new gear will better their life more than the cost of obtaining it.