RUMOR: Sony A9III will be the “fastest” camera ever made!

[Brownie]

On July 12 Sony will announce the new A6700. After that we will get three new Full Frame E-mount cameras within 4-5 months! One of them is the Sony A9III which sources told me will have the fastest autofocus, fastest readout, fastest fps of all mirrorless cameras on market now!

I still got no final specs, but my trusted sources are slowly starting to talk more about this camera

If it's that fast, does it mean A) Gobal Shutter? B) Remains at 24MP?

RUMOR: Sony A9III will be the “fastest” camera ever made! – sonyalpharumors

www.sonyalpharumors.com

And as an aside, what are the other two FF cameras? Will one be the A1ii? Maybe an A7s IV? Maybe Sony will go nuts and issue an A7 IVa, or even an A7 V?

 

[iamdlewis]

If it's that fast, does it mean A) Gobal Shutter? B) Remains at 24MP?

A) Highly unlikely. I would suspect that the first global shutter will appear on one of the top of the line cameras first, so the A1 or R1.
B) Still think this will get bumped up to 33MP to match the A7iv/v (whichever they are on now). The super fast stills frame rate will match whatever the fastest video frame rate will be, so maybe 240 in HD quality for whatever that MP count is.

And as an aside, what are the other two FF cameras?

It has been a few years since they updated that mounted security camera looking thing they did so that could be one.

 

[Matthias]

And as an aside, what are the other two FF cameras? Will one be the A1ii? Maybe an A7s IV? Maybe Sony will go nuts and issue an A7 IVa, or even an A7 V?

I think the other 2 will be (1) an A7C-II and (2) a full frame fixed lens camera to compete with Leica Q series. So possibly a RX1R-III... (even considering the fact that Zeiss will back out, the lens on the previous version was good so they don't need to develop a new one).

 

[Brownie]

I'll say this: Unless the A93 has at least 33MP and can be 'slowed' to 8-10 FPS Lossless Compressed RAW, I'm out. I see no need for that kind of speed. Unless you really must see bumble bee wings in 50 or 60 different positions within 1 second, it's a waste of resources.

 

[iamdlewis]

Unless the A93 has at least 33MP and can be 'slowed' to 8-10 FPS Lossless Compressed RAW

I don't see why they would change the drive mode options. You will not be able to get 8 but you could have 5/10/15/20/XX. Best thing about the Drive Mode option is that you can set the L/M/H to any of those values so "low" could be 20 with Medium at 5 and High at 20 or 10. The H+ though will be whatever the max Compressed RAW speed is.

 

[Brownie]

I don't see why they would change the drive mode options. You will not be able to get 8 but you could have 5/10/15/20/XX. Best thing about the Drive Mode option is that you can set the L/M/H to any of those values so "low" could be 20 with Medium at 5 and High at 20 or 10. The H+ though will be whatever the max Compressed RAW speed is.

You're assuming they'll keep it in even increments and based on current speeds. The A7RIII has 8 in RAW. The A7 IV has 6. They could bump the 9III to 60 and have 60/30/15/7. There's no way to know, especially with the rumor being the 'fastest mirrorless camera'.

BTW, the OM-1 is 60FPS, so it will be interesting to see what they come up with.

 

[iamdlewis]

They could bump the 9III to 60 and have 60/30/15/7.

They could do that but it be better to just add more values to the list they already have. Since the "fastest mirrorless camera" could mean a lot of very different things and doesn't necessarily mean that the standard FPS rate needs to be more than 20, it can also mean that some special burst rate is faster than anything else out there. Or it could mean that the AF is just faster than any other camera.

BTW, the OM-1 is 60FPS

From DPReview review:
The camera's faster sensor and processor allow it to shoot blackout-free at up to 50 frames per second with full autofocus and autoexposure, including the option to capture Raw files. If you can live with locking AF and AE at the first exposure, the OM-1 will shoot at up to 120 frame per second. Both modes are based on the electronic shutter, which with a ~1/125th readout speed shouldn't exhibit too much rolling shutter.

The 50fps-with-AF shooting is only possible with six of the 'Pro' series zooms, with the rate dropping to 25 fps with most Pro series primes, and older or less expensive lenses (14 fps with the early 14-42mm and 17mm F2.8 lenses).

The Z9/8 have a burst rate of 120fps at 11mp without AF or AE and matches the HD video mode slow-motion speed.

I know how much you love the if, if, if....

However Sony wants to define the "fastest mirrorless camera" I think they need to ditch the Frame Rate dial or add a setting that lets it be electronically controlled.

 

[AlphaWorld]

I don't see why they would change the drive mode options. You will not be able to get 8 but you could have 5/10/15/20/XX. Best thing about the Drive Mode option is that you can set the L/M/H to any of those values so "low" could be 20 with Medium at 5 and High at 20 or 10. The H+ though will be whatever the max Compressed RAW speed is.

You speak with such certainty, but I beg to differ Yes, the A1 offered multiples of 5, but that doesn't mean every other high speed model has to do the same. Another fast camera I owned has the ability to specify the exact numbers I wanted to for high and low speeds (admittedly that camera topped out about 14 fps, because it was a mechanical shutter). If there were value in offering finer selectivity, we may see it. If you are photographing something running at a particular frequency, being able to choose a frame rate that either matches that frequency, or deliberately does not match it, then there's a case for being able to fine-tune the speed.

You also seem certain it will have 33 megapixels, but I think that's more wishful thinking than considered thought. The A7IV is intended to be a "jack-of-all-trades", so it makes sense that it should offer a few more pixels. The A9 is a speed specialist, and photo-journalists are a key part of its target audience - there are a great many PJs who have (loudly!) stated that they neither need nor want a vast number of pixels. I think the chance of it remaining 24 Mp is good, especially if that means it can be even faster (extreme speed is going to get more headlines than a modest pixel bump).

I do think we'll have to petition Sony to come up with better names than L, M, Hi, Hi+, and perhaps Hi++ - that's so unimaginative! Clearly the top has to be Ludicrous speed, followed by Magnificent speed, then Humble speed -which we could abbreviate to L, M, H... Hmm - I foresee a slight problem there...

 

[AlphaWorld]

I think the other 2 will be (1) an A7C-II and (2) a full frame fixed lens camera to compete with Leica Q series. So possibly a RX1R-III... (even considering the fact that Zeiss will back out, the lens on the previous version was good so they don't need to develop a new one).

As for what the three FF cameras will be, I think the A9 III is obvious, and the A1 II is likely. The third one is the big guessing game:

• an A7C II
• the suggested A7CR
• maybe Sony might throw in a curve ball - perhaps the integral portrait grip body that a few people want?
• what about an ultra-light camera, even lighter than the A7C, with a stacked sensor, no mechanical shutter, and no IBIS (you can make it smaller and lighter if you drop IBIS, and we can live without IBIS a lot of the time)

Actually, I rather like the idea of an ultra-light FF body, together with some of the lightweight lenses that have been appearing recently. I have the 20-70, and pairing that with a 400g (or less) body would really appeal.

 

[Brownie]

I think the A7cII is a given, they've pretty much said as much. The biggest unknown is the third camera.

I still think both MP and speed are important. The Z8 accomplishes both at a price that Sony will have a tough time matching. If we go by Sony's previous successor cameras, I expect the A9III to be $4800-5000.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Even I'm half interested in an A7C II. If they bump it up to 33mp which I think they almost certainly will, I'd be pretty tempted. As has been said, coupled with the 20-70mm or the 16-35mm PZ, it would be a sweet little combination!

 

[iamdlewis]

Yes, the A1 offered multiples of 5, but that doesn't mean every other high speed model has to do the same.

The A9 also had intervals of 5. If the max rate is a x0 value the options Sony will give will be in multiples of 5. Sony isn't going to see any value in allowing for "select your own" or giving some between 5-10 value.

 

[RogerSmith]

really hoping the A9III has at least the 33mp sensor from A7IV, only stacked.

 

[AlphaWorld]

really hoping the A9III has at least the 33mp sensor from A7IV, only stacked.

I have seen a number of people saying it “will have 33Mp to match the A7IV”, but you make a good point - it’s not like they can re-use the sensor from the A7IV - the A9 sensor must be stacked, so it must be either a brand new sensor, or, as has been alluded to by at least one Sony person, the old A9 sensor (they said it was faster than the old processor could handle, hinting that the new processor could get more out of it).

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Will it come with flames and racing stripes?
So fastest FPS, OM1 is 50fps, I really can't see it being faster, and who in the hell needs 50fps. Editing Masochists aside it's far too much.
Yes the AF tweeks will no doubt be awesome. I reckon a stacked 30mp+ sensor is on the cards, and some other minor tweeks, but it will still be £/$4k plus and that's just too much.

 

[spudhead]

Ok so I have the a9 mk1, and never saw the point of the a9 mk2, I can tell you from my personal experience with the mk1 I do not need more frames and regardless of what people claim not all the frames in a burst are in focus that is fact, because unless it is a snail sleeping it is not possible. The the point of the a9 for me is the speed it grabs focus and how well it does it, and how well it keeps it, outside factors considered. it does need more pixels I have to be careful about crops and be sure shots are as good as they can be focus wise. even at the current 20 frames max on the mk1 until reviewing shots you do not often realise what shots the camera has bagged that your eye never logged in that split second your finger was down, and I rarely use high rate now. I do not see much of the AI stuff as a plus for me, so what else can they do with the new a9mk3? fact is for me at least the investment needs to either increase my enjoyment of the camera or increase my limited skills, so transfer into better images and I suspect I could be the limiting factor here. On a side note most of the better stand out shots in wildlife on here come from the higher end prime glass that costs thousands and we are starting to see camera body prices getting ever closer to the the cost of used high end primes, food for thought at least for me

 

[RogerSmith]

One thing I've seen online (Tony and Chelsea Northrup) is a speculative YouTube piece that Sony may be looking to "leap the competition" with A9III / A1II release by moving away from storage media and creating a truly connected camera with access to cloud storage (think cell phones) and to have a bunch of in camera editing options (again think cell phones). I kind of doubt it, and personally don't even want it.

I think they should move away from mechanical shutters, drop the AA filter (which is the only thing that irks me about the A9II, I know that loss of detail vis a vis my A7RV isn't resolution, its the AA filter when viewed on the same monitor)

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

To pick up on Spuds point about the IQ, I agree, unless you have primes, the leap from extra pixels is not going to be that noticeable, unless you are looking at A7RiV sensors size and then you might, especially with cropping. The prices are the biggest thing that puts me off, it's just not viable as a second camera for me, so it will have to be very special.
I also agree about AA filters. My Pentax K3 didn't have one and that's why it was always regarded as one of the the best APSC cameras for IQ.

 

[AlphaWorld]

Will it come with flames and racing stripes?
So fastest FPS, OM1 is 50fps, I really can't see it being faster, and who in the hell needs 50fps. Editing Masochists aside it's far too much.
Yes the AF tweeks will no doubt be awesome. I reckon a stacked 30mp+ sensor is on the cards, and some other minor tweeks, but it will still be £/$4k plus and that's just too much.

Here's a thought that just occurred to me - if it really is super-fast, that would mean it could capture a bracket of images very quickly. Maybe not a focus bracket, because the lens has to move, but imagine being able to capture a 16 frame pixel shift bracket in, say, 1/4 second (would require 64fps, but that's not inconceivable). Capturing all 16 frames so close together would minimise issues with subject motion. And you wouldn't have editing issues, because the result is a single image. You could capture a 4 frame pixel shift bracket in 1/16 and get superior colour rendition because every pixels would be captured in RGBG.

 

[Gaz]

The point is, it will be faster than an A1.

Obviously, my early prediction of the new release of a sub optimal camera, that Z8 for instance, or Sony’s new video cam, effectively supersedes the top branch for ~half the money, leaving those who purchased an A1 last month feeling ripped off.

The A9iii will be a baby A1 leaving room for the introduction of a new A1.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Here's a thought that just occurred to me - if it really is super-fast, that would mean it could capture a bracket of images very quickly. Maybe not a focus bracket, because the lens has to move, but imagine being able to capture a 16 frame pixel shift bracket in, say, 1/4 second (would require 64fps, but that's not inconceivable). Capturing all 16 frames so close together would minimise issues with subject motion. And you wouldn't have editing issues, because the result is a single image. You could capture a 4 frame pixel shift bracket in 1/16 and get superior colour rendition because every pixels would be captured in RGBG.

Given that the OM1 can do 120fps in Jpeg without tracking it's more than possible. All they are doing is shooting slow mo video and taking stills. It's clever software in the camera, just like it's focus tatcking, 8 frames in 1/4 second, so very possible to do wht you suggest with computational photography as it is. I reckon Sony will have looked closely at what that camera is capable of and see if they can relate it to a bigger, better sensor. Given I can get an OM1 for under £1500 on import I am very unlikely to buy an A9iii

 

[spudhead]

Given that the OM1 can do 120fps in Jpeg without tracking it's more than possible. All they are doing is shooting slow mo video and taking stills. It's clever software in the camera, just like it's focus tatcking, 8 frames in 1/4 second, so very possible to do wht you suggest with computational photography as it is. I reckon Sony will have looked closely at what that camera is capable of and see if they can relate it to a bigger, better sensor. Given I can get an OM1 for under £1500 on import I am very unlikely to buy an A9iii

Kev before thinking of the om1 system camera be aware the frame rates are dependent on glass used in regard of both zoom and primes, the rate drops a lot with non pro zooms and some pro primes in some frame rates the camera locks ae and af on the first frame to the last, also an issue with Sony cameras people forget. I would try before you buy the om1 system its quite different to the Sonys and still 20mp.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Yeah I am aware, but I was using it as an example of what can be done at a much lower price point. Sony are pricing themselves as if they were Leica.
The OM1 with one of those primes would still only be 3.2k

 

[spudhead]

Yeah I am aware, but I was using it as an example of what can be done at a much lower price point. Sony are pricing themselves as if they were Leica.
The OM1 with one of those primes would still only be 3.2k

Yep as I said before I have use of my daughters with the 40-150 2.8 and 1.4 x and 12-40 2.8 and yes its good but still a bit toy like to me build and handling wise but that is just my opinion, very good bang for the buck

 

[AlphaWorld]

The point is, it will be faster than an A1.

Obviously, my early prediction of the new release of a sub optimal camera, that Z8 for instance, or Sony’s new video cam, effectively supersedes the top branch for ~half the money, leaving those who purchased an A1 last month feeling ripped off.

The A9iii will be a baby A1 leaving room for the introduction of a new A1.

And that's one of the reasons I strongly doubt the A9 III will increase in pixel count. The A1 family is for those who want fast high res, while the A9 is for those who want fast but lower res - it's a strong differentiation between the two. Making the A9 III a brutally fast 24Mp camera will maintain that differentiation.

I think the people who want the A9III to be a "cheap A1" will be disappointed.

I may be wrong and I'm eager to find out what Sony are going to do.