Which would you choose? A7 III vs A9 & G vs G Master

NewBeetle

So after 18m of heavy, heavy use I've killed my A6000 for the second time in 4 months. While I'm awaiting John Lewis to sort it out (not going well currently) I'm thinking of bringing my planned upgrade forward from next Spring/Summer to sometime much sooner. I do pretty much all types of photography, with hardly ever any video at all. I do action, sports, wildlife, some landscape and lots of pet portraits along with wanting to get more into people portraits too.

I'm 90% set on going with Sony FF and like both the A7 III and A9. I'm pretty much decided on the first lens I intend to buy being a quality 70-200mm which will be quite adaptable to most things I shoot. I will continue to use classic primes from Pentax and Zeiss etc which mean I wouldn't need any primes right away.

The A7 III   f/2.8 G Master comes in at £3428
The A9   f/4 G Lens comes in at £3368

My budget was £3k  /- so both a little over but not by much. People always say buy the best glass you can, but this is about as far as I am comfortable with moneywise and the stacked sensor, better EVF, buffer etc etc make me lean towards the A9.

Any thoughts people?

Johnmcl7

I guess the main question is speed or dynamic range?  The A9 is clearly the choice if speed is your priority but the dynamic range isn't as good as the A7III.

Before I give my choice I have to mention two big caveats, I haven't used an A7III or A9 plus I have a D750 which is my choice for high speed shooting.  I'd go for the A7III and the 70-200mm F2.8 as the A7III looks a great all round camera and I particularly value the dynamic range of the Sony sensors.  I prefer the faster F2.8 on the 70-200mm as when I'm shooting indoors it can be a struggle to get a fast enough shutter speed.

snerkler

I’ve not use either, but have researched them extensively and have used the A7riii.   

So the main selling features of the A9 are the frame rate and buffer. Tbh the A7iii buffer is plenty big enough for most folk, and to be fair so is the frame rate at 8fps (it does 10fps but not with real-time viewer exposure changes). Therefore you have to ask yourself why you’d spend the extra on the A9? Sure it can do 20fps but do you need that, seriously. Plus it can only do that with full electronic shutter so it’s prone to banding and ‘jello effect’ although the latter is less noticeable than other fully electronic shutters due to the scan speed of the sensor. With mechanical shutter it only does 5fps.

The A9 supposedly has class leading AF, but from some A7iii users they claim the AF is better than the D750 (although I remain sceptical of this until I’ve tried for myself) in which case the AF should be amazing and more than good enough for every application.

The only other thing is the EVF of the A9 is better, and having viewed the one on the A7riii (same as the A9) I can honestly say it’s superb.

If it were me I’d buy the A7iii and f2.8 from the choice you’ve given. Try the f2.8 on the body first though as it is weighty.

Have you considered the A7riii?

NewBeetle

Thanks, yes I agree with everything you've written. I am leaning towards the A7 III and 2.8 lens. I'm not really considering the R3 as the speed is more important to me than the resolution really, and I would rather keep the file sizes in the 24mp range. If I did much more scenic/landscape then I would be considering it. I've had a play with 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses and know they come with a weight & size penalty but it's something I'm willing to accept. By most accounts the A9 is pretty much free from any rolling shutter or banding and I must admit I am really liking the sound of 20fps, plus being able to use f/1.4 wide open in bright light without ND filters really appeals too ( because of the 1/32000 shutter speed)

wysinawyg

Have you carried a 70-200 2.8 before?

I thought it was a must have when I got my 80D but it has mostly gathered dust due to the size and weight. I’ve barely bothered using it on my A9 going for a lighter, longer Tamron 100-400 when I leave the house.

Snerkler has it mostly nailed on the differences - A9 has a better EVF, buffer and 20fps (and loses on video which you don’t seem to care about). The latter being awesome for getting the right expression if you can be bothered over shooting and going through a mountain of near identical shots. The bigger thing for me though is the non blackout with electronic shutter. It is awesome, if a little disconcerting, to barely be able to tell when you’re taking shots vs the sound of a shutter clacking away.

snerkler

Ahh yes, I forgot about the blackout, or lack of it. That is a good feature