MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #18570523
Daniel you said 'ability to crop on the a7r III, but the better AF and ability to focus with the 2X TC on the 100-400' and that is the quandary. Remember not long ago we went to
Delaware to add Short-eared Owls to our portfolio. We just could not close the distance to them (gov. regulations/NWR) and though the a9 could give me every wing position at 20fps
I couldn't crop for a final image without loosing too much detail. the Riii let me crop enough for an image. Well you know it's hard shooting when 800mm was not enough to reach them.
So bottom line for wildlife shooters IMHO is just close do you think you can get to the targets you intend to shoot. Here is an example of where 800mm was just fine I think (using the a9,
and if I didn't like that wing position I have over 30 more variants because I followed this bierd for well over a second).
Another thought. If AF-C tracking is the dominant need the a9 is in another league over the Riii, they really do not compare. With the blackout free EVF and those frame rates there is nothing else
out there that comes close and you will think the Riii is loud with its mechanical compared and for fast moving BIF/race cars/athletes I don't think you want e-shutter on the Riii.
Just noticed I didn't denoise the background layer, sorry. I'll do that before this image hits Flickr.
Thanks for sharing. How do you find the "blackout" on the a7r III? Down here in Florida I'm spoiled to be able to get closer to wildlife then anywhere else I've been so reach hasn't been a huge issue, even when I was limited to 400mm, but I may be moving in the next 6 months so it's more of a consideration. I feel like if I used the a9 I wouldn't want to use anything else...