tmalone893 wrote in post #18512816
Do you think you could have gotten this shot with the Rx10iv? Lovely picture....
Tmalone, yes and know.
I think I mentioned sometimes they are in the weeds or in water with weeds between me and them more likely but unseen regardless and they
suddenly pop up and really zoom to speed.
So with the 100-400gm I can instantly twist the zoom to get to them reach wise.
With the RX10iv ~and granted way faster to zoom out than I'd feared pre-purchase~ it's just nowhere near as fast as with a manual zoom out of
Now once on them I have no doubt the RX10iv could have AF-C tracked the ducks. AF-C tracking birds is now so easy with these two cameras it
just dumbfounds me
A word on focus points in wide or zone mode. For me there is no way to keep a small flexible spot on the head of a flying bird, nor center focus either.
So I keep a group of dancing green boxes, i.e. wide or zone on the bird and hope that at either 20fps (a9) or 24fps (RX10iv) I get one with eyes that
The RX10iv has the DOF advantage AND pixel density advantage over the a9, an advantage even over the a6500 for 'pixels on target' but as good as
the RX10iv's AF-C tracking is, and it is remarkable, the a9 is another step up.
The obvious big difference is that the a9 can do this at F11 and even with ISO's pushing 6400 I can get a good image. I can't say that about the bridge camera.
Now you've heard me whine about the weight and it being my justification of leaving the big EOS bodies and Whites. On this trip after shooting the RX10iv for a session,
and those sessions were 3-4 hours, then go back to the a9 and zoom, I could tell a big difference on the joints/muscles.