It’s time: make your voice heard and vote for your favorite photography products of the year. Polls are currently open in all seven categories but don’t deliberate too long – they close December 18th.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
I wrote, two years ago, that I thought the distinction between DSLRs and mirrorless cameras would disappear. Not that mirrorless would eclipse DSLRs, more that the differences would reduce to the point that the presence or absence of a mirror becomes the least relevant part of a discussion of two cameras.
As I was writing a comparison of the Sony a7R III and Nikon D850 today, I was suddenly struck by the realization that it might have already happened. I think there are a lot of interesting differences between the two cameras but very few of them have anything to do with the way we’d tend to categorize them.
With this in mind, my gear of the year is the Sony NP-FZ100. Or, to those of you not obsessed with product codes, the a9 and a7R III’s battery. The simple reason for this is the role it plays in rendering the difference between mirror-less and mirror-full cameras moot.
It all comes down to the idea of ‘good enough.’ And please don’t misunderstand me, I’m not talking about accepting the mediocre or tolerating the barely sufficient. Instead I’m referring to the threshold beyond which any further excess is, if not excessive, then at least superfluous: it offers no practical benefit.
Once I have enough battery life to get me through a demanding day of shooting, then any extra left in the tank is all very nice, but not exactly necessary. I recently spent a morning shooting both stills and video of a cyclocross race with the a7R III. Shooting a mixture of JPEGs, uncompressed Raws and 4K video, I comfortably churned out more than the 64GB capacity of my memory card and had to switch to a second. What I didn’t come close to doing was running the battery out. At the end of the racing, I still had more than 27% charge left, despite the sub-10°C temperatures.
 |
| The move to the ‘Z-Type’ battery on the right is the difference between me having to worry about charging and carrying spare batteries and me never having to think about it. |
This suddenly eliminates the constant battery anxiety I’ve always felt with previous Sony mirrorless cameras (and that’s without including the RX1R II, an otherwise fabulous camera whose butterfly-like lifespan prompts even its proponents joke “it’s like shooting film: you need to think about what you’re going to do with your 36 exposures”). Because when I’m shooting, I don’t ever want to be worrying about whether I’ve brought enough batteries, and which ones are charged. I don’t even want to have to think about it.
In fairness Panasonic got here first, having put a big battery in its GH models as far back as the GH3, but I didn’t notice it to the same extent because I was primarily shooting video with those models.
More demanding shooters, be they photojournalists or longer-form filmmakers, can always attach a battery grip for longer duration, but for me, the FZ100 means the a7R III is able to surpass my ‘good enough’ threshold. So, while the D850 can boast a very impressive 1840 shots per charge, for me and my photography, that’s well into the territory of overkill.
So, as a technology that allows mirrorless cameras (hopefully of all brands) to offer the same practical benefits as their DSLR rivals, my gear of the year is a battery. Because it makes the a9 and a7R III into significantly better cameras, not just because it pulls another leg out from under all those tired ‘mirrorless vs DSLR’ arguments.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
| Sigma’s 14mm F1.8 Art lens makes it easier to get shots like this. ISO 5000 | 2 seconds | F1.8 | 14mm |
Over the past couple years I’ve developed a strong interest in wide-field astrophotography. Specifically, I’ve become passionate about photographing the aurora borealis, commonly known as the northern lights.
The aurora is Mother Nature’s own special effects show, and it’s one of those things that makes you stop to just appreciate the magic of the universe. No photo, IMAX screen, or VR headset will ever replicate the experience of standing under the sky when she flips on the light switch, but maybe that’s why I’m so drawn to aurora photography in the first place: it requires me to go to where I can experience the magic in person.
There are a lot of good lenses out there for this purpose, and I’ve used quite a few of them including the legendary Nikon 14-24mm F2.8, the Rokinon 14mm F2.8, the Venus Optics Laowa 15mm F2, various 16-35mm F2.8 variants, and even Sigma’s own 20mm F1.4 Art, but once I tried the Sigma 14mm F1.8 it was game over. I knew I had found the one.
 |
| ISO 1600 | 3.2 seconds | F1.8 | 14mm |
One thing you learn quickly when shooting aurora is that you need fast, wide lenses. Fast because you’re shooting at night (duh). Wide because the aurora typically covers a large portion of the sky. It also makes it easier to include some landscape to provide a sense of place. This is where the Sigma 14mm F1.8 Art lens comes in.
What makes this lens so special is the fast F1.8 aperture. That’s 1.3 EV faster than an F2.8 lens. Put another way, wide open the Sigma 14mm has a 2.5x light gathering advantage over F2.8 lenses. That’s huge.
One challenge when photographing the aurora is that it can dance around surprisingly fast at times. Even at high ISO values an exposure may be on the order of several seconds, making it difficult to capture the intricate structure you often see in person. That’s part of the reason time-lapse sequences never look as good as the real thing.
 |
| ISO 3200 | 5 seconds | F12.8 | 14mm |
Using the Sigma 14mm, however, I can cut my exposure time significantly. Where the Nikon 14-24mm F2.8 might require a 6 second exposure, the Sigma lets me get away with 2.5 seconds. Still not enough to freeze the action, but enough to reduce the degree to which patterns and structure in the aurora get averaged out.
Conversely, there are times when the aurora moves slowly and I’m not too concerned about shutter speed. In that case, I can lower my ISO significantly, say from 6400 to 2500, in order to get higher quality images.
But wait, there’s more! This lens even makes it easier to focus in the dark. I typically use live view to focus on a bright star. Sounds easy, but sometimes it’s not. The extra light at F1.8 makes this easier, making shooting more fun.
Blah, blah, blah… That all means squat if the photos don’t look good. Thankfully, this lens has great image quality.
 |
| ISO 6400 | 1.3 seconds | F1.8 | 14mm |
Wide open there’s some comatic aberration, which causes point sources of light near the edge of the frame to look distorted, but unless your viewer is pixel-peeping they probably won’t see it. I suppose if I were an astro purist, and the stars were the main subject of my photos, I might get a bit persnickety about this, but I’m not, so I don’t.
There’s also noticeable vignetting wide open, but it’s a smooth transition to the edges, and I’ve generally been able to correct for it effectively in Lightroom. Again, astro purists will probably cringe at this, but for aurora photos it works great.
If there’s any significant downside to this lens, it’s that it’s both big and heavy. This is one place where Sigma’s ‘Make the best optic possible and size be damned’ design approach is visible. Put a couple of these in your pack and you’re going to feel it. (Then again, some of those other lenses I mentioned above are pretty big as well.)
I’m looking forward to doing a lot more aurora photography in the future, and I’ll be doing much of it with this lens. It’s going to take a lot to displace it from my camera, which is why it’s my 2017 gear of the year.
$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_5251445179″,”galleryId”:”5251445179″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”standalone”:false,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”startInCommentsView”:false,”isMobile”:false}) });
$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_9309803257″,”galleryId”:”9309803257″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”standalone”:false,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”startInCommentsView”:false,”isMobile”:false}) });
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
It’s been fascinating to watch the rise of mirrorless cameras over the course of my 7+ years writing about digital photography. And Sony in particular has been fun to watch as they’ve lead the mirrorless charge in terms of sensor size and resolution.
I’ll never forget the moment the Sony NEX-7 was unveiled in a pre-launch briefing in 2011 – it was the first time I truly craved a mirrorless body – the publication I worked for at the time even named it ‘Camera of the Year’. Up until that point mirrorless still felt like something of a novelty: a nice option for amateurs craving a small, light ILC alternative to a DSLR, but certainly not a replacement for one, especially for those ‘serious’ about their photography.
As the mirrorless market continued to take off and cameras like the original Sony a7 were unveiled, my interest in what originally seemed like a niche continued to grow. And while a lot of brands have contributed serious innovation to the mirrorless market, it’s been Sony in particular making the mirrorless cameras I’m most eager to get my hands on – an opinion not shared by all my colleagues, mind you.
But time and time again I found my expectations of shooting a Sony mirrorless camera never quite matched the reality of using the product. For instance, when it came to the Sony a7, sure it packed a full-frame sensor in a super compact mirrorless body – something that’d never been done, but the user interface of the camera, to put it simply, felt unfinished. This led to an overly frustrating shooting experience.
 |
| The Sony a9 is the brand’s first truly refined mirrorless camera, in this writer’s opinion. ISO 1000 | 1/1000 sec | F5.6 |
To make matters worse, many of Sony’s early mirrorless UI stumbling points were uniquely their own: slow startup times, vague error messages, and batteries draining while the camera’s shut off were problems other manufacturers had long since addressed (not to mention poor battery life). And while no one has the perfect menus, Sony’s have historically been the most cluttered and confusing.
For years, early Sony mirrorless adopters defended their decision to go all-in citing that, eventually, you do get used to the annoying UI and find workarounds. And indeed I’m sure they did. But a good camera shouldn’t force you to work around it: it should work with you. And as the Sony a7 II-series came to market, it seemed clear the brand was intent on fixing a lot of these issues and shaking its image as the camera brand with bad UI.
But it wasn’t until the release of the Alpha 9 this year, that a Sony camera has felt as refined in use as it DSLR counterparts. A year early, the Sony a6500 came pretty close to hitting this mark, but it’s the Sony a9 that’s finally won me over as a whole-hearted mirrorless believer.
Make no mistake, the a9 is meant to compete against the likes of the flagship Nikon D5 and Canon EOS 1D X Mark II. What it lacks in built-in vertical grip, it makes up for in a faster burst (20 fps on the Sony, 14 fps on the Canon and 12 fps on the Nikon). But it has more appeal to me than as just a sports camera.
 |
| The a9 is a sports camera, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t also well-suited for shooting candids. In fact it’s flip-out touchscreen is perfect for discreetly focusing on a subject. ISO 100 | 1/640 sec | F5.6 |
For me, the mark of a truly good camera is one you find yourself reaching for regardless of the assignment or subject matter. Since the a9 landed in our office, it’s been a camera that I’ve found myself grabbing for both static and moving subjects. Because as well-suited as it might be for sports photography, it’s also a great street photography camera with lenses like the FE 28mm F2 attached. I find that using the flip-out touchscreen to select a point of focus is a great way to shoot candids.
I recently took a trip to Jackson, Wyoming where I expected to shoot a mix of wildlife, landscapes and video, and found myself bringing the a9 because it offered a fast burst rate with good AF, 4K video without any heavy crop factor and excellent dynamic range. But moreover, I packed it because it is a camera I enjoy shooting with and can, with some time spent, customize to complement my shooting style perfectly.
 |
| I picked the Sony a9 for a once in a lifetime trip to Jackson, Wyoming because of its small size, dynamic range, 4K video and burst speed. ISO 50 | 1/640 sec | F8 |
That’s a big step forward for Sony. They’ve long made cameras that out-spec’ed the competition but for me personally, were not enjoyable to use. But the a9’s menus have been overhauled and are less confusing, its also responsive (starts up fast) and rarely throws confusing errors messages. These may sound like little things, but they add up to vastly more pleasant shooting experience compared to Sonys of years past.
Improvements like a new, larger capacity battery that doesn’t self-drain, gave me more confidence in grabbing the Sony for what was likely a once in a lifetime shooting excursion. Plus, compared to a D5 or 1D X II, the a9 is a much smaller lighter camera to pack. And its in-body + lens stabilization allows me the flexibility to shoot handheld at slower shutter speeds and avoid lugging a tripod around. This was something that mattered to me as I was to do a lot of hiking in Jackson.
 |
| These bison may be nursing, and therefore stationary, but they can run at speeds up to 40 MPH. Good thing the Sony a9 can shoot at 20 fps. ISO 100 | 1/500 sec | F5.6 |
The Sony a9, and its recently-released cousin, the Sony a7R III are both exceptional cameras. I used to hesitate to pick up a Sony camera; with this recent generation, no longer. That said, there are still some areas these cameras could improve to truly leave their DSLR pals in the dust, specifically: weather-sealing and subject tracking.
The Sony a9 is dust and moisture resistant to certain degree, but the lack of robust rubber gaskets on the ports, SD card and battery doors does not lead me to trust its ability to survive shooting in conditions such as a lacrosse game in torrential downpours – I’d be much more comfortable grabbing a Nikon D5 of Canon 1D X II.
The same goes for any assignment/circumstance were nailing focus on the shot is mission critical: Nikon’s 3D Tracking is still superior to Sony’s Lock-on AF for subject tracking.
There are some other minor grievances I have with the a9, like the inability to enter menus while the buffer clears. Another: the omission of video gamma and color modes found in most other Sony cameras. But these are all things that can easily be added/improved in the next generation. And if there is one thing I’ve learned covering Sony’s camera technology, it’s that the brand listens to customers and industry feedback.
 |
| Note: This was shot through a seaplane window. ISO 800 | 1/2000 sec | F5.6 |
It’s no secret that Sony is hungry for a piece of the professional sports photography market, eager to get mirrorless cameras on the sidelines of the Olympics and Super Bowl. And with the Sony a9, there’s compelling reason to at least acknowledge Sony as a legit player. I think it will take a few more generations of cameras for Sony to blow past the competition, giving pros a concrete reason to consider switching. But if they keep moving in the direction they have been, I see no reason why more and more pros wouldn’t give them a chance.
So for winning me over and being the first Sony mirrorless camera I truly love shooting with, the a9 is my pick for 2017 gear of the year.
$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_5484254968″,”galleryId”:”5484254968″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”standalone”:false,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”startInCommentsView”:false,”isMobile”:false}) });
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)