Camera
Fujifilm X-E4 review: small size, big image quality
Introduction
Product photography by Dan Bracaglia
The Fujifilm X-E4 is a lightweight, rangefinder-styled camera built around a 26MP APS-C sized sensor that uses the company’s X-mount lineup of lenses. Billed as a fun-to-use and compact photographic companion, the X-E4 is the smallest X-mount camera on the market, encouraging you to keep it around wherever you go.
With Fujifilm’s latest sensor and processor combo, the X-E4 inherits a lot of the goodies from the most recent Fujifilm cameras, including updated autofocus, solid video specs and really impressive burst shooting rates. And if you’re a JPEG shooter, you now have eighteen of Fujifilm’s excellent film simulations to choose from.
 |
| We’ve always found the X-E series to be a fun companion for photo walks. Out-of-camera JPEG shot using the Provia or standard film simulation.ISO 160 | 1/480 sec | F8 | Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Photo: Carey Rose |
We’ve been fans of Fujifilm’s X-E series going back to the original Fujifilm X-E1. We enjoy the size, controls, and styling – and of course, the image quality. But since the release of the X-T3, the first Fujifilm camera to use the newer 26MP sensor, the X-E series has lagged behind the updates in other areas of Fujifilm’s lineup, so we were glad to see the X-E4 announced with the latest tech.
Key specifications:
- 26MP APS-C sensor with X-Trans color filter array
- 3.0″ tilting touchscreen with 1.62M dots (can tilt up 180 degrees)
- 2.36M-dot electronic viewfinder, 0.62x magnification
- DCI 4K/30p, 4:2:0, 8-bit internal video recording (4:2:2 10-bit over HDMI out)
- Full HD video at up to 240p, for 10x slow motion
- 8 fps burst shooting with mechanical shutter (20 fps with electronic)
- CIPA rated to 460 shots per charge (NP-W126S battery pack)
- 121mm x 73mm x 33mm
- 364g (12.9oz)
On the inside, the X-E4 is more or less a Fujifilm X-S10 (and therefore much of an X-T4) minus the image stabilization Does it have what it takes to be considered for your next camera purchase? Let’s find out.
The X-E4 is available now at a price of $849 body-only, and $1,049 when kitted with the XF 27mm F2.8 II pancake prime lens.
What’s new and how it compares
 |
| The 26MP sensor at the heart of the X-E4 is excellent, offering great dynamic range and fast readout speeds. |
Relative to the Fujifilm X-E3, the X-E4 brings a suite of updates, the most important of which is the latest 26MP X-Trans sensor and quad-core X-Processor 4. This means the image quality and, in some cases, performance of the X-E4 will be a match for the best that Fujifilm has to offer in its X-mount lineup. The camera’s body and controls have also been slimmed down relative to its predecessor, but we’ll delve into those details in the next section.
That 26MP sensor brings with it really solid image quality, a native base ISO of 160 (down from 200 on the X-E3), and super-fast readout speeds that let the X-E4 fire away images at 20 fps with the electronic shutter (or 30 fps if you opt for a 1.25x crop). You also get super-fast electronic shutter readout that tops out at 1/32,000 sec, which is handy for shooting wide-open in bright daylight if that’s your thing.
We’ve found that Fujifilm’s film simulation options can really alter the ‘feeling’ of a scene. Out-of-camera JPEGs.
ISO 640 | 1/32000 sec (yes, you read that right) | F1.4 | Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R
Fujifilm’s DR400 mode was enabled, which raises the effective base ISO from 160 to 640.
The quad-core processor keeps everything moving pretty swiftly, and though you’ll want the fastest memory card you can afford for those bursts, you won’t gain any benefits from faster UHS-II compatible cards with the camera’s UHS-I slot (it’s still a good investment to get the fastest UHS-I card you can, though). The X-E4 also comes loaded with Fujifilm’s latest film simulations, including Eterna, which is a favorite for video recording, as well as Classic Neg. And being able to re-process Raw files in-camera to try out the different film simulations is a fun way to find what looks you like best.
You also get an updated autofocus system with phase-detection coverage extending nearly to the edges of the frame, as well as the improved tracking interface and performance we first saw on the X-T4. We’ve found it’s a very capable AF system but may require some tuning to get the most out of it.
 |
| Fujifilm includes a USB-C to headphone port adapter in the box with the X-E4 for audio monitoring while shooting video. |
The video on the X-E4 is a match for the X-S10, meaning it’s really solid. You’re getting DCI 4K/30p footage without a crop, F-Log recording (8-bit internally, 10-bit to an external recorder), impressive slow-motion in Full HD, and capture aids like zebra warnings. You also get both headphone and microphone ports, using the included USB-C to headphone adapter. But that lack of in-body image stabilization will mean that, for handheld footage, you’re going to want to make sure you pick up a stabilized lens to keep your shots steady.
How it compares
The X-E4 slots into a pretty competitive segment in the camera market; we consider its most direct competitors to be the Nikon Z50, the Sony a6400 and the Canon EOS M6 Mark II, all of which are within $50 USD of the X-E4’s MSRP. All of these options use APS-C sensors, and none offer in-body image stabilization.
| Fujifilm X-E4 | Nikon Z50 | Sony a6400 | Canon EOS M6 Mark II | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSRP (body) | $849 | $859 | $899 | $849 |
| Sensor res. | 26MP X-Trans | 21MP | 24MP | 32.5MP |
| LCD type | Tilting | Tilting | Tilting | Tilting |
| LCD size/res | 3.0″ / 1.62M-dot | 3.2″ / 1.04M-dot | 3.0″ / 921k-dot | 3.0″ / 1.04M-dot |
| EVF res / mag (equiv.) |
2.36M-dot 0.62x |
2.36M-dot 0.68x |
2.36M-dot 0.68x |
Optional 2.36M-dot |
| Built-in flash | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Burst w/AF | 20 fps | 11 fps | 11 fps | 14 fps |
| Video res. | 4K/30p | 4K/30p | 4K/30p | 4K/30p |
| Log | F-Log (8-bit internal, 10-bit over HDMI) | No | S-Log (8-bit) | No |
| Mic / headphone socket | Yes / Yes (with adapter) | Yes / No | Yes / No | Yes / No |
| SD card speed | UHS-I | UHS-I | UHS-I | UHS-II |
| Battery life (LCD) | 460 shots | 320 shots | 410 shots | 305 shots |
| Weight | 364g (12.8oz) | 450g (15.9oz) | 403g (14.2oz) | 408g (14.4oz) |
As you can see, the X-E4 really offers a lot of bang for your buck in this market segment, coming in with at least competitive specs in every category (battery life is especially notable). It’s worth mentioning, though, that for another $150 USD, you can get into Fujifilm’s X-S10; that camera has very similar core features to the X-E4, but adds in-body image stabilization and a bigger grip. The tradeoff is that of course it’s a larger camera, and the ergonomics and handling are strikingly different.
Body and handling
 |
| Gone from previous X-E models is the minimal front grip; but the optional MHG-XE4 accessory grip shown here inspires some confidence single-handed shooting if you’re not concerned about traveling as light as possible. the grip adds an Arca-style plate to the base of the camera, for easy mounting onto most tripod systems. |
Just as the X-E3 saw a slight diminishing of size and control points relative to the X-E2S, so does the X-E4 relative to the X-E3. You get a slightly smaller (though a touch heavier) camera body than the outgoing model. This is ostensibly for the purpose of being more pocket-friendly (though such a claim is obviously going to be pretty lens-dependent). With the new XF 27mm F2.8 R WR lens attached, the X-E4 is lighter than Fujifilm’s own fixed-lens X100V.
In use, we found that the camera itself is reasonably comfortable in the hand with just a wrist strap as long as you’re sticking to a compact lens. If you’re eyeing larger lenses, the optional MHG-X34 nor TR-XE4 thumb rest will help. Just don’t expect ultimate comfort from a camera whose shape resembles a large bar of soap.
 |
| The X-E4 is the first X-E series camera to offer a tilting screen, which sits flush with the rear of the camera when folded away. |
But really, the X-E4 is a very attractive little camera. The faux leatherette looks and feels nice, the magnesium-alloy top plate is lovely and the camera body feels solid. The fold-flush rear screen is a real joy, and makes the X-E4 much easier to work with at high and low angles than its predecessor. A threaded shutter button is always a nice touch, and the dials have just the right amount of resistance.
Unfortunately, Fujifilm makes no claims of any weather resistance on the X-E4, despite doing so for its XF 27mm F2.8 R WR kit lens. On our test model at least, the ‘Menu/OK’ and ‘Disp/Back’ buttons on the rear plate are a little too mushy and a little too shallow. It’d also be nice if the shutter speed dial could spin 360 degrees like the exposure comp dial; once you hit ‘P’ or ‘B’, you can’t keep turning it.
 |
 |
We’re not personally sold on the disappearance of the ‘M-C-S’ (‘Manual,’ ‘Continuous’ and ‘Single’) focus mode control which was on the front of the X-E2. This switch was a quick way to adjust a major autofocus setting depending on your subject matter, and since Fujifilm’s autofocus system has historically benefitted from a bit more involvement on the part of the photographer in our testing, we’re sad to see it go.
At least you can now assign autofocus modes and area settings to a custom setting bank to assign to a button for quick toggling, but again, you’re low on buttons to which you can assign an ‘access custom settings banks’ function. The rear dial from the X-E3 has also been omitted, which does leave more room for your thumb, but again, it’s one less control point.
I wonder whether Fujifilm went a little too minimalist on the X-E4
The viewfinder is par for the course for this class of cameras, though not outstanding. The bigger issue is that, even though you’ll want to press the Drive/Delete button with your left thumb, you’ll almost certainly trigger the eye sensor to switch from the rear screen to using the EVF. It’s a pain. And while the camera doesn’t automatically switch to the EVF when you trigger the sensor with the screen tilted out, it does rotate the screen 180 degrees; the info display is flipped to seemingly prepare you for taking a selfie.
 |
| The 2.36M-dot resolution of the X-E4’s viewfinder is par for the segment; some users might find the 0.62x magnification on the small side. |
Basically, we’re wondering whether Fujifilm went a little too minimalist on the X-E4. It took us a while to get it set up to where we could easily access all of the settings we want (and there are lots of things to assign to buttons, just not lots of buttons). In the end, we enabled the touch-swipe for custom functions to get a little more control, meaning you can swipe up, down, left or right on the rear screen to trigger a function. It works pretty well.
Lastly, Fujifilm’s Auto ISO behavior is unchanged, meaning that you can set upper and lower bounds on ISO values, and then either specify a minimum shutter speed threshold or select ‘Auto.’ But there’s still no way to bias ‘Auto’ to be faster or slower than half the focal length, as you can on most other competitors. On the other hand, you do get three banks of separate Auto ISO settings you can quickly swap between.
 |
The X-E4 also has a new ‘P’ mode on its shutter speed dial. Selecting it will override whatever the lens’s aperture ring is set to, and will put the camera into the Program Automatic mode. You can accomplish the same thing by setting both the aperture and shutter speed dials to ‘A’.
Battery and storage
 |
The Fujifilm X-E4 uses a familiar NP-W126S battery pack to achieve a CIPA-rated 460 shots per charge. As with most cameras, this is likely to be an underestimate in real-world use (how often do you shoot with flash and then immediately enter playback?), but it gives a reliable measure of comparability among competitive cameras.
This rating should easily get you through a weekend’s worth of casual shooting should you be on holiday (hopeful thoughts for the future). And, probably thanks to increased processing efficiencies, the X-E4’s rating puts it at the front of its pack in this regard. You can also charge the battery via the camera’s USB-C port.
The UHS-I slot means you won’t get any speed benefits if you use faster UHS-II cards
The X-E4 uses SD cards for storage; they’re inexpensive and ubiquitous, but the X-E4 only supports UHS-I speeds. You can of course use UHS-II cards in the camera, you just won’t see any performance benefit beyond a certain point.
Informal testing with a SanDisk Extreme Pro UHS-I U3 card shows that you can shoot losslessly compressed Raw and Fine JPEG images for between 1 and 1.5 seconds of burst shooting at 20fps, and wait then a little under 10 seconds for the buffer to clear. Shooting JPEG-only gets you around 2.5 seconds of shooting before the buffer fills, and then it clears after around 8 seconds.
Image Quality
 |
| The X-E4 offers a wide range of JPEG color profiles – both color and B&W – meant to emulate traditional analog film stocks. This image was shot using the ‘Acros’ profile, a staff favorite. Out-of-camera JPEG.
ISO 160 | 1/1000 sec | F4 | XF 27mm F2.8 R WR |
Our test scene is designed to simulate a variety of textures, colors and detail types you’ll encounter in the real world. It also has two illumination modes to see the effect of different lighting conditions.
The X-E4 uses the same 26MP APS-C sensor and quad-core X-Processor 4 as its flagship cousin, the Fujifilm X-T4, and is capable of the same outstanding image quality. Raw files show good detail capture, competitive with other top APS-C cameras, though bested slightly by the higher-res EOS M6 II. Noise levels at high ISOs are also comparable to the camera’s closest and best competitors.
Default JPEG color from the X-E4 (shot using the ‘Provia / Standard’ profile) looks pleasing. The rendering of yellow tones in particular is spot-on; where some brands struggle with a slight greenish or orange hue in their yellows, Fujifilm does not. Greens and blues also look nicely saturated and accurate. Reds tones look accurate, but they aren’t quite as well-saturated as Canon, Sony or Nikon reds. Pink tones are more saturated/pinker than Canon and Sony’s offerings, which could result in skin tones for some folks looking a bit off.
Default sharpening at lower ISOs is not quite as sophisticated as some of its competitors, namely the Sony. But at high ISOs the X-E4 does a good job balancing noise reduction with detail retention.
Dynamic range
The X-E4 offers excellent Raw dynamic range for its sensor size, providing ample processing latitude for post-work. It uses the same dual gain style sensor as the flagship X-T4 which switches its gain ‘mode’ when the ISO hits 800.
In the lower mode you get maximum DR, but Raw files that are a bit noisier when brightened than those shot natively using the upper gain mode. At the upper gain mode, the sensor prioritizes low noise levels, at the cost of some dynamic range.
Brightened ISO 160 images look a bit noisier than their native ISO 3200 output, but it’s not a huge difference. This suggests the camera is adding very little noise, even in the lower gain mode. In practical terms, this means you can lower your ISO when shooting high contrast scenes, as a means of reducing exposure/preserving highlights, without facing much of a noise penalty when lightening shadows in post. However, users who want the absolute cleanest noise levels from this camera should shoot at ISO 800.
Autofocus
 |
| The X-E4’s AF point coverage – identical to that of the flagship X-T4 – is ample and users can easily move their AF point/region via a responsive AF joystick on the back. Out-of-camera JPEG. ISO 320 | 1/320 sec | F2.8 | XF 16mm F2.8 R WR Photo: Carey Rose |
Autofocus overview
The autofocus implementation, behavior and performance of the X-E4 is identical to that of the flagship X-T4. Users can choose from a variety of focus modes including a single point, a cluster of points, or the full AF region. In AF-C, a subject tracking mode gives users the ability to place an AF box over their chosen subject, initiate AF via shutter half-press and/or the ‘AFL’ button, and track said subject around the frame.
There’s also a face and eye-detect feature that can be turned on separately when using any of the AF modes. When a face is detected, a box will appear over it; a separate smaller box will appear over a detected eye. When multiple faces or eyes are detected in a scene, a tap of the AF joystick allows users to jump between them. Tapping the AF joystick away from a detected face/eye will also allow you to disengage face/eye detection and revert to the initially selected AF mode.
Autofocus performance
 |
| Unlike some of the competition, Fujifilm does not currently offer an ‘Animal Eye AF’ mode. No problem, we photographed Belvedere using a single point in AF-C. Out-of-camera JPEG. ISO 2500| 1/200 sec | F4 | XF 27mm F2.8 R WR Photo Dan Bracaglia |
In most shooting scenarios, we found using a single point in AF-C to be the most reliable way to achieve critical focus. That said, for mostly static subjects, the subject-tracking AF mode also does a very good job in terms of reliability.
Face/eye detection also works reasonably well in most shooting scenarios, but this feature can occasionally give false positives, or shots that appear to have been captured sharp, but are in fact, slightly mis-focused. For casual users, this feature should be good enough. But if you’re a pixel peeper or portrait professional, we wouldn’t rely on it to nail focus every time.
When using a continuous burst to photograph fast-moving subjects, like athletes or wildlife, we also recommend using a single point or zone in AF-C – moved via AF joystick – to maintain focus. In our testing at both 8 fps (the top mechanical burst) and 20 fps (the top e-shutter burst), the X-E4 had no problem maintaining focus on a cyclist approaching the camera in a straight line, with a close to perfect hit rate.
 |
|||||||||
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
In our above ‘weave’ test, we assess a camera’s AF tracking performance by having a cyclist weave toward the camera in a manner that is difficult for it to predict. In a similar fashion to the X-T4, the X-E4 struggles with hunting throughout the weave. This test was shot using a tripod-mounted XF 50-140mm F2.8 R WR lens at 135mm.
However, we had a less than perfect hit rate when photographing erratically moving subjects, approaching the camera, using the X-E4’s AF subject tracking mode.
While performing the above bike weave test, in which we challenge a camera to identify a subject and then use the correct focus points to follow and maintain focus, we observed the camera tended to get easily distracted by elements in the background – especially bright colors – jumping off our subject, before returning several shots later. We also noticed the X-E4 tended to be slightly behind our subject when using AF tracking. And while tweaking the camera’s ‘AF-C custom settings’ can lead to slight hit-rate improvements, for best results with fast/erratic subjects, we’d skip the AF tracking mode altogether and stick to a point or zone.
Video
 |
Video overview
The X-E4 may not be an obvious choice for video work, given its rangefinder-style body, but it is actually quite capable. In terms of output, it can shoot oversampled DCI and UHD 4K video in 24 or 30 fps (30-minute cap on continuous capture). Full HD video can be captured at up to a whopping 240 fps.
The camera offers internal 8-bit Log capture and external 10-bit Log output (via the Micro-HDMI port) to a dedicated capture device (like an Atomos Ninja). For those wishing to avoid the fuss of color-grading in post, the Eterna/Cinema profile might be just what you need, offering flat contrast and rich tones.
AF modes are limited when shooting video, compared to stills. While you still get face and eye-detection for human subjects, the standard autofocus subject tracking mode – where you place an AF box over your subject and initiate AF to lock-on – is absent. Face and eye detect work ok, but can occasionally the camera will lose the subject, leading to a focus rack.
There’s no dedicated video record button, though one of the three custom buttons can be assigned to this function. To capture video out-of-the-box, you’ll need to switch to video mode via the ‘drive’ button and hit the shutter release. The body has a full-size microphone port and an included USB-C-to-audio jack provides support for audio monitoring; you can adjust audio levels and add wind or low cut filters from within the camera’s menus.
It’s worth reiterating that, unlike the its oh-so-similar SLR-style sibling, the X-S10, the X-E4 has no in-body image stabilization to aid in hand-held shooting (nor is there any form of digital IS). So if you’re already tempted by the X-E4, but like shooting video, the X-S10 may be a better choice for you.
Video performance
Video quality from the X-E4 is identical to that of its siblings, the X-S10 and X-T30; which is to say, quite good. Full HD footage offers nice detail, though it is somewhat prone to moiré. 4K footage looks excellent – whether shooting UHD or DCI – offering significantly more detail than the Canon EOS M6 II, a bit more detail than the Nikon Z50, and similar amounts to Sony a6000-series cameras.
Conclusion
 |
| What we like | What we don’t like |
|---|---|
|
|
Fujifilm has positioned the X-E4 as the X100V’s twin with interchangeable lenses. But unlike previous generations of X-E and X100 cameras, this is not quite a fair positioning. The two share a lot of technology, but the X-E4 comes up a tad short next to its gold-award-winning sibling in several regards. The most notable are a lack of weather-sealing, a lower-resolution EVF, and a paring down of control points that at best, leads to a more straightforward shooting experience, and at worst, an occasionally frustrating one.
We wish Fujifilm hadn’t removed the front focus mode selector and rear dial found on its predecessor
The X-E4 does get a lot of things right, in terms of design. The 3″ tilting touchscreen is highly responsive and enjoyable to use, especially for street photography. And the 2.36M-dot EVF, while not jaw-dropping in resolution, should offer plenty of detail for most users. The camera is also quite handsome, not to mention compact, even if we found it rather slippery without its $90 accessory grip or $70 thumbrest. The paring down of control points left us frustrated, though. We wish Fujifilm hadn’t removed the front focus mode selector and rear dial found on its predecessor. We also wish it had more than just three physical custom buttons.
 |
| Converted from Raw in Adobe Camera Raw.
ISO 160 |F2.8 | 1/450 sec | Tokina 23mm F1.4 |
In terms of image quality output, the X-E4 is highly capable, thanks to its excellent pedigree. Image quality is a match for the flagship X-T4. Fujifilm’s latest X-Trans BSI CMOS 4 sensor is capable of excellent Raw files with good detail capture and lots of editing latitude. And Fujifilm JPEG profiles – which mimic classic film stocks – have long been a DPR staff favorite. The X-E4 offers a whopping 18, including ‘Classic Chrome,’ ‘Classic Negative’ and ‘Acros’ (to name some favorites).
The only important video-centric feature absent from the X-E4 is in-body image stabilization for hand-held shooting
Video-wise, the X-E4 is also highly capable with nicely detailed 4K output, including 8-bit Log capture internally and 10-bit Log capture to a dedicated capture device (via Micro-HDMI). Full HD video can be captured at up 240 fps, for all your super-slow motion needs. And you can plug in a microphone and headphones (the latter via USB-C to audio dongle). Arguably, the only important video-centric feature absent from the X-E4 is in-body image stabilization for hand-held shooting.
 |
| Out-of-camera JPEG shot using the ‘Astia/Soft’ film simulation.
ISO 160 | F2.8 |1/220 sec | Tokina 23mm F1.4 |
One notable area Fujifilm cameras tend to lag behind their closest competitors is autofocus subject tracking performance, and the X-E4 is no exception. For mostly static subjects, face and eye detection work well enough, as does the traditional subject tracking AF mode. But once you introduce movement, these modes become much less reliable. That said, AF performance using a single point or zone in AF-C works very well and the AF joystick is highly responsive.
We suspect the X-E4 is going to make a lot of photographers happy, especially those craving a near-pocket-size X-mount body with Fujifilm’s latest IQ performance
Ultimately, the X-E4 is a camera with a lot to offer and we suspect it is going to make a lot of photographers happy, especially those craving a near-pocket-size X-mount body with Fujifilm’s latest IQ performance. For those upgrading from other Fujifilm bodies, the lack of buttons will likely take some getting used to, but don’t let that be a deal-breaker. This is a camera anyone on staff at DPReview would be happy to grab for an afternoon of street photography or take on a long vacation – once that’s a thing again.
Compared to its peers
 |
The X-E4’s nearest competitor is the Sony a6400, a camera with very similar specs but offering a very different shooting experience: Where the X-E4 is more hands-on, the a6400 encourages a more set-it-and-forget-it mindset. Both cameras are rangefinder-style in design, and while we prefer the touchscreen and control points of the X-E4, we find the autofocus system of the a6400 far more capable. Both cameras offer good image and video quality, and you’ll get great Raw files from both, but we find Fujifilm’s JPEGs more pleasing.
Another competitor with similar specs is the SLR-style Nikon Z50. Both it and the X-E4 are well-rounded cameras offering plenty of capability. We prefer the Nikon’s ergonomics and control points, but appreciate Fujifilm’s considerably larger family of native APS-C lenses. You’ll get a bit more resolution from the X-E4, but not an earth-shattering amount, along with slightly more detailed 4K. But your choice between these two may ultimately come down to preference between SLR- or rangefinder-style.
The Canon EOS M6 Mark II is also a natural competitor to the X-E4, sporting similar specs. The most notable difference: the Canon doesn’t have a built-in EVF, but it does offer an accessory unit for the hotshoe making it more expensive. Both are highly capable in the image quality department, though the Canon does offer more resolution. But on the video side, we much prefer the X-E4’s output and feature set. We think the Fufjilm is a better looking camera than the Canon, but appreciate that latter’s hardy grip and ample control points. But there’s a lot more native glass available for the X-E4 than the M6 II, and the X-E4 offers superior battery life.
The Fujfiilm X-S10 is also a sensible competitor to the X-E4. It’s essentially the same camera under the hood, but in an SLR-shaped body with a deeper, more comfortable grip, better controls, and in-body image stabilization. All that comes with a slightly higher price tag, though.
Leave a Reply
Wildlife Photographer of the Year winners
The 11th annual International Landscape Photographer of the Year competition has announced the winners of its 2024 awards, showcasing stunning imagery from around the world. Photographers competed in various categories, including the coveted Landscape Photographer of the Year, requiring a portfolio of at least four images, and Landscape Photograph of the Year, recognizing the power of a single captivating shot.
This year’s competition saw Canadian photographer Andrew Mielzynski, an amateur with a deep connection to the natural environment, claim the top prize for his portfolio of stark images with simple color palettes. Ryohei Irie from Japan captured the Landscape Photograph of the Year award with a mesmerizing image of fireflies illuminating a forest.
Beyond the overall winners, the competition presented awards in specific categories, including Black and White, Aerial, Snow and Ice, and Forest, along with at-large winners. In addition to the overall and category winners, we’ve included several of our favorite photos from the 202 photographs recognized this year. You can visit the competition’s website to see all the winning images or to download its 2024 eBook.
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 1st place
 |
Photographer: Andrew Mielzynski, Canada
Subject and location: Cono de Arita in the Salar de Arizaro, Atacama Desert in Argentina
Description: The Cono is a perfectly cone-shaped volcano at 3,690 meters above sea level. It’s very graphic due to the contrast between the dark, perfectly formed cone and the bed of white salt that is found at its base.
Copyright Andrew Mielzynski / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 1st place
 |
Photographer: Andrew Mielzynski, Canada
Subject and location: Winter Cottonwoods, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Description: During the pandemic, I went out for a walk at a local park during a fierce winter storm. I ran across this scene. It seemed very chaotic, with many layers of trees. I loved how the snow, driven by high winds, was embedded into the bark of the trunks. The snow on the bark created a textural contrast that adds detail and interest to the trees. I took a few frames, trying to simplify the scene in front of me and settled on this one, loving the tones, the depth, the order and the minimalism. Even in a chaotic scene, there seems to be a sense of balance that feels orderly and pleasing.
Copyright Andrew Mielzynski / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 1st place
 |
Photographer: Andrew Mielzynski, Canada
Subject and location: Found in a roadside ditch near Heathcote, Ontario, Canada
Description: After a melt, we had a flash freeze with extremely cold temperatures and a clear blue sky. I was driving by a ditch on the side of a road that had been filled with water and had to stop and look (as we photographers do, can’t pass a ditch without investigating). This is what I found. Great textures and patterns, tones and flow, with lovely graphic lines creating a dynamic, abstract designs. I love this type of work – it’s so much fun, yet challenging to find just the right composition.
Copyright Andrew Mielzynski / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 2nd place
 |
Photographer: Ignacio Palacios, Australia
Subject and location: Pumice Field, La Puna, Argentina
Copyright Ignacio Palacios / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 2nd place
 |
Photographer: Ignacio Palacios, Australia
Subject and location: Seven Colors Mountain, Siloli Desert, Bolivian Altiplano
Copyright Ignacio Palacios / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 2nd place
 |
Photographer: Ignacio Palacios, Australia
Subject and location: Arita Cone, La Puna, Argentina
Copyright Ignacio Palacios / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 3rd place
 |
Photographer: Gheorghe Popa, Romania
Subject and location: Early Autumn, Vânători Neamț Natural Park, Romania
Copyright Gheorghe Popa / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 3rd place
 |
Photographer: Gheorghe Popa, Romania
Subject and location: Poisoned Beauty, Geamăna, Apuseni Mountains, Romania
Copyright Gheorghe Popa / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photographer of the Year: 3rd place
 |
Photographer: Gheorghe Popa, Romania
Subject and location: Whispers of the Sunken Trees Cuejdel Lake, Romania
Copyright Gheorghe Popa / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photograph of the Year: 1st place
 |
Photographer: Ryohei Irie, Japan
Subject and location: Traces of Light, Ichinomata, Yamaguchi Prefecture, Japan
Description: The Landscape Photograph of the Year Award went to Ryohei Irie of Japan. He likes the mysterious atmosphere created by the standing dead trees and firefly light. “I have been visiting this Subject and location for several years during the firefly season, and it is an interesting place because the intensity and length of the firefly light and the Subject and location where the fireflies fly vary greatly, depending on the year and time of day, resulting in completely different works, even when photographed in the same way.”
Copyright Ryohei Irie / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photograph of the Year: 2nd place
 |
Photographer: Justinus Sukotjo, Indonesia
Subject and location: Mother Care Framing, Walakiri Beach, Sumba Island, Indonesia
Copyright Justinus Sukotjo / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Landscape Photograph of the Year: 3rd place
 |
Photographer: Himadri Bhuyan, India
Subject and location: The Flow, Sohra, Meghalaya, India
Copyright Himadri Bhuyan / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Black and White Award
 |
Photographer: J. Fritz Rumpf, United States
Award: The Black and White Award 2024
Subject and location: White Tie Affair. Death Valley National Park, California, USA
Copyright J. Fritz Rumpf / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Aerial Award
 |
Photographer: Benjamin Barakat, Switzerland
Award: The Aerial Award 2024
Subject and location: The Final Dune, Namibia
Copyright Benjamin Barakat / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Snow and Ice Award
 |
Photographer: Jeroen van Nieuwenhove, Iceland
Award: The Snow and Ice Award 2024
Subject and location: Isþyrlu – Ice Swirl, Scoresbysund, Greenland
Copyright Jeroen van Nieuwenhove / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Forest Award
 |
Photographer: Shirley Wung, Taiwan
Award: The Forest Award 2024
Subject and location: Fireflies flying in the Misty Mountains, Wufeng Township, Hsinchu, Taiwan
Copyright Shirley Wung / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
The Exciting Sky Award
 |
Photographer: Federico Delucchi, Italy
Award: The Exciting Sky Award 2024
Subject and location: Aurora, meteor shower and other cool stuff, Rocca la Meja, Italy
Copyright Federico Delucchi / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Laura Bennet, United States
Subject and location: Sumba Island, Indonesia
Copyright Laura Bennet / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: William Preite, Italy
Subject and location: Pale di San Martino, Falcade, Dolomites, Italy
Copyright William Preite / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Siegfried Makedanz, Germany
Subject and location: Sandfellsjökull Glacier Lagoon, Southern Iceland
Copyright Siegfried Makedanz / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Sabine Weise, Germany
Subject and location: Moonscape Overlook, Utah Badlands, USA
Copyright Sabine Weise / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Yuriy Vantowski, United States
Subject and location: Mount Bromo, East Java, Indonesia
Copyright Yuriy Vantowski / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Tanay Das, India
Subject and location: Kistwa, Himalaya, Jammu and Kashmir, India
Copyright Tanay Das / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
Other top entries
 |
Photographer: Rajesh Jyothiswaran, United States
Subject and location: Texas, United States
Copyright Rajesh Jyothiswaran / The International Landscape Photographer of the Year
| Images: Canon, Nikon |
It wasn’t long ago that many of our reviews of APS-C cameras had to come with a warning: no matter how good the body was, you were almost certainly going to be limited by lens selection. This was especially true with Nikon and Canon’s mirrorless cameras. Sony has followed its longstanding tradition of letting third parties build out a healthy selection of lenses, and the selection for Fujifilm’s APS-C-only X-mount is second to none, but Nikon’s Z mount and Canon’s RF mount appeared to be almost completely locked down. As a result, you could count the number of APS-C lens options available on your fingers.
But things are changing. Over the past year, we’ve seen several APS-C lenses announced and released for Canon and Nikon cameras, filling notable gaps in the first-party lens lineups. But while the situation is improving, it’s clear that the two companies are still in control.
This week, Sigma released four APS-C primes for Canon’s RF mount, making good on its promise to release six licensed lenses for the system – earlier this year, it released the 10-18mm F2.8 and 18-50mm F2.8. Meanwhile, Nikon has allowed Sigma to release select primes for Z-mount – a trio of F1.4 primes at 16, 30, and 56mm. It’s worth noting the company’s 23mm F1.4 is the only one of its APS-C primes that it hasn’t brought to Z-mount; it likely isn’t a coincidence that Nikon’s only first-party APS-C prime lens is a 24mm F1.7.
 |
|
Sigma’s APS-C prime lens lineup is quite good, and now most of them are available for almost any mirrorless APS-C camera.
Image: Sigma |
However, Nikon hasn’t stopped companies like Viltrox and Sirui from releasing a slew of Z-mount APS-C prime lenses, complete with autofocus. If you pick up a Nikon Zfc or Z50II, you can get anywhere from a 13mm F1.4 (20mm equiv.) to a 75mm F1.2 (113mm equiv.) to go with it, as well as most of the classic focal lengths in between.
Your choices are no longer limited to a few first-party options, manual-focus only lenses, or glass meant for full-frame bodies
This is an important change for APS-C shooters. Even going back to the DSLR days, it’s felt like many manufacturers have viewed the format as a stepping stone to full-frame rather than something enthusiasts and pros might consciously choose. Neither Canon nor Nikon have been particularly prolific when releasing new APS-C glass. But with the gates being slightly opened, you’re no longer limited to a few first-party options, manual-focus-only lenses from third parties, or heavier, more expensive full-frame lenses. Now, there’s at least some selection of third-party lenses with autofocus to choose from, alongside Canon and Nikon’s offerings.
This isn’t to say that you can now buy any APS-C camera you want and be assured that all the lenses you want will be available – you are still at the mercy of what Canon and Nikon wish to allow. While plenty of primes are available for Z-mount APS-C cameras, no fast zoom lenses are available; Nikon’s all start at F3.5 and end at F5.6 or F6.3.
In fact, there are currently no third-party APS-C zooms available for Nikon Z-mount at all, despite the fact that two have made the jump from E and X-mount to RF – it also goes without saying that there are many others more available on Fujifilm and Sony’s systems. That’s a bummer for anyone looking to step up from the kit lens or wanting to shoot sports or birds in anything but ideal lighting without having to shell out for and lug around a full-frame 70-200mm.
 |
|
Tamron has promised to bring its 11-20mm F2.8 APS-C lens to Canon RF mount this year as well – no word on Z-mount, despite Tamron bringing some of its full-frame lenses to Nikon.
Image: Tamron |
RF mount at least has the two constant F2.8 zooms thanks to Sigma, with one more on the way from Tamron, though those are all at the wide end. However, there are far fewer autofocus primes available for Canon, as manufacturers like Sirui and Viltrox aren’t producing them. That’s not surprising; a representative for the latter once said that Canon had told it to stop producing products for RF mount. The 85mm F1.4 lens that Samyang announced for the system in 2020 also disappeared from the market not long after.
In a perfect world, these problems wouldn’t exist. Canon and Nikon would make the lenses that their APS-C cameras needed to stand on their own feet as a real alternative to full-frame options, and there would be robust competition from third parties, which would be allowed to make whatever lenses they want.
None of that seems particularly likely. However, at least those who choose to shoot with a smaller sensor in a Canon or Nikon body have gotten a wider choice of lenses, even if they’re still bound by the companies’ rules.
At the end of the day, that’s better for everyone interested in APS-C, because it means that cameras like the EOS R7 and Z50II are competitive with the Sony a6700 and Fujifilm X-T5 in a way that they wouldn’t have been with an extremely limited lens selection. With any luck, this trend will continue, and the APS-C landscape will become more competitive – even if Canon and Nikon aren’t giving it their full attention.
The Sony Alpha 1 II is the company’s latest flagship full-frame mirrorless camera. It’s built around the same 50.1MP stacked CMOS sensor as the original but now includes an “AI processing unit,” which allows its autofocus system to recognize seven different subject types and to automatically select one based on what’s in the scene.
Key specifications
- 50.1MP stacked CMOS sensor
- In-body stabilization rated at up to 8.5EV
- Improved autofocus subject recognition with automatic selection
- Continuous shooting at up to 30fps with full AF tracking
- Pre-release capture from 0.03 to 1 second
- Fully-articulated rear screen on tilt-out cradle
- 8K 30p video downsampled from 8.6K / 4K 120fps
- 9.44M dot 240fps viewfinder – full res up to 120fps
The a1 II will retail for $6,499.99 – the same as its predecessor – and will be available in mid-December.
Index:
- What’s new?
- How it compares
- Body and handling
- Initial impressions
- Sample Gallery
- Specifications
- Press release
What’s new
 |
Despite using the same sensor as its predecessor, Sony claims the a1 II will have improved image quality at mid-to-high ISOs thanks to its improved image processing engine. Presumably, these improvements will only appear in the JPEGs.
Improved Autofocus
The original a1’s autofocus system could recognize humans when shooting stills and videos, and animals and birds when shooting stills. The a1 II, however, inherits the dedicated “AI processor” seen in cameras like the a7R V and a9 III and can now recognize even more subjects: it adds insects, cars, trains and airplanes. All the recognition modes are now available in movie mode as well, and the system can specifically target key parts of recognized subjects, such as a driver’s helmet.
The a1 II brings an ‘Auto’ subject recognition mode to the Alpha line
Sony also claims that human and animal eye recognition should be around 30% better than the a1 and that bird eye recognition should be 50% better. The Animal and Bird modes have also been merged, meaning you won’t have to switch between subject recognition modes if you want to go from shooting animals to birds or vice versa.
 |
| The a1 II’s Auto Subject Detection mode lets you narrow-down the types of subject it’ll search for, to help optimize the performance. |
Not that you would necessarily have to switch modes manually. The a1 II is Sony’s first Alpha camera to have an Auto subject recognition mode, where it can determine what type of subject it should be tracking and lock on to it. As with the similar system on Nikon’s cameras, this comes with a small speed penalty compared to having a specific subject recognition mode selected. However, it can be useful if you need to quickly go between shooting a variety of subject types.
You can also speed up the system by limiting which types of subjects the Auto mode selects between; for example, you can make it so it only looks for humans, animals, and birds if you’re not planning to shoot any insects or vehicles.
Finally, Sony’s also adding extra small and extra large spot focus area options.
Pre-Capture
One feature that’s become commonplace since the launch of the a1 is pre-capture – a way for the camera to save the moments before you press the shutter, helping you capture key moments beyond your ability to anticipate them. The a1 II adds it, recording up to 30 frames in the moments leading up to you pressing the shutter button, though if you want to go above 20fps, you will be limited to using lossy compressed Raws instead of lossless compressed ones. When enabled, the pre-capture is activated by a half-press of the shutter, the press of the AF button, or both, depending on your settings.
You can set the pre-record window to be as short as 0.03 seconds or as long as a second, with several options in between.
Better stabilization
The a1 II’s internal image stabilization is now rated for up to 8.5 stops in the center of the frame and 7 stops on the periphery (a new CIPA metric), up from a 5.5 stop rating on the a1.
Viewfinder tweaks
 |
Hardware-wise, the a1 II’s EVF seems largely unchanged from the a1’s: it’s the same resolution and can run at the same 240fps. However, Sony says you can now run in 120fps mode with display quality set to ‘high,’ though you will still see a drop in resolution if you go up to 240fps.
There’s also now a ‘deep’ viewfinder eyecup included in the box, alongside the standard one
Video
 |
The a1 II retains most of the original’s video specs. This means 8K capture at up to 30p, full-width 4K capture at up to 60p and up to 120p with a 1.13x crop. The 4K isn’t derived from the 8K footage, though, so you don’t gain the detail benefit of 2x oversampling.
The a1 II adds a few quality-of-life updates, though. The most impactful will probably be the aforementioned support for using all the subject tracking modes while shooting video, but you can also now import up to 16 custom LUTs that you can use to preview what your Log footage will look like when graded. You can also embed the LUT alongside your files, so that someone else editing your footage can match your intended look.
Just as we’ve seen with Sony’s other recent large-sensor cameras, the a1 II only shoots the S-Log3 profile, which captures a very wide dynamic range. It no longer offers the less expansive S-Log2 option. The a1 II also gains the attractive and flexible S-Cinetone profile if you don’t want to color grade in post.
The camera also has the Auto Framing feature found on some of Sony’s vlogging cameras, where it will crop in on the subject and move the frame around to make it seem like there’s a cameraperson tracking them. There’s also a ‘Dynamic active’ image stabilization mode, which Sony says will increase the stabilization by up to 20% compared to the standard ‘Active’ mode, and a ‘Framing Stabilizer’ mode that’s meant to ensure that your frame maintains the same composition as much as possible when shooting handheld.
Noise Reduction Composite Raw
Sony has expanded on the a1’s pixel shift multi-shot mode, adding a noise reduction mode that shoots between 4 and 32 Raw images that can be composited together using a desktop computer running the company’s Imaging Edge software. Sony pitches it as a mode for low-light portraiture.
It’s most easily understood as a multi-shot mode without the pixel-shift movement. Rather than trying to boost resolution it aligns and combines multiple images to boost the signal-to-noise ratio (ie: tonal quality) at each pixel position. As with pixel shift mode, it’ll work best when there’s little to no movement within your scene.
The a1 II also gains focus bracketing, which the original a1 lacked.
How it compares
The most direct competitor to the a1 II is Nikon’s Z9, its pro-focused high speed, high resolution model. Canon’s EOS R1 lower resolution makes it more of an a9 III competitor, but it’s these models primarily and explicitly made for professional shooting in the most demanding circumstances that Sony’s trying to target.
However, given how much of the Z9 and R1 Nikon and Canon have included in the Z8 and EOS R5 II, respectively, it’s also fair to include one of those models here, too. Sony doesn’t use the two-grip and larger battery design for its pro models, which makes the comparison even more inviting, despite them being a different class of camera.
| Sony a1 II | Nikon Z9 | Canon EOS R5 II | Sony a1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $6,499 | $5,499 | $4,299 | $6,499 |
| Pixel count | 50MP | 45MP | 45MP | 50MP |
| Sensor type | Stacked CMOS | Stacked CMOS | Stacked CMOS | Stacked CMOS |
| Max frame rate | E: 30fps lossy compressed Raw / 20fps lossless compressed raw |
20fps 14-bit Raw
30fps JPEG |
E: 30fps
M: 12fps |
E: 30fps lossy compressed Raw / 20fps lossless compressed raw
M: 10fps |
| Flash sync speed | M: 1/400
E: 1/200 |
E: 1/200 |
M: 1/200
E: N/A |
M: 1/400
E: 1/200 |
| Stabilization | 8.5EV center, 7EV periphery | 6EV | 8.5EV | 5.5EV |
| Max video res / rate | 8K/30 | 8K/60 | 8K/60 | 8K/30 |
| Video formats |
|
|
|
|
| AF sensitivity | -5.33EV* | -5.0EV (-7.0 in Starlight AF mode) | -7.5EV | -5.33EV* |
| Viewfinder | 9.44M dots 0.90x | 3.69M dots 0.80x | 5.76M dots 0.76x | 9.44M dots 0.90x |
| Rear LCD | 3.2″ 2.1M dot, fully articulating with tilt | 3.2″ 2.1M dot, 4-axis tilting | 3.2″ 2.1M dot, fully articulated | 3.0″ 1.44M dot, tilting |
| Connectivity |
|
|
|
|
| Stills battery life EVF / LCD | 420 / 520 | 700 / 740 | 250 / 540 | 430 / 530 |
| Video battery life (LCD) Cont. / Actual | 150 min / 90 min | 170 min / – | 150 min / 95 min | |
| Dimensions | 136 x 97 x 83mm | 149 x 150 x 91mm | 138 x 98 x 88mm | 129 x 97 x 81mm |
| Weight | 743g | 1340g | 670g | 737g |
* – Sony rates its AF sensitivity using an F2 lens, while Nikon and Canon use an F1.2 lens. We’ve adjusted Sony’s rating by -1.33EV to account for the difference.
The a1 II has the joint fastest shooting rate here and its sensor readout is quicker than the roughly 1/160 that the EOS R5 II can achieve. Likewise it has a built-in Ethernet connection, which the Canon lacks and, unlike the EOS R5 II and Nikon Z8, has matched card slots so that pros can focus on a single type of media and never have to worry about an performance difference between slots.
It’s much more evenly-matched against the Z9, which has a much lower resolution viewfinder but a low-latency readout path from its sensor to make the viewfinder more responsive. The Z9 can only shoot at up to 20fps in Raw, dropping to 12-bit readout and JPEG-only mode to hit 30fps.
Body and handling
 |
Given that the a1’s audience is professionals who use it day in and day out, it’s no surprise that Sony has been conservative with changes to its magnesium body and controls – the a1 II’s tweaks are largely the same as the a9 III’s, with the grip getting deeper and the shutter button being angled forward towards your finger.
 |
The dials and buttons are largely in the same places, though the exposure compensation markings have been removed from the locking top-plate control dial. The stills / video / S&Q modes have also been moved to a sub-dial rather than being settings on the mode selector dial, and the drive select dial now has a disable setting that lets you control the camera’s drive mode purely through menus.
The a1 II also features an additional programmable button on the front next to the grip. By default, it acts as a ‘Speed Boost’ button, upping your shooting rate as you hold it down. For example, you could be shooting at 15fps and press the button to start shooting at 30fps for a few seconds when the action speeds up or when you want to be sure you’ll capture a specific moment. This option can be moved to another button and the boosted frame-rate can be tailored to suit your subject.
 |
The biggest physical change is the display. It’s a bit larger and higher resolution than the a1’s, and it can now tilt in addition to being fully articulated. It’s a design we saw with the a7RV, and one that should make both photographers and videographers happy. It also has the slightly updated menu system from the a7RV as well, with the interactive settings tab.
As discussed above, the viewfinder is largely still the same, with a large 0.9x magnification and 9.44M dots giving a resolution of 2048 x 1536px. Its 120fps mode is nicer to use now that it doesn’t come with a substantial drop in resolution.
Ports and slots
 |
The a1 II’s I/O is largely unchanged from its predecessor, though the ports have moved around a bit. It still has a headphone and microphone jack, a USB-C port that runs at 3.2 Gen 2 10Gbps speeds, a full-size HDMI port, Sony’s micro USB ‘Multi’ accessory port, and a flash sync port.
It also has dual-band 2.4 and 5GHz Wi-Fi with 2×2 MIMO and an upgraded Ethernet port that runs at 2.5Gbps instead of the 1Gbps speeds the port on the a1 was limited to. That should make transferring large videos and batches of photos over long distances faster – try finding a high-speed USB-C cable that’s more than a few meters long – and is another sign of the pro workflows this camera is designed to support. The Ethernet port also now has a Wake on LAN feture that can be used to remotely turn the a1 II on using Remote Camera Tool.
 |
On the other side, the a1 II features a pair of the combined CFexpress Type A / UHS-II SD card slots for storage that feature on many of Sony’s cameras.
Battery
 |
The a1 II uses Sony’s NP-FZ100 batteries, and includes a dual-battery charger in the box, which it claims will charge two batteries at once in around 155 minutes.
The camera is rated to give 420 shots per charge when using the rear screen. As always, CIPA figures tend to significantly underestimate the actual number of shots most people will get, and this discrepancy gets significantly larger when you’re shooting bursts. But, while we’d expect a camera rated at 420 shots per charge to actually be able to shoot multiple times this number in practice, it’s usually a good indicator of how its battery life compares with other cameras (ie: if it gets a rating 50% lower than another camera, it’s likely to capture around 50% fewer shots per charge).
Initial impressions
By Richard Butler
 |
|
The a1 II’s AF proved very effective at staying focused on the player we’d specified, in our testing so far.
Sony FE 400mm F2.8 GM OSS | F2.8 | 1/4000 sec | ISO 640 |
When the original a1 arrived, just shy of four years ago, it represented an unprecedented combination of high resolution and speed. Despite a 50MP sensor, its Stacked CMOS design with on-board RAM let it capture stills at up to 30fps with readout speeds of around 4ms (fast enough to allow flash sync at up to 1/200 sec). This was around four times faster readout than the 20fps Canon EOS R5, which had previously come closest to offering high-speed and high res.
However, in the time that’s passed, both Canon and Nikon have produced fast high-res bodies and done so at something closer to a consumer-reachable price, leaving Sony’s pro flagship looking expensive, rather than exemplary. Don’t let this or Sony’s single-grip approach fool you: the a1 II is designed to square-up against the Z9 and R1, not the Z8 and R5 II. But it goes to show how quickly things have been moving that these more affordable models can match so much of the of the original a1’s spec and offer more advanced subject recognition.
 |
|
A pro sports camera doesn’t have to be used solely for sports, and its impressive autofocus can help maintain a very high hit-rate even when scrutinizing all 60 million pixels.
Sony 28-70mm F2 GM @ 70mm | F8 | 1/200 sec | ISO 100 |
The a1 II helps redress this balance, somewhat, pairing the same processing capabilities as Sony’s other pro-focussed model, the a9 III, with the 50MP Stacked CMOS sensor. This includes the gain of subject recognition AF modes with the first ‘Auto’ option that lets you pare back the range of subjects it hunts for, to hit an optimal speed/convenience balance for your photography. We’ve been very impressed by the camera’s AF performance so far.
The a1 II also gains the pre-capture option that’s been becoming increasingly common on action-focused cameras. It still tops-out at 8K/30 on the video side though, and has no option for 4K derived from this 8K capture, leaving it behind both the R5 II and Z8 in this regard.
Interestingly, the a1 II still needs to drop to Sony’s damagingly lossy Raw format at 30 fps: it can only shoot lossless compressed Raw at 20fps. The difference only becomes apparent at high-contrast edges after significant editing pushes, so is unlikely to be a major issue for action shooting, but it’s a surprise that this couldn’t be addressed with the Mark II’s greater processing grunt.
“It’s these workflow features aimed at professionals that try to set the camera apart”
Critically, the a1 II also includes a series of features from both the a1 and the a9 III designed specifically for professionals trying to deliver images quickly that the less expensive rivals lack. This includes a variety of transfer options, including SFTP and several ways of marking files to be transferred. We’d also expect the a1 II to gain the ability to encode C2PA authentication metadata to its files.
Unsurprisingly, it’s the cumulative impact of these workflow features aimed at professionals working in high-intensity environments that try to set the camera apart. And if you’re not one of those people (and most of us aren’t), then the a1 II almost certainly isn’t worth so much more than the more consumer-priced models.
 |
| Details such as a high-speed Ethernet port and options like Start-on-LAN to enable a goal-line camera to be remotely activated and controlled are what help set the pro-tier products apart from the very high-end enthusiast/crossover models. |
But how can these small details, an Ethernet port, that huge, high-res viewfinder and details like matched media card slots really add up to justify a 50% premium over the enthusiast/pro crossover bodies, such as the Z8 and EOS R5 II? Ultimately, it may simply be a ‘Pro Tax’: that $6K is how much a pro-focused camera costs. It’s the amount the market has shown it will bear, and it’s likely to be how much companies (including single-photographer companies) will have budgeted.
If there’s any doubt in your mind about whether the a1 II is worth the extra $2000 over the Z8 or EOS R5 II, then you’re not its target audience, and consequently it almost certainly isn’t, But if you are a Sony-shooting pro, the a1 II adds significantly to the skill-set of the previous model. But against dramatically improved competition and with so much Z9 and R1 tech trickling down to the Z8 and R5 II, it’s not the game-changer its predecessor was. We’ll get a chance to test this assessment as we continue using the camera.
Sample gallery
Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter/magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review); we do so in good faith, so please don’t abuse it.
-
Solar Energy3 years agoDLR testing the use of molten salt in a solar power plant in Portugal
-
world news1 year ago
Gulf, France aid Gaza, Russia evacuates citizens
-
Camera1 year agoDJI Air 3 vs. Mini 4 Pro: which compact drone is best?
-
world news1 year ago
Strong majority of Americans support Israel-Hamas hostage deal
-
Camera4 years agoCharles ‘Chuck’ Geschke, co-founder of Adobe and inventor of the PDF, dies at 81
-
Camera1 year agoSony a9 III: what you need to know
-
Solar Energy12 months agoGlencore eyes options on battery recycling project
-
TOP SCEINCE7 months agoCan animals count?
Pingback: Google shares a deep dive into its new HDR+ with Bracketing technology found in its latest Pixel devices