Sony Alpha 1 II Review

This review page will be updated when my preordered a1 II arrives but here are my expectations.

The Alpha 1 II hits the streets as Sony's flagship mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, displacing its predecessor, the Sony Alpha 1, from that position. The Alpha 1 still has few shortcomings from an industry perspective, and it was long my favorite Sony camera, the ultimate Sony choice for nearly all pursuits. Now, the Alpha 1 II is that camera.

While the II is a new and unique model, we've seen most of its features before. The a1 II is a rollup of Sony's latest design, technology, and capabilities, including a dedicated AI processing unit, enhanced ergonomics, and other features seen in the Alpha 7R V and Alpha 9 III, applied to the enduringly excellent imaging system of the a1 version 1.

Attaining the ultimate camera status comes at a high price, a price that will primarily be found worthy by professionals and serious enthusiasts. Those willing to pay the price will have a phenomenal image-capturing tool in their hands.

"Designed for professionals at the top of their game, the Alpha 1 II is an ideal hybrid tool for photojournalism, wildlife, sports, portraiture, weddings, and commercial work." [Sony Electronics]

Summary of Sony Alpha 1 II Features

Back to Top

• High-resolution full-frame Exmor RS® stacked CMOS sensor with an approximate effective 50.1 MP (megapixels)
• Up to 30 fps blackout-free continuous shooting with AF/AE (autofocus/autoexposure) tracking
• High-speed anti-distortion shutter reduces rolling shutter effect for clear undistorted images
• AI processing unit bringing advanced AI-based subject recognition performance and a new "Auto" recognition mode that automatically detects subjects
• Real-time Recognition AF identifies and tracks subjects even if face/eye obscured
• Reliable recognition of a wider range of subjects
• Real-time Recognition AF for movies
• 0.03 to 1 second Pre-Capture
• Continuous Shooting Speed Boost instantly increases (or decreases) frame rate to capture the action
• Improved optical image stabilization of up to 8.5 stops (center) and 7.0 stops (periphery) for still images and a new Dynamic Active Mode for videos
• Updated processing algorithms for improved image noise reduction at mid-to-high ISO sensitivities (JPG)
• Up to 8K 30p / 4K 120p and 10-bit 4:2:2 video recording with Breathing Compensation, Auto Framing, and import User LUTs
• Dedicated Still/Movie/S&Q dial for flexible hybrid operation
• Flicker-free shooting
• 4-axis multi-angle touch LCD monitor combines the utility of a conventional tilting monitor with side-opening vari-angle flexibility
• New front Custom button
• Blackout-free QXGA 9.44 million dot viewfinder with up to 240fps refresh rate
• Dual CFexpress Type A/SDXC/SDHC compatible media slots
• Optional VG-C5 Vertical Grip
• Dedicated microphone for clear voice memos
• Efficient data transfer by high-speed 2.5GBASE-T wired LAN and wireless LAN
• Built-in Wi-Fi for FTP and smartphone transfers plus PC Remote tethering
• IPTC metadata embedding and presets
• Updated ergonomics, standard and deep viewfinder eyecups provided
• Rugged reliability for challenging environments
• Supplied charger charges two NP-FZ100 batteries in 155 minutes
• Lightweight design of approximately 1 lb, 7.3 oz (743 g)

Sensor and Image Quality

Back to Top

The Sony Alpha 1's imaging pipeline produces outstanding image quality. Change was not needed, and the a1's image quality directly migrates to the Sony a1 II. With no hint of change in this regard, I do not plan to produce the time-consuming lab image quality test results from the a1 II. The a1 discussion and results directly apply.

Model	FOVCF	Sensor	Pixel Size	Pixels/Megapixels		DLA*
Canon EOS R1	1.0x	36.0 x 24.0mm	6.00µm	6000 x 4000	24.2	f/9.7
Canon EOS R3	1.0x	36.0 x 24.0mm	6.00µm	6000 x 4000	24.1	f/9.7
Canon EOS R5 Mark II	1.0x	36.0 x 24.0mm	4.39µm	8192 x 5464	45.0	f/7.1
Sony Alpha 1 II	1.0x	35.9 x 24.0mm	4.2µm	8640 x 5760	50.1	f/6.7
Sony a1	1.0x	35.9 x 24.0mm	4.2µm	8640 x 5760	50.1	f/6.7
Sony a9 III	1.0x	35.6 x 23.8mm	5.9µm	6000 x 4000	24.6	f/9.6
Sony a9 II	1.0x	35.6 x 23.8mm	5.9µm	6000 x 4000	24.2	f/9.6
Sony a7R V	1.0x	35.7 x 23.8mm	3.76µm	9504 x 6336	61.0	f/6.1
Sony a7R IV	1.0x	35.7 x 23.8mm	3.76µm	9504 x 6336	61.0	f/6.1
Sony a7 IV	1.0x	35.9 x 23.9mm	5.1µm	7008 x 4672	33.0	f/8.2
Sony Alpha 7C R	1.0x	35.7 x 23.8mm	3.76µm	9504 x 6336	61.0	f/6.1
Sony Alpha 7C II	1.0x	35.9 x 23.9mm	3.76µm	7008 x 4672	33.0	f/8.2

The full-frame format imaging sensor size is a big deal.

With equivalent technology, the larger the sensor, the more light captured and the lower the noise levels in the comparable final image. A larger image circle requires a longer focal length for the same composition, and the longer focal length creates a differentiatingly stronger background blur that isolates subjects, making them stand out from a non-distracting background.

The a1 II retains the same final pixel count as the a1, and this camera's resolution is another big deal. 50 megapixels is my preferred pixel count.

From a general standpoint, 50 megapixels is a big number, and my usual ultra-high-resolution imaging sensor discussion applies. Does everyone need 50 megapixels of resolution? No, but from an image quality perspective, if all other aspects remain equal, more is better. It takes no more effort to press the shutter release on an ultra-high-resolution camera than on a low-resolution camera, and 50-megapixel landscape images are especially impressive.

Still, there are some downsides to ultra-high image resolution. More specifically, higher resolution magnifies things you don't want to see, including:

1. Lens aberrations (high-quality lenses will make the best use of the resolution available)
2. Subject motion (an increased pixel density means that details will cross over individual pixels at a higher rate of speed, meaning that a slightly faster shutter speed will be required to avoid increased blur at the pixel level)
3. Shortcomings in your technique, including camera shake (you will need slightly faster shutter speeds for sharp handheld images — image stabilization and use of a tripod becoming more necessary)
4. Focusing errors are magnified (the tech in the latest cameras mitigates this issue)
5. Environmental issues such as heat waves are magnified
6. Diffraction

Photographers do not need to understand the details of diffraction, but all should know its impact. As the aperture opening decreases (higher f/number), images become less sharp at the pixel level beyond the approximate aperture we refer to as the Diffraction Limited Aperture ("DLA", included in the table above). As resolution increases, that point of visible degradation occurs at a wider aperture, slightly negating the higher resolution advantage. While you will want to use apertures narrower than the DLA at times, the decision to do so should happen with the understanding that pixel-level sharpness becomes a compromise. Those wishing to retain maximum sharpness in their ultra-high resolution, very deep DOF images may decide that tilt-shift lenses and focus stacking techniques are especially attractive.

I've mentioned "pixel-level". When the 50-megapixel final output size matches that from lower-resolution imaging sensors, the entire list of magnification issues just presented is negated, and the oversampling that comes with downsizing to a lower resolution has benefits.

Large file sizes require high storage capacity, increase file transfer times, including imaging sensor readout, and require increased compute cycles, both in the camera and on the computer. Using high-capacity memory cards and drives and a faster computer are the ideal ways to mitigate the drawbacks of larger file sizes.

The advantages of the increased detail captured by a higher resolution imaging sensor abound and include output at a larger size or retaining high resolution after cropping. I often find myself using the entire image dimensions to frame the final composition, attempting to have the most detail for viewing or printing large. While this strategy is usually a good one, sometimes that tight framing gets me in trouble, such as when I clip wingtips, need a bleed edge for printing, or need to format the image to a non-3:2 ratio, such as for an 8x10 print. Having significant resolution available provides the freedom to frame subjects slightly looser, better accommodating such needs with high resolution remaining after moderate cropping. Birders especially will love that ultra-high pixel density imaging sensors effectively increase the "reach" of all lenses. With this much resolution, there is often the potential to crop various final compositions from a single image.

Low-resolution cameras (if I can refer to 24-megapixel imaging sensors as low resolution) are often considered ideal for low light. With a higher signal-to-noise ratio, the larger photosites on lower-resolution imaging sensors produce lower noise levels at the pixel level. This difference is primarily noticeable when photographing at high ISO settings and directly comparing at the pixel level. However, to equalize the comparison, the higher resolution image must be reduced to the lower resolution image's pixel dimensions (or the lower resolution image must be increased to the higher resolution). Reducing image dimensions includes the benefit of oversampling, a benefit often touted by manufacturers when describing video recording capabilities. The higher resolution camera typically performs at least similarly to the lower resolution camera in an equalized comparison, placing it on par with the camera thought to be the low light king.

Like all of the other Sony Alpha cameras, the a1 imaging sensor has a 3:2 aspect ratio. Other aspect ratios available are 1:1, 4:3, and 16:9.

The a1 has the ISO 100–32000 range available, and expanded ISO settings from ISO 50 to ISO 102400 are available in still image mode. The entire range is selectable in 1/3-stops.

Let's take a closer look at noise and dynamic range (again, Sony a1 test results remain relevant and are used for this discussion).

With the noise test results from 180 different test images available, much can be discerned. The smoothly colored Kodak color patches test chart subject combined with no noise reduction processing (key point) makes noise especially noticeable compared to detailed scenes that better hide noise levels. As always, noise reduction processing can improve upon the noise level seen in these images, but noise reduction can be applied to images from every camera, reducing its differentiation. So, avoiding noise reduction in the comparison levels the playing field. Unless otherwise noted, the Sony RAW-captured noise test images utilized the "Uncompressed" RAW setting and were processed in Capture One with the natural clarity method and the sharpening amount set to 30 (on a 0-1,000 scale).

As the ISO setting increases from 100 through 800, noise levels grow slowly. But, they remain very low, as usual, showing the impressive capabilities of a modern, high-resolution full-frame imaging sensor. At ISO 1600 through ISO 3200, noise levels become noticeable though images retain a high quality at these settings. By ISO 6400, images begin to show noticeable impact from noise, and by ISO 12800, noise is strong. ISO 25600 through 51200 results look bad unless significantly downsized, and ISO 102400 results look terrible.

Do not expect noise performance from an ultra-high-resolution imaging sensor to match that from the same size, similar generation low-resolution imaging sensors at the pixel level. However, if the lower resolution works for you, the higher-resolution images can be considered oversampled and processed to smaller dimensions, where they typically at least match the quality from the lower-resolution sensors.

With the a1 (and now the a1 II), Sony promised a repeat of the a7R III and IV's very impressive up to 15-stops of dynamic range at lower ISO sensitivity. One way to look at a camera's DR capabilities is to over or under-expose images and adjust them to the correct brightness in post-processing.

Increase the exposure by 3 stops and pull it back by the same in Capture One to get an idea of the dynamic range available. In that comparison, a1 appears to deliver the same dynamic range as the a7R V. Try higher ISO comparisons to see that these two cameras produce similar results and retain excellent dynamic range at high ISO settings. Images from both cameras have lost the color information in the brightest color blocks with the colors becoming gray, but both appear to have lost a similar amount of color detail. At higher ISO settings in this comparison, notice the reduced noise advantage of this form of oversampling. Also, look at the ISO 50 comparison to see the reduced dynamic range available at this expanded setting. Both cameras look outstanding with this chart overexposed by two stops.

It is similarly interesting to look at underexposed images with brightness increased by the offsetting amount. In the -3 EV comparison, the a1 turns in very slightly lower noise levels than the a7R V, though the a7R V has additional resolution available for oversampling. Underexposing when using the a1 involves little or no noise penalty vs. selecting a higher ISO setting in the first place. Still, getting the exposure right in the first place delivers a lower noise image if a longer exposure/same ISO setting can be utilized. A real advantage of this capability is that shadow details can be pulled out of a very high dynamic range scene that is otherwise properly exposed and when an HDR technique cannot be used or is not desired.

The JPG result set utilized the camera default settings. Manufacturers want you to think their cameras are sharp, even if using a mediocre-performing lens. However, this oversharpening is destructive to image details, and noise is sharpened. The compare-to image in that link was created with the USM strength sharpness parameter reduced from 4 to 2. The less-sharpened image still looks good, and the magnified difference makes that image look significantly better still. The two ISO 100 images below are enlarged to 300%, revealing the ugliness of oversharpening.

Load Comparison Images

Differences to look for include the halos around details and the increased noise.

Noise reduction can make a huge difference in the results, but not all of it is positive. Noise reduction is destructive to fine details and must be applied carefully for optimal results. The same applies to sharpening, and a stronger amount of sharpening may be needed when noise reduction strength is increased, boding well for Sony's default over-sharpening.

The Sony Alpha 1 II inherits the a1's imaging pipeline, producing the same exceptional image quality, featuring high resolution, modest noise levels, and excellent dynamic range.

Pixel Shift Multi Shooting

Back to Top

So, this camera's 50-megapixel resolution likely has your attention, but how does 199 megapixels sound? This camera has that option.

It started with the Sony a7R III. This camera arrived with an intriguing new feature called Pixel Shift Multi Shooting. That feature came back in an improved form in the a7R IV, and now the a1 has this feature.

Going way back to 2014, I asked Canon for a pixel shift feature (see: "Ultra-High Resolution Via Multiple Shots"). Sony answered my request.

I had requested a higher resolution final image to be created from the shifted sensor, but Sony's original decision in the a7 III was to enhance the existing resolution. With the Pixel Shift Multi Shooting feature enabled (now implemented with Shoot 4 Shots selected), the camera rapidly captures four images (Uncompressed RAW format and silent mode are automatically selected) to be composited together during post-processing. The big deal is that the sensor is shifted one pixel between each image capture, resulting in the pixels moving in a square pattern. Each pixel on the Bayer sensor (no high-pass filter is present) is filtered to capture either red, green, or blue light (only). The shift allows each pixel in the final composited image to have input from a pixel well filtered for each color (green gets double coverage), without demosaicing. While the native sensor resolution is retained, the result is a considerably sharper image, with noticeably lower noise and moiré essentially eliminated.

In the a7R III review, I suggested that Sony shift the sensor 1/2 pixel in each direction to implement my enhanced resolution concept as well. Apparently, they were listening, the a7R IV came with that superpower, and this feature returns in the a1.

New with the a7R IV and returning with the a1 is a Shoot 16 Shots option that captures images with the sensor moved 1/2 pixel between captures. This technique provides the benefits of clarifying the Bayer sensor while substantially increasing the resolution. Process the 16 images into incredibly high-resolution 199 MP images. The difference is dramatic.

Pixel Shift Multi Shooting is a great concept, but not one without downsides. The first and perhaps biggest downside is that both the camera and subject must remain motionless while capturing the 4 or 16 images. Essentially, PSMS requires tripod-based shooting and still subjects. Even heat waves can prevent optimal results, and with the current processing options, areas not identical between images result in a strong, fine band pattern.

Pixel Shift Multi Shooting creates either 4 or 16 normal RAW image files that can be individually used. Processing is required to combine these files into the enhanced or enhanced and enlarged result. At review time, the processing options I am aware of are Sony's Imaging Edge (formerly named Image Data Converter) and PixelShift2DNG. I'll give Sony's software another chance during the a1 review, but it has been kludgy (to be kind), and I struggled to process the a7R IV files (with error messages preventing the saving of edited .ARQ files, the combined RAW image). PixelShift2DNG was easy to use, but I need to spend more time working the results up to the sharpness I want.

Hours spent on processing Pixel Shift files have taught me that some editing prowess is required, especially in regards to sharpening. If the source files are over-sharpened, the result will show jaggies and other artifacts. If the source files are under-sharpened, the result will not be sharp.

I'll share some comparison examples from the a7R IV below.

Load Comparison Images

It is not hard to see the Pixel Shift Multi Shooting advantage in the 100% crops. Look closely at the lettering on the small round label on the candle and at the stitching detail in the flag fabric. The increased resolution is outstanding.

The difference made by the Pixel Shift capture and processing is dramatic. If shooting a scenario with no moving subjects, consider using the 4 or 16 image Pixel Shift Multi Shooting options. Aside from some storage space, there is little to lose. If the result does not work out, simply delete all except one of the RAW files as would have been otherwise captured.

Those with advanced processing skills can utilize 4-shot Pixel Shift Multi Shooting more frequently, even when some subjects move (such as tree branches). The shifted image can be processed and layered in editing software along with one of the source images. Show the single-source image (try using layer masks in Photoshop) in sections having movement problems. Potentially, salvage most of the shifted image quality. Utilizing this technique for 16-shot capture will be more challenging, requiring up-sizing of a base image.

New with the a1 was flash compatibility for PSMS image capture.

In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS)

Back to Top

Camera shake directly impacts image quality for both still images and movies, and Sony's 5-axis Optical In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) has long been a difference-maker. The a1 II's IBIS rating is 8.5 stops (7.0 in the periphery).

Many of Sony's lenses, including the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Lens, have image stabilization, OSS (Optical Steady Shot), included, and in-lens stabilization can be better tuned to the focal length in use. However, IBIS also has advantages, including correction for rotation.

With select OSS lenses, the a1 II features image stabilization with Body–Lens Coordinated Control when specific lenses are mounted. At review time, these seven lenses, with their latest firmware versions installed, are on this list:

Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS II PZ Lens
Sony FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS Lens
Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Lens
Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS Lens
Sony FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS Lens
Sony FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS Lens
Sony FE 300mm F2.8 GM OSS Lens

File Size and Media

Back to Top

Before Sony introduced their efficiently compressed non-lossy raw image format, Alpha cameras had a voracious appetite for memory cards and drives. The lossless raw file format retains the ultimate image quality while dramatically reducing memory card and drive storage requirements for an easy primary choice.

The lossy compressed file format available on previous Sony cameras remains a good option, and the large uncompressed RAW format is available. In addition, "The Alpha [a1 II] includes the HEIF (High Efficiency Image File) format for smooth 10-bit gradations that provide more realistic reproduction of skies and portrait subjects where subtle, natural gradation is essential." [Sony]

The Sony Alpha 1 II has dual media slots, both supporting SD/SDHC/SDXC (UHS-II) and CFexpress Type A memory cards.

Files can be written to both cards simultaneously (for redundancy), alternately (for increased performance), sequentially (for increased capacity), and sorted (by file type).

Compared to CFexpress Type B memory cards, CFexpress Type A cards are typically slower and considerably more expensive. Still, the type A cards are smaller, becoming less expensive, and the ability to use SD cards in both slots is a huge advantage. The primary advantage of CFexpress Type A cards over SD cards is speed and robustness.

Frame Rate, Buffer Depth, Shutter

Back to Top

The Sony Alpha 1 II also gets the Alpha 1's speed, including strong continuous shooting frame rate capabilities, and this discussion stems from the predecessor's review.

Early in the DSLR days, the fastest continuous frame rates available were an exact spec, with few contingencies. Today, with so many factors affecting this spec, an app is practically required to determine the realized continuous frame rate.

That said, with the right settings, the Sony Alpha 1 can record 50-megapixel images at an incredible 30 fps rate, a framerate commonly used for movie recording. The required settings for 30 fps still frame capture include the full electronic shutter, the lossy compressed setting (for RAW capture), the right lens (certain lenses disqualify 30 fps), and even the shutter speed is a concern. Each image requires time to capture, and if continuous AF is selected, the camera needs enough time between shots to process focus information. In focus modes other than AF-C, a 1/125 sec. or faster shutter speed is required, and 1/250 sec. or faster is required in AF-C (continuous AF) mode. Note that slowing the capture rate to 20 fps is required to use the lossless compressed RAW format.

The AF system is not the only feature that requires scene visibility. Your eyes have the same requirement. Keeping a moving subject (most still subjects do not require a fast frame rate) in the frame is incredibly important, and the a1 and a1 II's ability to shoot blackout-free is remarkable and differentiating.

Here are the a1 II's available still image frame rates:

AUTO/Electronic Shutter: Hi+: 30fps, Hi: 20fps, Mid: 15fps, Lo: 5fps

Mechanical Shutter: Hi+: 10fps, Hi: 8fps, Mid: 6fps, Lo: 3fps

As usual, the a1 and a1 II's buffer capacity specs are also complicated. The frame counts below appear to be from 20 fps captures, and the continuous shooting time in seconds column reflects this assumption.

File Type	Frames	Seconds
JPEG Extra fine L	182	9.1
JPEG Fine L	400	20.0
JPEG Standard L	400	20.0
RAW (lossy compression)	238	11.9
RAW (lossy compression) & JPG	192	9.6
RAW (lossless compression)	96	4.8
RAW (lossless compression) & JPG	83	4.2
RAW (uncompressed)	82	4.1
RAW (uncompressed) & JPG	78	3.9

Using 30 fps H+ mode yields 165 JPG and 155 RAW (lossy compressed RAW only) images for 5.5 and 5.2 seconds of shooting time. That pair of image count numbers highlights an interesting difference. While more JPG images can be recorded before reaching the buffer capacity, the difference is only slight. Similarly interesting is that the 20-fps lossy compressed RAW buffer capacity is considerably higher than the JPEG Extra fine L capacity.

Consider the specified until-full-buffer time durations for your expected shooting scenarios, and base your judgments accordingly. I use RAW (Lossless Compression) exclusively, and the 4.8-second spec duration is sufficient for most of my needs. Even in the worst 20 fps case above, the about-four-seconds of shooting time is quite good.

Daunting is selecting the best images from a shoot involving significant use of the 20 or 30 fps capability. A one-minute duration of 30 fps shutter release press creates 1,800 images (30 frames x 60 seconds). In an under-four-hour duck shoot, starting at 30 fps and soon moving to 20 fps, the a1 collected nearly 9,000 images.

Does everyone need 30 fps? Of course not. However, with the extreme number of images captured today, it is difficult to create imagery that stands above those from the crowd. Using the 30 fps rate may capture that perfect moment of action that makes an image rise above the rest. Bat on ball, ball leaving foot, shot put leaving the thrower's hand, hurdler in perfect jump pose, perfect wing flap pose, and peak of a dog's leap are a small number of examples that benefit from the fast frame rate.

The first two examples illustrate 20 fps capture, and the last shows 30 fps:

Load Comparison Images

In the first set of examples, 20 fps captured most of the desired sequence (yes, I should have held the shutter release a bit longer to get just the feet sticking out of the water). In the second set, the American widgeon wing flap shows the 20 fps rate insufficient for availing the full range of wing positions. Sorry, thanks to the wind direction, only back-facing wing flaps were performed on this day.

In the third set of examples, a 20 fps rate would have provided a good set of results to choose from, but the 30 fps rate provided the optimal ear and leg position options.

Here is another 30 fps example:

Load Comparison Images

The more I shoot at 30 fps, the more I find myself wanting to shoot at 30 fps.

Read the Going Down in the Steeplechase – Sometimes 30 fps and 50 MP are Critical page for more information on this image.

The 30-fps frame rate nearly ensures that the perfect frame is on the card if you had the shutter release fully pressed. However, pressing the shutter release early enough and holding it long enough takes us back to the massive number of files problem. Hindsight is often perfect, much more accurate than foresight, and the a1 II lets you capture peak action images after the peak moment is past.

It's called Pre-Capture, and this feature is game-changing. With Pre-Capture enabled, hold the shutter release halfway down while tracking the subject and fully press the shutter release when the peak action occurs. Your press will be slightly late due to response time, but the Pre-Capture shooting feature collects up to 30 frames from 0.3 to 1 second (based on a menu setting) before the full shutter release press and continues to shoot until you release or the buffer fills.

It has never been easier to photograph a bird taking flight, a lightning strike, a ball leaving a bat, hand, or foot, and many other time-critical images, including the strike of a little green heron (captured using the Canon EOS R5 Mark II's pre-continuous shooting feature).

Pre-Capture changes your mindset and often creates a more relaxed shooting strategy.

"... a rating can automatically be applied to the first image in continuous burst or Pre-Capture groups, or a divider image inserted before the first image in groups, enabling quick scrolling through and location of groups using the custom dial during playback." [Sony]

Here is a comparative look at max frame rates and buffer capacities.

Model	FPS	Max JPG	Max RAW	Shutter Lag	VF Blackout
Canon EOS R1	12/40	500	230		0ms
Canon EOS R3	12/30	540	150	20-76ms	0ms
Canon EOS R5 Mark II	12/30	760/200	230/93		0ms
Sony Alpha 1 II	10/30	400	238	20-30ms	0ms
Sony a1	10/30	400	238	20-42ms	0ms
Sony a9 III	120		106	20ms	0ms
Sony a9 II	10/20	361	239	20-33ms	0ms
Sony a7R V	10	1000+	583		n/a
Sony Alpha 7C R	8	48	36	20ms
Sony Alpha 7C II	10	88	44	20ms

For a data point: I tested the Sony Alpha 1's 10 fps mechanical shutter drive mode with the camera configured to manual mode (no AE time lag) using ISO 100, a 1/8000 shutter speed (no waiting for the shutter operation), a wide-open aperture (no time lost due to aperture blades closing), and manual focus (no focus lock delay). The image was black for the smallest file size, the battery was nearly full charge, and a freshly formatted fast memory card was loaded.

Using a relatively fast ProGrade Digital 64GB 200MB/s V60 UHS-II Memory Card, the Sony Alpha 1 fills the buffer with 73 uncompressed RAW images in 7.20 seconds. An additional frame was captured every .7 seconds after the buffer filled. Use the lossless-compressed RAW format to increase the buffer capacity to 88. Switch to the lossy-compressed RAW format, and the buffer does not fill until 169 images are captured.

Writing the buffer contents to the referenced card is a very slow process, taking a long 49.3 seconds for the referenced card. Fortunately, some (not all) setting changes are permitted during the buffer clearing process.

With dual card slots, the a1 offers the choice of writing each image to a single card or to both cards simultaneously. Writing to both slots alternately, the a1 writes files considerably faster. Using two V60-rated SDXC cards and the lossless-compressed RAW format, the a1's buffer capacity increased significantly, nearly 2x, to 160 from 88. Decreased was the buffer write time, dropping to 30.6 from 49.3 seconds. The downside to sort recording is the (modest) additional complication to uploading images.

Nextorage sent me two CFexpress Type A memory cards to evaluate, and the a1 was the first camera I wanted to test them in. With the a1 set to 30 fps and RAW lossless compression, the Nextorage 1920GB NX-A1SE Series 950 MB/s VPG200 card netted about 84 frames and emptied the buffer in 12.64 seconds. The faster-writing Nextorage 160GB NX-A1PRO Series 950 MB/s VPG400 Card netted about 103 frames and impressively emptied the buffer in only 3.2 seconds. When speed matters, get a fast card.

The available Sony Alpha a1 mechanical shutter speeds range from 1/8000 to 30 seconds plus Bulb. This range is typical for high-end camera models, but I'm ready for camera manufacturers to enable longer exposure settings. Why not offer 2-minute exposures via the dial? It seems availing this option amounts to only a small software change. Then, include a menu option to permit limiting the range.

Extremely impressive is the 1/32000 to 30 seconds shutter speed range available with the electronic shutter. Note that continuous shooting mode limits the electronic shutter exposure duration range to 1/32000 to (only) 1/2 second. An example of this limitation having an impact is when shooting continuous frames of the night sky using a remote release and equatorial tracking mount. In this case, the electronic shutter is desired for the lack of shutter shock, and the remote release button locked down permits motion-free control over the shutter and permits walking away for an extended length of time.

The full (first and second curtain) electronic shutter comes with both advantages and disadvantages.

A significant advantage is that the electronic shutter is silent, ideal for use during quiet events such as weddings, when photographing skittish wildlife, and any time movies are being recorded nearby with audio. With no mechanical shutter in use, there are no moving parts, shutter failure is improbable, and there is no shutter vibration to be concerned with.

The downsides of an electronic shutter are primarily related to the line-by-line reading of the imaging sensor. Fast side-to-side subject or camera movement can result in an angular-shifted image with vertically straight lines becoming noticeably slanted (with the camera in horizontal orientation). The second curtain of a mechanical shutter chasing the first curtain can produce the same effect. Still, the difference between mechanical shutter (with electronic first curtain shutter) and electronic shutter performance in this regard has historically been quite big.

Certain light pulsing can influence electronic shutter-captured results, potentially resulting in banding. Also, defocused highlight bokeh circles can become clipped when using an electronic shutter.

With the a1 and a1 II, Sony has addressed the electronic shutter disadvantages, with high-speed readout from the new image sensor delivering impressive performance. Even during fast panning with the a1, vertical lines remain nearly vertically straight for remarkable performance.

The increased readout speed also offers silent anti-flicker continuous shooting with an electronic shutter. "Stress-free continuous shooting is now possible even when shooting in challenging lighting situations with fluorescent or other flicker-prone types of artificial lighting." [Sony] The flicker avoidance feature is game-changing.

In addition, this increased speed enables electronic shutter flash X-sync up to 1/200 sec and 1/250 in APS-C mode.

The Sony a1's tested imaging sensor readout speed is 3.8ms, an incredibly low number. The tested 1st curtain mechanical readout speed is also very low — 2.4ms. Expectation for the same numbers from the a1 II are shown below.

Model (times in ms)	Electronic	1st Curtain Mechanical
Canon EOS R1	2.7	3.2
Canon EOS R3	4.8	3.2
Canon EOS R5 Mark II	6.3	3.4
Sony Alpha 1 II	3.8	2.4
Sony Alpha 1	3.8	2.4
Sony a9 III	0	0
Sony Alpha 7R V	99.3	3.5
Sony Alpha 7 IV	66.5	3.5
Sony Alpha 7C R	99.3	3.5
Sony Alpha 7C II	66.5	3.5

The reasons to use the mechanical shutter are dwindling — I rarely use it on the a1.

The Sony Alpha 1 II's flash X-sync is 1/400 seconds (really fast) with the mechanical shutter.

Interval shooting is available.

Autofocus

Back to Top

Precise focusing is mandatory for the ultimate image quality, and the latest MILC AF systems are showing dramatic improvements over cameras even a few years old. Headlining for the a7R V, a9 III (testing referenced here), and now the a1 II is a phenomenal AF system driven by an AI processing unit featuring AI-based image recognition and the fast BIONZ XR image processing engine. "State-of-the-art AI processing uses detailed information about human forms and postures to dramatically improve the camera's subject recognition accuracy and make full use of its potential resolution." [Sony]

That processing power facilitates impressive subject detection and tracking capabilities, giving this camera Sony's best AF performance to date.

Recognizable subject algorithms are updated, with Human, Animal or Bird, Animal, Bird, Insect, Car or Train (including helmets worn by drivers), or Airplane available, and the range of subjects can be limited.

The human pose estimation capability is especially interesting.

Detailed settings for each recognition target are configurable, with complex customization availed.

Tracking Shift Range restricts the subject recognition distance from the tracking frame (1-5).

Tracking Persistence Lvl "Sets the sensitivity for whether to continue tracking around the subject or shift the focus to another subject that is closer in shooting distance when a recognized subject is lost. When set to 5 (Locked On), even under conditions where a recognized subject is lost, such as when the subject that you want to shoot is temporarily hidden by another object, the camera continues to track the area around the subject. When set to 1 (Not Locked On), under conditions where the camera cannot continue to track a recognized subject, such as when the subject is moving fast, the camera cancels tracking and quickly shifts the focus to another subject that is closer in shooting distance." [Sony]

Recognition Sensitivity (1-5) sets the sensitivity of subject recognition. Lower settings prevent false recognition, and higher settings recognize subjects that are normally difficult.

Recognition Priority Set. enables subject type prioritization when animals and birds are recognized at the same time.

Via the Recognition Part option, the a1 II can be limited to recognizing only specific parts: Eye/Head/Body, Eye/Head, Eye, or Follow Individual, and recognition Part Select can be assigned to a custom key. A subject recognition frame can be enabled to show the eye, face/head, or body of the subject (only entire body of insects and front of car, train, or airplane).

Up to seven faces can be registered for optional priority detection and tracking. Pressing the multi-selector changes the face to track when multiple options are present. Auto, right eye, or left eye can be selected for human and animal subjects, with the switch available as a custom key function.

Numerous other autofocus parameters are available.

This AF system is remarkably good at identifying even small-in-the-frame subjects and tenaciously stays on its target.

A galloping quarter horse presented a challenge to this camera.

As the horse came into sight, the AF system immediately locked on the distant rider and tenaciously kept her in focus for the entire pass, every time, including when going past at a close distance.

A couple of dozen galloping and jumping passes at the a9 III's 120 fps resulted in a couple thousand images.

Out of that take, only 4 images were not sharp. The rider's head momentarily was completely hidden by pine boughs was the acceptable cause.

The a9 III's AF system overwhelmingly met this challenge and others, and again, the a1 II has the same system.

Available focus areas are Wide, Zone, Center Fix, Spot (XL, L , M, S, XS), Expand Spot, Custom (C1, C2, C3), Tracking (Wide, Zone, Center Fix, Spot (XL, L , M, S, XS), Expand Spot, and Custom (C1, C2, C3)).

Focus bracketing is available.

The a1 II's phase-detection AF point count is 759, and the low light AF capability is down to EV -4 (really dark).

The high performance of Sony's AF system makes selection from many images easier, as focus accuracy is considerably less of a shot-to-shot image quality factor.

Movies

Back to Top

The a1 II's movie capabilities are essentially the same as those in the a1, with a small number of quite useful enhancements, including Real-time Recognition AF, Breathing Compensation, Auto Framing, and import User LUTs.

The detailed movie specs for the latest generation cameras are deep, but 8K 30p and 4K 120p are headlining specs for this camera.

Movie recording format (XAVC HS 8K)
7680 x 4320 (4:2:0, 10bit) (Approx.)
29.97p (400 Mbps / 200 Mbps) 25p (400 Mbps / 200 Mbps) 23.98p (400 Mbps / 200 Mbps)

7680 x 4320 (4:2:2, 10bit) (Approx.)
29.97p (520 Mbps / 260 Mbps) 25p (520 Mbps / 260 Mbps) 23.98p (520 Mbps / 260 Mbps)

Movie Recording Format (XAVC HS 4K)
3840 x 2160 (4:2:0, 10bit) (Approx.)
119.88p (200 Mbps) 100p (200 Mbps) 59.94p (150 Mbps / 75 Mbps / 45 Mbps) 50p (150 Mbps / 75 Mbps / 45 Mbps) 23.98p (100 Mbps / 50 Mbps / 30 Mbps)

3840 x 2160 (4:2:2, 10bit) (Approx.)
119.88p (280 Mbps) 100p (280 Mbps) 59.94p (200 Mbps / 100 Mbps) 50p (200 Mbps / 100 Mbps) 23.98p (100 Mbps / 50 Mbps)

Movie Recording Format (XAVC S 4K)
3840 x 2160 (4:2:0, 8bit) (Approx.)
119.88p (200 Mbps) 100p (200 Mbps) 59.94p (150 Mbps) 50p (150 Mbps) 29.97p (100 Mbps / 60 Mbps) 25p (100 Mbps / 60 Mbps) 23.98p (100 Mbps / 60 Mbps)

3840 x 2160 (4:2:2, 10bit) (Approx.)
119.88p (280 Mbps) 100p (280 Mbps) 59.94p (200 Mbps) 50p (200 Mbps) 29.97p (140 Mbps) 25p (140 Mbps) 23.98p (100 Mbps)

Movie Recording Format (XAVC S HD)
1920 x 1080 (4:2:0, 8bit) (Approx.)
119.88p (100 Mbps / 60 Mbps) 100p (100 Mbps / 60 Mbps) 59.94p (50 Mbps / 25 Mbps) 50p (50 Mbps / 25 Mbps) 29.97p (50 Mbps / 16 Mbps) 25p (50 Mbps / 16 Mbps) 23.98p (50 Mbps)

1920 x 1080 (4:2:2, 10bit) (Approx.)
59.94p (50 Mbps) 50p (50 Mbps) 29.97p (50 Mbps) 25p (50 Mbps) 23.98p (50 Mbps)

Movie Recording Format (XAVC S-I 4K)
3840 x 2160 (4:2:2, 10bit) (Approx.)
59.94p (600 Mbps) 50p (500 Mbps) 29.97p (300 Mbps) 25p (250 Mbps) 23.98p (240 Mbps)

Movie Recording Format (XAVC S-I HD)
1920 x 1080 (4:2:2, 10bit) (Approx.)
59.94p (222 Mbps) 50p (185 Mbps) 29.97p (111 Mbps) 25p (93 Mbps) 23.98p (89 Mbps)

Network Streaming Video Resolution
3840 x 2160 (30p) 3840 x 2160 (25p) 2560 x 1440 (30p) 2560 x 1440 (25p) 1920 x 1080 (30p / 60p) 1920 x 1080 (25p / 50p) 1280 x 720 (30p / 60p) 1280 x 720 (25p / 50p)

Slow & Quick Motion (S&Q), Proxy recording, and RAW output to HDMI are featured.

Video data formats are MPEG-4 AVC/H.264, MPEG-H, and HEVC/H.265. AAC-LC 2ch (16bit 48 kHz) is the audio data format.

"The S-Log3 gamma curve emphasizes gradation characteristics from shadows to mid-grey. Minimum ISO when shooting S-Log3 is 800, while the expanded ISO range is 200 - 640. Compared to the α1, detail reproduction has been improved and matching with S-Log3 output from Sony’s cinema cameras is easier. User LUTs can also be imported into the camera for preview." [Sony]

The Real-time Recognition AF for movies is a significant improvement for many video scenarios.

The a1 II provides solid video performance.

Exposure/Metering System

Back to Top

All current Sony Alpha camera models calculate exposures accurately, and like the a9 III, a7R V, and other recent Alpha models, the a1 II features 1200-zone evaluative metering.

"Exposure and colour reproduction are notably improved compared to the α1, with exposure optimised for detected faces in stills and movies, and exposure stability improved by approximately 20% even when the face is backlit, over-illuminated in sunlight, or not facing the camera. White balance is accurate even for subjects in shade." [Sony]

The a1 II's Metering sensitivity remains EV -3 — EV 20. The usual +/- 5.0 EV exposure compensation in 1/3 and 1/2 steps is available.

Available metering modes are Multi, Center, and Spot (standard and large), Entire Screen Average mode (stable auto-exposure through composition changes), and Highlight (detects the brightest area in the frame to (strongly) avoid blown highlights).

Viewfinder and LCD

Back to Top

The Sony Alpha a1 II features a huge 0.64-type OLED electronic viewfinder with an extreme 9.44 million-dot Quad-XGA resolution, the same size and resolution as the Alpha 1's EVF. The image displayed by this EVF is beautiful.

The magnification is .90x, the eyepoint is 25mm, and the refresh rate options are 240, 120, or 60 fps.

This is a blackout-free EVF implementation, an imperative feature for tracking a fast-moving subject with a fast frame rate.

The a7R V and a9 III's upgraded rear LCD migrated to the a1 II. This is a sweet 3.2" (8cm) TFT, 4-Axis Multi-Angle Touch Screen, with approx. 2,095,104 dots.

Do you prefer Sony's classic pull back and tilt vertically LCD or the LCD type that opens to the side and then rotates vertically? What if you could have both options on the same LCD? Sony made that happen.

The a1 II's LCD will still pull straight back and tilt vertically (98° up, 40° down), but via a pair of hinges on the left side, it will also pivot 180° outward and then rotate 270°, with over 360° of total vertical rotation available. The only physical penalty for this design appears to be a slightly thicker overall LCD implementation.

The outward-positioned LCD clears an L-bracket and cables throughout the full rotation, and the front-facing capability facilitates vlogging. The flexibility this LCD provides is outstanding.

I've not found Sony's camera menus easy to navigate, but significant improvements have been made. "Touch-responsive main and function menus with menu tabs on the left of the display, and related parameter groups and parameters on the right, make for easy navigation and tracking control." [Sony]

Until recently, Sony's LCD touch capabilities were limited to touch AF point selection when the rear LCD was active and touchpad functionality for AF point selection when using the EVF. Now, use tap, pinch, swipe, etc., to navigate the camera.

"The menu provides a subset of the camera’s shooting settings related to the selected shooting mode, facilitating settings for stills and movies." [Sony] This feature makes switching between stills and movie mode settings efficient.

I find the viewfinder graphics, primarily the level indicator's two large superfluous semi-circles, consuming too much space and sometimes covering subject details. For example, it is sometimes difficult to see if a catchlight is present in an animal's eye.

Physical Design

Back to Top

Sony maintains similar camera designs, and those familiar with Sony's Alpha series cameras will readily familiarize themselves with the a1 II. Similarity reduces the acclimation effort required to learn a new camera and makes using multiple Alpha camera models easier (and creates manufacturing efficiencies).

The a1 II and a9 III are nearly identical, with port arrangement being the primary (minor) external difference between these models. Both cameras feature a full array of professional controls.

To visually compare the a1 II with many other camera models, use the site's camera product image comparison tool.

As you view the control layout for this camera, keep in mind that vast customizations are available. If the default options are not your preference, customization is likely available to optimize the camera to your needs.

As an overall comment, notice how Sony's raised buttons and button surrounds make the controls easy to tactilely locate and use.

Back of the Camera

The a1 II's movie start/stop remains in the a1's position vs. the a7R V's top location. A top-positioned record button better facilitates use from all sides of the camera, including for self-recording.

Did you notice the stacked exposure mode dial? You'll see the release and lever used for this adjustment in the camera's top view. The movie and S&Q modes, options previously on the mode dial, were moved to the lower dial, a significant improvement.

The well-designed 8-way multi-selector joystick is back and easy to use.

The rear control dial is a useful feature; however, I will offer a minor complaint about Sony's implementation. The edges of the control are not grippy enough (perhaps the surrounding plastic is raised too much), and the dial presses in all directions (like a joystick) but only has 4 accepted press directions. It would be nice if the directional movement was confined to only the supported 4 directions and the clicks better defined.

The programmable function button provides quick access to 12 common functions assigned to still photo mode and a different 12 assigned to movie mode. By default, ISO settings are easily accessed via the rear control wheel.

Overall, a solid set of easy-to-find back-of-the-camera controls is provided in a mature, proven layout.

A recessed area at the bottom corner of the LCD facilitates opening, even with gloves on. The increased LCD depth of the 4-axis design also aids in that capability.

Top of the Camera

The top of the a1 II features a significant number of versatile controls, including two unmarked dials readily accessed by the thumb in addition to the front dial. The lockable exposure compensation dial lost its labels, enabling this feature to provide other functions via customization. The downside to this change is that easy visual confirmation of the current setting is gone (the viewfinder provides this piece of info).

I mentioned the stacked mode dial. In this view, the lever and release button are visible.

The modes that professionals and serious photographers have come to expect are included: M, S, A, and P. Those who want to take advantage of a great camera without a learning curve (and those who want the camera to decide what settings are required in an instant) have the intelligent auto mode ready for immediate use.

Three custom mode options are again provided, ready to store your most-used settings for immediate recall. Note that the a1 II is also capable of saving and reading camera settings to and from a memory card.

S&Q, referring to "S"low and "Q"uick, is for Slow and Quick Motion movies.

A pair of programmable custom buttons are provided within convenient reach of the grip hand's index finger.

The a1 II's power switch, surrounding the shutter release, is conveniently positioned, allowing the camera to be powered on or off with the grip hand's index finger while the camera is in hand. The shutter release is mounted more flushly than previous Alpha models, but the entire surrounding area is raised and tilted forward.

The top-left side of the camera features stacked AF and drive mode dials that make changing these often-used settings fast.

Overall and as usual for Sony Alpha cameras, the a1 II provides many controls, availing quick setting changes. Once acclimated to the Sony control positioning and feature locations, this camera is easy to use, and the controls have a high-quality overall feel.

Did Sony's right-side camera triangular strap loop ever get in your memory card door's way? Mine did. They eventually annoyed me enough that I removed the strap loops on my a1 bodies. A small change is the a1 II's right side strap holder stud rotated slightly to position the strap holder forward of the door and out of the way. Unfortunately, it now contacts my right index finger when in a downward position. When tilted upward and pressured with the index finger, it may impede the rotation of the rightmost dial.

Sony does not include a top LCD on the latest Alpha camera models, and I don't miss this feature when using these cameras.

Side of the Camera

Ports on the left side of the camera from the top-right, moving clockwise, are mic and headphone (3.5 mm Stereo minijack), SuperSpeed USB Type-C (USB 3.2 10 Gbps), HDMI Type-A (full-size port), flash sync terminal, multi-terminal USB (Micro), and LAN terminal (1000BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 10BASE-T).

Noticeable on the camera's right/grip side is the memory card door release that includes a slide lock.

Front of the Camera

The front of the a1 II is relatively featureless. The ubiquitous light sensor, AF assist lamp, and lens release button are provided, and the a1 II features a 5th custom button easily reachable while gripping the camera.

Size of the Camera

Back to Top

One of the big attractions to the Sony MILCs is their small size and light weight. The easy target for camera body downsizing is the grip. Small is great in many respects; however, too small is detrimental to grip comfort and control, and I've long complained about Sony's Alpha grips.

When you want to have full control over something, you grasp it with your entire hand. You don't hold a baseball bat, tennis racket, or golf club with just your fingertips. The same is true for a camera grip. While I'm not swinging my camera in the same way as those sporting implements, I still want total control over my camera and an attached lens.

The initial Sony Alpha camera grips were too small for me, but Sony has continuously improved the Alpha grip size and shape, and the a1 II's grip, the same as the a9 III's grip, is the best ever.

The changes from the a1 I'm directly comparing with are subtle, but the increased palm swell and rounder right side of the camera are immediately noticed when picking up the a1 II. The a1 II has a shelf area that hangs over the inside front of the grip, substantially improving control. I'm not certain that the angled shutter release is advantageous, but it is minimally an aesthetic improvement, with it and the new grip shape reducing the boxiness of the camera.

I've often complained about Sony's larger lenses uncomfortably impacting my first two fingers' (non-cushioned) joints (I have medium-large hands). In side-by-side comparisons using the Sony FE 135mm F1.8 GM Lens, I'm cannot conclusively say that the new grip increases the clearance.

Again, the a1 II and a9 III grips are the best Sony Alpha designs available.

Model	Body Dimensions		CIPA Weight
Canon EOS R1	6.2 x 5.9 x 3.4"	(157.6 x 149.5 x 87.3mm)	39.3 oz. (1115g)
Canon EOS R3	5.9 x 5.6 x 3.4"	(150.0 x 142.6 x 87.2mm)	35.8 oz (1015g)
Canon EOS R5 Mark II	5.5 x 3.9 x 3.5"	(138.4 x 98.4 x 88.4mm)	23.6 oz. (670g)
Sony Alpha 1 II	5.4 x 3.9 x 3.4"	(136.1 x 96.9 x 82.9mm)	26.2 oz (743g)
Sony a1	5.1 x 3.9 x 3.3"	(128.9 x 96.9 x 80.8mm)	23.7 oz (673g)
Sony a9 III	5.4 x 3.9 x 3.4"	(136.1 x 96.9 x 82.9mm)	21.8 oz (617g)
Sony a7R V	5.3 x 3.8 x 3.3"	(131.3 x 96.9 x 82.4mm)	25.6 oz (723g)
Sony a7R IV	5.2 x 3.9 x 3.2"	(128.9 x 96.4 x 77.5mm)	23.5 oz (665g)
Sony Alpha 7C R	5.0 x 2.9 x 2.5"	(124.0 x 71.1 x 63.4mm)	18.0 oz (509g)
Sony Alpha 7C II	5.0 x 2.9 x 2.5"	(124.0 x 71.1 x 63.4mm)	18.0 oz (509g)

Overall, aside from the a7C series, there is only a minor size and weight difference between the Sony Alpha full-frame camera models. All are small, all are light. Those are features few will complain about, especially when carrying, either in hand or in a case, for long periods.

The Sony Alpha 1 II gained modest size and weight from the a1.

Ergonomics, Build Quality, and Durability

Back to Top

Built on a lightweight, high-rigidity, magnesium alloy chassis, the Sony Alpha 1 II is robustly built, with a high-quality feel – like the a9 III.

Most of the buttons, dials, and switches have good haptic feedback, and the fun-to-use factor remains high.

The a1 II features moisture resistance.

Additional Features

Back to Top

"For professionals seeking real-time image transfer solutions, the Alpha 1 II supports 2.5GBASE-T via wired LAN. Images and videos can be transmitted via stable, high-speed 5G communication when the camera is paired with Sony’s PDT-FP1 portable data transmitter (sold separately). Additionally, images and videos can be automatically transferred direct to Adobe Lightroom or Google Drive through the latest version of Sony's cloud storage service, Creators' Cloud." [Sony]

Wi-Fi (2.4 and 5 GHz, IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n/ac) and Bluetooth 5.0 (2.4 GHz) are built in.

Sony includes the deeper EP21 Eyepiece Cup in the box.

Battery

Back to Top

Convenient is that the a1 II shares the Sony NP-FZ100 battery pack power source with many other recent Alpha series models. This relatively compact battery is rated for approx. 420 shots (viewfinder) or 520 shots (LCD monitor) (CIPA standard). If those numbers were solid, this camera could drain a fully charged battery in seconds when shooting at 30 fps. Fortunately, real-world battery life exceeds CIPA ratings and dramatically exceeds CIPA ratings when shooting in continuous modes.

The Sony BC-ZD1 Dual Battery Charger is included. USB PD (Power Delivery) is supported, and the battery can be charged in-camera via the USB port and a USB power adapter.

Sony VG-C5 Vertical Battery Grip

Back to Top

The a1 II (and a9 III) is compatible with the Sony VG-C5 Vertical Grip.

The vertical grip provides improved handling, especially with larger lenses and especially in vertical orientation, where it provides the same grip and controls as the built-in grip. The VG-C5 permits using two NP-FZ100 batteries, doubling the number of shots per charge.

Aside from the purchase cost, the biggest downside to the grip is the size and weight it adds to the camera. The grip is easily removable, creating flexibility in its use. Remove the battery door via a spring-loaded switch to enable the grip to mount. The removed door clips into the space provided on the side of the grip area that inserts into the battery compartment.

The VG-C5 features magnesium alloy construction with dust and moisture resistance matching the a1 II and a9 III. This accessory is well-built and well-matched. If I'm photographing people or wildlife, a vertical grip is likely installed.

What is the Best Lens for the Sony Alpha 1 II?

Back to Top

A high-quality lens is required to take full advantage of the camera's image quality, and Sony offers a compelling lineup.

The lens is a required accessory, and most will find the Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II Lens (shown on the a1 II above) or the Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS Lens to be the best general-purpose lens option for the 9 III. The announced-at-the-same-time Sony FE 28-70mm F2 GM Lens promises to be another great option.

For the longer focal length needs so often encountered, the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Lens is a great choice, and the Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM II Lens is an excellent option for wide-angle needs.

The site's Best Sony Lenses page is a great starting point for the latest advice, including more affordable options. The Best Sony General-Purpose Lens, Best Sony Telephoto Zoom Lens, and Best Sony Wide-Angle Lens pages feature recommendations for these top 3 lens types. Also relevant for this camera model are the Best Sony Outdoor Sports Lens and Best Indoor Outdoor Sports Lens pages.

Check out the site's Sony Zoom Lens Reviews and Sony Lens Reviews for in-depth coverage of all of Sony's lenses.

Price

Back to Top

The a1 II is an ultra-high-performance camera, and its price reflects this fact. The best comes at a significant cost.

Alternatives

Back to Top

The Alpha 1 II is, without a doubt, my favorite Sony camera, and lower price is practically the only factor for choosing otherwise. Before the II, the a1 version I was my ultimate choice, and leads to the question I'm asking. Should I get the Sony a1 II or (keep) the Sony a1?

Check out the a1 II vs. a1 specification comparison and the visual comparison of these cameras. What are the differences between the Sony Alpha 1 II and the Alpha 1?

Let's get the short list out of the way first. I already gave you the answer, but I'll put a bullet beside it. Here are the Sony a1, shown on the left side in the above image, advantages over the a1 II:

• Lower price

When the a1 II was announced, the a1 was immediately discounted by $1,000.00. That discount is not a factor for those considering an upgrade, except that the lower new camera cost may put downward pressure on the used camera sale price, directly impacting the upgrade cost. The items on the next list must be worth the additional expense for the II purchase to be logical.

Here are the a1 II's advantages:

• 0.03 to 1 second Pre-Capture of up to one second and Continuous Shooting Speed Boost
• 8.5-stop IBIS vs. 5.5
• Improved grip ergonomics
• New C5 button
• 4-axis articulated LCD
• 3.2" LCD with 2.1 million dots vs. 1.44 million dots
• 120 fps EVF in high quality mode vs. 60 fps
• AF-dedicated AI processor
• Insect, vehicle (planes, trains, and automobiles), and Auto subject detection modes
• Improved eye detection for animals and humans (by 30%) and birds (50% improvement).
• Upgraded human pose estimation
• XS and XL Spot AF area options
• 30 ms electronic Shutter lag vs. 42
• Video improvements, including AF performance, auto framing, movie self-timer, breathing compensation, import and embed of up to 16 custom LUTs
• 2.5Gbps Ethernet vs. 1Gbps, and Wake on LAN vs. no
• Stacked exposure mode dial
• FDA-EP21 enhanced eyecup additionally included

Serious photographers chasing wildlife and other action subjects will find the first bullet worth the upgrade cost. Pre-Capture is game-changing.

Other individual improvements, such as AF and IBIS performance, will also be worth the upgrade cost to many photographers, and the cumulative enhancements show the II to be a solid upgrade.

Still, the price difference is a factor, and the a1 is still the outstanding performer it always was.

Those of us considering the a1 to a1 II upgrade must consider that the value of our current cameras will continue to decline, and a fresh camera with a full warranty has value.

Especially because of price, the Canon EOS R5 Mark II is a thorn in the a1 II's side, and this is the other showdown I was most interested in.

Check out the a1 II vs. R5 II specification comparison and the visual comparison of these cameras. What are the differences between the Sony Alpha 1 II and the R5 Mark II? Here are the a1 II advantages:

• 50 megapixels vs. 45 megapixels (50 is my favorite, but 45 is close)
• 3.8 ms imaging sensor readout speed vs. 6.3 (faster readout reduces electronic shutter issues)
• 0.64" (16mm) 9.44 million dot 0.90x EVF vs. 0.50" (12.7mm) 5.76 million dot 0.76x
• 240 fps EVF vs. 120
• 4-axis articulated LCD
• Up to 1 second Pre-Capture vs. 0.5 seconds
• +/- 5 stops exposure compensation vs. 3
• Pixel Shift Multi Shooting (provides dramatically higher resolution after post-processing, but everything in the frame must be still)
• 1/400 max flash sync vs. 1/250
• Movie Auto Framing feature
• Ethernet port vs. available with accessory grip
• 420 shots CIPA viewfinder battery life vs. 340
• Slightly smaller

Here are the R5 II advantages:

• Dramatically lower price
• 30 fps with lossless RAW vs. lossy
• Eye Control AF
• AF to EV -7.5 to 21 vs. -4 to 20 (ratings at f/1.2 vs. f/2, but still an advantage)
• 5,850 manually-selectable AF points vs. 759
• 8K 60p 12-bit internal RAW vs. 8K 30p 10-bit
• 6 GHz WiFi vs. 5
• Has a top LCD
• 630 shots CIPA LCD battery life vs. 520
• Cooling fan grip available
• Slightly lighter

The Sony camera has dual CFexpress Type A and SD combo slots, while the Canon camera has dedicated CFexpress Type B and SD slots.

Comparing across brands is significantly challenged by the differing interface and ergonomics. These cameras are quite different in those regards, and advantages will often be determined by personal preference. Notably, I find the Canon grip more comfortable when using mid- and large-sized lenses.

Another worthy comparison is against the Sony Alpha 9 III. I'll let you figure out which camera is which in the above image.

Check out the a1 II vs. a9 III specification comparison and the visual comparison of these cameras. What are the differences between the Sony Alpha 1 II and the s9 III? Here are the a1 II advantages over the a9 III:

• 50.1 MP vs. 24.6
• 1/32,000 second continuous shooting shutter speed vs. 1/16,000
• ISO 100–32000 vs. 250–25600, expandable to ISO 50 to ISO 102400 vs. 125–51200
• Improved IBIS — 8.5 stops vs. 8.0 (center)
• Slightly greater dynamic range

Here are the a9 III advantages over the a1 II:

• Global shutter, with no rolling shutter or banding in stills or movies, vs. 3.8 ms (still fast)
• 1/80000 second shutter speed vs. 1/32000
• 120 fps continuous shooting vs. 30 fps, Continuous Shooting Speed Boost feature
• Flash sync to 1/80000 vs. 1/400
• AF working range of EV -5 – 20 vs. EV -4 – 20
• Exposure metering range of EV -5 – 17 vs. EV -3 – 20
• Slightly less expensive

Most photographers will find the a1 II the better option, but the a9 III is the better choice for a niche market, primarily those who value extreme speed over resolution.

Summary

Back to Top

"A fusion of leading technologies delivers overwhelming performance" [Sony]

I love the Sony a1's name. It is short and to the point, reflecting the best-of-the-best features in and a no-compromise attitude behind its design. While the "II" complicates the name slightly, it brings a solid set of feature upgrades, making the II the new number 1 option for nearly everything (if the price doesn't get in the way).