Sony A9

[xQubeZx]

Hello, 

Just watched the annoncement of the Sony A9 and basically wondering what you guys think of it? 

 

To be clear I'm not going to buy one its way to expensive. However its interesting to see others viewpoint on it and see if you guys think Sony has done a smart move or not with this camera. (it feels like they made this one to compete with the Nikon D5 and Canon 1DX or at least the 5D Mark iv after reading the specs) 

 

Personally I think it looks amazing, however I would rather see a camera to replace the A7ii to bring down those prices or something that fits the consumer market more. One that is a bit more budget friendly. 

[oskarha]

20FPS burst is just amazing

[AkiraDaarkst]

54 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

Hello, 

Just watched the annoncement of the Sony A9 and basically wondering what you guys think of it? 

 

To be clear I'm not going to buy one its way to expensive. However its interesting to see others viewpoint on it and see if you guys think Sony has done a smart move or not with this camera. (it feels like they made this one to compete with the Nikon D5 and Canon 1DX or at least the 5D Mark iv after reading the specs) 

 

Personally I think it looks amazing, however I would rather see a camera to replace the A7ii to bring down those prices or something that fits the consumer market more. One that is a bit more budget friendly. 

Looking at the specs and reading the press releases.  Here are my initial thoughts:

• Price is encroaching on the territory of the likes of Nikon D5 or Canon 1D line.  Here's to hoping it would bring down prices of Nikon's flagship DSLRs.
• Looking to see if any of the press releases mention the number of memory card slots it has... for me, a camera that costs that much should offer 2 slots since it would mainly target professionals.  (edit: just saw a press release that says it has dual SD card slots and an ethernet port.  The card slots are SD card slots though.)
• How would it compare to a Nikon D# (single digit) or Canon 1D line in terms of durability and weatherproofing?
• Battery life might still not be on par with the likes of Nikon or Canon flagship DSLRs.
• The shutter speed and continuous burst speeds are impressive, along with internal buffer size.  (edit: But I also get a feeling that the buffer size has to be that high due to the use of SD memory cards. If the camera had used XQD, something Sony makes, or CFast cards the buffer size might be smaller.  20fps burst speed means it will fill up the RAW buffer in 12 seconds and it will very likely take longer to move those RAW files from buffer to memory card.)
• But it still wouldn't convince me to move away from my trusty Nikon D4 (which I may replace with a D5s/D6 when released in the future).  Camera body size to big lenses I use, the size and weight ratio would not be in balance for me.  And if I wanted another 4K video camera for such a price, I'd get a Sony FS5 which would just be $1000 (give or take a couple of hundred) more expensive.

[xQubeZx]

30 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Looking at the specs and reading the press releases.  Here are my initial thoughts:

• Price is encroaching on the territory of the likes of Nikon D5 or Canon 1D line.
• Looking to see if any of the press releases mention the number of memory card slots it has... for me, a camera that costs that much should offer 2 slots since it would mainly target professionals.  (edit: just saw a press release that says it has dual SD card slots and an ethernet port.  The card slots are SD card slots though.)
• How would it compare to a Nikon D# (single digit) or Canon 1D line in terms of durability and weatherproofing?
• Battery life might still not be on par with the likes of Nikon or Canon flagship DSLRs.
• The shutter speed and continuous burst speeds are impressive, along with internal buffer size.
• But it still wouldn't convince me to move away from my trusty Nikon D4 (which I may replace with a D5s/D6 when released in the future).  Camera body size to big lenses I use, the size and weight ratio would not be in balance for me.  And if I wanted another 4K video camera for such a price, I'd get a Sony FS5 which would just be $1000 (give or take a couple of hundred) more expensive.

I though about a lot of these things too when I saw it. It seems like Sony have listend on what people want tbh. They added dual SD's (One UHS-II), a joystick for moving focus points and a try at improving the battery. All these may probably have seemed like obvoius things but still, its exactly what people have asked for. However it would be nice to see a lot of these things in lower end bodies aswell. 

 

I think the durability won't be at the level of the 1DX or the D5 but it feels like Sony slowly are improving it. By looking at the back it looked like way more sofisticated and well built around the scroll wheel and joystick, however that is hard to say untill you have it in your hand and try it outside. 

 

In my mind this looks like a camera that would be good for journalist work, if it has good enough build. And what I have seen from my Instagram, lots of the people at Sonys event is photographers and videographers that does a lot of travel, adventure and action photography. The ones that does everything to keep weight down so they can get to remote locations easier and also don't have to worry about camera gear to take up valuable space. I think that is what this will be ideal for. A proffesional grade camera that can be taken everywhere easier than say a 1DX that is huge. 

 

I hope to be able to look at it in person in my local photography store in a month or so, won't be able to buy it but new tech is always very interesting. 

[xQubeZx]

44 minutes ago, oskarha said:

20FPS burst is just amazing

I did not get if that was 20FPS burst with mecanical shutter or not? Or is that just with electronic?

[oskarha]

Just now, xQubeZx said:

I did not get if that was 20FPS burst with mecanical shutter or not? Or is that just with electronic?

Not sure.

[AkiraDaarkst]

2 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

I did not get if that was 20FPS burst with mecanical shutter or not? Or is that just with electronic?

I don't think any of Sony mirrorless cameras actually have mechanical shutters.  It would get in the way of live view or EVFs which take the signal from the sensor.

 

3 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

I though about a lot of these things too when I saw it. It seems like Sony have listend on what people want tbh. They added dual SD's (One UHS-II), a joystick for moving focus points and a try at improving the battery. All these may probably have seemed like obvoius things but still, its exactly what people have asked for. However it would be nice to see a lot of these things in lower end bodies aswell. 

 

I think the durability won't be at the level of the 1DX or the D5 but it feels like Sony slowly are improving it. By looking at the back it looked like way more sofisticated and well built around the scroll wheel and joystick, however that is hard to say untill you have it in your hand and try it outside. 

 

In my mind this looks like a camera that would be good for journalist work, if it has good enough build. And what I have seen from my Instagram, lots of the people at Sonys event is photographers and videographers that does a lot of travel, adventure and action photography. The ones that does everything to keep weight down so they can get to remote locations easier and also don't have to worry about camera gear to take up valuable space. I think that is what this will be ideal for. A proffesional grade camera that can be taken everywhere easier than say a 1DX that is huge. 

 

I hope to be able to look at it in person in my local photography store in a month or so, won't be able to buy it but new tech is always very interesting. 

Sure, Sony is improving on things but my comment was just my initial impression.  I will also take a look at it when it arrives at stores nearby and have time to discuss it with people who will be using/have used it before (which may mean waiting for a few months).

 

Though just keep in mind, something like a 1Dx or Nikon D5 is built to be extremely durable.  There are photographers who travel to "extreme" locations or expose their gear to harsh conditions not because they are careless or have too much money to spare, but because it's necessary in order to get the shot.  A camera like the A9 would be perfect for one of my friends who works as an international journalist and he uses a D810.  But not for another one of my friends who likes to stand chest deep in swamps or visit very humid rainforests to capture exotic wildlife photos.

[xQubeZx]

2 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I don't think any of Sony mirrorless cameras actually have mechanical shutters.  It would get in the way of live view or EVFs which take the signal from the sensor.

 

Sure, Sony is improving on things but my comment was just my initial impression.  I will also take a look at it when it arrives at stores nearby and have time to discuss it with people who will be using/have used it before (which may mean waiting for a few months).

Yep. I really want to see how it will perform outside in real working conditions. My impressions are mostly initilal as well, its hard to say anything that isn't revolving around specs so far because noone really has any real world performance of it. However it really feels like Sony are serious about their mirrorless E mount line now and will keep on improving. I just hope some of this tech will move its way down into the cheaper models that are more in reach of us "normal" people.

 

And it looks like the mirrorless does have a mechanical shutter. Probably has to do with a rolling shutter effect being created otherwise.   

 

Is an image of it here on the A7ii but I guess its the same for all the others:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3798025 

[AkiraDaarkst]

4 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

And it looks like the mirrorless does have a mechanical shutter. Probably has to do with a rolling shutter effect being created otherwise.   

 

Is an image of it here on the A7ii but I guess its the same for all the others:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3798025 

OK it may have a mechanical shutter, but it would be almost useless for video.  Filming at 30fps to 60fps or more would wear out a mechanical shutter like this quickly.  In video cameras, a mechanical shutter is usually a rotating disc.

 

Also, one press release mentioned that the 20fps burst speed has no "black-out" which would be caused by a mechanical shutter blocking the sensor.  So that's why I am assuming the A9 might not have a mechanical shutter.  I could be wrong, I'll wait til someone does a tear down or can look at one in person at a store.

[xQubeZx]

Just now, AkiraDaarkst said:

OK it may have a mechanical shutter, but it would be almost useless for video.  Filming at 30fps to 60fps or more would wear out a mechanical shutter like this quickly.  In video cameras, a mechanical shutter is usually a rotating disc.

 

Also, one press release mentioned that the 20fps burst speed has no "black-out" which would be caused by a mechanical shutter blocking the sensor.  So that's why I am assuming the A9 might not have a mechanical shutter.  I could be wrong, I'll wait til someone does a tear down or can look at one in person at a store.

That sounds belivable. However no DSLR or Mirrorless films with the mechanical shutter? Isn't that the main reason so many of them have problem with rolling shutters. 

[AkiraDaarkst]

1 minute ago, xQubeZx said:

That sounds belivable. However no DSLR or Mirrorless films with the mechanical shutter? Isn't that the main reason so many of them have problem with rolling shutters. 

Rolling shutter is due to how the camera reads data off CMOS sensors.  Nothing to do with the mechanical shutter.  A mechanical shutter for a camera like a D3300 is rated to what, 100,000 actuations?  You'd end up reaching that count in less than an hour if filming at 30fps.  While it can occur due to a mechanical shutter, this wouldn't be the main cause for it in DSLRs.

[cc143]

The 20fps will be with the electronic shutter even if there is a mechanical shutter I'm there, so will be the 1/32000s shutter speed. 

 

I think Sony is getting cocky, they are obviously targeting a market that cares more about durability they simply can't offer in a csc. Also, the usual benefits of a csc do not apply to most 1dx/d5 users who travel with 30kg of gear anyway and each lens they buy comes in its own pelican. 

 

Which, btw, I think is another major flaw in their plan, do they have the 400mms and the 600mms people who use these cameras use? And even if they do, how expensive are they in comparison? Is there a size/ weight benefit?

 

They also have no vertical grip built in, which is sort of a must at that point. 

 

They got a lot of 5d users to switch over, and I like their input in that market, not because I would ever go FF csc, but it puts pressure in a market that is basically a stagnating duopoly and at that point there are people who will take it. 

 

However, I believe people who use the as or a7r may switch there, afterall, they already pay ~$3500 for their cameras anyway. Problem is, they are competing with themselves at that point. 

 

There is something else I feel should be addressed, that pertains to FF cscs in general, I buy the argument for a csc, and I love FF, I'm not sure though the 2 mix that well, mainly because to create a FF csc, you give up all size and weight benefits. Ive been researching fuji a lot lately and I think their approach with the x series is much more appropriate. But In sony's case, the size and weight difference is minimal due to the FF sensor anyway. To the point where the only reason I would consider Sony is the fact that it's a cheaper route to FF, not because it's lighter, smaller or more innovative, and in fact I would even not consider it if Canon and Nikon had better offerings at that price point. 

 

Also @AkiraDaarkst battery life will not be on par for 2 reasons, 1 They physically cannot fit a battery as large as Canon and Nikon can in there (I think I saw a picture and it looks the same as in all other sony cscs anyway) and 2 the FF sensor will devour it anyway since it will have to be powered constantly. I suppose there must be a setting that allows you to turn the screen off and only powers the EVF once you bring it up to your eye to shoot, but again, that is limited to the eye proximity sensor's sensitivity and battery size will still limit it anyway. 

 

The solution of usb charging works well with their other bodies, and although I like it a lot, I don't think sports or wildlife photographers will find shooting tethered to a battery bank a good substitute to the ~2,000 shot battery life of a 1dx/d5. In fact the 350 shots this will manage if its the same battery as the a6000/6300/6500/7/7ii is laughable in comparison, and don't forget doesn't account for usage while idle. 

[AkiraDaarkst]

1 hour ago, cc143 said:

The 20fps will be with the electronic shutter even if there is a mechanical shutter I'm there, so will be the 1/32000s shutter speed. 

 

I think Sony is getting cocky, they are obviously targeting a market that cares more about durability they simply can't offer in a csc. Also, the usual benefits of a csc do not apply to most 1dx/d5 users who travel with 30kg of gear anyway and each lens they buy comes in its own pelican. 

 

Which, btw, I think is another major flaw in their plan, do they have the 400mms and the 600mms people who use these cameras use? And even if they do, how expensive are they in comparison? Is there a size/ weight benefit?

 

They also have no vertical grip built in, which is sort of a must at that point. 

 

They got a lot of 5d users to switch over, and I like their input in that market, not because I would ever go FF csc, but it puts pressure in a market that is basically a stagnating duopoly and at that point there are people who will take it. 

 

However, I believe people who use the as or a7r may switch there, afterall, they already pay ~$3500 for their cameras anyway. Problem is, they are competing with themselves at that point. 

 

There is something else I feel should be addressed, that pertains to FF cscs in general, I buy the argument for a csc, and I love FF, I'm not sure though the 2 mix that well, mainly because to create a FF csc, you give up all size and weight benefits. Ive been researching fuji a lot lately and I think their approach with the x series is much more appropriate. But In sony's case, the size and weight difference is minimal due to the FF sensor anyway. To the point where the only reason I would consider Sony is the fact that it's a cheaper route to FF, not because it's lighter, smaller or more innovative, and in fact I would even not consider it if Canon and Nikon had better offerings at that price point. 

 

Also @AkiraDaarkst battery life will not be on par for 2 reasons, 1 They physically cannot fit a battery as large as Canon and Nikon can in there (I think I saw a picture and it looks the same as in all other sony cscs anyway) and 2 the FF sensor will devour it anyway since it will have to be powered constantly. I suppose there must be a setting that allows you to turn the screen off and only powers the EVF once you bring it up to your eye to shoot, but again, that is limited to the eye proximity sensor's sensitivity and battery size will still limit it anyway. 

 

The solution of usb charging works well with their other bodies, and although I like it a lot, I don't think sports or wildlife photographers will find shooting tethered to a battery bank a good substitute to the ~2,000 shot battery life of a 1dx/d5. In fact the 350 shots this will manage if its the same battery as the a6000/6300/6500/7/7ii is laughable in comparison, and don't forget doesn't account for usage while idle. 

I share a lot of your viewpoints regarding this new A9 and the direction Sony is heading.

 

Regarding long lenses, Sony doesn't have that many 300mm plus lenses.  This is what they have for the A-mount, including third party lenses.

Sony 500mm f/4

Sony 300mm f/2.8

Sony 70-400 f/4-5.6

And 500mm, 300mm lenses from Sigma.  F/4.5 and f/2.8 respectively.  Also a Sigma 50-500mm

 

Nothing 300mm plus in the E-mount ecosystem, as far as I can see on B&H.  And even if there were, I'd look at the size of a Sony A7 series body mounted on something like a 400mm f/2.8 or 500mm f/4 lens and laugh.  I'd also be concerned about whether the E-mount is strong enough to hold such a big and heavy lens.  My Nikon D4 can support the weight of a 400mm f/2.8 lens when I lift it up to mount the camera+lens on a tripod, but I don't mount the body on the tripod of course, I mount the lens.  I think a Sony E-mount would break.

 

Lack of such lenses are one of the more prominent reasons why you won't see Sony cameras next to the field in events such as the Olympics or the World Cup.

[cc143]

20 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I share a lot of your viewpoints regarding this new A9 and the direction Sony is heading.

 

Regarding long lenses, Sony doesn't have that many 300mm plus lenses.  This is what they have for the A-mount, including third party lenses.

Sony 500mm f/4

Sony 300mm f/2.8

Sony 70-400 f/4-5.6

And 500mm, 300mm lenses from Sigma.  F/4.5 and f/2.8 respectively.  Also a Sigma 50-500mm

 

Nothing 300mm plus in the E-mount ecosystem, as far as I can see on B&H.  And even if there were, I'd look at the size of a Sony A7 series body mounted on something like a 400mm f/2.8 or 500mm f/4 lens and laugh.  I'd also be concerned about whether the E-mount is strong enough to hold such a big and heavy lens.  My Nikon D4 can support the weight of a 400mm f/2.8 lens when I lift it up to mount the camera+lens on a tripod, but I don't mount the body on the tripod of course, I mount the lens.  I think a Sony E-mount would break.

 

Lack of such lenses are one of the more prominent reasons why you won't see Sony cameras next to the field in events such as the Olympics or the World Cup.

I would also be concerned with quality and price of potential sony offerings at that point as well, not just the optics, but AF motors and ruggedness as well. Sure, optically they might be fine, they do have a relationship with Zeiss afterall, but I'm not sure if I'd like a 3k+ sony lens on my camera at the side of a football pitch in a nice British January afternoon. I've been using Canon cameras for years and have seen them be abused to extremes which I'm not confident sony equipment can handle (obviously I'm sure the same goes for Nikon DSLRs as well.) 

 

Also, Im not sure Id trust an adapter would handle the sheer weight of a long fast lens like a 400mm or 500mm, I'm sure it doesn't feel right with an adapted 70-200 even. 

 

The a9 as it looks now, I think should be the Porsche 918 spyder of Sony. A here's what we can do sort of statement, but their main focus should still be the 911. (i.e. the a7, or even a6x00 cameras.) 

 

I do hope though it will prompt Canon and Nikon to get their heads out of their rear and innovate a bit more. Hybrid viewfinders, focus peaking, 4k recording touchscreens over usb charging, some smaller form factor cameras, IBIS, these are all features they should be providing by now. I am truly convinced the reason Sony is chewing their market share is not that they do what Canon and Nikon profess to do better, or because their cameras are smaller. I think its these easily implementable and fairly minor features that got Sony where it is. But to pros, these are often gimmicky. Sony will sell well in the market of the 5d and d810, because it is being taken over by prosumers like youtubers etc. People who buy their 1dxs and d5s and actually need them to get the job done wouldn't even consider switching.

[xQubeZx]

33 minutes ago, cc143 said:

I would also be concerned with quality and price of potential sony offerings at that point as well, not just the optics, but AF motors and ruggedness as well. Sure, optically they might be fine, they do have a relationship with Zeiss afterall, but I'm not sure if I'd like a 3k+ sony lens on my camera at the side of a football pitch in a nice British January afternoon. I've been using Canon cameras for years and have seen them be abused to extremes which I'm not confident sony equipment can handle (obviously I'm sure the same goes for Nikon DSLRs as well.) 

 

Also, Im not sure Id trust an adapter would handle the sheer weight of a long fast lens like a 400mm or 500mm, I'm sure it doesn't feel right with an adapted 70-200 even. 

 

The a9 as it looks now, I think should be the Porsche 918 spyder of Sony. A here's what we can do sort of statement, but their main focus should still be the 911. (i.e. the a7, or even a6x00 cameras.) 

 

I do hope though it will prompt Canon and Nikon to get their heads out of their rear and innovate a bit more. Hybrid viewfinders, focus peaking, 4k recording touchscreens over usb charging, some smaller form factor cameras, IBIS, these are all features they should be providing by now. I am truly convinced the reason Sony is chewing their market share is not that they do what Canon and Nikon profess to do better, or because their cameras are smaller. I think its these easily implementable and fairly minor features that got Sony where it is. But to pros, these are often gimmicky. Sony will sell well in the market of the 5d and d810, because it is being taken over by prosumers like youtubers etc. People who buy their 1dxs and d5s and actually need them to get the job done wouldn't even consider switching.

I think the A9 fits the spot as Sony's "5D" or D810/D750. I do however doubt it is as rugged and can take as much of a beating. I think it will be a nice camera, however I don't think pro sports photographers will want it. I think its more the lifestyle, adventure, and a few action photographers that will want it. For portraits the A7r ii makes more sense with its high MP count too. However, the A7 body is quite the bit lighter than a say Canon 6D body. And I think this will be the same. But as soon you add the 70-200's that goes away but if you are using it with a few small primes as the 35 2.8 or 50 1.8 I think its a quite small and lightweight kit. 

 

Kinda agree on your reference to the 918 too. Personally I'd rather see more focus in the A7 and a6xxx series. Maybe a camera with more of a A7 body but with a  cheaper APS-C sensor and so. 

[cc143]

2 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

I think the A9 fits the spot as Sony's "5D" or D810/D750. I do however doubt it is as rugged and can take as much of a beating. I think it will be a nice camera, however I don't think pro sports photographers will want it. I think its more the lifestyle, adventure, and a few action photographers that will want it. For portraits the A7r ii makes more sense with its high MP count too. However, the A7 body is quite the bit lighter than a say Canon 6D body. And I think this will be the same. But as soon you add the 70-200's that goes away but if you are using it with a few small primes as the 35 2.8 or 50 1.8 I think its a quite small and lightweight kit. 

 

Kinda agree on your reference to the 918 too. Personally I'd rather see more focus in the A7 and a6xxx series. Maybe a camera with more of a A7 body but with a  cheaper APS-C sensor and so. 

Why though? the a7rii is at the same price aas the 5d4 and d810, and to be honest I wouldn't go for it as things stand, so why spend $1000 more to get the a9? Yes there are things that could have been done better with the 5d4, but everyone I hear that has actually used it is pretty pleased, and the Sony glass is just not up to par in my opinion. The d810 needs a refresh, but it is bound to be coming soon. 

 

The weight is not important imo either, the size though is, and in size, they don't differ much the a7 and 5d4 or d810 when you add a lens on them. That's why I believe fuji's approach is better at this point. 

[xQubeZx]

12 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Why though? the a7rii is at the same price aas the 5d4 and d810, and to be honest I wouldn't go for it as things stand, so why spend $1000 more to get the a9? Yes there are things that could have been done better with the 5d4, but everyone I hear that has actually used it is pretty pleased, and the Sony glass is just not up to par in my opinion. The d810 needs a refresh, but it is bound to be coming soon. 

 

The weight is not important imo either, the size though is, and in size, they don't differ much the a7 and 5d4 or d810 when you add a lens on them. That's why I believe fuji's approach is better at this point. 

I think it really depends on what you do. For work where you don't have to carry your gear a lot sure the weight won't matter. But as soon you need to carry it for long periods or hiking with it for a day, then you will appreciate the lighter body. So that will all depend on what you do. 

 

I think the reason to get one is if you are doing a lot of photos, but also quite a bit of video as it has way more support for that over the others. The EVF is also a selling point, this is all personal prefference but I think that one may be amazing. 

 

Really, I think all three of these are amazing camras and what you pick entirley depends on how you use it and what you do with it. However I wouldn't count any of them out because all are good in their own aspects. The A9 has its advantages in EVF, Size (even though lenses are the same the body makes a difference thats how I feel at least), the AF and video features. 5D's are good for their very allround usecase. Works for everything quite good. D810 great for landscapes or studio work. 

 

For my shooting style a mirrorless is what I'd preffer. If its Sony or Fuji however doesn't matter but I have to say the FF sensor is a selling point. But that doesn't make the others bad, not at all. 

[cc143]

@xQubeZx I tend to carry my gear around for long periods and have hiked with gear many times and have to say I don't find the weight that bad, but that is personal preference sure, I'm used to carrying much heavier packs, which is why I guess 10kg of camera gear doesn't seem that heavy. 

 

The EVF is also dependent on the condition, there are times I'd like one, but I'd choose an OVF over an EVF anyday for sure, A hybrid is an entirely different story. The size issue, what I mean is that what they save from the flange distance they end up making up for in the lens itself, which makes an a7 with a 24-70mm pretty much the same as a 5d with a 24-70mm anyway. 

 

Also, I'm not convinced AF is better in Sony cameras, it used to be quite bad and although it must have improved, I'm not sure is better than others. Canon's DPAF for instance...

 

Regarding the a9, I have read more on it, it seems the battery now lasts for 480 shots, which is still laughable for a professional camera if you ask me, especially considering that it will not get anywhere near that anyway, it can do it in a factory under certain conditions, sure, but in the real world...I have my doubts. 

 

The silent shooting is nice, especially for street photography or I guess weadding services and the sort where a Nikon or even a Canon shutter will sound quite loud. Its also good that you no longer have to hear that god awful sony shutter. It always made me think something was wrong with the camera, but that may be just me. The tracking AF I'm also reserved in believing is anywhere near as good as a 1dx/d5 or d500/7d even, but I wouldn't rule it out entirely. 

 

Also, addressing the 20 fps, is that really necessary? I mean 14fps burst sounds immense, think about 1.5 times that. Part of me does think its a stunt rather than they actually heard somewhere Canon's 14-16fps is actually not fast enough for anyone. At that rate you are practically shooting video anyway;P I can't really thin that 20fps is necessary, even for sports, I haven't really shot sports a lot to actually know for sure, but come on...20fps! 

 

The across the frame focus sounds nice, though, I would assume that would be implemented by the others at some point. 

 

[AkiraDaarkst]

So here's what DPReview has to say about the A9 so far.  Pay attention to the "Notes to Editors" section.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/1308959313/the-sony-a9-is-a-24mp-sports-shooting-powerhouse