UHHers lets get real here. The ONLY reason architect put up this thread is his anti-Sony, pro-Canon mindset, just a fact. It is his answer to all the threads touting this historical release from Sony, heaven forbid, from Sony first and NOT from Canon. LOL

All the major makers, including Canon, have been in a race to get the first fullframe global sensor shutter hybrid camera to market. Trust me if Canon had been first, you would have seen architect singing its praises far and wide here in UHH, LOL

Global sensor shutter from Sony and others have been around in industrial cameras and some cinema cameras for awhile. The A9III with its global sensor shutter in a fullframe hybird camera is a historic release, no matter the naysayers.

All makers will continue to make BSI, and BSI stacked mirrorless cameras, in addition to having their own global shutter release.

The A9III and global sensor shutters aren't for everyone, but they ARE for many pros and hobbyists alike that will make great use of its exceptional speed with absolutely no rolling shutter in stills and video, and more.

All rolling sensor shutters, including the best of the fast stacked sensors like in the Nikon Z9/Z8, Canon R3, Sony A9/A9II and A1 still are affected by rolling shutter in certain situations with certain fast subjects and fast panning in video and stills.

Only a true global shutter eliminates all rolling shutter, eliminates all banding and flicker issues, and allows flash sync at all shutter speeds, just the facts.

Does everyone need a global shutter camera, of course not. And don't expect all makers to have them in all formats and all price ranges. For now they will be a pricey premium option for pros and hobbyists that can afford them and can use them.

I personally currently have stacked BSI sensor 50mp Sony A1; BSI sensor 61mp A7RV, and 12mp BSI sensor videocentric A7SIII. I shoot all subjects, worldwide . I dont necessarily need a global shutter for landscapes, but yes I could use it for sports ,fast action and fast wildlife, and even for portraits with flash at high sync speeds.

Is there a slight trade-off with dynamic range and high ISO noise at this point in global shutter development, yes. But not so much that I cant get rid of any excess noise in post, and still have plenty of dynamic range for all my professional uses, just a fact.

I know many fellow pros, like myself who have pre-ordered the A9III, and will use its global sensor shutter to great advantage.

Just follow the great A9III global shutter sensor images you will see from the Super Bowl, NCAA Basketball Tourney, Major League Baseball, Grand Slam Tennis, and the Summer Olympics and from top wildlife shooters around the world.

Then make your own decision if this Sony A9III, and global shutter sensor cameras are worthy of the praise they are getting, and not what UHHer architect has to say to try and diss it, and diss anything Sony, LOL.

From PetaPixel Jan. 5, 2024:
For Pros, The Sony a9 III’s Speed Will Be Worth the Image Quality Tradeoff

https://petapixel.com/2024/01/05/for-pros-the-sony-a9-iiis-speed-will-be-worth-the-image-quality-tradeoff/

Cheers and best to you all, whatever brand you prefer.

I guess I see Sony's a9iii as several things. First, I believe it is valid that Sony wanted the bragging rights that come with being the first CMOS, full frame, stacked sensor camera. They're a major player in the sensor market and a large player in the camera market and this gets people talking. Next, there are some photographers who will generate additional income with this camera. It will shoot at speeds and in ways that allow things (banding elimination or very high sync speeds) or make things easier than other cameras (high frame rate, etc.). I suspect the number of photographers who need this will be relatively small. Then there will be another group of people who want it, for whatever reason they do, and they can afford it, so they'll buy it and enjoy it, regardless of its limitations.

Truthfully, I think the A1 was very much in this vein as well. When it was released there was nothing like it. It was a tour de force and would do some things no other camera would do at the time. Like the a9iii, there were some who turned the capabilities into profits. However, I suspect there were many more who bought the camera because they wanted it and could afford it. Sony picked up many wildlife and birding photogs because of this camera and I know very few people who make any real money shooting these genres. It doesn't matter though, because people, especially those in wealthier countries, buy lots of stuff they don't need. As a side note, I think Nikon is currently capitalizing best on this with their wildlife and birding lens lineup. I suspect the majority of 400f4.5s, 180-200, 400f2.8TC, 600f2.8TC and 600f6.3 buyers aren't making lots of money with their kit, they're shooting as a hobby.

Finaly, with respect to dynamic range, for years Canon lagged Sony and Nikon. The 5Dmkiii had relatively abysmal dynamic range (1 to 2 stops behind depending on which camera it was compared to). Amazingly enough, though, it sold amazingly well, was used to produce countless photo contest winners and served many photographers very well across all genres. More broadly, there were many years in which Canon's dynamic range was behind (a stop or two, depending on the year and comparison), and they did lose some buyers to Sony or Nikon for this reason, but they still chugged along making cameras which sold and performed quite well; well enough to keep them at the top of the heap from a volume standpoint. For some, the dynamic range of the a9iii will be a deal breaker, but for many uses, it will likely not make much difference.