Jump to content

A9 networking details


Recommended Posts

A few sobering facts on the much touted networking capabilities of the A9:

WLAN:

Its wireless connectivity is specified by Sony as "Wi-Fi Compatible, IEEE 802.11b/g/n(2.4GHz band)".

 

According to this source, this translates to a maximum net transfer rate (802.11n) of 30 Mbit/s, which is close to the maximum rate of 3.5 MByte/s I was able to achieve during my tests.

 

In practical terms: transferring one single uncompressed raw image at maximum resulution (~50MB) takes around 14 seconds.
At that speed, transferring the contents of a full 16 GB memory card requires 75 minutes. Let that sink in.  :o

 

LAN:

In the marketing section of the A9's feature description, it boldly claims:

 

"A wired LAN connection gives you the highest possible transfer speeds for large image files".

 

Don't get all too excited about that either.

It's already quite telling, that in Sony's Interface Specification the "LAN Terminal" is merely specified as "existing" (Yes).

In repeated batch transfers of 100 files (3.5 GB in total) to an FTP server running on my iMac, I was unable to achieve beyond 10.3 MB/s sustained data transfer rate via LAN cable.
That equates to a 100 Base-T connection on the A9 side, as both my iMac's LAN terminal and the network cable are Gigabit capable.

At that speed, transferring the contents of a full 16 GB memory card still requires 26 minutes. :unsure:

But not all is lost. Although not networking in its strict sense, data can get extracted from the camera at higher rates:

 

USB:
Transferring via USB cable gives a sustained data transfer rate of 35 MB/s, which brings the transfer time of 16 GB down to 7.6 minutes.

 

Direct read from memory card:

Taking the memory card out of the A9 and putting it directly into the iMacs memory card reader slot gives a sustained data transfer rate of 74 MB/s, which brings the transfer time of 16 GB down to 3.6 minutes.

 

Before you ask: memory card is a  300MBs SD: Sony 128GB SF-G SDXC UHS-II.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

Thank you for these real world examples. In my view the ability to do a network transfer is there for situations where you really need it. Normally, it would be to transfer jpeg files while on assignment. I don't think it's meant to be the main method for transferring raw files to your computer.

 

On another note, I don't know if you really want to quote WvB in your signature? It made me wonder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On another note, I don't know if you really want to quote WvB in your signature? It made me wonder.

 

Thanks for your feedback.

Personally, I don't think the quote gets tainted, just because it's from WvB. And I didn't want to decorate myself with somebody elses merits. That's why I gave the author, too. I'll think about it. Probably there are lots more people who have said the same thing too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Hello ! A friend gave me an old Sony SLT A65 that was locked in a suitcase for some years and guess what... It was pretty dirty. The translucent mirror looks strange. I know it's a pellicle mirror, but something is really weird , at least to me who never saw this entity before. It shows a rainbow pattern when lit, like a diffraction grid. And when I point the camera to a strong light source, let´s say streets lights or car lights, a huge halo and a diffuse pattern appears, almost like one of that photographic filters from the '70s. I guess the mirror is damaged. Does enyone have any experience with this ? I managed to remove the mirror and carefully rinse it with water and detergent solution , rinse again and dry, but the rainbow patter persists. My question is basically about the translucent mirror behavior with strong highlights and if the rainbow pattern on its surface is normal.   Thanks!  
    • Sounds like you need a manual, and you are correct different settings can affect what you can do in the drive more.  Did you simple press the DRIVE button and select the THREE rectangles? There are several "burst" modes -- that you set with the Fn button or DRIVE button.  One takes several photos, when you press the button once (CONTINUOUS).  Another requires you to press the shutter button each time (SINGLE).  When you press the DRIVE button, what icon shows up -- a single rectangle or three?
    • If the 18-105 is too bulky, then so is the Tamron 17-70. Quality wise however, definately pick the Tamron over the Sony Zeiss 16-70, which is a compromised and dated design and similar in quality to the 18-105. I was in the same boat as you for a while (also had the 16-50 kit lens and 18-105 f/4), and went with the Sony 16-55 F/2.8 G. Happy with the choice as it's more compact than the Tamron 17-70 and vastly better quality than the Zony 16-70. In your case however, the omission of stabilized optics might be a dealbreaker. Did you consider the tiny but decent Sigma 18-50 f/2.8?
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...