Alpha 1

agree, i can get same amount of good images for kids from m10 compared to sony a1. mf with range finder is not bad and the whole process is much more joyful. also for sony you likely will take thousands of images for a two hours event, nightmare for post processing.

I have recently shot with top level Nikon (Z9, Z8, Z6III) and Sony (A1, A9II, A7SIII). I was a professional motorsports photographer and my primary weekend kit was 2 Z9's and 2 Z6III's (depending on how much video the client wanted vs photos, more video was Z6III's, more photos or bad weather, Z9's)

Short answer: generally, yes, Nikon's latest generation of cameras is going to be better than any Sony APS-C body at AF. Long answer: about 5 years ago AF in mirrorless made a generational leap in performance, the first since we got PDAF on-sensor with the Nikon V1/J1, and saw significant improvemen

As someone who has spent a lot of time with all the major brands, I am very comfortable saying that Sony and Canon are not any better in low light, in fact most of their bodies have much lower AF sensitivity as measured by the manufactures themselves. The Z6III for example is sensitive down to -10.0

which one? Not my A7RV Sony cameras don't have the best screens unless you buy something like an A1 II or A9III. The Z6III has a killer EVF for example. Yeah maybe i'll try a Nikon Zf All Nikon mirrorless cameras do the "green box when you nail the manual focus" thing.