technic
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
davev wrote:
Thanks again. As for the comparison between the two cameras, this is how I see it.
I used Canon equipment for at least 15 years. Canon was cutting edge and a real joy to use.
As the years went on, I, like many others started to feel that Canon was purposely crippling the cameras.
That's not to say that great photos couldn't be made with they're equipment, but it seemed like the cameras
were made for one type of shooting, so multiple cameras were needed, unless you could afford the top of the line.
I couldn't.
So after years of micro adjusting lenses to the different cameras that I owned, along comes Sony with a revolutionary camera.
The a7III.
That camera was affordable, more megapixels than most of the Canons, high iso that Canon could only dream of, and the ability to still use my lenses
with adapters on it. Of course they were a bit slower, but for the most part ... ok.
I've been shooting Sony for the last year and half. I have the a6300, a7III, the a6400, and the a7RIII, in order that I bought them.
The a6300, in my opinion is a dud. I pretty much wrote it off as a mistake.
Then the a7III came along and became my go to camera, but for wildlife, it lacked reach, and at the time, lacked lenses for reach.
So I got the a6400. Nice little camera that I hate the ergonomics of. The viewfinder off to the side drives me nuts.
Which brings us to the a7RIII.
The a7RIII, in crop mode is 18 megapixels. Not great, but better than the a7III.
When Sony was bringing out the a6600, I thought for sure the sensor would be upgraded to a 30-36 mp count, but I was wrong.
Now we're back to the Canon M6II. 32mp is the count I was looking for. I would have liked to have bought the 90D,
but I didn't want to go back to micro adjusting my lenses again.
So, back to the question, how do they compare. Short answer, they don't.
Once again, one camera handles some things great, the other does something different.
If you can fill the screen with the a7RIII, the amount of detail in your shot will amaze you.
The colors seem richer, the images sharper, but, for faster moving wildlife, it can't cut it. I wish it did, but it doesn't.
I've only had the m6II for a week, and have only been out shooting with if a couple of times.
The fact that the viewfinder isn't built in is a shame. I'll probably end up breaking it at some point.
It protrudes to far out the back of the camera, my camera bag will probably end up snapping it.
The files are ok, and right now, this time of year, the light is awful, and the the images just lack punch. (unless in full on sunlight)
I know this camera is for running small, but it's real small for a guy that in his younger days could palm a basketball.
I'm hoping that someone comes out with a grip or a cage for me to build it a little larger.
Like I said, I ran with Canon for years, and yet this menu seems foreign to me.
You can customize buttons and dials, but some are limited to only a few options.
Everyone hates the Sony menus, but there are so many ways to set up the buttons, you rarely have to use the menus.
So far, the M6II is a bit of a let down, but its way to early to write it off.
If we ever see a good sunny day, I'll try to get out with it.
The flight shots that I took turned out ok, but I was hoping for a better keeper rate. (which may come with more hours of use)
The photos I took at iso 1600 thought were a bit grainy, but that was under a overcast sky.
Wow, that got wordy didn't it.
Here's a photo make it better. 
A busy background hides the grain at iso 1600.
 |
|
|
|
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49185196642_e5d116606a_h.jpg |
|
|
|
| ...Show more →
Thanks for reporting; that image is still grainy IMHO, very much like my 80D at 1600 ISO (and a lot worse than most High ISO shots I see from Nikon D500).
Yes, sadly there is no affordable camera nowadays that can do it all especially if you need both fast AF and high pixel density (for reach). I would love getting rid of MFA woes by using ML camera instead of DSLR, and AF for action on the M6 II already seems better than on the 90D. But it isn't ready for real action, and neither is any other affordable ML camera. But it is promising that several recent ML cameras (like Nikon Z50 and Z6, Canon R, Canon M6 II) are doing pretty well for slower action shots like big birds. Will be interesting to see how close they can get to Sony A9 AF performance while still keeping the camera affordable ...
|
Are you sure you want the 7D3 to be 20Mpx?