scrappydog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #10 · How is Sony Image quality better than Canon? | |
abdul10000 wrote:
I remember when the A7 and A7R were introduced the image quality of Sony got allot of praise and many people switched over from Canon, but I have never seen a review that shows clearly this advantage.
In what way are Sony sensors so much better? Is it noise, dynamic range, color rendition, etc? I did my own test recently with A7R and 5D3 and used my self as a test model.
I sat in a large room framed from the opposite corner with a 24mm focal length on both cameras. This was done on purpose so that I appear small and to include the high dynamic range of the window. Everything including lighting, lens (16-35/f4), tripod, settings (f8,iso800,1/30th, raw), etc was the same except of course for the cameras.
Aside from the resolution difference and a small color difference the pictures turned out pretty identical in noise and dynamic range. I made sure to compare the pictures in photoshop at different zoom levels (for example 100% for both and 100% 5d3 & 76% a7r) to compensate for the size difference. There just wasn't a clear advantage to see.
Therefore, I have to ask what is the advantage that so many talk about and that I am missing?
Thx...Show more →
Before buying the A7r2, I shot the 60D, 5D2, 5D3, and 7D2. The biggest differences for me were the results when shooting in poor conditions, lifting shadows, dynamic range, and accurate AF.
In great conditions, shots out of my Canon gear was often really nice but it was sometimes a mixed bag when shooting in poor conditions. Occasionally, it was a mixed bag in good conditions too. I recall shooting bird nests at a rookery in Florida on a clear, perfect (albeit hot) day with my Canon 5D3. All of my shots looked like garbage despite that they were perfectly exposed and the light was bright and clear. I still don't know why my camera went wonky, but it was not the first time. I don't have this problem with my Sony bodies. So far, I have shot the A6000, A6400, A7r2, A7r3, and A9. I will say that Sony's full frame camera image quality is much better IMO than the image quality from their crop sensors. We still have my old Fuji X100s. I strongly prefer the image quality out of that camera than out of my Sony crop bodies. That said, none of my Sony bodies end up with wonky results like my Canon bodies did.
The second issue is lifting shadows. All of my Canon bodies had banding and ugly noise in the shadows, especially the 60D and 5D2. Lifting them was often not worth it. When you lift shadows on Sony, they are generally very clean. Of the Sony bodies that I have shot, I think the A7r2 had the cleanest shadows.
The third issue is dynamic range. My Canon bodies often clipped the highlights, which was a problem for me because I often shot them in uneven light and I photographed bald eagles a lot (the crown and tail often clipped). My response to this was to underexpose, but introduced the ugly noise issue discussed above. I got tired dealing with this issue every time I shot. As noted, I bought an A7r2, and immediately I got 2 whole stops above the 18% grey clipping point when perfectly exposed. 2 stops! Needless to say, I clipped the highlights with that camera maybe 2-3 times, total. I now shoot the A9, which does not have the same latitude as the A7r2, but it's still very good and so much better than my Canon bodies.
The final issue is accurate AF. When I shot Canon, I thought my shots looked fine. Some better than others, as always, but generally fine. When I got my Sony bodies, I was getting pinpoint accuracy with my shots, which I was amazed by. After shooting Sony for 4-5 years, it's hard for me to look at my old Canon shots. My photos where often soft with slight front focus or back focus, despite my efforts to microadjust each of my lenses. I think Canon's mirrorless offerings will assist with this because they are focusing on the sensor, which is more precise.
|
