Archive 2020 · EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
p.13 #1EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
dmcphoto wrote:
All the technology advances listed for Sony are not primarily related to image quality alone, but more to that in combination with advanced and high speed readout. For image quality also color science plays a part, something that does not demand those chip fabrication technologies. In addition Sony does things that is negative for image quality, like destroying an increasing part of the pixels for dedicated phase detection.
Canon has demonstrated that they can now get the same base ISO dynamic range, and they have also demonstrated over time that they want to be leading in resolution.
So I think image quality wise the R5 will not disappoint, and I look even more forward to seeing the next high resolution model.You beat me to it! As I was returning to add the part about those technologies increasing readout speed I saw your post. Indeed, we see this in the fact that Sony can read out a 24MP sensor in just over 1/3 the time it takes Canon to read a 20MP 1DX3 sensor.
Sony does destroy more pixels for dedicated phase detection, but their readout speed allows them to incorporate more accurate contrast focus detection into their one shot AF mode, so it's a mixed bag and not all negative. With Sony making 150 MP Phase One MF image sensors...Show more →
567 PD pixels on the A7riv of 61MP in total? Not a big deal. What was more of a problem was that a sensor being constantly busy produces more heat (-> noise) compared to DSLRs.
Canon's DPAF won't come with no penalty, too. They use almost 90% of the pixels now in the 1dxiii, for example. Shouldn't read noise be higher with more diodes being used simultaneously?
DPAF has the advantage of producing no striping in backlit scenarios, something I encounter with A9/A7iii from time to time (Nikon has that, too of course). I think cross-type sensitivity can be much easier implemented with Canons DPAF, too (Sony + Nikon right now have only a linear sensitivity) and you have many more active AF points for AF, giving you the possibility to build up a depth map or use those for pattern recognition. Although being a Sony shooter, I see great potential in DPAF.
alundeb wrote
^All the technology advances listed for Sony are not primarily related to image quality alone, but more to that in combination with advanced and high speed readout. For image quality also color science plays a part, something that does not demand those chip fabrication technologies. In addition Sony does things that is negative for image quality, like destroying an increasing part of the pixels for dedicated phase detection.
Canon has demonstrated that they can now get the same base ISO dynamic range, and they have also demonstrated over time that they want to be leading in resolution.
So I think image quality wise the R5 will not disappoint, and I look even more forward to seeing the next high resolution model.
Sony does destroy more pixels for dedicated phase detection, but their readout speed allows them to incorporate more accurate contrast focus detection into their one shot AF mode, so it's a mixed bag and not all negative. With Sony making 150 MP Phase One MF image sensors...Show more →
567 PD pixels on the A7riv of 61MP in total? Not a big deal. What was more of a problem was that a sensor being constantly busy produces more heat (-> noise) compared to DSLRs.
Canon's DPAF won't come with no penalty, too. They use almost 90% of the pixels now in the 1dxiii, for example. Shouldn't read noise be higher with more diodes being used simultaneously?
DPAF has the advantage of producing no striping in backlit scenarios, something I encounter with A9/A7iii from time to time (Nikon has that, too of course). I think cross-type sensitivity can be much easier implemented with Canons DPAF, too (Sony + Nikon right now have only a linear sensitivity) and you have many more active AF points for AF, giving you the possibility to build up a depth map or use those for pattern recognition. Although being a Sony shooter, I see great potential in DPAF.
Feb 23, 2020 at 02:59 PM
p.13 #2EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
For cross type sensitivity, wouldn’t we need quad pixel AF?
Feb 23, 2020 at 03:03 PM
p.13 #3EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
Holger wrote:
dmcphoto wrote
alundeb wrote
^All the technology advances listed for Sony are not primarily related to image quality alone, but more to that in combination with advanced and high speed readout. For image quality also color science plays a part, something that does not demand those chip fabrication technologies. In addition Sony does things that is negative for image quality, like destroying an increasing part of the pixels for dedicated phase detection.
Canon has demonstrated that they can now get the same base ISO dynamic range, and they have also demonstrated over time that they want to be leading in resolution.
So I think image quality wise the R5 will not disappoint, and I look even more forward to seeing the next high resolution model.
Sony does destroy more pixels for dedicated phase detection, but their readout speed allows them to incorporate more accurate contrast focus detection into their one shot AF mode, so it's a mixed bag and not all negative. With Sony making 150 MP Phase One MF image sensors in addition to those used by Hassleblad, Fuji, Pentax, Olympus, Nikon, Sony, and others, I don't think Sony will take a back seat in the IQ or speed realm. That's not to say that Canon can't, or won't, make a respectable product, but it's just not possible for them to meet Sony's sensor fab expertise.
IMO
Canon's DPAF won't come with no penalty, too. They use almost 90% of the pixels now in the 1dxiii, for example. Shouldn't read noise be higher with more diodes being used simultaneously?
DPAF has the advantage of producing no striping in backlit scenarios, something I encounter with A9/A7iii from time to time (Nikon has that, too of course). I think cross-type sensitivity can be much easier implemented...Show more →
Dual pixels are read as two diodes for AF calculation exposures only. For the exposure that makes the image, the two diodes are coupled and read as one.
More importantly, a tiny bit more noise is less annoying than striping, even if that occurs only once in a while. Sony cameras does handle it better than some others, like the Fuji GFX 100 that tries to fix the striping but introduces shadow banding instead. The cure is worse than the disease, and reduced the usable DR of the most interesting medium format camera significantly.
Feb 23, 2020 at 03:18 PM
p.13 #4EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
evertdoorn wrote:
For cross type sensitivity, wouldn’t we need quad pixel AF?
You would need an other type of orientation of many of the pixels. I like the Interview with Canon at IR, a very good source in the past for well informed interviews and there are a lot of nice talking points (flange distance, mount diameter etc.).
Due to the very high number of AF points the linear orientation is not a big problem:
"but when I asked the Canon engineers about it, they gave essentially the same answer the Nikon engineers had about the Z7: Thanks to the very high density of AF points, the chances of missing focus on a subject because it has no horizontal detail are very low. Even with a subject like window blinds, if the camera is the tiniest bit tilted relative to the subject, an edge of a slat (for instance) would cross an area covered by an AF point, letting the camera focus."
As the Z6/7 have clearly less AF PD points, they are at a disadvantage like Sony, as we all know.
https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2018/09/15/canon-eos-r-qa-with-the-canon-engineers
Edited on Feb 23, 2020 at 03:26 PM · View previous versions
For cross type sensitivity, wouldn’t we need quad pixel AF?
You would need an other type of orientation of many of the pixels. I like the Interview with Canon at IR, a very good source in the past for well informed interviews and there are a lot of nice talking points (flange distance, mount diameter etc.).
Due to the very high number of AF points the linear orientation is not a big problem:
"but when I asked the Canon engineers about it, they gave essentially the same answer the Nikon engineers had about the Z7: Thanks to the very high density of AF points, the chances of missing focus on a subject because it has no horizontal detail are very low. Even with a subject like window blinds, if the camera is the tiniest bit tilted relative to the subject, an edge of a slat (for instance) would cross an area covered by an AF point, letting the camera focus."
As the Z6/7 have clearly less AF PD points, they are at a disadvantage like Sony, as we all know.
https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2018/09/15/canon-eos-r-qa-with-the-canon-engineers
Edited on Feb 23, 2020 at 03:26 PM · View previous versions
Feb 23, 2020 at 03:25 PM
p.13 #5EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
alundeb wrote:
All the technology advances listed for Sony are not primarily related to image quality alone, but more to that in combination with advanced and high speed readout. For image quality also color science plays a part, something that does not demand those chip fabrication technologies. In addition Sony does things that is negative for image quality, like destroying an increasing part of the pixels for dedicated phase detection.
Canon has demonstrated that they can now get the same base ISO dynamic range, and they have also demonstrated over time that they want to be leading in resolution.
So I think image quality wise the R5 will not disappoint, and I look even more forward to seeing the next high resolution model.You beat me to it! As I was returning to add the part about those technologies increasing readout speed I saw your post. Indeed, we see this in the fact that Sony can read out a 24MP sensor in just over 1/3 the time it takes Canon to read a 20MP 1DX3 sensor.
Sony does destroy more pixels for dedicated phase detection, but their readout speed allows them to incorporate more accurate contrast focus detection into their one shot AF mode, so it's a mixed bag and not all negative. With Sony making 150 MP Phase One MF image sensors in addition to those used by Hassleblad, Fuji, Pentax, Olympus, Nikon, Sony, and others, I don't think Sony will take a back seat in the IQ or speed realm. That's not to say that Canon can't, or won't, make a respectable product, but it's just not possible for them to meet Sony's sensor fab expertise.
IMO567 PD pixels on the A7riv of 61MP in total? Not a big deal. What was more of a problem was that a sensor being constantly busy produces more heat (-> noise) compared to DSLRs.
Canon's DPAF won't come with no penalty, too. They use almost 90% of the pixels now in the 1dxiii, for example. Shouldn't read noise be higher with more diodes being used simultaneously?
DPAF has the advantage of producing no striping in backlit scenarios, something I encounter with A9/A7iii from time to time (Nikon has that, too of course). I think cross-type sensitivity can be much easier implemented with Canons DPAF, too (Sony + Nikon right now have only a linear sensitivity) and you have many more active AF points for AF, giving you the possibility to build up a depth map or use those for pattern recognition. Although being a Sony shooter, I see great potential in DPAF.Dual pixels are read as two diodes for AF calculation exposures only. For the exposure that makes the image, the two diodes are coupled and read as one.
More importantly, a tiny bit more noise is less annoying than striping, even if that occurs only once in a while. Sony cameras does handle it better than some others, like the Fuji GFX 100 that tries to fix the striping but introduces shadow banding instead. The cure is worse than the disease, and reduced the usable DR of the most interesting medium format camera significantly.
Agree to the striping.
Holger wrote
dmcphoto wrote
alundeb wrote
^All the technology advances listed for Sony are not primarily related to image quality alone, but more to that in combination with advanced and high speed readout. For image quality also color science plays a part, something that does not demand those chip fabrication technologies. In addition Sony does things that is negative for image quality, like destroying an increasing part of the pixels for dedicated phase detection.
Canon has demonstrated that they can now get the same base ISO dynamic range, and they have also demonstrated over time that they want to be leading in resolution.
So I think image quality wise the R5 will not disappoint, and I look even more forward to seeing the next high resolution model.
Sony does destroy more pixels for dedicated phase detection, but their readout speed allows them to incorporate more accurate contrast focus detection into their one shot AF mode, so it's a mixed bag and not all negative. With Sony making 150 MP Phase One MF image sensors in addition to those used by Hassleblad, Fuji, Pentax, Olympus, Nikon, Sony, and others, I don't think Sony will take a back seat in the IQ or speed realm. That's not to say that Canon can't, or won't, make a respectable product, but it's just not possible for them to meet Sony's sensor fab expertise.
IMO
Canon's DPAF won't come with no penalty, too. They use almost 90% of the pixels now in the 1dxiii, for example. Shouldn't read noise be higher with more diodes being used simultaneously?
DPAF has the advantage of producing no striping in backlit scenarios, something I encounter with A9/A7iii from time to time (Nikon has that, too of course). I think cross-type sensitivity can be much easier implemented with Canons DPAF, too (Sony + Nikon right now have only a linear sensitivity) and you have many more active AF points for AF, giving you the possibility to build up a depth map or use those for pattern recognition. Although being a Sony shooter, I see great potential in DPAF.
More importantly, a tiny bit more noise is less annoying than striping, even if that occurs only once in a while. Sony cameras does handle it better than some others, like the Fuji GFX 100 that tries to fix the striping but introduces shadow banding instead. The cure is worse than the disease, and reduced the usable DR of the most interesting medium format camera significantly.
Agree to the striping.
Feb 23, 2020 at 03:25 PM
p.13 #6EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
One more thing, the number of AF points does not equal the number of PDAF pixels. Each AF point needs a number of PDAF pixels to work. IIRC the PDAF pixel density is about 1:5 in the newest Sony cameras, destroying about 1/25 of the pixels or 1M pixels.
Sorry all, meant to say 1:5 out of the blue pixels, not total pixels. So it will be only a quarter of what I said earlier, so typically up to 250 K pixels are PD pixels in a modern 24 MP Sony sensor.
Edited on Feb 24, 2020 at 12:54 AM · View previous versions
Sorry all, meant to say 1:5 out of the blue pixels, not total pixels. So it will be only a quarter of what I said earlier, so typically up to 250 K pixels are PD pixels in a modern 24 MP Sony sensor.
Edited on Feb 24, 2020 at 12:54 AM · View previous versions
Feb 23, 2020 at 03:40 PM
p.13 #7EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
ChrisMak wrote:
The EOS-R5 should logically be an allround mirrorless pro body like the 5DIV is an allround pro dslr. There is not yet a reason to release a 1DX like mirrorless AF and speed monster because Canon still needs a couple of years to make the RF lenses for such a body, like a 300mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 400mm f2.8
Because the existing EF lenses adapt very well to the EOS-R, everybody seems to think that Canon will be content to develop a mirrorless top body without the neccessary EF lenses, but that is not like Canon.
Look at the EF lenses...Show more →
EB-1 wrote:
The R5 should be an all around body like the 5D IV, but at 45MP it certainly is not.
EBH
alundeb wrote:
I am at a loss regarding your resolution requirements. There will be three resolution classes from Canon in the new generation RF mount cameras. 20, 45 and 84 MP (roughly). Three resolutions with sensible doubling between. How can 45 in the middle not be an allround body?
EB-1 wrote:
There will be an 80MP camera!? That doens't seem to be the current rumor of 45MP.
45MP is too noisy for general purpose IME.
EBH
coudet wrote:
It doesn't have to be, it depends on the actual sensor. Would you consider A7R3 (42mp) to be too noisy?
I've owned the a7r III since the first week and it has some good points, but a lot of annoying limitations. Canon noise is less ugly than Sony noise, so 45MP Canon can be usable for some situations. The big questions is whether it will be a bit cleaner than the old Nikon D850. Maybe by next year there will be a 30-32MP body with AF at framing speed, an updated EOS R.
In any case, I'll probably preorder the R5 to test with the EF lenses. There's too much nonsense and too many uncritical users online to get much useful info without both controlled indoor tests and field trials.
EBH
The EOS-R5 should logically be an allround mirrorless pro body like the 5DIV is an allround pro dslr. There is not yet a reason to release a 1DX like mirrorless AF and speed monster because Canon still needs a couple of years to make the RF lenses for such a body, like a 300mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 400mm f2.8
Because the existing EF lenses adapt very well to the EOS-R, everybody seems to think that Canon will be content to develop a mirrorless top body without the neccessary EF lenses, but that is not like Canon.
Look at the EF lenses...Show more →
EB-1 wrote:
The R5 should be an all around body like the 5D IV, but at 45MP it certainly is not.
EBH
alundeb wrote:
I am at a loss regarding your resolution requirements. There will be three resolution classes from Canon in the new generation RF mount cameras. 20, 45 and 84 MP (roughly). Three resolutions with sensible doubling between. How can 45 in the middle not be an allround body?
EB-1 wrote:
There will be an 80MP camera!? That doens't seem to be the current rumor of 45MP.
45MP is too noisy for general purpose IME.
EBH
coudet wrote:
It doesn't have to be, it depends on the actual sensor. Would you consider A7R3 (42mp) to be too noisy?
I've owned the a7r III since the first week and it has some good points, but a lot of annoying limitations. Canon noise is less ugly than Sony noise, so 45MP Canon can be usable for some situations. The big questions is whether it will be a bit cleaner than the old Nikon D850. Maybe by next year there will be a 30-32MP body with AF at framing speed, an updated EOS R.
In any case, I'll probably preorder the R5 to test with the EF lenses. There's too much nonsense and too many uncritical users online to get much useful info without both controlled indoor tests and field trials.
EBH
Feb 23, 2020 at 03:52 PM
p.13 #8EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
gdanmitchell wrote:
markd61 wrote
...Frankly, Canon is just beginning to flex it’s considerable tech prowess in the mirrorless field. The RF line of lenses has already made a statement of intent and seems to be just gathering steam.So for the moment, I believe Canon is about to loose its first rounds of shock and awe in the mirrorless body campaign.
First, Sony made an absolutely brilliant set of moves when they introduced the mirrorless A7rII full frame camera. Sony recognized that they were very unlikely to be as successful in the DSLR space, even though they had proven that they could make competitive DSLR systems. The issue was that the base of Canon and Nikon DSLR users was so large...Show more →
Canon can afford a longer R&D period between cameras than Sony because their bred and butter are their inexpensive consumer cameras and lenses. I agree they’ve produced some very impressive RF lenses so far, but how they manage expectations for the R5 and how that camera delivers I think is a huge gamble.
For the reasons you’ve mentioned, it can’t not perform. If it’s the actual cross of the a9 and a7riii that it appears to be, I may move to Canon. But that’s a big if.
Feb 23, 2020 at 04:01 PM
p.13 #9EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
arbitrage wrote:
Yeah, I understand all that but Dan made at least two mentions of Sony directly going after Canon users and Dan even goes as far as saying they forego their own lens development to go after Canon glass owners....I call hogwash on that because there is no evidence of that and it is blatantly false information that they made an EF adapter.
I made at least one error and perhaps two, though I don't think they change my overall point.
1. I mentioned A7rII where I meant to refer to the 36MP A7r which had a sensor equivalent to that in the D800 and (more accurately, perhaps) the D800e.
2. I apologize if I'm mistaken about Sony producing/selling an adapter to use Canon lenses on the A7r. Was that only third-party stuff? Given the overwhelming argument that photographers could take their Canon lenses along to the A7r, the enthusiasm for doing so, and the fact that this was the only initial route to having necessary lenses at first...
After acknowledging and correcting those errors, I think my basic analysis is still correct.
Dan
Edited on Feb 24, 2020 at 12:25 PM · View previous versions
Yeah, I understand all that but Dan made at least two mentions of Sony directly going after Canon users and Dan even goes as far as saying they forego their own lens development to go after Canon glass owners....I call hogwash on that because there is no evidence of that and it is blatantly false information that they made an EF adapter.
I made at least one error and perhaps two, though I don't think they change my overall point.
1. I mentioned A7rII where I meant to refer to the 36MP A7r which had a sensor equivalent to that in the D800 and (more accurately, perhaps) the D800e.
2. I apologize if I'm mistaken about Sony producing/selling an adapter to use Canon lenses on the A7r. Was that only third-party stuff? Given the overwhelming argument that photographers could take their Canon lenses along to the A7r, the enthusiasm for doing so, and the fact that this was the only initial route to having necessary lenses at first...
After acknowledging and correcting those errors, I think my basic analysis is still correct.
Dan
Edited on Feb 24, 2020 at 12:25 PM · View previous versions
Feb 23, 2020 at 07:44 PM
p.13 #10EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
Sounds like some are getting nervous and sending out warnings to Sony. 
Can't say they were not warned over a year ago.
Go Tokura (Canon's Image Communication Business Operations Chief Executive)
"As you may know, Canon has a history of not always being first in the market with new technology, but we are very good at catching up, going beyond and becoming the leader."
Can't say they were not warned over a year ago.
Go Tokura (Canon's Image Communication Business Operations Chief Executive)
"As you may know, Canon has a history of not always being first in the market with new technology, but we are very good at catching up, going beyond and becoming the leader."
Feb 24, 2020 at 11:01 AM
p.13 #11EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
I've long advocated that part of the advantage of mirrorless is that the space / size design changes that come from the mirrorbox being no longer necessary ... is that you now have MORE SPACE to engineer / design / work with for power generation & heat dissipation.
I've said for years that if Sony would build the mirrorless in a larger body (or whoever decides to first) will do well, because of the performance capability. Sure, you can still make it smaller than if it would have a mirrorbox ... but, that doesn't mean you have to give away all the advantage, just for the sake of making it small.
Judging from the pics, it looks like Canon is going to retain sufficient size to pack some punch. I mean there's a reason why a 1D series is larger than a 5D series ... power & heat dissipation require such. I'm glad to see that the R5 appears to have a thick body to support the engineering guts.
Combined with what looks like a good layout (joystick & assumed touch screen), a size that looks like it'll land between a traditional 5D IV, and the EOS R ... I think they may have put the mirrorbox space to good use (rather than just whittlin' down the size ... because you can).
Imo, if they have taken their time to figure out how to best use that space for power / heat dissipation (and card placement, etc.) ... well, if the time spent to crack that nut was well used. I'm seeing a "home run" for the EOS-R5.
Video @ 8K ... on spec is great, but since I'm not video oriented, the 12 FPS mechanical & 20 FPS max is going to be sweet. I mean, 20 fps @ 40MP-ish ... that's some processing power that is a quantum leap over some previous FF spec. Typically, you have to choose between fps & MP to accommodate the processing limitations (back to power & heat dissipation).
If my read on this is anywhere close, this EOS R5 (with IBIS, so now we can use more glass) is going to be rather well heralded. Will it garner the same as the original 5D for its place in history, maybe not quite that much ... but, let's just say I think it'll be one that proves itself to have been worth the wait. Which is really tough thing to say about Canon, because we all love to hate on how slow they are at getting there.
Time will tell, but the early presentation lends me to think that Canon got this one pretty darn good (at least in the direction that I've been hoping for) ... i.e. 1) use the space to increase power / heat performance capability and 2) use the space to retain good ergonomics. I sense a world-class workhorse is about to hit the track ... not just a Shetland pony that is smaller in size.
We'll soon find out ... Build it, and they will come. This one could be worth waiting for.
I've said for years that if Sony would build the mirrorless in a larger body (or whoever decides to first) will do well, because of the performance capability. Sure, you can still make it smaller than if it would have a mirrorbox ... but, that doesn't mean you have to give away all the advantage, just for the sake of making it small.
Judging from the pics, it looks like Canon is going to retain sufficient size to pack some punch. I mean there's a reason why a 1D series is larger than a 5D series ... power & heat dissipation require such. I'm glad to see that the R5 appears to have a thick body to support the engineering guts.
Combined with what looks like a good layout (joystick & assumed touch screen), a size that looks like it'll land between a traditional 5D IV, and the EOS R ... I think they may have put the mirrorbox space to good use (rather than just whittlin' down the size ... because you can).
Imo, if they have taken their time to figure out how to best use that space for power / heat dissipation (and card placement, etc.) ... well, if the time spent to crack that nut was well used. I'm seeing a "home run" for the EOS-R5.
Video @ 8K ... on spec is great, but since I'm not video oriented, the 12 FPS mechanical & 20 FPS max is going to be sweet. I mean, 20 fps @ 40MP-ish ... that's some processing power that is a quantum leap over some previous FF spec. Typically, you have to choose between fps & MP to accommodate the processing limitations (back to power & heat dissipation).
If my read on this is anywhere close, this EOS R5 (with IBIS, so now we can use more glass) is going to be rather well heralded. Will it garner the same as the original 5D for its place in history, maybe not quite that much ... but, let's just say I think it'll be one that proves itself to have been worth the wait. Which is really tough thing to say about Canon, because we all love to hate on how slow they are at getting there.
Time will tell, but the early presentation lends me to think that Canon got this one pretty darn good (at least in the direction that I've been hoping for) ... i.e. 1) use the space to increase power / heat performance capability and 2) use the space to retain good ergonomics. I sense a world-class workhorse is about to hit the track ... not just a Shetland pony that is smaller in size.
We'll soon find out ... Build it, and they will come. This one could be worth waiting for.
Feb 24, 2020 at 12:14 PM
p.13 #12EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
RustyBug wrote:
It wasn't that they necessarily "targeted" adaptation of Canon glass by original design / intent. Rather, they became the benefactor of Canon's glass through (3rd party) adaptation ... and that was quite a benefit that lended them a helping hand in popularity.
For instance, the ability for landscapers to use Canon's T&S glass on Sony ... something that Sony likely is not ever going to develop. Same goes with other glass, in that it "bought them time" to either build or continue to borrow. In this regard, Sony had a full lineup of glass without having to produce the entire...Show more →
It sounds like Sony targeted everyone else equally since they open sourced the E mount back in 2011. They didn't have to engineer and build an adapter. Why market something that you hope will only solve a short term problem and that Sony would likely have to take on support liability for their in-house adapter if the other guys lenses don't always work as advertised on all Sony E mount Cameras. After all there's a number of 3rd party manufacturers will independently do it for you no strings attached. Sony probably realized all of this after FotodioX, or whoever was first, introduced their (reversed engineered?) adapter in 2006.
See here: https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201102/11-018E/
arbitrage wrote
Where does the idea that Sony targeted Canon users directly come from? Sony never made an adapter for Canon lenses. That was all done via 3rd parties, just as the Nikon (and other) adapters were. The only adapter Sony made was for their A-mount lenses.For instance, the ability for landscapers to use Canon's T&S glass on Sony ... something that Sony likely is not ever going to develop. Same goes with other glass, in that it "bought them time" to either build or continue to borrow. In this regard, Sony had a full lineup of glass without having to produce the entire...Show more →
It sounds like Sony targeted everyone else equally since they open sourced the E mount back in 2011. They didn't have to engineer and build an adapter. Why market something that you hope will only solve a short term problem and that Sony would likely have to take on support liability for their in-house adapter if the other guys lenses don't always work as advertised on all Sony E mount Cameras. After all there's a number of 3rd party manufacturers will independently do it for you no strings attached. Sony probably realized all of this after FotodioX, or whoever was first, introduced their (reversed engineered?) adapter in 2006.
See here: https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201102/11-018E/
Feb 24, 2020 at 01:20 PM
p.13 #13EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
They get very close, so leap-frogging will start soon:
Feb 24, 2020 at 04:37 PM
p.13 #14EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
Holger wrote:
They get very close, so leap-frogging will start soon:
I'd say the leap frogging has already happened. Sony users just don't want to acknowledge it yet.
1DXIII
20 fps Mechanical (in Live View)
zero wait to clear buffer
Dual CFexpress memory cards
A9II
10 fps Mechanical
6 month wait to clear buffer
Dual SD cards
Now that Canon just surpassed the A9II with a DSLR, just imagine what we're going to see with a full MILC flagship 1R.
Based on what we're seeing on the 1DXIII, I'm hopeful the R5 picks up the same AF features which would equal the A9II at a release price of $3499.
I keep hearing the cute little buzz phrase some Sony YouTuber came up with. The "Canon cripple hammer".
Funny how that little phrase has an opposite meaning now.
They get very close, so leap-frogging will start soon:
I'd say the leap frogging has already happened. Sony users just don't want to acknowledge it yet.
1DXIII
20 fps Mechanical (in Live View)
zero wait to clear buffer
Dual CFexpress memory cards
A9II
10 fps Mechanical
6 month wait to clear buffer
Dual SD cards
Now that Canon just surpassed the A9II with a DSLR, just imagine what we're going to see with a full MILC flagship 1R.
Based on what we're seeing on the 1DXIII, I'm hopeful the R5 picks up the same AF features which would equal the A9II at a release price of $3499.
I keep hearing the cute little buzz phrase some Sony YouTuber came up with. The "Canon cripple hammer".
Funny how that little phrase has an opposite meaning now.
Feb 25, 2020 at 09:07 AM
p.13 #15EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
As they say, "'Don't get ahead of your skis."
The more likely (continuing) reality...
1. At times any of several companies could have the most compelling photographic tool, with your assessment of "most compelling" being somewhat subjective and different depending on what/how you photograph. The "lead" among companies rotates over time.
2. In a truly objective sense, the differences are far less important that we imagine — the fact is that all of these companies are making extremely competent equipment, and the difference between the best thing and the second-best thing in some aspect of camera performance is actually not that great. In addition, the second-best thing is almost certainly better in some other area of performance.
Regarding #2, I think there's a sort of inverse proportion principle: The more strongly you regard your camera company affiliation as if it were that of fan of a sports team, the larger you imagine the differences to be when they favor your brand and the smaller you regard them to be when they favor another brand/team.
Dan
lighthound wrote:
I'd say the leap frogging has already happened. Sony users just don't want to acknowledge it yet.
1DXIII
20 fps Mechanical (in Live View)
zero wait to clear buffer
Dual CFexpress memory cards
A9II
10 fps Mechanical
6 month wait to clear buffer
Dual SD cards
Now that Canon just surpassed the A9II with a DSLR, just imagine what we're going to see with a full MILC flagship 1R.
Based on what we're seeing on the 1DXIII, I'm hopeful the R5 picks up the same AF features which would equal the A9II at a release price of $3499.
I keep hearing the cute little buzz phrase...Show more →
The more likely (continuing) reality...
1. At times any of several companies could have the most compelling photographic tool, with your assessment of "most compelling" being somewhat subjective and different depending on what/how you photograph. The "lead" among companies rotates over time.
2. In a truly objective sense, the differences are far less important that we imagine — the fact is that all of these companies are making extremely competent equipment, and the difference between the best thing and the second-best thing in some aspect of camera performance is actually not that great. In addition, the second-best thing is almost certainly better in some other area of performance.
Regarding #2, I think there's a sort of inverse proportion principle: The more strongly you regard your camera company affiliation as if it were that of fan of a sports team, the larger you imagine the differences to be when they favor your brand and the smaller you regard them to be when they favor another brand/team.
Dan
lighthound wrote:
Holger wrote
They get very close, so leap-frogging will start soon:1DXIII
20 fps Mechanical (in Live View)
zero wait to clear buffer
Dual CFexpress memory cards
A9II
10 fps Mechanical
6 month wait to clear buffer
Dual SD cards
Now that Canon just surpassed the A9II with a DSLR, just imagine what we're going to see with a full MILC flagship 1R.
Based on what we're seeing on the 1DXIII, I'm hopeful the R5 picks up the same AF features which would equal the A9II at a release price of $3499.
I keep hearing the cute little buzz phrase...Show more →
Feb 25, 2020 at 09:18 AM
p.13 #16EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
lighthound wrote:
I'd say the leap frogging has already happened. Sony users just don't want to acknowledge it yet.
1DXIII
20 fps Mechanical (in Live View)
zero wait to clear buffer
Dual CFexpress memory cards
A9II
10 fps Mechanical
6 month wait to clear buffer
Dual SD cards
Now that Canon just surpassed the A9II with a DSLR, just imagine what we're going to see with a full MILC flagship 1R.
Based on what we're seeing on the 1DXIII, I'm hopeful the R5 picks up the same AF features which would equal the A9II at a release price of $3499.
I keep hearing the cute little buzz phrase...Show more →
Not really. Canon doesn't have a stacked sensor (1dxiii has 1/60s read out only. I don't need mechanical shutter unless I use flash at all with the A9ii. So the Sony stays in E-shutter 95% of the time and doesn't wear out the shutter. You can use it in LV or EVF mode at full speed). Buffer never has been an issue. I never shoot at 20fps for half a minute and I don't know anybody having done that at big sports events. Nevertheless, that is a weak point of the Sony.
Regarding AF, Canon just managed to get close, maybe even if we are nice, to Sony's 3 year old technology (!) at 2000 Euros less than the Canon.
You are dreaming to think a non-flagship R5 to even surpass the 1dxiii, all that with a higher MP sensor and in a much cheaper body. How realistic is that? We don't even know what the R5 will bring to the table in detail (20fps with AF frozen or not, etc., 12fps with frozen AF, or not, nothing is clear right now).
You seem to think this (likely) 45MP camera to surpass A9ii AF, won't happen. So your comment sound like a fanboy delusional comment, sorry to say that. And that comes from someone like me, even thinking of adding an R5 (I am not brand addicted).
Holger wrote
They get very close, so leap-frogging will start soon:1DXIII
20 fps Mechanical (in Live View)
zero wait to clear buffer
Dual CFexpress memory cards
A9II
10 fps Mechanical
6 month wait to clear buffer
Dual SD cards
Now that Canon just surpassed the A9II with a DSLR, just imagine what we're going to see with a full MILC flagship 1R.
Based on what we're seeing on the 1DXIII, I'm hopeful the R5 picks up the same AF features which would equal the A9II at a release price of $3499.
I keep hearing the cute little buzz phrase...Show more →
Not really. Canon doesn't have a stacked sensor (1dxiii has 1/60s read out only. I don't need mechanical shutter unless I use flash at all with the A9ii. So the Sony stays in E-shutter 95% of the time and doesn't wear out the shutter. You can use it in LV or EVF mode at full speed). Buffer never has been an issue. I never shoot at 20fps for half a minute and I don't know anybody having done that at big sports events. Nevertheless, that is a weak point of the Sony.
Regarding AF, Canon just managed to get close, maybe even if we are nice, to Sony's 3 year old technology (!) at 2000 Euros less than the Canon.
You are dreaming to think a non-flagship R5 to even surpass the 1dxiii, all that with a higher MP sensor and in a much cheaper body. How realistic is that? We don't even know what the R5 will bring to the table in detail (20fps with AF frozen or not, etc., 12fps with frozen AF, or not, nothing is clear right now).
You seem to think this (likely) 45MP camera to surpass A9ii AF, won't happen. So your comment sound like a fanboy delusional comment, sorry to say that. And that comes from someone like me, even thinking of adding an R5 (I am not brand addicted).
Feb 25, 2020 at 09:33 AM
p.13 #17EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
lighthound wrote:
I'd say the leap frogging has already happened. Sony users just don't want to acknowledge it yet.
1DXIII
20 fps Mechanical (in Live View)
zero wait to clear buffer
Dual CFexpress memory cards
A9II
10 fps Mechanical
6 month wait to clear buffer
Dual SD cards
Now that Canon just surpassed the A9II with a DSLR, just imagine what we're going to see with a full MILC flagship 1R.
Based on what we're seeing on the 1DXIII, I'm hopeful the R5 picks up the same AF features which would equal the A9II at a release price of $3499.
I keep hearing the cute little buzz phrase...Show more →
Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Until we see what Canon does with the R5 and whether they ever move to a R1 (and if they do how far out it is) it is premature to really compare an R5 to an A9II. By the time an R1 shows up there could be an A9III or an A9R or who knows what....one can wish for anything but until I see a full spec sheet and can read all the caveats in the user manuals I'm not going to place my bets or my $$$ onto either system.
The Cripple Hammer may still rear its ugly head with the R5 especially if the price point is $3500 (I'd bet an extra $1K onto that price). The Youtuber that made that phrase is a M43 shooter for the most part and he isn't a stills shooter, all he talks about is video. I think he occasionally uses an A6400 but that is it for his Sony use.
Holger wrote
They get very close, so leap-frogging will start soon:1DXIII
20 fps Mechanical (in Live View)
zero wait to clear buffer
Dual CFexpress memory cards
A9II
10 fps Mechanical
6 month wait to clear buffer
Dual SD cards
Now that Canon just surpassed the A9II with a DSLR, just imagine what we're going to see with a full MILC flagship 1R.
Based on what we're seeing on the 1DXIII, I'm hopeful the R5 picks up the same AF features which would equal the A9II at a release price of $3499.
I keep hearing the cute little buzz phrase...Show more →
Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Until we see what Canon does with the R5 and whether they ever move to a R1 (and if they do how far out it is) it is premature to really compare an R5 to an A9II. By the time an R1 shows up there could be an A9III or an A9R or who knows what....one can wish for anything but until I see a full spec sheet and can read all the caveats in the user manuals I'm not going to place my bets or my $$$ onto either system.
The Cripple Hammer may still rear its ugly head with the R5 especially if the price point is $3500 (I'd bet an extra $1K onto that price). The Youtuber that made that phrase is a M43 shooter for the most part and he isn't a stills shooter, all he talks about is video. I think he occasionally uses an A6400 but that is it for his Sony use.
Feb 25, 2020 at 10:27 AM
p.13 #18EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
I wouldn't get ahead of yourself on the R5 just yet....it sounds like Canon plans to finally close the gap, but Sony will probably soon respond with another TKO uppercut.
Feb 25, 2020 at 11:02 AM
p.13 #19EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
I'm sure no matter what, it will be picked apart by critics on technical details, but I think it will be a great camera. I'm sure there will be some brand wars comparisons on tenths of a stop of dynamic range etc. etc. If you can afford one and want one, go for it! If you shoot Nikon or Sony, someone with this gear is no better off than you and vice versa in most practical situations.
Meanwhile there are still people shooting with a 5D Mark I that still do great on things such as composition and exposure and who spend time out shooting instead of bragging for self-validation or tearing other people down on forums, which unfortunately seems to be the norm for any sort of gear post or question these days, including this one, which is unfortunate.
I'm most looking forward to smaller form factor, weather sealing and potentially dual card slots. Depending on the price, it may be some time before I buy one if ever. I do want to get into the R mount, but maybe I wait for an R6 (6D equivalent) or wait for the cost of the R to come down.
Meanwhile there are still people shooting with a 5D Mark I that still do great on things such as composition and exposure and who spend time out shooting instead of bragging for self-validation or tearing other people down on forums, which unfortunately seems to be the norm for any sort of gear post or question these days, including this one, which is unfortunate.
I'm most looking forward to smaller form factor, weather sealing and potentially dual card slots. Depending on the price, it may be some time before I buy one if ever. I do want to get into the R mount, but maybe I wait for an R6 (6D equivalent) or wait for the cost of the R to come down.
Feb 25, 2020 at 11:13 AM
p.13 #20EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype?
Leapfrogging is good, but it seems that people take it as given that Sony will respond soon. I am not so sure about that.
Feb 25, 2020 at 11:20 AM