p.17 #3 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
JohnDizzo15 wrote:
Side note - still keeping my A9 as neither of the new Canon bodies appears to be able to do what I can do with the A9 for stills in ES. Also, I love this Sigma 35/1.2 which is not currently available in RF mount. If/when Canon can offer what I get from the A9 + 35/1.2 in sufficient fashion, then I wouldn't be opposed to purging my Sony stuff completely. But until then, I will continue to maintain multiple systems (Sony, Fuji, Canon).
Does it do 15 or 20 frames per second?
Sorry for my bad english.
Jul 13, 2020 at 01:41 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.17 #4 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
Tiny backwater? More like a wonderful rare gem in the World in my opinion.
if it was populated like so cal is, it wouldn't be a rare gem.
p.17 #5 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Is not the A7Riv their jack-of-all? Seems like a jack to me.
IMO the A7R4 is a high resolution camera that is not designed for speed. The equivalent to an R5 (on paper, at least) would be a cross between the A92 and the A7R4, which I suspect is not something we're ever gonna see from Sony based on its traditional product segmentation. Arguably the "jack of all trades" camera in the Sony FF lineup is the A73, which seems much more closely positioned to the Canon R6 than either the A7R4 or A9 are to the Canon R5.
p.17 #6 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
wordfool wrote:
IMO the A7R4 is a high resolution camera that is not designed for speed. The equivalent to an R5 (on paper, at least) would be a cross between the A92 and the A7R4, which I suspect is not something we're ever gonna see from Sony based on its traditional product segmentation. Arguably the "jack of all trades" camera in the Sony FF lineup is the A73, which seems much more closely positioned to the Canon R6 than either the A7R4 or A9 are to the Canon R5.
The R4 inherited a good deal of features from the A9 AF system, can it not hold its own against the aging A7iii? I'm not sure what you mean by "speed".
p.17 #7 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Editorrr wrote:
Does it do 15 or 20 frames per second?
Sorry for my bad english.
I believe it caps out at 15. I never shoot it that way though so I can’t be sure. More importantly, it shoots silently and with minimal negative ES issues.
p.17 #8 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
wordfool wrote:
IMO the A7R4 is a high resolution camera that is not designed for speed. The equivalent to an R5 (on paper, at least) would be a cross between the A92 and the A7R4, which I suspect is not something we're ever gonna see from Sony based on its traditional product segmentation. Arguably the "jack of all trades" camera in the Sony FF lineup is the A73, which seems much more closely positioned to the Canon R6 than either the A7R4 or A9 are to the Canon R5.
The R5 is like an A7R3 with worse image quality but better video. Compared to the A7R4 it has much worse low-ISO image quality. The Canon 20FPS in E-shutter mode is useless because the times when you want high frame rates completely intersect with times when the slow scan rate of the Canon electronic shutter will induce image distortion. If you want 20 FPS only the A9/A92 will give it to you (and their AF system and blackout-free VF is much better for action).
Lens-wise, the Sony cameras have far more options.
The A7R3 and R4 both do 10FPS with mechanical shutter, the Canon does 12FPS, so there's nothing significantly different there. The Canon video specs are impressive for sure, even with the overheating limitations.
p.17 #9 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
The R4 inherited a good deal of features from the A9 AF system, can it not hold its own against the aging A7iii? I'm not sure what you mean by "speed".
Speed, as in AF/tracking capability, sensor readout, and FPS -- things the A9 is specifically designed for. Yes, the A73 is indeed aging but soon likely to be replaced by the A74, but my point was that the feature set of the base A7x series is much more of a basic jack-of-all when compared to the A7Rx and A9x series, both of which have more specialization.
p.17 #11 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
Tiny backwater? More like a wonderful rare gem in the World in my opinion.
The tiny backwater Europeans & Americans spend a complete day in a tiny seat smelling other people's flatulence at great expensive to photograph because it's so gorgeous.
But no, I was talking about Australia, the country that has it's fibre optic cable, economy, gun laws, mental health and domestic terrorists in check.
No one watches TV, the last data I saw stated 90% of Australians, Indonesians, Chinese, Japanese etc. stream more than 90% of their content including news in up to 4K.
8K content is available on all of the popular sites such as YouTube and has been for years, Canon will be the company helping to add to that and when there's enough of it 8K displays will be mainstream and Canon will release another affordable camera that records 12K that some Sony fanboys will complain about because of they weren't happy with the way Canon released the spec sheet lol.
Seriously. We're so vested in brands we don't own or have shares in. So much hate for electronic devices from brands other than the ones we own, so sad.
For me the worst thing about most Canon cameras are the ergonomics, having to turn the camera on with your left hand then shoot with the right instead of Canon using the Sony button they stole from Nikon with the power switch around the actuator. Things like that annoy me when I'm using a Canon.
p.17 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Not sure I’ve seen a head to head between them but I bet the R4 can keep up pretty darn well.
wordfool wrote:
Speed, as in AF/tracking capability, sensor readout, and FPS -- things the A9 is specifically designed for. Yes, the A73 is indeed aging but soon likely to be replaced by the A74, but my point was that the feature set of the base A7x series is much more of a basic jack-of-all when compared to the A7Rx and A9x series, both of which have more specialization.
Jul 13, 2020 at 09:31 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.17 #14 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Bob_S wrote:
But no, I was talking about Australia, the country that has it's fibre optic cable, economy, gun laws, mental health and domestic terrorists in check.
Bob_S wrote:
No one watches TV, the last data I saw stated 90% of Australians, Indonesians, Chinese, Japanese etc. stream more than 90% of their content including news in up to 4K.
4k is not 8k.
shooting 8k is not useful in 2020, and probably not in 2021 either.
Bob_S wrote:
8K content is available on all of the popular sites such as YouTube and has been for years,
"In order to stream 8K video reliably, tests have indicated that homes would require internet connections capable of more than 85 megabits per second (Mbps), which is beyond what many properties have today." https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53322755
p.17 #15 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Nanda you're right. It sucks at astro, macro, splash, BIF, landscaping. I really should sell the darned thing!
Video is garbage on it as well, I mean who needs eye detect, 4k down sampled from 6K, touch tracking, S-log (14 stops DR), HLG, full digital interface for audio, etc.... completely useless
shooting 8k is not useful in 2020, and probably not in 2021 either.
"In order to stream 8K video reliably, tests have indicated that homes would require internet connections capable of more than 85 megabits per second (Mbps), which is beyond what many properties have today." https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53322755
There's NBN, which so good, then there's cable. I have both and 85mbps is the slowest day of the year.
Forget the BBC, it's the Asian century, that part of the world is lagging behind. I was talking about Asia.
Yes, you don't need 8K devices now, but if you want 8K devices to display native resolution content in 4 years, you need to start creating that content now.
p.17 #18 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
I was very excited when cameras started including 4K because the benefits outweigh the problems. Back then 1080p capture on DSLR wasn’t even true 1080p so 4K seemed a vast improvement. I don’t think that is the case for 8K now. I certainly have trouble seeing any difference at all.
RoamingScott wrote:
These were the EXACT arguments against 4K. People are hopelessly shortsighted when it comes to the speed of tech adoption.
p.17 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
These were the EXACT arguments against 4K. People are hopelessly shortsighted when it comes to the speed of tech adoption.
I remember the excuses not to adopt well, who needs 4K, we don't have the monitors, they are too expensive, there's no content anyway, my computer can't edit 4K.
Now YouTubers with 1000 subs are making 4K videos daily/weekly and many have been for at least 5 years.
p.17 #20 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Bob_S wrote:
I remember the excuses not to adopt well, who needs 4K, we don't have the monitors, they are too expensive, there's no content anyway, my computer can't edit 4K.
Now YouTubers with 1000 subs are making 4K videos daily/weekly and many have been for at least 5 years.
Even if the new Canon R5's 8K shooting is rudimentary (overheating, expensive), we must applaud Canon for innovating.
Currently 8k is not mainstream but just like 4k, it will be used by everyone soon. Canon just have to perfect it now.
