p.3 #1 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
NJPhotographer wrote:
Martin Bissig's video shows that the R5's electronic shutter works very well for action -
I'm not sure why some people here are saying the A9/A9II works better.
When he shot in the electronic shutter mode the moving subject was a tiny part of the frame, and far away. This is not likely to show the artifacts. He explicitly mentioned that the electronic shutter will show artifacts in some indoor lighting, and rolling shutter with moving objects.
We will see what testing shows. I think the a9 reads at 1/160 while I have read that the R5 reads at 1/60. The a9 is nearly 3 times faster. That is a big difference.
Jul 09, 2020 at 03:16 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.3 #2 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
NJPhotographer wrote:
Martin Bissig shows a motocross rider flying through the air, details perfectly frozen. I would define that as action.
details are always "perfectly frozen", when the shutter speed is high enough, it works like that with every camera that's ever been made, and no, you can't properly judge a photo by looking at video of it.
if you have links to big r5 action pics that were shot with the electronic shutter, please post it.
The EyeAF on birds is something ahead of what Sony can do at the moment but how about overall tracking speed and accuracy? Better than A7R IV?
Jul 09, 2020 at 03:22 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.3 #4 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
So the 1DX3 that shoots 16-20fps in AF-C (and is the defacto sports cam model worldwide) can't use EF glass? Wow, I never knew that
wow, you own sony and you don't understand that not all lenses can shoot at 20fps? seriously
p.3 #5 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
osv2 wrote:
wow, you own sony and you don't understand that not all lenses can shoot at 20fps? seriously
or was that a joke, lol
I literally talked about this earlier in the thread when I compared first gen Sony lenses to the new standard they've reached with the 24/135 when it comes to AF.
You're purposefully obtuse. I cannot speak more plainly than I have. No EF lens will work WORSE on RF, so anyone owning those lenses or looking to fill a gap until a native RF option comes out is better off using an RF body for many reasons...except perhaps in the few known cases where there is some known issue like the 400mm.
p.3 #6 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
When he shot in the electronic shutter mode the moving subject was a tiny part of the frame, and far away. This is not likely to show the artifacts. He explicitly mentioned that the electronic shutter will show artifacts in some indoor lighting, and rolling shutter with moving objects.
We will see what testing shows. I think the a9 reads at 1/160 while I have read that the R5 reads at 1/60. The a9 is nearly 3 times faster. That is a big difference.
Yes but the R5 has a 45MP sensor, so 20fps is actually impressive (compared to 10fps from A7RIII with similar sensor res.)
The A9/A9II bodies still have the advantage on sensor read speed since they have BSI + stacked electronics technology but the Canon has a higher resolution sensor while offering the same number of FPS.
p.3 #7 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Positives: Better ibis and cfexpress, bird eye autofocus is huge.
Negatives: More expensive than Sony, a focus on video which I will never use, bulkier, heavier than Sonys. Less mp. Canon still has a closed mount which is terrible for consumers as well as a focus on heavy lenses.
p.3 #8 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes but the R5 has a 45MP sensor, so 20fps is actually impressive (compared to 10fps from A7RIII with similar sensor res.)
The A9/A9II bodies still have the advantage on sensor read speed since they have BSI + stacked electronics technology but the Canon has a higher resolution sensor while offering the same number of FPS.
Yep, that is impressive. But what good is 20 frames a second if you can't shoot fast moving subjects with it. I have never shot a static subject at 20 frames a second.
Jul 09, 2020 at 03:34 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.3 #9 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
I literally talked about this earlier in the thread when I compared first gen Sony lenses to the new standard they've reached with the 24/135 when it comes to AF.
You're purposefully obtuse. I cannot speak more plainly than I have. No EF lens will work WORSE on RF, so anyone owning those lenses or looking to fill a gap until a native RF option comes out is better off using an RF body for many reasons...except perhaps in the few known cases where there is some known issue like the 400mm.
my side of this conversation is going right over your head.
sometimes i forget that sony owners don't all own an a9, and therefore don't understand the role that af motors play in af-c frame rates.
god knows enough as been written about it tho, and sony has a bunch of lenses that are limited to 15fps, that probably should have been the first clue to what i said
p.3 #10 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
Yep, that is impressive. But what good is 20 frames a second if you can't shoot fast moving subjects with it. I have never shot a static subject at 20 frames a second.
I think it will work well for action but not very fast action.
p.3 #11 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
arbitrage wrote:
Sony A9/A9II still have faster read speeds than the R5. We don't know what the R5's read speed is but they still have a footnote that says you can expect banding in certain light sources in e-shutter. That alone tells me it isn't as fast as the A9 because the A9 has eliminated that issue.
There is no way the R5 is 1/160 like the A9/A9II.
Multiple people have commented on this. We (either you or I) are confusing read speed (which is sheer data transfer rate) vs scan speed (scan from top to bottom). A9 still has a faster scan, but Canon is reading 45MP x 20 in electronic shutter and moving it into buffer (with upto 180 Raw). I understand that scan speed is slower, but as 1Dx III shows, it is still considerably faster than A7 and Nikon Z. It will work well for action where subject is not crossing the frame horizontally. For example a runner coming towards the camera, or birds in flight where camera is also usually panning with the subject.
The real benefit, however, is in the video specs which are through the roof. 8K/30 and 4K/120 for a full frame in Raw or 10-bit ! Sony is still struggling with 4k/30 being limited to 8-bit. A7S III might change that (we will know soon), but it will be a low MP camera.
p.3 #12 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
The new Canons looks great to me, however I need an alternative that outperforms the A9 as well as native big teles before I would consider buying Canon again (investing in EF glass knowing it is more or less about to be obsolete is out of the question). A R5 with a super light native 500/4 for instance would start to look interesting though, but the question is how good it would be for BIF. Electronic shutter may give bad rolling shutter distortion and mechanical shutter gives slide show effect while shooting bursts.
Looking forward to see if Sony rises up to the challenge, I think the 2019 releases was dull. Maybe the A7S follow up rumored to launch soon will give us some ideas of what they have in the pipeline.
Jul 09, 2020 at 03:45 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.3 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
No EF lens will work WORSE on RF
p.3 #14 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Fred Miranda wrote:
I've heard from one of the ambassadors that 4 second handholding with sharp results is possible due to 8-stop IS. That's better than what Sony can do for sure. Also Eye AF covers the entire frame (100% coverage).
It looks like 20 frames per second with great tracking is somehow a breakthrough but we have enjoyed this with Sony for many years now. The difference is that Canon did it with a 45MP sensor.
In the video above, I've heard the phrase "capturing the decisive moment" many times. I thought this was a Leica say!
“...capturing “the decisive moment" Copying is a sign of respect 🤓
p.3 #15 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
Yep, that is impressive. But what good is 20 frames a second if you can't shoot fast moving subjects with it. I have never shot a static subject at 20 frames a second.
The R5's 20fps e-shutter seems to work well enough for a motocross rider flying through the air, according to a Canon ambassador's video. Maybe there's a catch, but that seems fast enough.
Jul 09, 2020 at 03:55 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #16 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
indusphoto wrote:
Multiple people have commented on this. We (either you or I) are confusing read speed (which is sheer data transfer rate) vs scan speed (scan from top to bottom). A9 still has a faster scan, but Canon is reading 45MP x 20 in electronic shutter and moving it into buffer (with upto 180 Raw). I understand that scan speed is slower, but as 1Dx III shows, it is still considerably faster than A7 and Nikon Z. It will work well for action where subject is not crossing the frame horizontally. For example a runner coming towards the camera, or birds in flight where camera is also usually panning with the subject.
The real benefit, however, is in the video specs which are through the roof. 8K/30 and 4K/120 for a full frame in Raw or 10-bit ! Sony is still struggling with 4k/30 being limited to 8-bit. A7S III might change that (we will know soon), but it will be a low MP camera. ...Show more →
Part of the problem in language is Sony (or at least the people on this board) has always called what you call scan speed, sensor read out. We just have to keep the two concept separate. What you call read speed (I might prefer throughput) is how much data you can tranfer in a given time needs to be distinguished from what you call scan speed (what Sony and people around here call sensor read out--here I like your terminology of scan speed but might add sensor scan speed) from one another. Throughput is very important for video and you need the throughput of the R5 for 8K, but sensor scan speed is very important not only to prevent motion blur, but also for AF speed, and viewfinder lag. The faster the sensor reads the data the more times the data can be read when calculating AF and the fast the sensor reads the data the quicker the camera can get that image to the viewfinder. Now throughput can be a bottle neck for AF and viewfinder lag, but it seems you don't need the throughput of the R5 to prevent a bottleneck for both AF and viewfinder lag. The sensor scan speed is quite slow on the A7 series cameras and the Nikon Z cameras, so no surprise that the R5 can beat it (but it is still an achievement), but let's see just how fast the R5 is. We know the A9 (II) can scan the sensor in about 1/150th of a second. The Sony A7 series and the Nikon Z cameras can scan the sensor is about 1/30th of a second. If the R5 is 1/50th that is good for the class of camera, but photographically will still be quite limiting. If it is 1/80th of a second that would be much more impressive. I will be very surprised if it is any higher and I suspect it will be about 1/50th, but we will see.
p.3 #17 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
indusphoto wrote:
Multiple people have commented on this. We (either you or I) are confusing read speed (which is sheer data transfer rate) vs scan speed (scan from top to bottom). A9 still has a faster scan, but Canon is reading 45MP x 20 in electronic shutter and moving it into buffer (with upto 180 Raw). I understand that scan speed is slower, but as 1Dx III shows, it is still considerably faster than A7 and Nikon Z. It will work well for action where subject is not crossing the frame horizontally. For example a runner coming towards the camera, or birds in flight where camera is also usually panning with the subject.
The real benefit, however, is in the video specs which are through the roof. 8K/30 and 4K/120 for a full frame in Raw or 10-bit ! Sony is still struggling with 4k/30 being limited to 8-bit. A7S III might change that (we will know soon), but it will be a low MP camera. ...Show more →
Sony isn't "struggling" with those things. The Bionz X ISP/SoC isn't capable of it. It's a 7 year old chip. They're not even attempting to implement those things. When they finally release a new ISP/SoC they'll be more than capable of implementing 10-bit video and whatever else they want.
p.3 #18 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
osv2 wrote:
see this ef lens on eos-r, at 2.5fps
Welcome to the burst mode in servo on the R. The R sucks. The R5 does not suck. Also if you're going to link a 20 min long video, at least timestamp the relevant part, although there's no relevant part here.
I've never talked to such a brick wall that was so self assured without knowing the subject material at all.
p.3 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
osv2 wrote:
details are always "perfectly frozen", when the shutter speed is high enough, it works like that with every camera that's ever been made, and no, you can't properly judge a photo by looking at video of it.
if you have links to big r5 action pics that were shot with the electronic shutter, please post it.
Electronic shutter doesn't work like that with every camera that's ever been made. With most cameras, ES works poorly for fast action, even at a high shutter speed. The exception so far has been the A9/A9II. Martin's video suggests that the R5 may have a similar capability. But of course the subject is distant so it's not a definitive test.
Jul 09, 2020 at 04:25 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.3 #20 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
Welcome to the burst mode in servo on the R. The R sucks.
eos-r is rated at 5fps burst, it was the ef lens that crippled it to 2.5fps... yes, lenses matter ;-)
RoamingScott wrote:
The R5 does not suck.
you claimed 20fps on the r5 with ef lenses
back off the koolaid.
RoamingScott wrote:
Also if you're going to link a 20 min long video, at least timestamp the relevant part, although there's no relevant part here.
I've never talked to such a brick wall that was so self assured without knowing the subject material at all.
you made a dumb blanket claim that was wrong, get over it, lol.
