p.23 #1 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
vdo1 wrote:
5 years ago some of those "ambassadors" were arguing that any camera without a mirror / OVF can't be but a toy or just utter garbage. Now it seems that even their legendary big hands have shrinked and suddenly they are able to hold smaller cameras...
+1. I don't even follow anymore closely what Canon is doing. Have totally lost interest in the brand. Still using EF lens gear which I own since many years but that's it. I have moved on since 2014 with my A7R and never looked back.
p.23 #2 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Perhaps the camera is clever enough to focus on the face / eye even in the presence of droplets. This could be one of the points of the demonstation.
In advertising photography, having a crew and the use of flashes is par for the course.
BokehBeauty wrote:
Concerning your comments on the kayaking scene. With all due respect have you ever shot whitewater kayaking of class V and above in remote locations, I did this sport for more than 30years. Not sure, but this river stretch might be the end of the great canyon of the Soca in Slovenia. To mount flashes close enough would be a huge effort, even more dangerous than kayaking. Yes kayaking is not that fast, but he shows sequences of images in drops with sharp faces. In drops the kayaker gets fast and the splashing water made face detect useless so far. ...Show more →
p.23 #5 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Same here, until the R5. I don’t think I’ve been this excited for a camera since the A7RII was announced. It (seemingly) checks all of the boxes my Sony bodies have for years, continues all of the things Canon has been great at while also pushing this market segment forward with 8k and 4K 120p for hybrid shooters. Then add in the RF lenses that I’ve envied for years for their faster aperture (I even made a post about adapting the RF 28-70mm f2 to E-mount but was told it couldn’t be done.) I really hope this camera lives up to the hype.
retrofocus wrote:
+1. I don't even follow anymore closely what Canon is doing. Have totally lost interest in the brand. Still using EF lens gear which I own since many years but that's it. I have moved on since 2014 with my A7R and never looked back.
p.23 #6 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
I actually hope that this would incite Sony to do an A9R. Everything that the A9 is, except in fourtysomething MP. If they pull that out of their hat, I could honestly take the "this will be my last camera" pledge.
p.23 #7 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
IndyFab wrote:
Please excuse if this has been posted before,
The EYE af looks impressive
Yeah it looks to me like Sony will have some catching up to do here. These new Canon cameras have some decent processing power so I’m not surprised it’s this good. I wonder if Sony will try to get on par with this performance in firmware updates and if so, how much improvement is realistically possible in the firmware alone.
p.23 #8 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
I don't recall ever seeing a release announcement where the demonstrators (testers) were so obviously restricted by NDA in what the were able to show and talk about. Canon seems to really be trying hard to control that narrative on these cameras. This could be the result of having to do everything remotely because of the Covid-19 crisis. This is a new model for everyone. However, it does give me pause, so although these look like amazing cameras, I am withholding my final opinion until the cameras are in general distribution, and have been thoroughly tested by independent reviewers.
There seem to be a lot of little gotchas they did not want to come out. The rolling shutter, the reduced focus area at f11, the reduced burst rate as the battery depletes, etc.
p.23 #9 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
AlphaPhotography wrote:
Same here, until the R5. I don’t think I’ve been this excited for a camera since the A7RII was announced. It (seemingly) checks all of the boxes my Sony bodies have for years, continues all of the things Canon has been great at while also pushing this market segment forward with 8k and 4K 120p for hybrid shooters. Then add in the RF lenses that I’ve envied for years for their faster aperture (I even made a post about adapting the RF 28-70mm f2 to E-mount but was told it couldn’t be done.) I really hope this camera lives up to the hype.
For me the reason is simple: I use predominantly my MLC with rangefinder M-mount lenses, and thicker sensor stacks are less desirable. And Canon always uses one of the thickest stacks which would be not beneficial for me. I get very good-good results in this kind of combination from my first gen A7R camera. I also don't need all the bells and whistles either.
p.23 #10 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
All the examples I have seen put out by Canon so far seem carefully choreographed.
Why not show a bird in flight, a runner, or a golf swing, so we can judge against these things where rolling shutter is often tested?
They could show it, e.g., with some fast-moving subjects and illustrating results from mechanical shutter and electronic shutter side by side, but I suspect it would take some of the thunder from the release, and people might not understand all the parameters that affect it (such as speed of movement). They do have a web page on the topic:
they could add examples to this article but I suppose the emphasis in product marketing is on showing the good results that these features make possible while informing the customers about the downsides (but without image examples showing the distortion or how bad it can get).
I think this is just something that users will have to find out either by testing or by reading reviews. Already there have been some estimates of the R6's (19ms) and R5's (32ms) sensor read time in early reviews of the cameras.
12 fps is still plenty fast for shooting action. I don't normally go beyond 8 fps even with my 12-fps-capable camera. If you really need to shoot at 20 fps often then the Sony A9 II would seem to be the appropriate choice, unless you want even faster frame rates. In fact even more often I shoot single frames rather than bursts, as I dislike having to edit through all the variations that would result from burst shooting.
p.23 #11 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
AlphaPhotography wrote:
What are your thoughts if sensor/IQ is the same or better than comparable Sony cameras like the A7RIII/IV? What advantages and disadvantages do you see for each system/camera besides the touch interface and articulating display?
Well IMO, Sony definitely needs to address the issue of the user interface, sooner better than later. By UI, I mean not only on the camera but also the UI of their software (Playmemories app and the Imaging Edge). Now, that doesn't mean they aren't usable now. I just find it annoying that obvious flaws remain neglected for a long time in subsequent releases. Their software still feels like a betarelease! This is perhaps due to a company's culture that they traditionally underscore the importance of UI. Minolta certainly cared much about this though (I used to be a Minolta user in the past). Sony doesn't give priority to UI and as a result the flaws and mistakes in the design persist, model after model. Sometimes they have genuinely good ideas but there is a say that more than half of a good idea is in how it is executed. Pick a good idea but execute it bad and the result will be abysmal. I would say the Sony's idea of camera apps could have been very successful if it had been executed properly. But it remained half baked, probably underfunded and eventually, instead of correcting their mistakes, they just abandoned it. Regarding their software interface on the PC, they got caught in the modern hype of integration with online social media. Their Playmemories app design is a hint to that. But they are yet to even properly develop that aspect of the software which IMO wasn't even necessary at the beginning when Sony started developing their camera system. The idea can work but again, it is left poorly developed with most flaws of the initial attempt still out there. Even their website design is bad and confusing with several places to login which end up being unrelated to each other (hardware registration, support, etc.).
That said, I don't know much about Canon UI interface. Maybe, if I try it, I realize they have itsown flaws too. At this point Sony system is working for me. I just try to bypass or go around the point that are frustrating to me. I really like their idea of extensive button customization but I think it can still greatly be improved.
Aside from UI and sensor performance, other important aspects: AF performance (viewfinder coverage, AF tracking, eye AF, low light sensitivity and accuracy). Sony is ahead of Canon and Nikon in the mirrorless domain but the gap is being narrowed down and I am sure soon or late they are all going to be good enough that nobody can distinguish much between them. Silent shooting is great and my understanding is that Sony is still better in A9 series, maybe not in A7series. IMO, they should work towards a global electronic shutter. Mechanical shutter is an old concept now.
There are other useful features here and there which I may remember if I think about them (like focus stacking, etc.). Considering the mindset of the consumers in the Internet era, I wouldn't be surprised if different system all approach each other that distinct individuality among different system vanish which isn't something I would like to see but likely, it may happen.
p.23 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Not really true: the sensor stack of the EOS R is actually thinner than what’s in the Sony A7/A9 series.
From the Petapixel teardown:
“ The internal low-pass filter and the dust reduction system glass combined had a thickness of about 1.6mm. This places the Canon thinner than the Sony at about 2mm, but much thicker than the Nikon Z7’s 1.1mm.”
retrofocus wrote:
For me the reason is simple: I use predominantly my MLC with rangefinder M-mount lenses, and thicker sensor stacks are less desirable. And Canon always uses one of the thickest stacks which would be not beneficial for me. I get very good-good results in this kind of combination from my first gen A7R camera. I also don't need all the bells and whistles either.
p.23 #18 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
Who shoots at 12,800?
Sony shooters, all the time.
Well sure maybe some of them and in some cases perhaps if they have no choice. Not me and I shoot with Sony and shoot low light and night all the time but obviously it depends on what you are trying to do and what lenses you are using. To me it’s one of those things that just because you can do it, it doesn’t mean you should but everyone’s situation is different.
p.23 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
2xbass wrote:
Well sure maybe some of them and in some cases perhaps if they have no choice. Not me and I shoot with Sony and shoot low light and night all the time but obviously it depends on what you are trying to do and what lenses you are using. To me it’s one of those things that just because you can do it, it doesn’t mean you should but everyone’s situation is different.
I quite often need to dip down to ISO 12,800 when shooting documentary images. Many places in the world are not lit with LED lighting...in fact no lighting and have to fall back on things like light from fires etc. Sure no one always shoots at these extremes...but it's nice to have if you go there.
click through the neowise photos, awful banding at high ISO just like the R and old 5D2 and 5D4.
You're right, that is bad for the R5 if one wants to shoot ISO 12,800 or higher. It will be interesting to see whether the lower-res R6 performs the same or better in this respect. Unfortunately, DPReview doesn't show anything over ISO 6,400 for the R6.
