p.41 #1 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Hummingbird sequence posted over in the R5 image thread shot in ES shows that distortion is well controlled in most of these wing positions. I see a few that are a bit distorted at the tip but 1000x better than what the A7RIV and Z7/50 that I've owned do...those ones make most shots of hummers unusable.
The R5 is going to work in ES for the majority of BIF. I also had a member share a long sequence of a kingfisher IF that showed no distortion in the wings and shot in ES.
There will still be some shots ruined that an A9 wouldn't have ruined but I think ES is going to be very useable even for quicker BIF.
p.41 #2 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
This testing seems to indicate that rolling shutter is a real issue using electronic shutter.
The hit rate is also much lower than what I have come to expect when using my a9.
For me currently the Canon R5 remains an enigma. I expect that we will learn much more in the coming months about how this camera performs in the real World.
As of today it looks like the video features are being pretty widely criticized as market hype more than usable features. This at least in the 8K, and high frame rate 4k areas.
It seems it may be a better stills camera, but many restrictions exist that I am not accustomed to seeing in stills cameras. Much more testing is needed before we have a comprehensive understanding.
For now it looks to me like a combo of a9 and a7RIV/III is a better overall package. Possibly we expect too much of an "all arounder camera" and just much accept compromises in exchange for a single camera solution.
p.41 #3 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Poefolk wrote:
Canon sports shooter thoughts on R5
Says that sensor readout isn't up to the job for e-shutter for action, so we're back to one of the main selling points of this camera being crippled vs a true action cam like the A9. What's the point of A9 level AF if you can't actually shoot fasting moving stuff?
p.41 #4 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
History suggests the A7R V will be out long before the R5 replacement. Sony appears more capable of regularly turn out sensor improvements.
As primarily a landscape shooter it looks Sony still has the edge unless one is willing to switch brands generation to generation.
Importantly the R5 gives Canon still shooters little reason to switch from Canon. 35mm for stills is obviously maturing as we get above 40mp. There is only so much information in a 35mm image circle.
The IBIS on Canon is now very impressive. So is the AF.
Throwing video in the mix makes comparisons a lot more complicated.
p.41 #5 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
vdo1 wrote:
The real fail here is within the logic of stating that the R5 is "only so slightly worse" on a long list of parameters / features, then draw the conclusion that "since the differences are only so small and I personally don't care about them anyway, then the Canon is the better camera and thus a success".
Not to mention the fanboyism of trying to promote it as such on 40 pages in a different brand's forum.
First, my primary camera is a Sony A7R IV....so a 'different brand's forum?' Give me a break. I've owned the Sony A7II, A7III, A7R IV, a6000 and a6400 (and still own the a7R IV and a6400).
Secondly...yes, there are areas where it is worse. There are also areas where it is better...but you gloss right over those to proudly proclaim how it sucks. I also never said the Canon was the better camera. I said it was a very competitive stills camera, which is certainly true. If you don't think it is, then I don't know how you could call the A7R IV a competitive stills camera, considering the two cameras trade blows and are largely the same in capability and quality.
Areas where the A7R IV is superior to the R5 from what I have seen:
- Resolution (though fairly slight looking at the DPReview comparisons)
- Battery life
- Native lens selection
Areas where they are essentially a wash:
- EVF quality
- Practical burst mode shooting (Canon has higher overall rates, but is a little less consistent...Sony slower but more consistent).
- Dynamic range
- Practical video shooting (modes without overheating)
- Human Eye AF and tracking
Areas where the R5 is superior to the A7R IV:
- Animal Eye AF tracking
- Ergonomics
- Top burst rates
- In-Body Image Stabilization
- Top video spec (if you can work within the thermal limits)
And you view that as a slam dunk Sony Crushing the Canon list?
Again, there's no nuance. My guess is that you have fairly limited experience with different brands, because your arguments read like someone either reading a spec sheet without knowledge of what the implications are, or from someone who has very limited experience with a variety of gear.
I've owned Canon, Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic mirrorless cameras, and have extended use and have reviewed a total of 35 different camera bodies in the last 8 years. I have yet to encounter a camera that is 100% crap, or 100% awesome. They are all various shades of strengths and weaknesses, and very rarely are two cameras in the same competitive space so incredibly better than the competition that such hyperbolic statements that you have made are warranted.
p.41 #6 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
The R5 looks good, it exceeds the 7R series as an high res action camera at the moment. But to keep it in perspective, Canon is traditionally on a 4 year upgrade cycle and chances are it may not look so hot 1-2 years from now.
p.41 #7 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Jman13 wrote:
Areas where they are essentially a wash:
- Dynamic range
That's simply not true. I can create arbitrary levels of fake dynamic range in the A7R4 by applying NR to Sony's low ISO files, as Canon does in camera to the RAW files without recourse. They do that because their sensor is not great at low ISO performance. Resolution is also a lot worse for landscape images (AA filter).
Jman13 wrote:
Areas where the R5 is superior to the A7R IV:
- Ergonomics
Yes, for people who prefer the R5 ergonomics they are superior to the A7R IV. I don't prefer them at all.
p.41 #8 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Jman13 wrote:
First, my primary camera is a Sony A7R IV....so a 'different brand's forum?' Give me a break. I've owned the Sony A7II, A7III, A7R IV, a6000 and a6400 (and still own the a7R IV and a6400).
Secondly...yes, there are areas where it is worse. There are also areas where it is better...but you gloss right over those to proudly proclaim how it sucks. I also never said the Canon was the better camera. I said it was a very competitive stills camera, which is certainly true. If you don't think it is, then I don't know how you could call the A7R IV a competitive stills camera, considering the two cameras trade blows and are largely the same in capability and quality.
Areas where the A7R IV is superior to the R5 from what I have seen:
- Resolution (though fairly slight looking at the DPReview comparisons)
- Battery life
- Native lens selection
Areas where they are essentially a wash:
- EVF quality
- Practical burst mode shooting (Canon has higher overall rates, but is a little less consistent...Sony slower but more consistent).
- Dynamic range
- Practical video shooting (modes without overheating)
- Human Eye AF and tracking
Areas where the R5 is superior to the A7R IV:
- Animal Eye AF tracking
- Ergonomics
- Top burst rates
- In-Body Image Stabilization
- Top video spec (if you can work within the thermal limits)
And you view that as a slam dunk Sony Crushing the Canon list?
Again, there's no nuance. My guess is that you have fairly limited experience with different brands, because your arguments read like someone either reading a spec sheet without knowledge of what the implications are, or from someone who has very limited experience with a variety of gear.
I've owned Canon, Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic mirrorless cameras, and have extended use and have reviewed a total of 35 different camera bodies in the last 8 years. I have yet to encounter a camera that is 100% crap, or 100% awesome. They are all various shades of strengths and weaknesses, and very rarely are two cameras in the same competitive space so incredibly better than the competition that such hyperbolic statements that you have made are warranted. ...Show more →
The problem is the R5 has gone from the "ultimate mirrorless video camera" (pre-release, Peter McKinnon's shilly take on it), to "an ok regular 4K mirrorless if you baby it", to "better stick to one single 4K mode, but it's a stills monster", to "well, it's actually kind of limited for action stills, but it's still ok for slower stuff!" today.
That's quite a gap of expectations from pre-release a few weeks ago to real world impressions. People are rightfully sour that the goalposts of what this camera realistically is keep moving farther away from what was promised last month.
And as I've said before, Sony posters are the only group on FM that can accurately judge and compare the R5 to anything else that's relevant to Canon's latest offerings, because all other brands are falling behind. Sony folks to tend towards pragmatism and not a ton of brand loyalty. Go browse some Nikon forum threads if you want your brain to turn to fanboy mush in minutes.
I was openly mocked for suggesting the R5 was beset by multiple "small cripple-hammers" that were quickly adding up but..well...here we are.
p.41 #10 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
[
The problem is the R5 has gone from the "ultimate mirrorless video camera" (pre-release, Peter McKinnon's shilly take on it), to "an ok regular 4K mirrorless if you baby it", to "better stick to one single 4K mode, but it's a stills monster", to "well, it's actually kind of limited for action stills, but it's still ok for slower stuff!" today.
That's quite a gap of expectations from pre-release a few weeks ago to real world impressions. People are rightfully sour that the goalposts of what this camera realistically is keep moving farther away from what was promised last month.
And as I've said before, Sony posters are the only group on FM that can accurately judge and compared the R5 to anything else that's relevant to Canon's latest offerings, because all other brands are falling behind. Sony folks to tend towards pragmatism and not a ton of brand loyalty. Go browse some Nikon forum threads if you want your brain to turn to fanboy mush in minutes....Show more →
I am totally with you that Canon bungled the crap out of the marketing with this camera. This should NOT have been marketed as video heavy as it was, because it is very clear that the high end video modes are severely crippled.
p.41 #11 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
randomguy wrote:
The R5 looks good, it exceeds the 7R series as an high res action camera at the moment. But to keep it in perspective, Canon is traditionally on a 4 year upgrade cycle and chances are it may not look so hot 1-2 years from now.
5 year cycle for highest resolution. But realistically, there is little difference in a large print between the 5DSR, A7RIII, A7RIV, and the R5.
Serious still work for large print should be shot for stitching anyways.
p.41 #12 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
vdo1 wrote:
More logic fail. Your camera collection does not change in any way the fact that these (by now) 41 pages are posted in a different forum that Canon's.
Your implication was that I had spent 40 pages convincing people that the Canon was the ultimate machine.
Yes, this thread, which is about what Sony shooters think of a new competitors camera, is in the Sony forum. Because it's asking Sony shooters what they think of the camera.
My point was that you are incapable of nuance. And that has been reinforced by your further responses.
p.41 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
vdo1 wrote:
More logic fail. Your camera collection does not change in any way the fact that these (by now) 41 pages are posted in a different forum that Canon's.
I for one enjoy seeing differing opinions about cameras from other brands in the Sony forum. I often learn things from "lively" discussions. Only speaking with people we agree can be boring.
I find Jman's posts to be mostly informative and polite, even when I disagree with some of his conclusions. Therefore, I welcome his contributions.
p.41 #14 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Jman13 wrote:
Your implication was that I had spent 40 pages convincing people that the Canon was the ultimate machine.
Yes, this thread, which is about what Sony shooters think of a new competitors camera, is in the Sony forum. Because it's asking Sony shooters what they think of the camera.
My point was that you are incapable of nuance. And that has been reinforced by your further responses.
What "nuance", the one of pretending that logic fallacies are valid arguments and continue the conversation based on their "conclusions"?
p.41 #15 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
I for one enjoy seeing differing opinions about cameras from other brands in the Sony forum. I often learn things from "lively" discussions. Only speaking with people we agree can be boring.
I find Jman's posts to be mostly informative and polite, even when I disagree with some of his conclusions. Therefore, I welcome his contributions.
Please read me more carefully. I didn't protest against the existence of the thread, I protested against being accused of fanboyism for daring to oppose the Canon promoters views. All this in a forum that is not the Canon's one but of the targeted brand. Ah the irony.
p.41 #17 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
1bwana1 wrote:
I for one enjoy seeing differing opinions about cameras from other brands in the Sony forum. I often learn things from "lively" discussions. Only speaking with people we agree can be boring.
I find Jman's posts to be mostly informative and polite, even when I disagree with some of his conclusions. Therefore, I welcome his contributions.
+1
I'm also happy this thread is here, as I never read other forums and here I can actually get to know the pros and cons of R5...
I also don't understand this everpresent canon hate, maybe because I've started putting more time and effort into photography already and only with Sony .
... and yes to me R5 seems like a good all around camera (agree on terrible marketing), losing in some aspects, winning in others, albeit pricey (I guess that's canon tax ).
p.41 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
vdo1, are you actually serious or is this just some blatant trolling?
Your criticism against Jordan really is uncalled for. His reviews and comparisons have always been objective and spot on. It's very clear that he's not "promoting" anything.
Let it go, cameras are just tools you know.
p.41 #20 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
A good rule of thumb: the more someone pays for something, the more vociferously they will defend that brand to the death on internet forums. Validation, and the brain chemicals associated with it, are a hell of a drug.
and here I can actually get to know the pros and cons of R5...
.
).