p.47 #2 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Jman13 wrote:
Have you actually used Pixel shift regularly in the field? I have. It's essentially unusable unless you want to spend huge amounts of time. Even for architecture...because the vibration of moving traffic is enough at 240MP to cause artifacting by the minute changes in camera position. It's 16 shots for the increase in real resolution, usually with a second between, and if one of them is off slightly, the merge is ruined. And you won't know until you get back at the computer because it doesn't do it in-camera...you have to use Imaging Edge, merge the RAW files, output a new RAW file and then begin work.
It is an edge case scenario (especially since the people who need 240 megapixel images are so rare that it's a vanishingly small group that would bother with the workflow hindrance for that anyway because there's no need when you have 60 megapixel single shot images.
I'm not sure why you are harping on pixel-shift so much. It is a fringe feature that is not used by many. It can yield very detailed images if you can get everything perfect, but those situations aren't all that common, and even where you can do it, it's a huge increase in time to process them for the rare situation that you need that level of detail. I'm struggling to find real world use case scenarios for 240 megapixel still life images. ...Show more →
So what is your proposed alternative to enhancing IQ? Stacking and/or pano? Are they any easier or better? Or are you going to declare those too as useless endeavors?
Aug 08, 2020 at 10:53 AM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.47 #3 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Eruditass wrote:
The IBIS numbers are based on a specific protocol that, while inflated, are directly comparable to other manufacturers numbers, which are inflated the same amount
i'd tell you to look on the official r5 website and see how many lenses canon actually claims were tested to cipa standards, but the canon website got hacked, lol: "the site is down and unavailable"
you'll have to take my word for it that they only listed one lens that was tested on the r5, to cipa standards.
beyond that, multiple reviewers have commented on r5/r6 ibis wobble:
p.47 #4 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
osv2 wrote:
i'd tell you to look on the official r5 website and see how many lenses canon actually claims were tested to cipa standards, but the canon website got hacked, lol: "the site is down and unavailable"
you'll have to take my word for it that they only listed one lens that was tested on the r5, to cipa standards.
beyond that, multiple reviewers have commented on r5/r6 ibis wobble:
Do you have a link to any wobble that is not wide angle?
Wide angle wobble is a known problem with every implementation of IBIS that I know of, as you're dealing with persepctive distortion and rotation. Even the 5-axis systems only use gyro rotation estimates as projects onto translations, as rotating around those axis would be resulting in the tilt-shift effect.
Aug 08, 2020 at 11:44 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.47 #5 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
osv2 wrote:
i shoot sports with the fe200-600, where is the canon 600mm superzoom? oh wait, they never made one with af, in the entire history of the company
I think they don't have such a superzoom, because they have always left that sort of lens to 3rd party makers and have instead focussed on the 600 f/4 lenses that are a stop and a third faster. If you want 600mm for sports shooting are you better off with a 600 (really more like 550 close in) Sony f/6.3 lens or a 600 f/4 Canon lens? If you buy an older Canon lens you can get a 600 f/4 for between $3,500 and $4,000. Where can you do that with Sony? You will be spending three times that much with Sony for a 600 f/4. Yeah, you will have to use an adapter, but it will work at least as well as it does and a DSLR--actually the IBIS will be a big help on mirrorless--and that stop and third aperture will let you shoot in a lot lower light. I don't see the superzoom as a bit win for Sony here, but maybe for your use. As always, YMMV.
p.47 #6 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
There is no R-mount 300 2.8. In fact no R-mount sports lenses at all!
If you are talking about adapting lenses, both Canon and Sony mirrorless bodies can adapt Canon EF-mount glass.
Aug 08, 2020 at 12:07 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.47 #7 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
vdo1 wrote:
So what is your proposed alternative to enhancing IQ? Stacking and/or pano? Are they any easier or better? Or are you going to declare those too as useless endeavors?
How about tilt/shift lenses for architecture? You can get a nice bump in IQ, without multiple shots that way and it works in a lot more conditions than pixel shift. Even a 40 something MP camera let's me print in great quality as big as I ever want. I don't need pixel shift to be able to print any bigger. Of course, YMMV.
Aug 08, 2020 at 12:08 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.47 #8 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
There is no R-mount 300 2.8. In fact no R-mount sports lenses at all!
If you are talking about adapting lenses, both Canon and Sony mirrorless bodies can adapt Canon EF-mount glass.
Yes, but there is a fantastic EF 300 f/2.8 IS that works wonderfully on a Canon R5 camera even if you have to use an adapter, so that is a lot better than anything that Sony has to offer (well accept if you adapted an A-mount 300 f/2.8 and spent 4 times as much money).
p.47 #9 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer wrote:
I think they don't have such a superzoom, because they have always left that sort of lens to 3rd party makers and have instead focussed on the 600 f/4 lenses that are a stop and a third faster. If you want 600mm for sports shooting are you better off with a 600 (really more like 550 close in) Sony f/6.3 lens or a 600 f/4 Canon lens? If you buy an older Canon lens you can get a 600 f/4 for between $3,500 and $4,000. Where can you do that with Sony? You will be spending three times that much with Sony for a 600 f/4. Yeah, you will have to use an adapter, but it will work at least as well as it does and a DSLR--actually the IBIS will be a big help on mirrorless--and that stop and third aperture will let you shoot in a lot lower light. I don't see the superzoom as a bit win for Sony here, but maybe for your use. As always, YMMV....Show more →
Both Canon and Sony mirrorless bodies can use Canon EF glass, if you want to use old cheap legacy mount glass. Sony can also use old cheap Minolta and Sony dSLR and SLR glass. So what?
p.47 #10 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Yes, but there is a fantastic EF 300 f/2.8 IS that works wonderfully on a Canon R5 camera, so that is a lot better than anything that Sony has to offer (well accept if you adapted an A-mount 300 f/2.8 and spent 4 times as much money).
I'm willing to bet the A92 with that lens works better than the R5 does. And it won't overheat and stop working either, nor will the battery run out in a few minutes.
Sony also gives you choices about using dozens of new designed-for-mirrorless third-party lenses. Canon doesn't.
Aug 08, 2020 at 12:12 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.47 #11 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
lightskyland wrote:
Both Canon and Sony mirrorless bodies can use Canon EF glass, if you want to use old cheap legacy mount glass. Sony can also use old cheap Minolta and Sony dSLR and SLR glass. So what?
Both Canon and Sony can use Canon EF glass, but that glass does not perform the same on the two cameras. The whole point that you are ignoring is that EF glass works a lot better on Canon RF cameras than it does on Sony cameras. The reason is simple Canon knows the lens protocols for all Canon EF lenses. People who make adapters for Sony do not know those protocols so EF lenses on Sony cameras simply do not work as well and EF lenses on Canon RF cameras. If you can acknowledge that simple fact then there is not point in having a discussion. You have simply demonstrated you will not acknowledge any weakness in the Sony system at all.
Aug 08, 2020 at 12:14 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.47 #12 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
I'm willing to bet the A92 with that lens works better than the R5 does. And it won't overheat and stop working either, nor will the battery run out in a few minutes.
Sony also gives you choices about using dozens of new designed-for-mirrorless third-party lenses. Canon doesn't.
What is the third party 300 f/2.8 designed for mirrorless that I can use with my Sony A9? And I will take you up on that bet any time. Canon EF lenses on Sony bodies are limited by the reverse engineered adapter. Set up the test and I think you will see that you are wrong. As Tim Gangloff reports of the previous page after using both extensively, "Well for me the difference is the Canon to Canon adapter works pretty seamlessly. The Sony adapters (metabones etc) only partially work and in my experience were worthless for fast action." Have you used the R5 and actually compared Canon EF lens performance to the performance of those same lenses on the A9 (II)? If you haven't, then you either need to cite someone who has that supports your position or admit you are making bets without any knowledge.
p.47 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer wrote:
How about tilt/shift lenses for architecture? You can get a nice bump in IQ, without multiple shots that way and it works in a lot more conditions than pixel shift. Even a 40 something MP camera let's me print in great quality as big as I ever want. I don't need pixel shift to be able to print any bigger. Of course, YMMV.
E-mount has much higher quality lenses for landscape and architecture than Canon's T/S lenses. So much so that you're better off using them and focus stacking versus doing a tilt / shift. And of course you can use the Canon tilt/shift lenses on Sony cameras with an adapter - exactly the same way you use them on an R5.
Aug 08, 2020 at 12:17 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.47 #14 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
lightskyland wrote:
E-mount has much higher quality lenses for landscape and architecture than Canon's T/S lenses. So much so that you're better off using them and focus stacking versus doing a tilt / shift. And of course you can use the Canon tilt/shift lenses on Sony cameras with an adapter - exactly the same way you use them on an R5.
Please don't hijack another discussion and take it in a different direction. That question was about what could you do to increase performance besides pixel shift. Tilt/shift is an obvious answer and it work in some situations in which stacking will not (when the conditions are changing fairly rapidly)--exactly the conditions in which pixel shift will not work.
p.47 #15 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer wrote:
Please don't hijack another discussion and take it in a different direction. That question was about what could you do to increase performance besides pixel shift. Tilt/shift is an obvious answer and it work in some situations in which stacking will not (when the conditions are changing fairly rapidly)--exactly the conditions in which pixel shift will not work.
No, tilt/shift does not work when conditions are changing rapidly. It's very slow and time consuming especially to do it well. Focus stacking is much faster than getting the focal plane properly adjusted for the scene and dialed in.
What does work is higher megapixel cameras with better dynamic range (not masked by RAW noise reduction like the R5) and no resolution-robbing antialiasing filter.
p.47 #16 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
osv2 wrote:
i shoot sports with the fe200-600, where is the canon 600mm superzoom? oh wait, they never made one with af, in the entire history of the company
People choose a 300 f/2.8 over a slow super-zoom to isolate players on a crowded field, and also to shoot indoors or night-time games or winter sports. Of course, in theory you can shoot sports with any lens. Not knocking your skill at all, but I shot the 2017 Vans in Hawaii (not a paid shoot, was there on vacation) with an 80D and the Sigma 150-600. The AF worked very well..
Aug 08, 2020 at 12:26 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.47 #17 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
lightskyland wrote:
No, tilt/shift does not work when conditions are changing rapidly. It's very slow and time consuming especially to do it well. Focus stacking is much faster than getting the focal plane properly adjusted for the scene and dialed in.
What does work is higher megapixel cameras with better dynamic range (not masked by RAW noise reduction like the R5) and no resolution-robbing antialias filter.
Really? You obviously have not used tilt/shift. It does take from a few seconds to a couple of minutes to set up, but you capture the image in one exposure so if you can implement any sort of reasonable planning it works great for changing conditions because the capture is one exposure. Focus stacking is multiple exposures which of course can not be made simultaneously so changes make combining those exposures difficult to impossible depending on the speed of the changes. That you can't understand that demonstrates your lack of knowledge.
And yes higher DR and more resolution if you want to print bigger and even dropping the AA filter for a high MP camera (a camera below about 40MP, however, I want the AA filter to decrease moire) are all good things, but that doesn't mean the tilt/shift doesn't have some unique advantages especially for architecture. That you can't acknowledge that again demonstrates you complete lack of ability to recognize any limitations or weaknesses in the Sony system.
p.47 #18 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer wrote:
How about tilt/shift lenses for architecture? You can get a nice bump in IQ, without multiple shots that way and it works in a lot more conditions than pixel shift. Even a 40 something MP camera let's me print in great quality as big as I ever want. I don't need pixel shift to be able to print any bigger. Of course, YMMV.
Tilt/shift is addressing a different issue. It only enhances IQ versus an image taken at tilt / shift 0 then digitally processed for "perspective correction". If you don't need to do such corrections then it doesn't enhance IQ vs a standard lens (measured as apparent sharpness, noise, color quality).
Also, nothing stops one to use tilt/shift lenses in conjunction with pixel shift or stacking (and btw I know of two flavors of stacking, one is just an average of multiple images at same lens settings, and one usually reffered as "focus stacking" where you change the focusing distance between shots; they usually have rather different purposes; I was reffering to the first one in my previous post).
Finally, purchasing a tilt/shift lens is expensive and justified only for rather specific subjects. An extra option in the menu saying "pixel shift" or "smooth reflections" have little cost and more universal applications. BTW Sony please bring "back smooth reflections" in some form....
p.47 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer wrote:
Really? You obviously have not used tilt/shift.
I used a large format camera for several years. I absolutely have used tilt and shift. And it's faster with a 4x5 camera to get accurate tilt and shift than with a dSLR lens with fiddly knobs. If conditions are changing rapidly it's far, far faster to dial in a few focus changes for stacking than it is to change tilt, shift and focus for even one image.
so if you can implement any sort of reasonable planning
When I photograph I balance sky, clouds, light and foreground in my composition. That means I need to act quickly to changing conditions in the sky and clouds and adjust my composition. Whoops - just blew up all my careful work adjusting the tilt and shift! This is why I stopped using LF gear.
That you can't acknowledge that again demonstrates you complete lack of ability to recognize any limitations or weaknesses in the Sony system.
More ad-hominem nonsense. The R system doesn't have any tilt-shift lenses anyway. And people have been using tilt-shift lenses with Sony mirrorless cameras since 2010. In fact they bought Sony cameras to get better results out of their Canon T/S lenses.
p.47 #20 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Speaking of those long white lenses. I bet that any self respecting pro covering sport events would be using the 1DX not the R5. Simply because they can't risk the battery going flat or the camera overheating and shutting down 15 minutes into the game.
The R5 is as un-pro as they could possibly have made it. I think even the wedding guys will avoid it other than as a secondary camera. To be kept in a thermal bag until actually needed.
