p.8 #1 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
IndyFab wrote:
After viewing your Instagram page, I can understand and appreciate your statement from the world and type of shooting you do . BTW.... nice shooting and processed images !!
However I believe many sports and wildlife shooters would appreciate more MP than the A9 & II provide for more headroom to crop in post.like the A7rIV provides. Both Landscape & Sport & WL shooters would appreciate less high iso noise when using the A7rIV. They are not always using flash like wedding and portrait shooters use..
Nah, landscape guys will usually go after bigger DR and to alesser extent, color fidelity.
p.8 #2 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
dakel wrote:
Agree with Fred above. The R5 could potentially act as a single body replacement for the Sony A9 + A7RIV. This is what I currently own and I'm sure I'm not alone in this. The A9 for sports and the A7RIV for landscape. My gut feeling is that I will still prefer the A9 for sports over the R5 because of the blackout free viewfinder and the faster sensor scan times. I shoot my daughters Volleyball and that ball moves very fast and looked pretty wonky when I shot it the Fuji X-T3 with electronic shutter.
That's to be determined in the hands of many early adopter competent shooters here on FM ..
What everyone would like for a long time, one camera that does it all.
p.8 #5 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
I think the a7IV have a good chance to keep the reign, even if they keep it under $2k I can't see why Sony wouldn't be able to easily match most of the R6 specs
now the a7sIII might face a tougher challenge, they would have to further drop the a7rIV pricing to accommodate the SIII or they'll do their pricing and trust their specs to lure out the R5 consumers, and we know just the fact or not having 8k people will pile up on them
p.8 #6 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
IndyFab wrote:
After viewing your Instagram page, I can understand and appreciate your statement from the world and type of shooting you do . BTW.... nice shooting and processed images !!
However I believe many sports and wildlife shooters would appreciate more MP than the A9 & II provide for more headroom to crop in post.like the A7rIV provides. Both Landscape & Sport & WL shooters would appreciate less high iso noise when using the A7rIV. They are not always using flash like wedding and portrait shooters use.
Thank you. The needs differ, for sure. The sweet spot for me was the 36MP the D810 offered. However, I read the rumor, that a future firmware update would allow the A7riv to shoot in an s-raw mode giving you smaller MP files. This is something I would like to have for higher MP cameras to adjust to shooting needs flexibly.
The stacked sensor in the A9 is said to be very expensive and difficult to manufacture. It comes with a read noise penalty at lower isos, too. Nevertheless, I wouldn't mind a 36MP A9iii to be honest, if possible not much more expensive.
p.8 #7 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
arbitrage wrote:
I have a preorder in for an R5 and yesterday was about 50/50 between keeping or cancelling. After a full day and a sleep on it, I'm probably 90/10 towards cancelling at least till September when the 100-500 is released.
Things that I want from the R5:
1) Better ergonomics IMO than the A9II/A7RIV...more substantial to hold onto, nicer curves, top plate LCD, nicer wheels
2) Better card slots and buffer clearing. Sure the Sony buffers are deeper but I don't need 230 shot buffers no matter what I shoot. What I need is a camera that instantly clears the buffer like my Nikon's do with their XQD cards. I'm fairly certain the R5 will clear its buffer to CFe instantly and the buffer is still deeper than I need (180 mechanical, 83 e-shutter, and even 87 mechanical just to SD)
3) 45 @ 12....I've owned 45 at 10 (D850) and I'm always chasing pixels so 45 @ 12 is really impressive.
4) Bird eye-AF...maybe this is something that will help but the A9 seems to be uncanny in nailing the head area anyways that targeting an eye isn't really that critical...I think that the most useful situation I have for this will be with the larger BIF where near wing focus often ruins shots...those types of birds should be where the eye-AF actually works for BIF (its not going to work on a swallows) and I think it will greatly improve keepers by ignoring the near wing as the bird gets large in frame...I'm thinking herons, eagles and even sometimes ducks but remains to be seen if it works for ducks. The seagull video is impressive but it is a wide-angle lens, it is a black eye on white head and they are hovering more than flying. Although holding the eye on those seagulls with the rapid wing flapping and the jerky movement looked pretty impressive.
Things that have me 90% ready to cancel preorder:
1) Lenses....the only RF lens that makes sense for my type of photography is the 100-500...well that is late September and I have nothing to use till then unless I buy a used 400DOII to adapt. That was my ideal lens on R5 until I read between the lines in some of the press release and it seems to imply that the really fast AF will need the 12-pin connection of the RF glass. So to really get top performance I need to wait at least for the 100-500.
2) Price in Canada is just pushing my limits a little bit once I consider lenses, TCs, grips, batteries, CFe cards etc. If I still had my 400DOII around (that was the last big lens I sold) I'd be much more likely to just get the R5 and try it out with that but I don't really feel like dropping $5500 CAD on a used lens just to see how good it is adapted.
To buy an R5, 100-500, 1.4TC, grip, extra battery and a 128GB CFe card I'm looking at $10,670 CAD And that is just an f/7.1 zoom lens in the end.
3) 45 at 20 even more so but I only need/use 20FPS for fast swallows, kestrels and the occasional other thing I think is going to be a fleeting moment...all of those things are very fast and even if the sensor scan speed is as fast as 1DXIII or even a bit faster, I don't think it will work for the things I actually need 20FPS for.
And of course the last and most important point is I don't see how it will improve my photography over the amazing A9II, 200-600 and 600GM I already own....when it comes down to it, I just want the R5 to test it out...not that it will really do anything for me that I can't already achieve.
Even if you rent one, there is no RF super-tele lens for you to play. Yes, you can always adapt EF lenses but why leave a system to another with adapted lenses? Canon mirrorless is still an evolving system.
I'd say when in doubt, just stay put and continue shooting with your proven gear. It's being working for you, why change?
Soon enough, Canon will have a mature RF line and fine-tuned bodies. Hopefully Sony won't be sleeping at the wheel and continue innovating as well. At least wait and see what Sony brings with the A7 IV. Very likely it will have a 9.44m dot EVF and perhaps improvements in AF and FPS which you really care.
Something else to keep in mind is image quality. Is Canon really challenging Sony in terms of dynamic range and SNR? I don't know but very likely not.
p.8 #9 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Fred Miranda wrote:
Even if you rent one, there is no RF super-tele lens for you to play. Yes, you can always adapt EF lenses but why leave a system to another if you would have to adapt lenses to it? Canon mirrorless is still an evolving system.
When in doubt, stay put and continue shooting with your proven gear. It's being working for you, why change?
Soon enough, Canon will have a mature RF line and fine-tuned bodies. Hopefully Sony won't be sleeping at the wheel and continue innovating as well. At least wait and see what Sony brings with the A7 IV. Very likely it will have a 9.44m dot EVF and perhaps improvements in AF and FPS which you really care.
Something else to keep in mind is image quality. Is Canon really challenging Sony in terms of dynamic range and SNR? I don't know but very likely not....Show more →
"Something else to keep in mind is image quality. Is Canon really challenging Sony in terms of dynamic range and SNR? I don't know but very likely not." 👍🏼 And if Canon did manage to squeeze ahead, how long before Sony trumps that ? Gentlepeople, "start your engines"
As others have mentioned, I am now looking for a beefy A7rIV firmware update.
p.8 #11 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
patotts wrote:
I think many of us eagerly awaited the release of the Canon R5 (some perhaps even the R6) and I am curious what are your initial reactions to the specs/details?
The jury is still out on performance and IQ but, as a Sony user, what do you like or dislike with the new Canon release? Anyone thinking of giving it a try?
I won't give it a try. Been down the Canon path, won't go back. The specs of both cameras are great. I am not a video person, so the amazing video specs don't have much import to me. I love the high-res viewfinder, the cfexpress card, swivel screen, the ergonomics, and menus. The body sizes are a bummer. The inevitable EVF partial-blackout is going to be a drag. I hope these releases put pressure on Sony. What these releases tell me is that Canon is going all-in on mirrorless sooner rather than later. That said, I will happily keep my A9's blackout-free EVF and AF system.
"Fred Miranda wrote:
The new Canon bodies offers almost 3 extra stops of compensation. How did they do that?
Petegh wrote:
By specifically designing lenses with larger image circles; a larger lens mount; and from a patent I recall seeing, they are using a slightly different technology than others..."
Yes, I thought I remembered that Sony in extending their IBIS had to cope with their relatively smallish lens mount, presumably because of the image circle of the lenses. There are almost certainly ways of overcoming this, as they have already extended IBIS in the past, but it is a possible difficulty and constraint for their engineers that will bear watching in terms of their IBIS improvements in subsequent models and how well they are able to compete with Canon on this feature.
For me, the R5's expanded IBIS is the main attraction and advantage that camera has over the Sony line (which, I hasten to add, has advantages and attractions of its own).
p.8 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
httivals wrote:
Whether Nikon, Sony, or Canon, it's primarily about the lenses.
I need tamron to branch out, nothing out there gives me small, high quality, affordable lenses (priority in that order). If there were 6 lenses on the canon system, I'de start switching, the Tamron f2.8 trinity, 24 f1.4 native, 35 f2.8, and 28-200. Those are all the lenses that I absolutely do NOT want to live without.
p.8 #14 · 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.
That's a big target. If they can do the same with feeding swallows (which is to say, super small, super fast, super erratic), I would say Canon is where they need to be. I can get feeding swallow shots with my A9. I am confident that Sony has the advantage with their stacked sensors.
p.8 #15 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
scrappydog wrote:
That's a big target. If they can do the same with feeding swallows (which is to say, super small, super fast, super erratic), I would say Canon is where they need to be. I can get feeding swallow shots with my A9. I am confident that Sony has the advantage with their stacked sensors.
p.8 #16 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Holger wrote:
We need to be careful here:
1) There is a sometimes big difference when using mechanical and E-shutter. Just look at A9 vs. A9(es) and 1dxiii vs. 1dxiii(es)
2) The A9ii wasn't measured in mechanical shutter mode as far as I know (need to look that up again, but I think I read it), so curves should even be minimally higher, similarly to A9 vs. A9ev
3) The stacked sensor causes a low-iso penalty in read noise This was improved clearly form A9 to A9ii, but is design specific.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Keep in mind that graph for the 1DX III DR is for the mechanical shutter. In electronic shutter mode the 1DX III (and presumably the R6) takes a big hit in low ISO DR. In fact, in electronic mode across the whole ISO range the 1DX III never exceeds the A9 II. Further from ISO 640 and higher the A9 II has higher DR at every ISO than the 1DX III in mechanical shutter or electronic shutter, and these aren't sensor with top low ISO performance and really make a lot more sense when you need higher ISOs. So, IMO, for what these cameras are built for (i.e., speed and high ISO shooting) the A9 II sensor clearly is stronger especially when using a silent shutter, not to mention that the fast sensor scan (i.e., read out) of the A9 II is going to facilitate better AF and a better view finder experience. Here is the graph you posted with the 1 DX III in electronic shutter mode included:
With regard to the Canon claim that R5 having 1 stop better DR than the Canon R, we will have to wait to see if that claim holds up -- such claims when cameras come out often don't. Further if the claims does hold up will the improvement only be at base ISO where the Canon R is relatively challenged. Even if the Canon R5 get a full stop DR improvement at base ISO, it still won't be ahead of the Sony's and especially the A7r III will have better performance at higher ISOs. So, such an improvement would be more about Canon coming very close to catching up with the Sony sensors, but not surpassing them in any way.
Edit: the link from photons to photos is broken so a screen shot of the graph is posted below and it looks like Holger and I were responding along similar lines at the same time....Show more →
Thanks guys....Good point about the e-shutter of the 1DXIII ES. That is a significant change from mechanical. If we assume the R6 will have similar results then that is a handicap using the R6 in silent mode...something I would do a lot of to not scare birds off!!
Anyways my R5 preorder is being cancelled as I type so I will hold put in Sony land until the 100-500 comes out late September and then re-evaluate after we know a lot more about the camera and what compromises it has with EF glass...because ideally I'd rather look at getting a 400DOII or 400f/2.8ISIII for it if I could but don't want to be investing in EF glass if it hampers AF and/or EVF performance...we already know for certain it hampers IS but with long lenses it seems the IBIS isn't doing much anyways so that may not be a big deal.
p.8 #17 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
I honestly have zero interest to even read the specs. I’ll never go backwards to Canon or Nikon for that matter unless it was extremely significant. This is not even close to that. Sorry folks can’t help you here. I would need earth shattering tech.
p.8 #18 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Holger wrote:
Thank you. The needs differ, for sure. The sweet spot for me was the 36MP the D810 offered. However, I read the rumor, that a future firmware update would allow the A7riv to shoot in an s-raw mode giving you smaller MP files. This is something I would like to have for higher MP cameras to adjust to shooting needs flexibly.
The stacked sensor in the A9 is said to be very expensive and difficult to manufacture. It comes with a read noise penalty at lower isos, too. Nevertheless, I wouldn't mind a 36MP A9iii to be honest, if possible not much more expensive. ...Show more →
p.8 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Charlie N wrote:
I need tamron to branch out, nothing out there gives me small, high quality, affordable lenses (priority in that order). If there were 6 lenses on the canon system, I'de start switching, the Tamron f2.8 trinity, 24 f1.4 native, 35 f2.8, and 28-200. Those are all the lenses that I absolutely do NOT want to live without.
A closed mount system is similar to what Nintendo was doing before the Playstation. Sony came in with that and had an open mount. Anyone could burn it on cds rather than paying nintendo to put it on their limited cartridges. The closed mount is terrible for consumers, and the lack of third party lenses is a direct result of that decision. Sony is just using the same strategy that it did in videogames and it is working well. Actually with the playstation 1, the downside was lack of good first party games. THat is not a problem with the Sony E Mount.
p.8 #20 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Steve Spencer wrote:
I think the thing to keep in mind is that for years Canon divided their 1D line into high resolution cameras (1DS) and high speed cameras (1D) and most recently the 1DX for speed and the 5DR for high resolution. Canon took a very different strategy here and has a high resolution and high speed body and they didn't stop there they added ground breaking video. This camera does a lot and it does it quite well, but as you would expect in a camera that does so much there are cameras that are better at individual things.
As a high resolution camera the Sony A7r IV has more resolution and we will see when the sensor is tested but I am going to guess it will have better dynamic range (DR) as well at base ISO and probably a bit better color sensitivity. If you really want high resolution the Fuji GFX 100 is going to clearly be superior, and even the Nikon Z7 which has the same resolution with its base ISO of 64 will probably have a bit better IQ, and even the Panasonic S1R will compete well as a high resolution camera. Still the R5 for high resolution work is going to be a great camera. It might be limited by weak DR, or less than optimal color sensitivity, but I don't think it will be. So if you just need a high resolution camera and don't need a high speed camera there will be better options, but none of those options will do the other things that the R5 can do.
As a high speed camera the Sony A9 (II) has a better electronic shutter (but not quite as good of a mechanical shutter) and probably has better AF as well (we will see as the R5 is tested more). There isn't any other mirrorless camera than can compete with the R5 for a high speed camera. Sure Canon's own 1DX III and Nikon's D6 will still be at least very competitive DSLRs for high speed work and in some ways better as a sports camera, but none of these other high speed cameras have anywhere near the resolution of the R5. So if you want high speed and high resolution (as many wildlife photogs will want) there really is nothing like this R5.
Then there is video. Right now this R5 has the best specs of pretty much any camera designed for stills, but if Sony brings out a successor to the A7S II, that camera might well beat it in some important features. I don't expect such a camera to be 8K like the R5, but I would think such a camera would have a very fast sensor scan time (i.e., readout) and may be able to match the R5 in everything except being 8K and have less rolling shutter effect. The successor to the A7S II, would then for many people's purposes be slightly ahead for video, but if you want a camera that is great for stills and video it will be hard to beat the R5.
What is really impressive about the R5, however, is that it can do all of these things so well. It is a great high resolution camera, a great high speed camera, and a great stills camera for video. If you only need one of these things you still might be better off with a different camera, but if you want 2 or all 3 of these things it is going to be a very compelling option.
Personally, I don't need 2 or more of these things in the same camera, so this camera really isn't for me, but I can see why a lot of people are excited about it and Canon finally has the high level camera to go with it high level lenses and that too is a really good thing for the new R system....Show more →
) and I think it will greatly improve keepers by ignoring the near wing as the bird gets large in frame...I'm thinking herons, eagles and even sometimes ducks but remains to be seen if it works for ducks. The seagull video is impressive but it is a wide-angle lens, it is a black eye on white head and they are hovering more than flying. Although holding the eye on those seagulls with the rapid wing flapping and the jerky movement looked pretty impressive.
And that is just an f/7.1 zoom lens in the end.
