rscheffler wrote:
Like you said elsewhere, it must be a use-it-to-see-it situation because that measurably better sensor in the a7R5/SL3 compared to the a1, in respect to DR, sure doesn't look like much of an advantage on paper (at Photons to Photos).
But what do I know, I shoot with Canon.
Well, an iPhone 14 matches the M11 DR at ISO 6400 according to P2P.....
I have the cameras all here. Hopefully later this week I'll have side by side tests.
flash wrote:
Well, an iPhone 14 matches the M11 DR at ISO 6400 according to P2P.....
I have the cameras all here. Hopefully later this week I'll have side by side tests.
Gordon
One thing that I think gets lost in the paper sometimes is that not all manufacturers are playing with the same amount of light for their given ISO setting, so if an image requires a different amount of light for its "rated" ISO ... the gage might need to be re-calibrated a bit.
Seems to me that if a rig requires 1/3, 1/2, or 2/3 stop more light than its setting, is that really the setting , or if I feed it more light, does that inflate the DR by a similar amount ... well, you get the gist.
Many pieces to the puzzle on how diff mfr's / diff models approach things, and single test points on paper don't always reveal the whole story. Always interesting to see tests, etc. ... but, it's a tough gig to construct an ideal one that covers everything. Ultimately, the proof is in the pudding ... and different tastes, well ... you know.
flash wrote:
Then you buy one of the three excellent high res fast read out sensor cameras instead. ie: A1, Z8 or Z9.
Oh, and stop relying just on specs for the rest. The Sl3's IBIS is at least as good as the A7R5 and everyone I've shown both cameras to so far thinks the EVF's are the same. Don't forget the Nikons are using lower res EVF's and they're considerd *modern cameras*. And the A1 sensor is as old as the one in the SL3. You can't just compare on paper specs. DpReview tried this in another recent piece of clickbait bullshit. Pick them up and compare side by side in a decent store. Or rent them. That's the only way.
Personally, I have no idea why an aviation photographer would be shoooting L mount when the Sony A1 exists.
Planetwide wrote:
1/10 readout is a significant problem, as I photograph a lot of aviation. I had hoped that the SL3 would have AF capable of tracking fast moving aircraft at close range, head on. It does not. The readout speed will make the camera unusable for propeller driven aircraft. So this is an issue for me.
I will continue to use my R3 and future R1 for this purpose.
For me, this then relegates the SL3 to travel/street cam, but the above portrait is an illustrates the rolling shutter in mildly dynamic situations. It makes me wonder if the camera has a use case for anything with movement. As you said more MF like, but then this is a 35mm format camera, not medium format.
I can't help but wonder if the SL3 is basically an EVF M11, and no longer what the SL & SL2 were - which was very functional usable camera's.
, or if I feed it more light, does that inflate the DR by a similar amount ... well, you get the gist. 
