RoamingScott
Online
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6 | |
Jman13 wrote:
vdo1 wrote:
Jman13 wrote:
The fanboying in this thread is disconcerting for FM. So many hyperbolic statements about drawbacks being "failures," and Sony just "crushing" Canon.
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.
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.
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.
|
