# Industry News: Sony Introduces the High-resolution A7R IV with World’s First 61.0 MP Back-illuminated, Full-frame Image Sensor



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 16, 2019)

> *Press Release:*
> *NEW YORK — July 16, 2019 —* Sony Electronics Inc. today announced the latest addition to its acclaimed Alpha 7R series full-frame mirrorless camera line-up: the extremely versatile, powerful Alpha 7R IV (model ILCE-7RM4).
> Sony’s highest resolution full-frame camera ever, the new Alpha 7R IV delivers stunning image quality with high resolution and wide dynamic range while maintaining outstanding focusing performance, high-speed continuous shooting and much, much more.
> “We are continuing to drive innovation, break boundaries and redefine the expectations of digital camera performance,” said Neal Manowitz, deputy president of Imaging Product and Solutions Americas at Sony Electronics. “The new Alpha 7R IV combines medium format-level image quality with high-speed shooting, extremely fast focusing and an extensive list of upgrades to design, connectivity and usability. This will allow professional photographers, videographers and all other types of creators...



Continue reading...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 16, 2019)

Looks interesting. Moderate changes from the last one but will probably be as popular.


----------



## Tahoejr (Jul 16, 2019)

Canon said they would be the most aggressive camera company in terms of mirror-less development, but Sony certainly isn't taking a wait and see mode. Hopefully the new Canon RF models will be sooner than 2020


----------



## criscokkat (Jul 16, 2019)

Maybe Sony fans will stop harping about video (little chance, I know) when Canon introduces non-crop 4k/30fps to the pro models of R. One notable thing about the new camera is that while the sensor is more megapixels the video capabilities didn't actually improve, except for getting rid of pixel binning. So in fact Canon has the ability to improve over the Sony in these areas. I don't know if Canon will get better DR than the Sony, but if it gets to 13 or 14 stops of range it's close enough. 

It'll also be interesting to see if canon rolls out something like pixel shifting on their version of this camera.


----------



## Cryve (Jul 16, 2019)

As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.

sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.

i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/


----------



## 6degrees (Jul 16, 2019)

Nothing else attracts me more than Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L, and Canon RF 16-28mm F2 L.

Basically Canon RF F1.2 primes and F2 zooms are much more important, for pro level photography/equipment in my opinion, than anything else in mirrorless industry. Lenses are much more important than bodies. Canon R body is behind for sure and it will catch up. But if the lens mount has flaw, it is going to stay there for 30 years.

The only thing about Canon RF lenses that bothers me is the prices. Cheaper than Zeiss Otus, Leica M, I know. But still too much.


----------



## Cochese (Jul 16, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/


I'm not sure about your lens choice, Sony doesn't have much to offer price-wise that Canon doesn't have. Least of all, the Sigma 150-600 is sub $1k on all platforms. So that's one thing you needn't worry about too much. The rest of it is just a camera body. If you need the Sony, get it, but if not, wait?


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 16, 2019)

I finally see a camera that will make me an awesome photographer and turn me into a "pro" !!!!


----------



## Cryve (Jul 16, 2019)

Cochese said:


> I'm not sure about your lens choice, Sony doesn't have much to offer price-wise that Canon doesn't have. Least of all, the Sigma 150-600 is sub $1k on all platforms. So that's one thing you needn't worry about too much. The rest of it is just a camera body. If you need the Sony, get it, but if not, wait?


Currently on the 80d and sigma 150-600 sport. the 80d was nice for starting out but now i want something more professional. I want maximum reach because its often difficult to get close to subjects.
for the last two years i was waiting for the 7d iii but i changed my mind along the way. i basicaly want the reach of an aps-c but also the good iso and ability to blur the background of a full frame (for when i can get close). so a high mp ff is suited best.

For composition i am used to having a lot of freedom with the 80d, but on the 5dsr the focusing points are all clumbed in the middle. thats why i need a mirrorless ff with high mp.
sonys offering is basicaly exactly what i want. good reach, good iso, good fps, good tracking.


i hope the canon eos high mp model can offer something similar, but im not sure. i hope so tho

PS: and im not a noob who thinks he will be pro with a better camera. i think im already doing a decent job and just want features that match the efforts that i put in. all animals in the wild:


----------



## djack41 (Jul 16, 2019)

Big deal, Sony. Canon up-staged you with the awesome new Powershot and exciting lens cap technology.


----------



## albron00 (Jul 16, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/


I've been with Canon for years: from 500d to 5dM3 and I like them a lot.
For the last 3 years I had couple of a7II and now a7r3. I love it. 
Do I need 60+ megapixels?? Probably not.


----------



## dude (Jul 16, 2019)

Canon is falling behind. Sony moves forward at a crazy pace. What will the ILC market look like in five years? I can't even imagine.


----------



## tron (Jul 16, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/


You could have Nikon 500 5.6PF with D500 and D850.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 16, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/



I have exactly the same requirements and Sony seems to be the best choice. Can get this 60MP camera and have 200-1000mm from 61MP to 22MP. 
Basically replaces the 7D2 with better reach and better image quality. Can also add a A6300/6400 for bargain backup which fits in a very small place..


----------



## fox40phil (Jul 16, 2019)

Sounds awesome!!! 

But what I really don't understand..why don't lower the res. in the Sony camers in the body! 
I m often using with my 5DIV only 17MP.. or sometimes less! I have also done this with my 5DII (22 & 10MP)! This is a feature I dont want to miss!


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 16, 2019)

6degrees said:


> Nothing else attracts me more than Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L, and Canon RF 16-28mm F2 L.
> 
> Basically Canon RF F1.2 primes and F2 zooms are much more important, in my opinion, than anything else in mirrorless industry. Lenses are much more important than bodies. Canon R body is behind for sure and it will catch up. But if the lens mount has flaw, it is going to stay there for 30 years.
> 
> The only thing about Canon RF lenses that bothers me is prices.


16-28 is is rumored and why so important over a 2.8 15-35 is??


----------



## 6degrees (Jul 16, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> 16-28 is is rumored and why so important over a 2.8 15-35 is??



Larger aperture. I only see values of larger aperture lenses for pro level photography/equipment.


----------



## docsmith (Jul 16, 2019)

I keep digging the hole I am in with Canon deeper and deeper....I just picked up an EF 85 f/1.4 IS in that refurbished sale.

I am really looking forward to it!


----------



## MayaTlab (Jul 16, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> One notable thing about the new camera is that while the sensor is more megapixels the video capabilities didn't actually improve, except for getting rid of pixel binning. So in fact Canon has the ability to improve over the Sony in these areas.



The lack of pixel binning is a major improvement as it means that the sensor readout speed has increased despite the increase in megapixels. The A7RIII was already twice faster than the A7RII. 
Canon has a lot of catching up to do when it comes to readout speeds and all the more so for high megapixels sensors.


----------



## mpb001 (Jul 16, 2019)

I am sure that it will be s great camera, but I still like Canon ergonomics and the file size of my 5DIV. I really don’t need or want 61 MP. I am sure Canon will probably surpass this Sony with even more MP, but other than having the ability to crop with this many MP, the usefulness of extremely high MP is questionable. I do like 90 % of my cropping in-camera. I rarely crop a native image.


----------



## snappy604 (Jul 16, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I finally see a camera that will make me an awesome photographer and turn me into a "pro" !!!!




don't buy that hype.. it's the camera grip that determines if your pictures are PRO or not.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 16, 2019)

Sony are making it tough. Canon have one more year for me to at least catchup if not surpass in some areas. The DR gap is getting too large to ignore for my landscape and Astro work. The focus system, IBIS, eye detect and focus coverage gap is also getting too great to ignore for my wildlife work. I don’t currently care about video. 

Items keeping me in the Canon camp are down to lenses (I have over 20k invested in EF that is now at risk due to RF), weather sealing, handling, menu system/learning curve and CPS. 

It guts me that Canon has thrown away 2019 in my book. All the while Sony has been catching up in lenses and distancing themselves in the other key areas. Canon, I am rooting for you but it is time to show the goods.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 16, 2019)

tron said:


> You could have Nikon 500 5.6PF with D500 and D850.


Nikon does have some real pluses. But, it does have some serious minuses. Firstly, the 500/5.6 is back ordered if you want it, and secondly, my most used lens is the 100-400mm zoom and Nikon has no acceptable for me equivalent. The Sony knock-off 100-400mm is the nearest equivalent. During the meanwhile, I’ll soldier on with the 5DSR, it still for most of what I do will not be significantly outclassed by the Sony, but I would love to have that A9 AF, 10 fps and buffer, and to be able to switch to an APS-C mode for smaller files.


----------



## drama (Jul 16, 2019)

RobbieHat said:


> It guts me that Canon has thrown away 2019 in my book. All the while Sony has been catching up in lenses and distancing themselves in the other key areas. Canon, I am rooting for you but it is time to show the goods.



You work in landscape, astro and nature photography? Tell us your secrets, oh wise one!
Canon have hardly "thrown away" 2019. They've announced and released a ton of RF mount lenses in readiness for a new body, and we're only six months in. If you don't want to wait, Sony just announced a 60mpx 10fps camera for your nature/astro/landscape fast moving work. I guess you're the target market! Either way, I'm sure Canon will heed your demands and immediately release all their R&D for fear of you leaving.


----------



## Tom W (Jul 16, 2019)

Well, they know that Canon's about to put out a high-mpx mirrorless body, and they wanted to get the jump on the competition.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 16, 2019)

Cryve said:


> i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.



The 5Ds and 5Dsr are available at killer prices right now, so low that you could reasonably buy one just to hold you over until Canon releases its high resolution R. The big question is whether or not the high rez R will also be a fast shooter (8-10 fps).

While I tip my hat to Sony on taking the resolution title, 50mp vs 61mp is not going to make a large difference in ability to crop. You'll get the usual chorus that the 5Ds/sr are not "high ISO bodies" but I can post samples all day long to objectively prove the opposite. Right now there's not even 1ev of difference at high ISO between the best and worst shipping FF sensors. If you look at per pixel noise the 5Ds/sr is in the lower half of that bunch. Total image noise, the upper half and I would argue near the top.

The big differences are 10 vs 5 fps, and AF. Having spent a lot of stick time with an 8 fps and a 5 fps body side-by-side, my desire for fps has cooled. I noticed no loss in my ability to capture the decisive moment. That may be related to my shooting style. If you truly need a higher frame rate and high resolution, you have to wait and see what Canon's high resolution R is like. Or go with a D850 or A7R IV.

With regard to AF: I have had stick time on an A9 and came away with mixed feelings about the AF. Intelligent tracking is cool, but when it misses it misses for a significant gap and there's little you can do until it finds its footing again. With a 5Ds it's up to me to keep an AF point on the target. But as long as I do the AF is fast and confident with perhaps a single off frame here or there.

There is no perfect camera and if the A7R IV squarely addresses your desires then go for it. If it doesn't quite hit the mark then see what Canon comes up with in the next iteration of R bodies, perhaps with a 5Ds/sr to hold you over.

One note: Sony is saying the A7R IV has better weather sealing. They've said this with every generation. Their repeat failures here is one of the things that has kept me from giving Sony a shot. If you shoot in anything other than dry weather, I would caution you to wait and see if the A7R IV can actually resist rain and snow. I was torn between the 5Ds and the A7R III right up until the test came out that showed the A7R III leaking like a submarine screen door. For me that killed Sony as a choice _regardless of any other technology or consideration._ It's ridiculous that Sony can't get this right. 

Last time rain hit I was shooting the 5Ds + 16-35 f/4L IS and I didn't even pause or hesitate, I just kept hiking and shooting.


----------



## tron (Jul 16, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Nikon does have some real pluses. But, it does have some serious minuses. Firstly, the 500/5.6 is back ordered if you want it, and secondly, my most used lens is the 100-400mm zoom and Nikon has no acceptable for me equivalent. The Sony knock-off 100-400mm is the nearest equivalent. During the meanwhile, I’ll soldier on with the 5DSR, it still for most of what I do will not be significantly outclassed by the Sony, but I would love to have that A9 AF, 10 fps and buffer, and to be able to switch to an APS-C mode for smaller files.


Yes 5DsR and 100-400II is a killer combination. I was just answering to the other post. I am currently OK! 5DSR, 5DIV and 7DII with 100-400II 400DOII and 500II. All I was saying is that someone who starts from scratch may consider other options. Not a fan of 200-500 though so for me it would be either the 500PF which you correctly said is not available or ... Canon!


----------



## Trey T (Jul 16, 2019)

geez ... 10fps @ 60MP FF RAW - pure insane.

Canon's 1D X II is 14fps @ 20MP FF

I'm hoping that the proposed "RX" will spec'ed about 15fps @ 30MP FF, but that will likely to kill-off the 1D X II, which is going for about $5K right now.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 16, 2019)

tron said:


> Yes 5DsR and 100-400 is a killer combination. I was just answering to the other post. I am currently OK! 5DSR, 5DIV and 7DII with 100-400 400DO and 500II. All I was saying is that someone who starts from scratch may consider other options. Not a fun of 200-500 though so for me it would be either the 500PF which you correctly said is not available or ... Canon!


We agree most strongly on bodies and lenses, though I am just too old to manage the 500II.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 16, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I finally see a camera that will make me an awesome photographer and turn me into a "pro" !!!!


You resent Sony making a good camera? Aren't you satisfied and out shooting with the new R?

Megapixels don't excite me. Striving for an exciting FF body with great specs is admirable. Would this make me trust Sony as "my" camera company? No! 

And I don't "demand" Canon responds by the end of the year, or rushes their release schedule. Just put out a solid, 5D type shooter that doesn't require me to learn a whole new control interface, or toss in weird touch strips, etc.

Go, Canon, go!


----------



## tron (Jul 16, 2019)

AlanF said:


> We agree most strongly on bodies and lenses, though I am just too old to manage the 500II.


I mostly use it when I use a car. When I go on various organized excursions I mostly use the 400DOII. But I used once the 500 because it was a mixed one (car, then bus then back to my car a few days later. In order to save on space I just took the 500 for all occasions. I will hopefully repeat that in a similar case late October. When I walk and carry it it is easier that having it at my back. But it is more difficult to shoot handheld and it needs much higher speeds not only for the 400 - 500 difference but for its weight which makes my hand to shake a little.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 16, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Big deal, Sony. Canon up-staged you with the awesome new Powershot and exciting lens cap technology.


Or by selling more cameras, if you care about that sort of thing. We probably don’t, but I’m sure Canon and Sony do.


----------



## Tahoejr (Jul 16, 2019)

I don't think these bi-annual Sony PR bursts will sway the majority of Canon users but do believe they will have a material impact on Nikon. It is crickets over in their forums.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 16, 2019)

AlanF said:


> During the meanwhile, I’ll soldier on with the 5DSR, it still for most of what I do will not be significantly outclassed by the Sony, but I would love to have that A9 AF, 10 fps and buffer, and to be able to switch to an APS-C mode for smaller files.



Of those four things I would love the buffer and like the APS-C mode. I can't say 10 fps never has any utility, I just don't feel it's that big of a difference (again, perhaps influenced heavily by my shooting style). Would be cool to have though.

I came away from my A9 shoots thinking that if I tweaked the prefs and got used to it my keeper rate would be practically the same as with the 5Ds (or any Canon 61pt system), perhaps with a little less effort on my part. For all the hyper over some new mirrorless features, I feel like the kit I have now is already so capable that further body improvements would have minimal impact on my work. My technique and my opportunity to go shoot are far bigger factors. Perhaps that's always been true, but with past kits I could usually point to one or two things that I really wished were better.

If I had to point to one "issue" with my current kit it would be RAW buffer size. That matters more to me than fps. I don't want to ever think about the buffer.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 16, 2019)

Tahoejr said:


> I don't think these bi-annual Sony PR bursts will sway the majority of Canon users but do believe they will have a material impact on Nikon. It is crickets over in their forums.



Kind of ironic because Nikon's current lineup is quite competitive.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 16, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> One note: Sony is saying the A7R IV has better weather sealing. They've said this with every generation. Their repeat failures here is one of the things that has kept me from giving Sony a shot. If you shoot in anything other than dry weather, I would caution you to wait and see if the A7R IV can actually resist rain and snow. I was torn between the 5Ds and the A7R III right up until the test came out that showed the A7R III leaking like a submarine screen door. For me that killed Sony as a choice _regardless of any other technology or consideration._ It's ridiculous that Sony can't get this right.


When you’re starting from leaking like a sieve, even one gasket or o-ring is “better”.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 16, 2019)

docsmith said:


> I keep digging the hole I am in with Canon deeper and deeper....I just picked up an EF 85 f/1.4 IS in that refurbished sale.
> 
> I am really looking forward to it!


Enjoy it, I find mine to be an excellent lens.


----------



## DrToast (Jul 16, 2019)

Kind of nutty that both the Canon 5D and Sony A7r are both on their fourth iteration.


----------



## hamoser (Jul 16, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Or by selling more cameras, if you care about that sort of thing. We probably don’t, but I’m sure Canon and Sony do.


I thought it was profit they cared about?


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 16, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Of those four things I would love the buffer and like the APS-C mode. I can't say 10 fps never has any utility, I just don't feel it's that big of a difference (again, perhaps influenced heavily by my shooting style). Would be cool to have though.
> 
> I came away from my A9 shoots thinking that if I tweaked the prefs and got used to it my keeper rate would be practically the same as with the 5Ds (or any Canon 61pt system), perhaps with a little less effort on my part. For all the hyper over some new mirrorless features, I feel like the kit I have now is already so capable that further body improvements would have minimal impact on my work. My technique and my opportunity to go shoot are far bigger factors. Perhaps that's always been true, but with past kits I could usually point to one or two things that I really wished were better.
> 
> If I had to point to one "issue" with my current kit it would be RAW buffer size. That matters more to me than fps. I don't want to ever think about the buffer.


I agree with you.

BUT. Canon seems to be leaving EF development on the side of the road. And I'm not the only one who has been longing for a great 50mm 1.2. Does that justify a body just for the lens? It does make me want to wait before I pick a new second body to back up my current 5D IV. I've come to enjoy the 5D IV's better AF and burst mode, and little in-the-VF features to the point the 5D III feels a little "slow" for me now. Sure, I can take great photos with the 5D III, but I get more keepers with the IV and enjoy it more.

I'd like a 5D V (yes, the next generation of tech) level mirrorless that lets me use the new RF lenses. Ok, I'd really like a new 50mm 1.2 for the EF bodies, but that seems less likely!


----------



## Grimbald (Jul 16, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> One note: Sony is saying the A7R IV has better weather sealing. They've said this with every generation. Their repeat failures here is one of the things that has kept me from giving Sony a shot. If you shoot in anything other than dry weather, I would caution you to wait and see if the A7R IV can actually resist rain and snow. I was torn between the 5Ds and the A7R III right up until the test came out that showed the A7R III leaking like a submarine screen door. For me that killed Sony as a choice _regardless of any other technology or consideration._ It's ridiculous that Sony can't get this right.
> 
> Last time rain hit I was shooting the 5Ds + 16-35 f/4L IS and I didn't even pause or hesitate, I just kept hiking and shooting.




That's such an important point that gets often neglected for many outdoor photographers. Such cameras look nice on paper and in a review, but resistance and durability barely ever get tested or even mentioned. I've dropped my 5d mark iv on rocks and in the mud and it still works perfectly. Those are just things that happen if you spend enough time working with your gear.


----------



## Darrell Cadieux (Jul 16, 2019)

Tahoejr said:


> Canon said they would be the most aggressive camera company in terms of mirror-less development, but Sony certainly isn't taking a wait and see mode. Hopefully the new Canon RF models will be sooner than 2020


2020 will be an explosion of Canon gear as it is an Olympic year and the Olympics are being hosted in Japan. There will be all new models and glass coming...hang on to your hats.


----------



## C Tographer (Jul 16, 2019)

Video is really bad on this camera.

Sensor crop. Low-quality 8-bit with reduced color information.


----------



## langdonb (Jul 16, 2019)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I have exactly the same requirements and Sony seems to be the best choice. Can get this 60MP camera and have 200-1000mm from 61MP to 22MP.
> Basically replaces the 7D2 with better reach and better image quality. Can also add a A6300/6400 for bargain backup which fits in a very small place..


I too am a wildlife shooter currently three 5DIV bodies with 500mm f4, 100-400 II and 70-200 2.8 II, TC's as needed. I recently had the opportunity on a game drive in Zambia to try a Sony A9 and A7III with 400 2.8 and 100-400 lens. The A9 action focus system is superior to the 5DIV and would love to see something equal in Canon's new offerings. But the killer for me is the horrible ergonomics of Sony bodies particularly when used on longer lens. Canon has that down to a perfection and their decision to make the R bodies design follow the DSLR's was brilliant. Hard to judge whether the Sony changes in design of the news body might make a difference to ergonomics.


----------



## Canon1966 (Jul 16, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Big deal, Sony. Canon up-staged you with the awesome new Powershot and exciting lens cap technology.



That's Funny! LOL! I think the lens cap technology is silly to bring out at the level current technology is in. I would take IBIS over that. any day.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 16, 2019)

Specs are pretty impressive. It will be interesting to have a hold in store when it is available. I am assuming I will hold it for about 3 seconds before putting it back down again in horror. But. They do say they have improved the ergonomics. Lets see


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jul 16, 2019)

Any real surprise today was the legion of complaints from Sony users. Not so much against what the new A7R iv can do, but a few features missing, and other models they thought should be upgraded first. I was expecting 90% to 95% positive replies, but that wasn't quite the case.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 16, 2019)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I have exactly the same requirements and Sony seems to be the best choice. Can get this 60MP camera and have 200-1000mm from 61MP to 22MP.
> Basically replaces the 7D2 with better reach and better image quality. Can also add a A6300/6400 for bargain backup which fits in a very small place..


In terms of resolution, it's giving you with the 200-600mm f/6.3, 200-600mm, even when you crop by 1.6x. The crop mode lowers the field of view and doesn't increase resolution.


----------



## djack41 (Jul 16, 2019)

Look at the new Sony review from Tony Northrup. Sony is playing hardball.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 16, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Look at the new Sony review from Tony Northrup. Sony is playing hardball.


No way and I am going to look at a TN review. I did view two recently and learned my lesson.


----------



## Etienne (Jul 16, 2019)

6degrees said:


> Nothing else attracts me more than Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L, and Canon RF 16-28mm F2 L.
> 
> Basically Canon RF F1.2 primes and F2 zooms are much more important, for pro level photography/equipment in my opinion, than anything else in mirrorless industry. Lenses are much more important than bodies. Canon R body is behind for sure and it will catch up. But if the lens mount has flaw, it is going to stay there for 30 years.
> 
> The only thing about Canon RF lenses that bothers me is the prices. Cheaper than Zeiss Otus, Leica M, I know. But still too much.


Canon makes great lenses to be sure, but they aren't going to catch to Sony on mirrorless bodies or video in small cameras any time soon because Sony proves with every release that they are serious about pushing the limits.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 16, 2019)

dude said:


> Canon is falling behind. Sony moves forward at a crazy pace. What will the ILC market look like in five years? I can't even imagine.


You'll be running top of the line multiple graphics cards and CPU's, 256GB of ram and 500 TB of drives to hold all the photos. Oh, and a 20,000 btu air conditioning unit to cool it all. That's what. Then the photos won't be any better. But you'd have the most awesome camera in town... until next year. And a blistering 10 frames per second. wow. The wildlife guys will be real happy with that.


----------



## Etienne (Jul 16, 2019)

fox40phil said:


> Sounds awesome!!!
> 
> But what I really don't understand..why don't lower the res. in the Sony camers in the body!
> I m often using with my 5DIV only 17MP.. or sometimes less! I have also done this with my 5DII (22 & 10MP)! This is a feature I dont want to miss!


Sony offers 3 models of the A7 line. The A7s mark III is yet to surface. It is the lowest resolution and is geared to video. The A7 III is the least expensive all-rounder yet does a great job in both video and photo. The A7r is for high res enthusiasts


----------



## Bennymiata (Jul 16, 2019)

Until they change the distance between the grip and the lens and stop squeezing the fingers on my right hand, I won't be buying one.


----------



## Etienne (Jul 16, 2019)

docsmith said:


> I keep digging the hole I am in with Canon deeper and deeper....I just picked up an EF 85 f/1.4 IS in that refurbished sale.
> 
> I am really looking forward to it!


Canon's game playing on features to separate camera lines, and unwillingness to go all-in on a small camera swung the decision for me. I loved my camera gear, but started selling a little over a year ago because Canon makes me nervous about investing more in their gear. I only have 2 L lenses left. I held hope for the RF line of cameras, but video falls far short and I tired of waiting on Canon to show the aggressive innovation they showed with the 5D2. Canon has opened the door for Sony, and Sony appears seriously aggressive.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 16, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Big deal, Sony. Canon up-staged you with the awesome new Powershot and exciting lens cap technology.


And awesome lenses.


----------



## Etienne (Jul 16, 2019)

Darrell Cadieux said:


> 2020 will be an explosion of Canon gear as it is an Olympic year and the Olympics are being hosted in Japan. There will be all new models and glass coming...hang on to your hats.


We've been holding our hats for many years, and each year it's the same... wait a little longer and Canon will catch up. And with every release Canon crimps their cameras to protect the top of the line. Oh, joy ... keep the faith... Canon is coming. But Sony isn't sitting on their hands. Canon should become a lens company, and release their lenses in sony, nikon, panasonic mounts.... we'd have the best of both worlds, great lenses on great cameras


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 16, 2019)

hamoser said:


> I thought it was profit they cared about?


Same thing.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 16, 2019)

snappy604 said:


> don't buy that hype.. it's the camera grip that determines if your pictures are PRO or not.


And all this time I thought it was the L bracket and multi camera harness.


----------



## Saitir (Jul 16, 2019)

I must be mis-understanding something here... Isn't direct readout super 35mm 4k just a fancy way of saying the 4k is cropped on the sensor? I thought pixel binning was the preffered way of getting 4k off of a higher resolution sensor? 
Just a dumby looking fur enlightenment...


----------



## ozturert (Jul 16, 2019)

Tahoejr said:


> Canon said they would be the most aggressive camera company in terms of mirror-less development, but Sony certainly isn't taking a wait and see mode. Hopefully the new Canon RF models will be sooner than 2020


Sony's tactic is to release new products not at once but in certain periods. For example now A7RIV, in 1 week A6900, in 3 months A7SIII, in 5 months 2 lenses, in 8 months A9 II etc... This way they can keep the attention by distributing new releases throughout the year.
Canon and Nikon mostly release/announce 1-2 bodies together with some lenses so their releases are like a flash in a year.


----------



## gmon750 (Jul 17, 2019)

The only thing having me wait for whatever "pro" body Canon has in store are the stellar RF lenses and the superior ergonomics. Sony is definitely giving Canon a gut-punch with this new camera, so I hope Canon gets something in consumers hands quickly.

That being said, I will continue to happily use my 5DM3. Unlike the Sony fanbois harping all over the Internet, our dSLR cameras have not suddenly stopped working or takes inferior shots.

61MP is just nuts. I certainly don't need that kind of resolution but the storage manufacturers I'm sure are just salivating with all the future buyers needing massive storage solutions for these upcoming photos.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 17, 2019)

Saitir said:


> I must be mis-understanding something here... Isn't direct readout super 35mm 4k just a fancy way of saying the 4k is cropped on the sensor? I thought pixel binning was the preffered way of getting 4k off of a higher resolution sensor?
> Just a dumby looking fur enlightenment...


Yes. But if they use the term 'cropped' then people won't be able to hate on cannon as much. And I reckon the youtoob 'reviewers' will buy it hook line and sinker. Some won't of course. But the fanboy ones will


----------



## PerKr (Jul 17, 2019)

Wow. This might be a record. For me. I don't think I ever cared less about a new camera release that might be a future alternative for me. So I guess I don't need a new camera for quite a while...


----------



## drjlo (Jul 17, 2019)

Kai already has hands-on video of Sony A7R IV. 
I must say, 61 MP blasting away at 10 FPS with accurate AF has my full attention...with IBIS...with 15 stops DR...


----------



## Randywayne (Jul 17, 2019)

Sony's headquarters
Management/Marketing: "We want you to bring us a camera that will sell for $3500 US."

(2 years later)
Engineers: "Here you go!"

Management/Marketing: "Whoa!"


Canon's headquarters
Management/Marketing: "We want you to bring us a camera that will sell for $3500 US."

(3 years later)
Engineers: "Here you go!"

Management/Marketing: "No! No! You need to remove this feature and this feature and limit this other feature and. . . ."


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> And all this time I thought it was the L bracket and multi camera harness.



Come on...you BOTH KNOW that it's the battery brand that produces award winning photos.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Jul 17, 2019)

Saitir said:


> I must be mis-understanding something here... Isn't direct readout super 35mm 4k just a fancy way of saying the 4k is cropped on the sensor? I thought pixel binning was the preffered way of getting 4k off of a higher resolution sensor?
> Just a dumby looking fur enlightenment...


Good question. I'm not sure why they didn't bin down from 8K to 4K. Maybe it took too much processing power or the sensor readout wasn't fast enough. There isn't really any good way to get 4k from a 9K capture in-camera. I don't think it's going to be much of a video cam. The R's are targeted towards pixel peepers. Sony has been holding back their updated A7S which is where I'd expect to see the biggest improvements in video capture.

edit: The A7IV is oversampling 6k and processing it down to 4k so it's reading a 6K vs a 4K crop. This usually yields a better result that a straight 1:1 readout.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2019)

Etienne said:


> We've been holding our hats for many years, and each year it's the same... wait a little longer and Canon will catch up.



That's not a fair assessment. 'Many years' ago it was Sony playing catch up. Sure, the first FF mirrorless bodies were 'new' and 'innovative' but their AF and ergonomics sucked, their EVFs couldn't touch an OVF, and their sensors suffered from fatal IQ flaws under certain conditions (off sensor flare; compressed RAWs; eating stars; and then striping with gen III).

Sony fans act like it has been nothing but innovation from day one (of FF mirrorless) when in fact much of the 'innovation' involved trying to catch up to where DSRLs were for years. And in some respects they're still not quite there. Weather sealing, ergonomics...and while I appreciate exposure preview in an EVF, I still would rather spend the day looking through an OVF. It has gotten better and is winning over more people, but there's still room to improve.

Sony has moved fast but at the expense of some important details. They also focus on headline grabbing features (i.e. FF 4k) while ignoring specs that are just as important but not as well appreciated by amateurs (i.e. bitrate).

Now I admit I would like to see Canon move faster on body tech. Given recent rumors it looks like they will in late 2019 and in 2020. But the situation still isn't a KO by Sony the way people portray it.



> And with every release Canon crimps their cameras to protect the top of the line.



I don't think there's any basis for that claim. It comes from specs on the video side but it seems pretty clear that Canon has had a readout speed issue which has 'crimped' video.


----------



## Camerajah (Jul 17, 2019)

But I think we shouldn't expect much from the touch screen interface


----------



## stochasticmotions (Jul 17, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/


do what I do and have both


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> Any real surprise today was the legion of complaints from Sony users. Not so much against what the new A7R iv can do, but a few features missing, and other models they thought should be upgraded first. I was expecting 90% to 95% positive replies, but that wasn't quite the case.


2 reasons. it isnt much of an improvement since they are used to all these good features in a slightly inferior version with less MP. 4k60p is missing. we all know many sony users use the camera for video especially anyone that switched from another system. They get crisper 4k with better AF but that isnt a biggie for them. Now compared to a Canon camera in the same price rang, it is a huge upgrade.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

hamoser said:


> I thought it was profit they cared about?


I suggest you review their IR presentation materials.


----------



## Randywayne (Jul 17, 2019)

stochasticmotions said:


> do what I do and have both



Exactly. I use my 5D mark IV for 90% of my shooting and didn't "angrily sell all my Canon gear!" but rather picked up an a7III (and MC-11) and happily enjoy both worlds.


----------



## David Hull (Jul 17, 2019)

RobbieHat said:


> Sony are making it tough. Canon have one more year for me to at least catchup if not surpass in some areas. The DR gap is getting too large to ignore for my landscape and Astro work. The focus system, IBIS, eye detect and focus coverage gap is also getting too great to ignore for my wildlife work. I don’t currently care about video.
> 
> Items keeping me in the Canon camp are down to lenses (I have over 20k invested in EF that is now at risk due to RF), weather sealing, handling, menu system/learning curve and CPS.
> 
> It guts me that Canon has thrown away 2019 in my book. All the while Sony has been catching up in lenses and distancing themselves in the other key areas. Canon, I am rooting for you but it is time to show the goods.


I would wait and see what the DR really is. until you see some real test data, it's just a number on paper.


----------



## woodman411 (Jul 17, 2019)

This thread for some reason brought out the Canon trolls masquerading as either on-the-fence or gullible-impressed users ("I have Canon but Sony's really tempting me!" or "Sony was already 5 years ahead of Canon, now they're 10 years ahead!"). If you're really on-the-fence or impressed, wouldn't you be trying and buying Sony and posting on _Sony_ forums? Really. I did. I heard all the rave reviews since the original A7, then all the hoopla when the a7R2 came out, so decided to try it. I liked the compact size especially with a few of the zeiss lenses. But I was stunned how undeveloped it was - slow, sluggish, freezes when buffering, frustrating menus, video autofocus inferior to dpaf, etc. Very few reviews mentioned this, among many other flaws, including the pervasive dust sensor issue, oh and the anti-flicker on the a7r3 doesn't actually work (ref: TDP a7r3 review).

If you're really on-the-fence, see what 2 pro's said about the a7R2 (yes it's an older model, but compare what they experience versus the online reviews, and notice the *reality gap*): https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59526785 (pro users are "unknown user"/Sr1racha, the OP, who was Sung Park from http://www.sungparkphotography.com , and Jeff2013 from http://www.gr8photography.com ) In short, Sony's specs and real-world performance don't match. They over-hype and under-deliver. Canon does the opposite. Really, if you're impressed with Sony, go try it. The grass is always greener. Then maybe (probably) we'll eventually see you back here.


----------



## drjlo (Jul 17, 2019)

I use both Canon and Sony, but what I really want to know is if Sony ever shaped up their customer service fails. Sony was (is?) notorious in their lack of customer support, horrific turnaround time for repairs, denial of known Sony equipments faults, etc.


----------



## Tony Bennett (Jul 17, 2019)

Randywayne said:


> Exactly. I use my 5D mark IV for 90% of my shooting and didn't "angrily sell all my Canon gear!" but rather picked up an a7III (and MC-11) and happily enjoy both worlds.


Same thing for me. 5D4 and A7III and a Tamron 28-75. The Sony is nice. Took that camera only on vacation and it performed flawlessly in 5 different national parks and the files are great. The A7III and Tamron were great for all the hiking we did. I attached it to my backpack with the Peak Designs clip and I almost forgot it was there most of the time and we were on some tough hikes in Glacier National Parks and Yellowstone NP. Already started printing large prints today at the studio.


----------



## Bennymiata (Jul 17, 2019)

Am I correct that this new Sony does 4k at only 100mbps?
That's the same quality as my DJI Osmo Pocket.

Pretty poor for a new camera and makes it hard to grade properly.


----------



## mover (Jul 17, 2019)

Imagine being one of those people who bought the Nikon Z7 for the same price as the A7RIV. Oops! Canon was smart not to come out so quick with their Hi Res mirror-less. I know if I was a Nikon shooter I would be mmmmmmmmmm UPSET!


----------



## Randywayne (Jul 17, 2019)

Tony Bennett said:


> Same thing for me. 5D4 and A7III and a Tamron 28-75. The Sony is nice. Took that camera only on vacation and it performed flawlessly in 5 different national parks and the files are great. The A7III and Tamron were great for all the hiking we did. I attached it to my backpack with the Peak Designs clip and I almost forgot it was there most of the time and we were on some tough hikes in Glacier National Parks and Yellowstone NP. Already started printing large prints today at the studio.



Last August I took my a7III on an Alaskan cruise (had my Canon with me as well) and it was my favorite camera to use aboard the ship and even some non-harsh environmental excursions. My favorite paring was with my Canon 17-40mm f/4. This lens NEVER impressed me on any of my Canon bodies but the pics on the Sony turned out tack sharp (mostly). They were so sharp that I even noticed the lens was decentered with the right side being completely sharp and 20% of the left being soft.

By the way, I'd love to pick up the Tamron 28-75 but it just irks me that they raised the price on it a hundred bucks -and it is STILL on back order. LOL









Alaska - Wayne's Land Photography


This gallery hosted by SmugMug; your photos look better here.




www.wayneslandphotography.com


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

Randywayne said:


> Sony's headquarters
> Management/Marketing: "We want you to bring us a camera that will sell for $3500 US."
> 
> (2 years later)
> ...


yup. they are almost ripping us off at this point.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> This thread for some reason brought out the Canon trolls masquerading as either on-the-fence or gullible-impressed users ("I have Canon but Sony's really tempting me!" or "Sony was already 5 years ahead of Canon, now they're 10 years ahead!"). If you're really on-the-fence or impressed, wouldn't you be trying and buying Sony and posting on _Sony_ forums? Really. I did. I heard all the rave reviews since the original A7, then all the hoopla when the a7R2 came out, so decided to try it. I liked the compact size especially with a few of the zeiss lenses. But I was stunned how undeveloped it was - slow, sluggish, freezes when buffering, frustrating menus, video autofocus inferior to dpaf, etc. Very few reviews mentioned this, among many other flaws, including the pervasive dust sensor issue, oh and the anti-flicker on the a7r3 doesn't actually work (ref: TDP a7r3 review).
> 
> If you're really on-the-fence, see what 2 pro's said about the a7R2 (yes it's an older model, but compare what they experience versus the online reviews, and notice the *reality gap*): https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59526785 (pro users are "unknown user"/Sr1racha, the OP, who was Sung Park from http://www.sungparkphotography.com , and Jeff2013 from http://www.gr8photography.com ) In short, Sony's specs and real-world performance don't match. They over-hype and under-deliver. Canon does the opposite. Really, if you're impressed with Sony, go try it. The grass is always greener. Then maybe (probably) we'll eventually see you back here.


I have heard mostly good things about Sony cameras after the A9 released. The 3rd gen alpha seems to be a winner. now the 4th gen seems to be an even further step in the right direction. I dont see why everyone is knocking it. What more could you want outside of 4k 60p. Why wouldnt someone think about buying Sony cameras today..


----------



## PVCC (Jul 17, 2019)

I'd like to mention just 5 things:

1- That is one of the most "Cinematographic" promotional video of a camera I've seen. Sony has put noticeable very detailed shots on it. (Cinematographer & Editor mode ON when watching it...)

2- The camera looks great, specs too (almost every), but REMEMBER:
If you don't use EXTREME HIGH QUALITY OPTICS, you won't ever get "Real" 60MP resolution images (the picture might have 60MP in size, but not in Real detail, which applies to every ultra high res camera). So think about spending MANY TIMES the cost of the camera in Lenses (if you're interested on it)

3- Sony (and Panasonic, each on its path) are SMART Companies, which innovate and RARELY (at least in last years) "Cripple" their cameras as Canon usually do (Nikon too). Even having Cinema/Video cameras (the old "argument" -cheap excuse- of Canon to not "cannibalize" their own cameras is obsolete...). Someone said, if you don't cannibalize your own product, someone else will do it. True.

4- Canon and Nikon, the most renowned camera brands are many years behind in the mirrorless camera field. That's because Sony was smarter and not "stoned" to "old school" (or petrified minds in charge, sounds harsh, I know). The mirrorless offer several Amazing features that are not possible with DSLRs (like the continuous image processing, which deals in a superb AF and Face recognition, even Augmented Reality -if you don't see it yet, just wait a bit.. etc). Canon will certainly and finally go "full" on mirrorless in near future, but since they invested so much in DSLR development they are s...l...o...w... They 1st real mirrorless cameras are still babies.

5- Canon still sell more (that's what's is said...), but don't ever think you will be in the same place forever mate... 
I love Canon lenses (but hate their TERRIBLE Quality Control, when you have to return a VERY expensive lens 3 times to finally get a "good copy"... something that demonstrate their extremely poor interest and efforts to offer real-state quality, just wanting to sell, expecting that most customers will NOT check those expensive lenses really carefully (very big percentage don't do it). I suffered this for years and it never ends... Even though, I admire the amazing Optics (when you finally get the "good copy" lens...)

Cheers Sony!! I really hope some japanese Product Managers at Canon go away retired and the company gets Fresh minds NOT AFRAID of releasing all possible features in their cameras to their "loyal customers" -whom Canon are supposed to "listen to"...- (really difficult, if not impossible. Some japanese CEOs are like a stone, sadly)


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 17, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> I have heard mostly good things about Sony cameras after the A9 released. The 3rd gen alpha seems to be a winner. now the 4th gen seems to be an even further step in the right direction. I dont see why everyone is knocking it. What more could you want outside of 4k 60p. Why wouldnt someone think about buying Sony cameras today..


Ergonomics(they claim to have improved them but I will have to hold one to see), weather sealing (they claim to have improved it so again the proof will be in the using), the evf(while they are improving I have not yet looked through one that i like more rhan a OVF), lenses(I have a bunch of canon lenses and having played with the sonys and adapted canon glass I have not been impressed), lack of intuitive usabilty. None of these reasons can be found on a spec sheet. No doubt sonys specs are awesome. Great sensors and fantasic innovation in things like AF etc. But there have just been too many important compromises to this point.


----------



## edoorn (Jul 17, 2019)

Well about lens quality control; read the piece Roger of lensrentals wrote about the 70-200’s...seems Sony still has some things to sort out. I don’t recognize it with Canon to be honest, I have about 8 L lenses ranging from 16 to 500mm and they are all doing their jobs very well.

But back to this cam; seems like a great tool. Does anyone know if it has an option to shoot something like mRaw? As in; smaller file size but no crop? i know it has an aps c mode but I suppose thats cropped.

If the RS or whatever the high res R is called will be good enough I’ll get that, mainly for wildllife, but if not this might be a good alternative. One problem: I’d pair it with the (sony) 400 2.8 and that lens seems to be vaporware over here; since its release last year, no major retailer here has had it available yet and only sony ambassadors seem to be able to get their hands on it...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

PVCC said:


> I'd like to mention just 5 things:
> 
> 1- That is one of the most "Cinematographic" promotional video of a camera I've seen. Sony has put noticeable very detailed shots on it. (Cinematographer & Editor mode ON when watching it...)
> 
> ...


YAPODFC.


----------



## ozturert (Jul 17, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> yup. they are almost ripping us off at this point.


So this new Sony has 8bit video instead of Eos R's 10bit. This new Sony needs a special mode to focus in dark, but still cannon AF in as dark as Eos R can focus. This new Sony's touchscreen cannot be used in menus (just like previous Sony cameras) whereas Canon's can be used for almost any function. Oh and this "new" Sony uses 1.6x and 1.8x crop factor to get decent 4K video (for which Canon has been criticised heavily).
I will not even start what Sony "removed/cut off" in A7III (like horrible LCD, a lot worse EVF, way worse weather sealing etc..).
Do not fall victim to Sony propaganda. ALL companies cut something.


----------



## uri.raz (Jul 17, 2019)

PVCC said:


> The mirrorless offer several Amazing features that are not possible with DSLRs (like the continuous image processing, which deals in a superb AF and Face recognition, even Augmented Reality -if you don't see it yet, just wait a bit.. etc).



Augmented Reality MILCs? Wake me up when that happens. And, mind you, Canon already has a 120MP 9.4 fps APS-H sensor, just not in a MILC (yet?).


----------



## Woody (Jul 17, 2019)

Canon is *******! Sony now has 2 jaw-dropping top-of-the-line cameras in the A9 and A7R IV. Impressive. Even Canon websites are listing Sony camera announcements on their front page!


----------



## max_sr (Jul 17, 2019)

Bennymiata said:


> Until they change the distance between the grip and the lens and stop squeezing the fingers on my right hand, I won't be buying one.



they did


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Yes. But if they use the term 'cropped' then people won't be able to hate on cannon as much. And I reckon the youtoob 'reviewers' will buy it hook line and sinker. Some won't of course. But the fanboy ones will


I believe they give you an option for full frame 4k and s35 4k for supposedly better results. Even still s35 is standard vs the crappy 1.7 crop of the eos r and 5d iv. No lenses are made with a 1.7 crop in mind.


----------



## max_sr (Jul 17, 2019)

Saitir said:


> I must be mis-understanding something here... Isn't direct readout super 35mm 4k just a fancy way of saying the 4k is cropped on the sensor? I thought pixel binning was the preffered way of getting 4k off of a higher resolution sensor?
> Just a dumby looking fur enlightenment...



They use full pixel readout with 6k to 4k downsampling, if you shoot in crop mode. You can still shoot in fullframe mode with pixel binning. Obviously they can't downsample the whole 60 megapixels.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

mover said:


> Imagine being one of those people who bought the Nikon Z7 for the same price as the A7RIV. Oops! Canon was smart not to come out so quick with their Hi Res mirror-less. I know if I was a Nikon shooter I would be mmmmmmmmmm UPSET!


yeah but with Canon there is a high chance of coming later yet inferior in a few ways.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2019)

PVCC said:


> 5- Canon still sell more (that's what's is said...), but don't ever think you will be in the same place forever mate...
> I love Canon lenses (but hate their TERRIBLE Quality Control, when you have to return a VERY expensive lens 3 times to finally get a "good copy"... something that demonstrate their extremely poor interest and efforts to offer real-state quality, just wanting to sell, expecting that most customers will NOT check those expensive lenses really carefully (very big percentage don't do it). I suffered this for years and it never ends... Even though, I admire the amazing Optics (when you finally get the "good copy" lens...)



Lensrentals are professional lens testers and publish their results on quality variation for all to see. Canon generally has very good quality control and often the best of the usual producers, especially their most recent lenses. Sony is often the worst. Read the latest blog of two days ago on 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/07/just-the-mtf-charts-70-200mm-f2-8-zooms/
This is what they write about the Sony: "_Welcome to the MTF of the most tested lens in our history. Why did we test so many copies? Because Sony fanboys (and employees) were absolutely, positively, certain this lens was the best 70-200mm EVER. It’s not. It’s a decent lens with a LOT of sample variation_."

If you want each lens to be individually tested and only the very best picked out, the price will be some ten times more, as lenstrentals has pointed out in the past, and reiterated two days ago with their comments on the Zeiss $21,000 Cinema 70-200mm T2.9 zoom."_If you are expecting that extra $18,000 buys you higher resolution, well, nope. What it buys is consistency, lack of focus breathing, a true parfocal image, and accurate focusing scale."_


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 17, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> I believe they give you an option for full frame 4k and s35 4k for supposedly better results. Even still s35 is standard vs the crappy 1.7 crop of the eos r and 5d iv. No lenses are made with a 1.7 crop in mind.


Ues. The option is pixel binning for the ff 4k which I have heard plenty of people whinge about as it leads to soft images. And a crop is a crop.whether it is super 35 or 1.7 is irrelevant. Don't get me wrong. I think what they offer is fine. But i couldn't care less about video. What i am insinuating is that the youtoob fanboi reviewers will overlook and deficiencies in the areas they constantly blast canon for. Personally from what I can see it looks like a pretty damn good camera.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

ozturert said:


> So this new Sony has 8bit video instead of Eos R's 10bit. This new Sony needs a special mode to focus in dark, but still cannon AF in as dark as Eos R can focus. This new Sony's touchscreen cannot be used in menus (just like previous Sony cameras) whereas Canon's can be used for almost any function. Oh and this "new" Sony uses 1.6x and 1.8x crop factor to get decent 4K video (for which Canon has been criticised heavily).
> I will not even start what Sony "removed/cut off" in A7III (like horrible LCD, a lot worse EVF, way worse weather sealing etc..).
> Do not fall victim to Sony propaganda. ALL companies cut something.


EOS R is 10 bit externally and only in 4k not even in 1080. makes no sense, example of crippling and thinking for customers. I dont know about the AF claims. Where is the verification of this. True the menus are still ass. S35 is a like 1.5 crop. Do you have evidence that the FF 4k is bad? Liek samples and comparisons. 1.5 is still better than 1.7/1.8. i have video lens and they all are tighter then they should be. this is the a7riv and they claim better oled and weather sealing. So far the only thing you are right about is the terrible menus. I dont see what is cut from this camera at all.


----------



## Sparky (Jul 17, 2019)

docsmith said:


> I keep digging the hole I am in with Canon deeper and deeper....I just picked up an EF 85 f/1.4 IS in that refurbished sale.
> 
> I am really looking forward to it!


It’s a great lens, you’ll have lots of fun with it!


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Ues. The option is pixel binning for the ff 4k which I have heard plenty of people whinge about as it leads to soft images. And a crop is a crop.whether it is super 35 or 1.7 is irrelevant. Don't get me wrong. I think what they offer is fine. But i couldn't care less about video. What i am insinuating is that the youtoob fanboi reviewers will overlook and deficiencies in the areas they constantly blast canon for. Personally from what I can see it looks like a pretty damn good camera.


I just find it hard to hate on the camera. ALso it is focused on stills not video but it seems more than capable of doing good videos and still has better video features than what canon and nikon has atm. This is like complaining about the gfx100 video features or the s1r. the main purpose of this isnt video ljust like those other cameras yet people are already bashing this camera from that perspective. I would get it day 1 if i didnt invest into Canon already.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 17, 2019)

snappy604 said:


> don't buy that hype.. it's the camera grip that determines if your pictures are PRO or not.


Not the lens cap? Schweppes...


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 17, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> I just find it hard to hate on the camera. ALso it is focused on stills not video but it seems more than capable of doing good videos and still has better video features than what canon and nikon has atm. This is like complaining about the gfx100 video features or the s1r. the main purpose of this isnt video ljust like those other cameras yet people are already bashing this camera from that perspective. I would get it day 1 if i didnt invest into Canon already.


I can't find any problems in the specs either. I will assume untill proven otherwise that it has all the standard sony deficiencies but on paper it looks the goods. Thing is, on paper, all so y ff mirrorless have looked the goods. Their deficiencies tend to get exposed through use over time. And only time will tell with this one. They do seem to be ironing out some of the problems though. Good for all of us who are invested in canon as it will force improvement in canon cameras


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 17, 2019)

Darrell Cadieux said:


> 2020 will be an explosion of Canon gear as it is an Olympic year and the Olympics are being hosted in Japan. There will be all new models and glass coming...hang on to your hats.


Rather hang on to your wallets ...


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 17, 2019)

drjlo said:


> I use both Canon and Sony, but what I really want to know is if Sony ever shaped up their customer service fails. Sony was (is?) notorious in their lack of customer support, horrific turnaround time for repairs, denial of known Sony equipments faults, etc.


And inability to supply spare parts for a three years old (only) high cost large screen TVs. 
No stock, no support. The tech is good until it fails and when it fails you better be prepared to fork out mega dollars for a replacement “toy”. 
Just great.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 17, 2019)

drjlo said:


> I use both Canon and Sony, but what I really want to know is if Sony ever shaped up their customer service fails. Sony was (is?) notorious in their lack of customer support, horrific turnaround time for repairs, denial of known Sony equipments faults, etc.


Even the Cinematography division has poor customer service.


----------



## tron (Jul 17, 2019)

docsmith said:


> I keep digging the hole I am in with Canon deeper and deeper....I just picked up an EF 85 f/1.4 IS in that refurbished sale.
> 
> I am really looking forward to it!


Me too. I got a second (cheap) 5DsR and I am thinking about the 35mm 1.4L II...


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 17, 2019)

I know the weaknesses of my 5DS (its very noisy in low light) but equally I know its strengths and packaging & menus is high on the list, and I simply love the resolution I can play with. Likewise with the 6D MKII which is my "go to" landscape camera it serves the purpose well I use it for. 
Ive seriously struggled with the EOS R it has some really annoying features (the drag focus point being one of them, the meaningless Touch Bar another). I like the weight & size of it although the back button focus button is not as ergonomic as with the 5DS. The images from it are very good, the menus typically Canon and all the better for it but if Canon release a pro camera with the toggle switch then I would sell it in an instance because its NEVER my first choice camera and I don't have an infinity with it like I do with the 5DS or the 6D MKII. The RF 24-105mm f4L IS USM is a much better optic than the EF versions I have owned / own and the fast RF zooms & primes so far are killer optics. 
No question in some areas Canon lag, in body stabilisation has been inside Olympus & Panasonic cameras for years and latterly Sony. Dynamic range has consistently been a Canon weak spot (Landscape we want more) and all Canon cameras seem to suffer from noise in high ISOs far worse than the competition. 

All of the above said. A lifetime using Canon will likely never see me change to Sony, worse still for Sony professionally we buy & rent their cameras & lenses and they are inferior to both Nikon & Canon from a robustness point of view and nothing Ive seen in the A9 has changed that point of view. 

Canon need to do better with the camera bodies, they need to accept the sensors lag the competition and that in body stabilisation is now a fact of life. In all other areas, business as usual.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> I can't find any problems in the specs either. I will assume untill proven otherwise that it has all the standard sony deficiencies but on paper it looks the goods. Thing is, on paper, all so y ff mirrorless have looked the goods. Their deficiencies tend to get exposed through use over time. And only time will tell with this one. They do seem to be ironing out some of the problems though. Good for all of us who are invested in canon as it will force improvement in canon cameras


It has the specs we want for bird photography - high resolution, superb AF, high fps when we want it and that APS-C mode. It's taken 3 generations of Sony users to be beta testers for it to get there. Canon might be slow, but its products work. I'd like to try it out.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jul 17, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/



Agreed.
As much as I hate to say this canon does seem to be severely falling behind.
They still have superior lenses but really do need to step up the sensor and technology of the R cameras.
I have no problem dropping the DSLRs completely if they will become industry leaders in mirrorless and that really includes battery life which is one of the last far superior aspects of the DSLR.


----------



## Dreamwalker Photography (Jul 17, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


OMG! Canon Rumors is trolling themselves with Sony announcements! Have they become paid shills for Sony? Ask 'Aussie Shooter'...only he knows for sure.

On a more serious note, where are the Canon engineers? What are they doing? Why is Canon not on the leading edge as they have been for decades? Giving the technological lead to a movie company...ROTCOL.


----------



## Stereodude (Jul 17, 2019)

Dreamwalker Photography said:


> On a more serious note, where are the Canon engineers? What are they doing? Why is Canon not on the leading edge as they have been for decades? Giving the technological lead to a movie company...ROTCOL.


I don't think it's that hard to figure out. Sony is hungry in the market and Canon is fat, rich, and happy.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> I don't think it's that hard to figure out. Sony is hungry in the market and Canon is fat, rich, and happy.


Sony has been ‘hungry’ for a decade, but they haven’t gained any weight.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 17, 2019)

Dreamwalker Photography said:


> OMG! Canon Rumors is trolling themselves with Sony announcements! Have they become paid shills for Sony? Ask 'Aussie Shooter'...only he knows for sure.
> 
> On a more serious note, where are the Canon engineers? What are they doing? Why is Canon not on the leading edge as they have been for decades? Giving the technological lead to a movie company...ROTCOL.


Nope. If you take not you will see that Canon rumors used the appropriate 'Industry news' section of the forum. Not a 'future canon 1dx mirrorless equivalent ' thread. You should follow their example.


----------



## ozturert (Jul 17, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> EOS R is 10 bit externally and only in 4k not even in 1080. makes no sense, example of crippling and thinking for customers. I dont know about the AF claims. Where is the verification of this. True the menus are still ass. S35 is a like 1.5 crop. Do you have evidence that the FF 4k is bad? Liek samples and comparisons. 1.5 is still better than 1.7/1.8. i have video lens and they all are tighter then they should be. this is the a7riv and they claim better oled and weather sealing. So far the only thing you are right about is the terrible menus. I dont see what is cut from this camera at all.


Only Panasonic S1 has internal 10bit recording (under 2500 USD) and that is the reason why S1 is huge compared to other FF mirrorless cameras. No other model does that. It isn't Canon crippling or thinking for customers. This is Sony propaganda.
Which AF verification? Sony says A7R IV has a special AF mode for low light focusing. Sony can verify this if you ask them, but Sony doesn't claim AF at -6EV so that must be true.
I never said 4K video in A7R IV was bad, I talked about the crop mode which Canon has been criticised a lot. Now Sony has the same crop if you want a good quality 4K video.
Sony claims better weather sealing than A7R III which had no sealing around battery/card cover.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 17, 2019)

AlanF said:


> In terms of resolution, it's giving you with the 200-600mm f/6.3, 200-600mm, even when you crop by 1.6x. The crop mode lowers the field of view and doesn't increase resolution.



What i meant is that you still have 22 MP left after cropping 1.67x, making your 200-600 lens 200-1000 effectively.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 17, 2019)

langdonb said:


> I too am a wildlife shooter currently three 5DIV bodies with 500mm f4, 100-400 II and 70-200 2.8 II, TC's as needed. I recently had the opportunity on a game drive in Zambia to try a Sony A9 and A7III with 400 2.8 and 100-400 lens. The A9 action focus system is superior to the 5DIV and would love to see something equal in Canon's new offerings. But the killer for me is the horrible ergonomics of Sony bodies particularly when used on longer lens. Canon has that down to a perfection and their decision to make the R bodies design follow the DSLR's was brilliant. Hard to judge whether the Sony changes in design of the news body might make a difference to ergonomics.



The R does not seem very similar to other bodies to me. One of my favourite thing on Canon DSLRs was the big wheel on the back, replaced on the R with a flimsy and small directional pad.
Also touchscreen cannot replace the joystick for quick operation or with gloves.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> YAPODFC.


That's interesting. I wanted to figure out what that means, google it and google only returned your own 2 year old crypto post https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...ny-mf-cmos-sensors-out-now.34000/#post-697702


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 17, 2019)

Sparky said:


> It’s a great lens, you’ll have lots of fun with it!


Not sure what kind of fun you guys are having with lenses, I'd rather have some good shots with my lenses...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> That's interesting. I wanted to figure out what that means, google it and google only returned your own 2 year old crypto post https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...ny-mf-cmos-sensors-out-now.34000/#post-697702


Further back:




__





5D3 No Longer in Production


I am as unsure about all this as you are but it was what I was told and what I saw when I looked at their computer system (albeit I also have doubts about the validity of their system and their employees interpretation of that system). Here's a thread about Best Buy discontinuing the 5DII a...




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 17, 2019)

My main gripe with the Sony bodies is the instance on using SD cards. Cfast would be better, but every pro camera using CFExpress is the ideal. I want to have 'a' set of memory cards I trust. But I am sure there are folks just as happy they can put SD cards into this thing.


----------



## Tremotino (Jul 17, 2019)

Etienne said:


> We've been holding our hats for many years, and each year it's the same... wait a little longer and Canon will catch up. And with every release Canon crimps their cameras to protect the top of the line. Oh, joy ... keep the faith... Canon is coming. But Sony isn't sitting on their hands. Canon should become a lens company, and release their lenses in sony, nikon, panasonic mounts.... we'd have the best of both worlds, great lenses on great cameras



nonsense, 
you can't have the awesome Rf lensea for e mount. Tjey would be unaffordable


----------



## Stereodude (Jul 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sony has been ‘hungry’ for a decade, but they haven’t gained any weight.


It's only a matter of time if things continue like they are. Japanese cars used to be a joke, now they're generally regarded as the standard. Korean cars used to be a joke, now they're considered competitive. Sony's offerings will not be dismissed indefinitely if things continue as they have been. Canon can't ride their momentum forever.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2019)

blackcoffee17 said:


> What i meant is that you still have 22 MP left after cropping 1.67x, making your 200-600 lens 200-1000 effectively.


If you meant 200-1000 relative to a FF 22 MP sensor, then OK. It's about the same with a 5DS vs a 1DX.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> It's only a matter of time if things continue like they are. Japanese cars used to be a joke, now they're generally regarded as the standard. Korean cars used to be a joke, now they're considered competitive. Sony's offerings will not be dismissed indefinitely if things continue as they have been. Canon can't ride their momentum forever.


After 20 years with Merc, I've just switched to Toyota with no regrets. For their smaller range of A and B Class, they have done the equivalent of using a Sony sensor - using an engine jointly developed with Renault and Nissan, and charging much more with lower reliability rating on Which consumer reports.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> It's only a matter of time if things continue like they are. Japanese cars used to be a joke, now they're generally regarded as the standard. Korean cars used to be a joke, now they're considered competitive. Sony's offerings will not be dismissed indefinitely if things continue as they have been. Canon can't ride their momentum forever.


Funny how I’ve been reading comments like that on this forum since I joined nine years ago. Still waiting. 

The thing that many people, including yourself, apparently fail to grasp is that the views expressed on this forum really don’t represent the market as a whole. That fact should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, because comments like yours have been made here for close to a decade, and over that decade the only thing that has happened to Canon’s market dominance is a slight increase. But hey, maybe that will change someday.


----------



## woodman411 (Jul 17, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Agreed.
> As much as I hate to say this canon does seem to be severely falling behind.
> They still have superior lenses but really do need to step up the sensor and technology of the R cameras.
> I have no problem dropping the DSLRs completely if they will become industry leaders in mirrorless and that really includes battery life which is one of the last far superior aspects of the DSLR.



How good is Sony's sensor when someone posts a video on the a9 + 600 f/4 (that's US $17,000), and the only thing people comment on, is sensor dust? 



 Canon nipped this issue in the bud with its sensor shutter closing. Google "sony sensor dust", this issue is real and pervasive, and Sony has done nothing to address it since the original A7. Here's another example: anti-flicker. The irony baffles me as to how Sony brags about high frame rate, yet can't get this simple yet vital concept right: consistent exposure in artificial light. Only TDP documented this with the a7R3 ( https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sony-a7R-III.aspx ) . Here's another Sony flaw when it comes to video: low bitrates, which affects grading, kinda important. Alik Griffin pointed this out in his R versus A7 review ( https://alikgriffin.com/canon-eos-r-just-about-everyone-got-it-wrong ), very few other reviews did. This affects grading, as Potato Jet and Armando Ferreira discovered: ( 



 ). Funny how so many pro-Sony reviews "forgot" to mention this important flaw.

But you go right ahead and keep believing that Canon is "severely falling behind". But if you really believed that, you wouldn't be here. You would have switched. And be posting on Sony forums, and sharing your pics and showing how much better the equipment made your photography, right?


----------



## BillB (Jul 17, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> It's only a matter of time if things continue like they are. Japanese cars used to be a joke, now they're generally regarded as the standard. Korean cars used to be a joke, now they're considered competitive. Sony's offerings will not be dismissed indefinitely if things continue as they have been. Canon can't ride their momentum forever.


Well, how long is Sony willing to keep putting money in to camera development without increasing its camera share? We don't know whether Sony is making money on its cameras or not.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 17, 2019)

Woody said:


> Canon is *******! Sony now has 2 jaw-dropping top-of-the-line cameras in the A9 and A7R IV. Impressive. Even Canon websites are listing Sony camera announcements on their front page!


On which websites is Canon listing Sony on the front page? Don't confuse private blog sites with official stuff.


----------



## Justhandguns (Jul 17, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Agreed.
> As much as I hate to say this canon does seem to be severely falling behind.
> They still have superior lenses but really do need to step up the sensor and technology of the R cameras.
> I have no problem dropping the DSLRs completely if they will become industry leaders in mirrorless and that really includes battery life which is one of the last far superior aspects of the DSLR.



I think it is only the lens collection that keep us here. I think Canon knows this well.

I must say the new A7 really got me interested.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 17, 2019)

AlanF said:


> It has the specs we want for bird photography - high resolution, superb AF, high fps when we want it and that APS-C mode. It's taken 3 generations of Sony users to be beta testers for it to get there. Canon might be slow, but its products work. I'd like to try it out.


???

"High-speed continuous shooting at up to 10 fps(4) with full AF / AE tracking for approximately seven seconds(5) in full-frame mode with an increased buffer memory, and approximately three times as long in APS-C mode."
Of course, I'm not a wildlife shooter, but this seems slow to me... at least compared to a 1DX Mark II (which is more money). But that sensor....

I guess the A9 is Sony's sports/wildlife cam? I really don't know.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 17, 2019)

AlanF said:


> If you meant 200-1000 relative to a FF 22 MP sensor, then OK. It's about the same with a 5DS vs a 1DX.



Yes, except that Canon does not have anything like the 200-600 natively.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jul 17, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> ....The grass is always greener. ...


Since this is a photography gear site, shouldn't that read "The glass is always cleaner .."?


----------



## ashmadux (Jul 17, 2019)

Tahoejr said:


> Canon said they would be the most aggressive camera company in terms of mirror-less development, but Sony certainly isn't taking a wait and see mode. Hopefully the new Canon RF models will be sooner than 2020



I dont think anyone could credibly believe that. Canon has had years upon years where all they showed- even with thier biggest lines- 5d, 7d- that they were content with making adequate cameras.

There hasn't been true excitement for a canon body arguably since the 1dx2, and that has a limited audience. The RP got so much attention for its cheapness, but has one of the most pathetic spec sheets of any modern full frame camera. And thier sensor tech....just...shameful. Lookat all the bad press it took for them to finally be looking into ibis. 

Canon's own philosophy has now ******* them. They can't catch up to this. They wont. 

*I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development.* The writing is on the wall, especially if they have no desire to make class leading products. at that end, whats the point?


----------



## woodman411 (Jul 17, 2019)

Justhandguns said:


> I think it is only the lens collection that keep us here. I think Canon knows this well.
> 
> I must say the new A7 really got me interested.



Not really, good Canon glass has tremendous resale value, you wouldn't lose much at all, I've bought and sold a ton of them so I know. Oh wait stupid me, this is just a troll comment...


----------



## ashmadux (Jul 17, 2019)

drama said:


> You work in landscape, astro and nature photography? Tell us your secrets, oh wise one!
> Canon have hardly "thrown away" 2019. They've announced and released a ton of RF mount lenses in readiness for a new body, and we're only six months in. If you don't want to wait, Sony just announced a 60mpx 10fps camera for your nature/astro/landscape fast moving work. I guess you're the target market! Either way, I'm sure Canon will heed your demands and immediately release all their R&D for fear of you leaving.




lenses.

Everyone has lenses.

No one really needs canons specialty lenses, to be totally honest. We need our solid work lenses. 

And yeah...lets all buy Canon R's now. Not a chance.


----------



## Stereodude (Jul 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Funny how I’ve been reading comments like that on this forum since I joined nine years ago. Still waiting.


Way to have that early 80's Big 3 attitude.



> The thing that many people, including yourself, apparently fail to grasp is that the views expressed on this forum really don’t represent the market as a whole. That fact should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, because comments like yours have been made here for close to a decade, and over that decade the only thing that has happened to Canon’s market dominance is a slight increase. But hey, maybe that will change someday.


Do you have any more baseless & rude insults you'd like to sling around in your blind, head in the sand, loyalty to Canon? You're on a roll with your "modicum of intelligence".



BillB said:


> Well, how long is Sony willing to keep putting money in to camera development without increasing its camera share? We don't know whether Sony is making money on its cameras or not.


It seems like the 2nd part of your post invalidates the second. The first part assumes they're losing money which in the second part you admit you don't know.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> ???
> 
> "High-speed continuous shooting at up to 10 fps(4) with full AF / AE tracking for approximately seven seconds(5) in full-frame mode with an increased buffer memory, and approximately three times as long in APS-C mode."
> Of course, I'm not a wildlife shooter, but this seems slow to me... at least compared to a 1DX Mark II (which is more money). But that sensor....
> ...



Side note: If I read the footnotes correctly on the Sony release, those figures are jpg only.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 17, 2019)

Codebunny said:


> My main gripe with the Sony bodies is the instance on using SD cards. Cfast would be better, but every pro camera using CFExpress is the ideal. I want to have 'a' set of memory cards I trust. But I am sure there are folks just as happy they can put SD cards into this thing.


Never had a single SD card failure in over 20 years. Sony Tough SD cards are the way to go.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 17, 2019)

AlanF said:


> If you meant 200-1000 relative to a FF 22 MP sensor, then OK. It's about the same with a 5DS vs a 1DX.



What you mean relative to FF sensor? 

The way i look at it: i have 61MP / 10 FPS full frame quality at 200-600mm and APS-C quality 22MP / 10 FPS at 1000mm, still pretty amazing. And 1.3 crop gives 30MP / 800mm / 10 FPS. All in a single camera with an $1800 lens.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> ...Do you have any more baseless & rude insults you'd like to sling around in your blind, head in the sand, loyalty to Canon? You're on a roll with your "modicum of intelligence"....
> 
> 
> ...It seems like the 2nd part of your post invalidates the second. The first part assumes they're losing money which in the second part you admit you don't know.



If you consider those comments from Neuro to be rude, you obviously haven't been paying much attention to this forum.He was on good behavior with those remarks. 

No, BillB's comment did not contradict themselves. He wondered how long Sony would be willing to invest in cameras without gaining market share. He then commented that we don't know if they are actually making money on cameras or not. One can certainly make money without gaining market share, but it's also appropriate to assume that most companies would like to increase their market share, especially when the overall market is shrinking.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2019)

blackcoffee17 said:


> What you mean relative to FF sensor?
> 
> The way i look at it: i have 61MP / 10 FPS full frame quality at 200-600mm and APS-C quality 22MP / 10 FPS at 1000mm, still pretty amazing. And 1.3 crop gives 30MP / 800mm / 10 FPS. All in a single camera with an $1800 lens.


Yes, that sounds great. But, please keep in mind that that $1,800 lens performs on par with a $900 Sigma lens. So, if you put a $900 Sigma lens on a 20 mp 10 fps Canon 7DII, you have about the same level of performance for well under half the price.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 17, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> lenses.
> 
> Everyone has lenses.
> 
> ...



While i like Canon's amazing RF lenses, for me the Sony 200-600 worth more than all specialty 1.2 lenses for $3000. 
As you said, everyone has lenses now


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 17, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Yes, that sounds great. But, please keep in mind that that $1,800 lens performs on par with a $900 Sigma lens. So, if you put a $900 Sigma lens on a 20 mp 10 fps Canon 7DII, you have about the same level of performance for well under half the price.



From the test i've seen it's a pretty sharp and good quality lens. Also IF and internal zoom and weathersealed. But more importantly it's a native lens, so less likely to have AF or future compatibility issues.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 17, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> I dont think anyone could credibly believe that. Canon has had years upon years where all they showed- even with thier biggest lines- 5d, 7d- that they were content with making adequate cameras.
> 
> There hasn't been true excitement for a canon body arguably since the 1dx2,


Canon is not in body excitement business; they are making workhorses. My 10 years old 5D2 is still pretty adequate for my needs.

Sony, on the other hand, is way too much of an entertainment company, and it shows.



ashmadux said:


> Canon's own philosophy has now ******* them. They can't catch up to this. They wont.
> 
> *I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development.* The writing is on the wall, especially if they have no desire to make class leading products. at that end, whats the point?


I don't know what will happen to ILC market in 5 years from now, but if it still exist, Canon will still be selling their workhorses. Sony, on the other hand, may run out of "true excitement" ideas in camera business and switch to yet another market of new toys for rich kids.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Yes, that sounds great. But, please keep in mind that that $1,800 lens performs on par with a $900 Sigma lens. So, if you put a $900 Sigma lens on a 20 mp 10 fps Canon 7DII, you have about the same level of performance for well under half the price.



Where has someone compared it with a $900 Sigma? The only comparison I have seen so far is a worthless one by TN with the more expensive Sigma Sport. It is not a rhetorical question but a genuine one as I am interested in comparisons and haven't found any proper reviews by the good sites.


----------



## Justhandguns (Jul 17, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Canon is not in body excitement business; they are making workhorses. My 10 years old 5D2 is still pretty adequate for my needs.
> 
> Sony, on the other hand, is way too much of an entertainment company, and it shows.
> 
> ...



Well, there is always an argument for that. Before Canon's EOS/EF long line of "AF" SLR, journalism = Nikon, that was when Auto Focus took over the world of 'workhorse' film cameras. There is every chance that Canon may lose the crown to someone else if they are not bring out something innovative. Canon was the company which brought USM focusing motors to photography, they were the one which introduced 'Eye Focus', not the 'eye tracking' these days, it is eyeball tracking of which focusing point you are looking at into the view finder (EOS5/50e/3). By looking at the trend and roadmap of Canon at the moment, I serious do not see them repeating their glories in the 90s'.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Where has someone compared it with a $900 Sigma? The only comparison I have seen so far is a worthless one by TN with the more expensive Sigma Sport. It is not a rhetorical question but a genuine one as I am interested in comparisons and haven't found any proper reviews by the good sites.


I _thought_ I had seen some early reviews that were placing it in the same range as the Sigmas and the Tamrons, but of course, now I can't locate them. My apologies if I'm incorrect.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2019)

blackcoffee17 said:


> From the test i've seen it's a pretty sharp and good quality lens. Also IF and internal zoom and weathersealed. But more importantly it's a native lens, so less likely to have AF or future compatibility issues.


I don't disagree. I was just pointing out that you can get nearly the same thing with the 7DII and third party lenses, or, for that matter, the D500 and Nikon lens and both options are less expensive and have been available for years.

Simply trying to introduce a doze of reality into all the hype.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I don't disagree. I was just pointing out that you can get nearly the same thing with the 7DII and third party lenses, or, for that matter, the D500 and Nikon lens and both options are less expensive and have been available for years.
> 
> Simply trying to introduce a doze of reality into all the hype.


It's so easy to stoke up GAS by hype and Sony are masters of it!


----------



## deleteme (Jul 17, 2019)

The real points of significance for me in this new body are the AF improvements if they really work, the large buffer for 10fps at 61MP and the improved grip.
I have experience with high res cameras and the res is nice but world changing. 
Over the years usability is key.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

Dreamwalker Photography said:


> OMG! Canon Rumors is trolling themselves with Sony announcements! Have they become paid shills for Sony? Ask 'Aussie Shooter'...only he knows for sure.
> 
> On a more serious note, where are the Canon engineers? What are they doing? Why is Canon not on the leading edge as they have been for decades? Giving the technological lead to a movie company...ROTCOL.


I'd say they been slacking since the first EOS cinema line {partially the exception of the 5div}. AS for what they are doing. They are pulling a nintendo. "Spend less, give less, make more money." Now that the market is worse, they have even less incentive to go all out. It seems to be working when I see these sales charts.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 17, 2019)

ozturert said:


> Only Panasonic S1 has internal 10bit recording (under 2500 USD) and that is the reason why S1 is huge compared to other FF mirrorless cameras. No other model does that. It isn't Canon crippling or thinking for customers. This is Sony propaganda.
> Which AF verification? Sony says A7R IV has a special AF mode for low light focusing. Sony can verify this if you ask them, but Sony doesn't claim AF at -6EV so that must be true.
> I never said 4K video in A7R IV was bad, I talked about the crop mode which Canon has been criticised a lot. Now Sony has the same crop if you want a good quality 4K video.
> Sony claims better weather sealing than A7R III which had no sealing around battery/card cover.


Sony is super 35/aps-c type of crop vs 1.74 crop on canon. they arent the same. you also arent factoring in that they make specific lenses for s35 not for 1.74. so it becomes a major inconvenience if you want to shoot wide in 4k.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> The real points of significance for me in this new body are the AF improvements if they really work, the large buffer for 10fps at 61MP...


Yes, but keep this Sony footnote in mind:
_[v] In *JPEG *(Extra fine / Fine) or compressed RAW mode_


----------



## Architect1776 (Jul 17, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> How good is Sony's sensor when someone posts a video on the a9 + 600 f/4 (that's US $17,000), and the only thing people comment on, is sensor dust?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I stand by my statement.
The development of cameras is different from developing technology.
Canon has some incredible sensors and technology but seem to have a problem incorporating it into consumer products. And by consumer I mean pros as well vs heavy industrial applications.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Or by selling more cameras, if you care about that sort of thing. We probably don’t, but I’m sure Canon and Sony do.











RIM/Blackberry global revenue 2004-2022 | Statista


In its 2022 fiscal year, Canadian company BlackBerry recorded revenues of 718 million U.S.




www.statista.com





I’m being glib here as I’m on the train, but Neuro, you’re smarter than this. RIM is an extreme example, but unit sales are sometimes a lagging indicator—not a leading one. 

Nobody shoots Minoltas anymore.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 17, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> How good is Sony's sensor when someone posts a video on the a9 + 600 f/4 (that's US $17,000), and the only thing people comment on, is sensor dust?
> 
> 
> 
> Canon nipped this issue in the bud with its sensor shutter closing. [..]



Canon only nipped that on half of their RF mount cameras, the RP doesn't have that option. I've worked around it with the EF-RF filter adapter for the time being, but once I have actual RF lenses I'll need to stock up on sensor cleaning utensils.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 17, 2019)

Justhandguns said:


> Well, there is always an argument for that. Before Canon's EOS/EF long line of "AF" SLR, journalism = Nikon, that was when Auto Focus took over the world of 'workhorse' film cameras. There is every chance that Canon may lose the crown to someone else if they are not bring out something innovative. Canon was the company which brought USM focusing motors to photography, they were the one which introduced 'Eye Focus', not the 'eye tracking' these days, it is eyeball tracking of which focusing point you are looking at into the view finder (EOS5/50e/3). By looking at the trend and roadmap of Canon at the moment, I serious do not see them repeating their glories in the 90s'.


Reminds me of a saying from that time: "Minolta makes the best bodies, Nikon makes the best lenses and Canon
makes the best compromise".

Making "the best bodies" did not help Minolta back then.
Bringing top technology (SWM + VR) only to costly lenses did not help Nikon.
Canon's workhorses were working for soccer moms as well as for journalists.

And although Canon's 'Eye Focus' did not work for me on my 50e, it was still a very capable and comfortable camera of its time.


----------



## KirkD (Jul 17, 2019)

As a nature/landscape photographer, 15 stops of dynamic range really gets my attention!! I have no plans to switch to Sony, and already have an EOS R. I don't really need super-high resolution; dynamic range is much more important to me. When Canon's pro-level mirrorless body comes out, I expect improved HDR and in -body stabilization, and a continuation of their amazing RF lenses. Canon is definitely slow off the mark when it comes to mirrorless, but I think they are finally showing some exciting promise over the next year and a half. The Sony camera is nice, but not nice enough for me to say good bye to some pretty impressive RF lenses and upcoming cameras.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 17, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Side note: If I read the footnotes correctly on the Sony release, those figures are jpg only.


Ouch! But I wouldn't expect fast out of such a dense sensor anyway.


----------



## max_sr (Jul 17, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> ???
> 
> "High-speed continuous shooting at up to 10 fps(4) with full AF / AE tracking for approximately seven seconds(5) in full-frame mode with an increased buffer memory, and approximately three times as long in APS-C mode."
> Of course, I'm not a wildlife shooter, but this seems slow to me... at least compared to a 1DX Mark II (which is more money). But that sensor....
> ...



Yes it's about as slow as the 7DII.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 17, 2019)

KirkD said:


> As a nature/landscape photographer, 15 stops of dynamic range really gets my attention!!



Why?, It’s marketing bull. Sony have claimed 15 stops of DR since the A7r, the MkII and MkIII had less than the MkI and none of them have close to 15 stops of usable DR.


----------



## Del Paso (Jul 17, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> I dont think anyone could credibly believe that. Canon has had years upon years where all they showed- even with thier biggest lines- 5d, 7d- that they were content with making adequate cameras.
> 
> There hasn't been true excitement for a canon body arguably since the 1dx2, and that has a limited audience. The RP got so much attention for its cheapness, but has one of the most pathetic spec sheets of any modern full frame camera. And thier sensor tech....just...shameful. Lookat all the bad press it took for them to finally be looking into ibis.
> 
> ...


If I were you, I'd replace my crystal bowl with a reliable one...


----------



## tron (Jul 17, 2019)

I cannot see how an EVF camera even this still non-existent - for a few months - Sony can be suitable for birding since it has an EVF. Maybe for bird portraits but for flying that remains to be seen. I guess it would make a fine landscape camera with an adaptor for Canon lenses though...

EDIT: I admit though that Canon should introduce new models a little faster. 7DII and 5DsR are long overdue.


----------



## woodman411 (Jul 17, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I stand by my statement.
> The development of cameras is different from developing technology.
> Canon has some incredible sensors and technology but seem to have a problem incorporating it into consumer products. And by consumer I mean pros as well vs heavy industrial applications.



Everytime I hear Canon is behind in sensor: please show me a real world comparison (not lab numbers, not the pathetic dxo numbers), real shots, where the 5d4 sensor "ruined" a shot and the Sony "saved" it because of dynamic range. Please just show me one example. Just one. You probably can't. But don't feel bad. No one can. You know why? Because like Alik Griffin said, the internet is one big echo chamber, people just regurgitating the same ol stuff.


----------



## Yasko (Jul 17, 2019)

6degrees said:


> Nothing else attracts me more than Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L, and Canon RF 16-28mm F2 L.
> 
> Basically Canon RF F1.2 primes and F2 zooms are much more important, for pro level photography/equipment in my opinion, than anything else in mirrorless industry. Lenses are much more important than bodies. Canon R body is behind for sure and it will catch up. But if the lens mount has flaw, it is going to stay there for 30 years.
> 
> The only thing about Canon RF lenses that bothers me is the prices. Cheaper than Zeiss Otus, Leica M, I know. But still too much.



With today‘s high ISO Bodies a f/2 zoom is impressive but more a hassle to carry (and pay) than a need-to-have.
There are f/2.8 and f/4 lenses available with really good IQ. Of course a f/2 is „better“, but really necessary? I doubt that.
Looking forward to „you have no idea“ comments


----------



## clicstudio (Jul 17, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/


I switched to an a7r iii from a 1Dx II last year and after 18 years of Canon "1" bodies. I could never go back. It's the best thing that ever happened to me. I can do.thjngs I never thought possible before and at half the price, half the weight and with 99% AF accuracy and lot more DR. 
I don't do wild life but I have shot birds in flight just for fun and thos thing doesn't let go of the subject. Perfect AF every time. Rent one and try it for a few days. You willrnever go back. Just my opinion. Cheers!


----------



## Kit. (Jul 17, 2019)

davidhfe said:


> Nobody shoots Minoltas anymore.


Oh lol, you are to be surprised...


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> I dont think anyone could credibly believe that. Canon has had years upon years where all they showed- even with thier biggest lines- 5d, 7d- that they were content with making adequate cameras...I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development.



This is the kind of nonsense that results when every Canon innovation is ignored and every Sony innovation is hyped to the moon.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> Perfect AF every time. Rent one and try it for a few days. You willrnever go back. Just my opinion. Cheers!



Perhaps you could post your settings because I didn't get perfect AF with the supposedly better A9.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Why?, It’s marketing bull. Sony have claimed 15 stops of DR since the A7r, the MkII and MkIII had less than the MkI and none of them have close to 15 stops of usable DR.



Eh...I may be forgetting a Sony PR, but I believe it's their fans who have been claiming 15 stops DR.

Every since the D800 came out fanboys have been acting as if ALL Sony sensors could deliver 15 stops (rounding up) of DR. This was never the case. The D8x0 series always stood out as the highest DR bodies, with a few other Nikon sensors delivering similar performance, all of them in the 14-15ev range. Most Sony sensors have been at or below the 5D4 (i.e. 13-14ev range). There are some notable exceptions where a Nikon or Sony sensor delivers 12s. 

These same people tend to assume that ALL Canon sensors have the DR of a 5D3 with banding or a 6D2 with harsh shadow noise.

As I recall the mkII A7's did lose DR compared to the mkI's, and then the mkIII's actually got close to the D8x0 series. I don't feel like looking at DxO at the moment** to get exact numbers, but I think the mkIII's are on par with the D8x0 series, all of which are close to 15 (if you round up to a whole integer).

I've admittedly been a broken record regarding DR on this forum (and others) because...

Most people really have no idea how a DxO DR score translates into reality, i.e. what it actually means for image processing. DR is just pushed on sites like dpreview so they get GAS and "know" they need it.
Most images are not exposed/processed for maximum DR. Example: if you have a D850 and you're not using ETTR then you're not getting any more DR than a 5Dsr shooter who is using ETTR. If you're shooting JPEG you're not doing any better than cameras more than a decade old in RAW.
1ev in the DxO score amounts to little more than a NR slider adjustment. 2ev means a real shadow detail difference that cannot be eliminated with post processing technique (NR), but only in images pushed to the max in terms of DR. 3ev and more starts to equate to actual difficulties with wide DR scenes that can only be shot in 1 frame.

** I really don't ever feel like looking at DxO, but their DR tests are internally consistent and reasonably close to reality. The rest of their tests are demonstrably trash.


----------



## 6degrees (Jul 17, 2019)

Yasko said:


> With today‘s high ISO Bodies a f/2 zoom is impressive but more a hassle to carry (and pay) than a need-to-have.
> There are f/2.8 and f/4 lenses available with really good IQ. Of course a f/2 is „better“, but really necessary? I doubt that.
> Looking forward to „you have no idea“ comments



F4 or even F2.8 lenses can’t generate artistic bokeh effect. Period. They are only good if the purpose is to take snapshot with everything clear and no emphasized main focus in the photo. Those everything clear snapshot photos, taken by F4 or even F2.8 lenses, will not have popup effect which separating main focus/object from backgrounds, as those taken by F2, F1.4, or F1.2 pro lenses.

To make artistic photography, larger aperture lenses are the must.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2019)

6degrees said:


> ...To make artistic photography, larger aperture lenses are the must..



I think these people might disagree, but I'm sure you know more than they did.

Group f/64 —

Ansel Adams
Imogen Cunningham
John Paul Edwards
Sonya Noskowiak
Henry Swift
Willard Van Dyke
Edward Weston
Preston Holder
Consuelo Kanaga
Alma Lavenson
Brett Weston.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> Everytime I hear Canon is behind in sensor: please show me a real world comparison (not lab numbers, not the pathetic dxo numbers), real shots, where the 5d4 sensor "ruined" a shot and the Sony "saved" it because of dynamic range. Please just show me one example. Just one. You probably can't. But don't feel bad. No one can. You know why? Because like Alik Griffin said, the internet is one big echo chamber, people just regurgitating the same ol stuff.



You will never get that example. I have tried to get similar examples for years. Once the DR debate goes to "practical examples" I can typically end it with a shot I've repeatedly posted from an _original_ Canon 7D.

I have never been forced to post shots from a higher DR Canon such as the 5Ds or a 5D4. No one has ever been able to challenge, with a real world example, a freaking 7D.

I've often been tempted to play devil's advocate because I know I could pull out the 7D and borrow a D800, go out at sunset, and illustrate the difference between them in a real world setting. I could probably find the difference against a 5D4 as well (but also illustrate how, in that case, it can be mitigated with NR). But the people who scream the loudest about how important DR is to every photograph they take have never, not even once, been able to challenge and force me to move to a higher DR camera than a freaking Canon 7D.

Most people are not shooting and processing for maximum DR. They're simply chasing DR as a spec.


----------



## 6degrees (Jul 17, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I think these people might disagree, but I'm sure you know more than they did.
> 
> Group f/64 —
> 
> ...



Those, who understand this issue, will appreciate what Canon RF F1.2 L lenses really mean. That is not what everyday-changed-body can replace. . Yesterday they were cheering for a7riii, today a7riv, tomorrow a7rv. But lenses are the same. Canon RF F1.2 L are the future.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2019)

6degrees said:


> We, who understand this issue, will appreciate what Canon RF F1.2 L lenses really mean. That is not what everyday-changed-body can replace. . Yesterday they were cheering for a7riii, today a7riv, tomorrow a7rv. But lenses are the same. Canon RF F1.2 L are the future.


I'm sorry but your response is incomprehensible. I understand that some people are in love with the overly romantic soft-focus effect that extremely wide aperture lenses provide. Wedding, portrait and commercial photographers who need to give the public what they want may utilize these lenses and there is nothing wrong with that. 

The look can be fairly termed "artistic" but it hasn't been art since Paul Strand introduced straight photography to Alfred Stieglitz. I was simply trying to educate you. Of course, if you choose not to learn anything, that is your choice.


----------



## SteB1 (Jul 17, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/


Yes, I have to admit I've been looking at these. Currently I used a 7D mkII and 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS II as my main walk around set up, plus a number of other lenses and bodies. The 200-600mm f6.3 looks amazing. The internal zoom is the main feature, because in practise it's almost impossible to zoom in an out when something like a flying bird comes closer than expected. It seems sharp at 600mm, and there are other little features like the tabs either side of the lens for carrying it. This A7R IV gives 26.2mp in crop mode and it gives the buffer 3x the limit. With the high resolution EVF this is going to make an incredible portable wildlife set up.

I'd like to think Canon were going to match this because I'm very invested in the system, for instance I have 7 Canon fit macro lenses. However, there seems no good reason to think that Canon are going to introduce something competitive in the next few years. Like yourself 10k+ lenses are out of the question, not just on price, but on portability.


----------



## AJ (Jul 17, 2019)

Ok so the Sony has 9.8% more pixels in each dimension compared to the 5DS. To me this is more like Sony catching up to Canon.


----------



## dcm (Jul 17, 2019)

Dreamwalker Photography said:


> OMG! Canon Rumors is trolling themselves with Sony announcements! Have they become paid shills for Sony? Ask 'Aussie Shooter'...only he knows for sure.
> 
> On a more serious note, where are the Canon engineers? What are they doing? Why is Canon not on the leading edge as they have been for decades? Giving the technological lead to a movie company...ROTCOL.



Actually, CR know its audience well and preemptively posted the article before someone else did, probably in the wrong category. What happens after that is a bit out of their control.

Looks nicely spec’d. Sony photo gear never really interested me, even though I have used their video and audio gear as long as I’ve used Canon photo gear. Early advice I got during film days was to choose my glass and don’t get hung up on bodies. Bodies change much more frequently than lenses. This still holds in my opinion.


----------



## PVCC (Jul 17, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Lensrentals are professional lens testers and publish their results on quality variation for all to see. Canon generally has very good quality control and often the best of the usual producers, especially their most recent lenses. Sony is often the worst. Read the latest blog of two days ago on 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/07/just-the-mtf-charts-70-200mm-f2-8-zooms/
> This is what they write about the Sony: "_Welcome to the MTF of the most tested lens in our history. Why did we test so many copies? Because Sony fanboys (and employees) were absolutely, positively, certain this lens was the best 70-200mm EVER. It’s not. It’s a decent lens with a LOT of sample variation_."
> 
> If you want each lens to be individually tested and only the very best picked out, the price will be some ten times more, as lenstrentals has pointed out in the past, and reiterated two days ago with their comments on the Zeiss $21,000 Cinema 70-200mm T2.9 zoom."_If you are expecting that extra $18,000 buys you higher resolution, well, nope. What it buys is consistency, lack of focus breathing, a true parfocal image, and accurate focusing scale."_



Hi,

Since some people replied to my 5th point, I'd say:

I also own many L lenses, and had to return many times to get a multi-thousand dollars Lens working "as expected".

With that I mean: 2 copies (of different models) were AWFUL. Unacceptable blurred left or right area of the frame, no matter the aperture. In fact the appetite doesn't help much (if anything) when optical elements are misaligned...

If a company sells $2 - $3K (or even 10K) Lenses, any normal customer would expect it's working fine. I know some copies may do better, but not that way...

Just remember one IMPORTANT THING:
In USA you can Return a lens until you're satisfied with the copy you get. But is NOT always possible in other countries...

Several times, when explaining the problem, other people told me "but you can return it until the good copy". Well, unfortunately not. That's only in US, CA, Europe and some few other countries/regions.

So, for me, be Sony (with even more expensive optics), Canon or Nikon, they should increase the QC of lenses, which lot of times are 2, 3 or more times the cost of the camera itself in the Pro field.

In fact they do it. But it seems too low for so expensive Pro product.

Testing individually is done at certain level. But need to implement an industrial procedure, not by humans, to ensure better QC.

It's not so difficult at all. These companies are leaders in optics and can perfectly check the proper alignment in a automated array of production. "Engineering" speaking is not that difficult, nor so much more expensive.

The more expensive cost comes when they detect so many variants or worse, "bad copies", that require to go back if they want to KEEP A PRO STANDARD (as supposed..), at least for the "Best in class" line of lenses they sell.

It should be done for such expensive lenses. As well as they test the cameras.

Don't get me wrong, Nothing is "100% error free".
But sometimes they're out of the obvious & expected "normal" quality standards.

PS: I do know LensRentals. They know this problem very well, as Bryan at the-digital-picture does.

PPS: Sorry for my typos, from smartphone is not that easy


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2019)

PVCC said:


> Hi,
> 
> Since some people replied to my 5th point, I'd say:
> 
> ...


You claim it is not so difficult at all to get the quality control and you know lensrentals. Here is their take on it, a good read that explains the problems: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/02/optical-quality-assurance/


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2019)

PVCC said:


> I also own many L lenses, and had to return many times to get a multi-thousand dollars Lens working "as expected".
> 
> With that I mean: 2 copies (of different models) were AWFUL. Unacceptable blurred left or right area of the frame, no matter the aperture.



Have you had Canon test your body mount for an alignment issue?

Both the mount (relative to the film or sensor plane) and the lens have to be within a certain range of each other in terms of alignment. A lens can test just within acceptable range on one side of the range, and a body on the other, and the combination will show a problem. Yet the same lens on a different body can be fine, and the same body with a different lens can be fine.

Typically if the lens alone is out of spec then exchanging or repairing it solves the problem. It's when the body mount is also close to being out of spec that you can go through lens after lens or repair after repair and still see the issue.

I went through this due to a lens that developed an issue over time with the left side being blurry compared to the rest of the frame. Canon Irvine looked at it several times and said there was no problem. Finally a manager got involved, asked for both my DSLR and lens, and instructed a tech to adjust them both to be as close to perfect as possible. The lens was nearly out of spec, but so was the body mount, and it was the combo that created the problem.

I was annoyed that Canon's techs were putting my lens on a bench and saying "it's fine" when it was on the edge of not being fine. But to their credit they adjusted both at no additional charge over the first visit, and I might have run into the issue with another lens later had the body not also been adjusted.

This was a long time ago btw, Canon 10D days. I haven't had a problem with a Canon body or L lens since.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> Way to have that early 80's Big 3 attitude.
> 
> 
> Do you have any more baseless & rude insults you'd like to sling around in your blind, head in the sand, loyalty to Canon? You're on a roll with your "modicum of intelligence".
> ...


Apparently you find facts personally offensive. I find that rather sad.


----------



## Stereodude (Jul 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Apparently you find facts personally offensive. I find that rather sad.


I didn't realize you were a fact. I would have pegged you for something else, but thanks for letting me know.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jul 17, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Look at the new Sony review from Tony Northrup. Sony is playing hardball.



Or Sony is late to the game. Chelsea Northrup sounded high on something .. The A7R iv having *no touchscreen* means existing Sony users will do time travel backwards. Further, the screen is smaller with less dots than Nikon and Canon recent full frame mirrorless bodies released. The A7R iv has *no S-RAW or M-RAW* which should plague various users when they go to transfer and process files. I know this for a fact, because I shoot the 50 mp 5DS and often need M-RAW to keep file size within reason. It's worth $3500 .. but not a home run yet. Hardly anybody put it through the paces yet. It could do better or worse than expected. My thought .. they should have made it better and raised the price to $4000



AJ said:


> Ok so the Sony has 9.8% more pixels in each dimension compared to the 5DS. To me this is more like Sony catching up to Canon.



That's a realistic way to express it. Then its still behind the 1DX mk ii for FPS (which barely matters in this case). As I wrote above, the RAW settings are lame in the A7R iv. It leaves good reason for a lot of Sony enthusiasts to keep A7R iii bodies, then wait.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> But you go right ahead and keep believing that Canon is "severely falling behind". But if you really believed that, you wouldn't be here. You would have switched. And be posting on Sony forums, and sharing your pics and showing how much better the equipment made your photography, right?


Well, I’m not sure about that. I think there are some individuals who, upon finding that grass they thought would be greener has large brown patches and profligate weeds, come back here in some sort of attempt to convince themselves they made a good choice after all.

Or as me dear ol’ Irish Gran would have put it, they stepped into a bucket of sh!t and are looking for others to jump in with them.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> I didn't realize you were a fact. I would have pegged you for something else, but thanks for letting me know.


From your comments, I infer that you wouldn’t know a fact if it bit you on the ass. Could be a tough way to go through life.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2019)

davidhfe said:


> I’m being glib here as I’m on the train, but Neuro, you’re smarter than this. RIM is an extreme example, but unit sales are sometimes a lagging indicator—not a leading one.


So Canon has been lagging for 16 years and counting. Okidokeee.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> *I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development.* The writing is on the wall, especially if they have no desire to make class leading products. at that end, whats the point?


YAPODFC. 

Remember when mirrorless was going to kill the DSLR in 5 years? That was >8 years ago and DSLRs still comprise the majority of the ILC market. 

Regardless, Canon doesn’t care if you give them 5 years or 5 minutes. If they can’t maintain market share over time, they’ll probably bail on the market...you know, the typical Sony move.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2019)

6degrees said:


> F4 or even F2.8 lenses can’t generate artistic bokeh effect. Period.


Perhaps not in _your_ hands, but that’s got nothing to do with the lens.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jul 18, 2019)

Tahoejr said:


> Canon said they would be the most aggressive camera company in terms of mirror-less development, but Sony certainly isn't taking a wait and see mode. Hopefully the new Canon RF models will be sooner than 2020


they are aggressively filing patents.


----------



## tmc784 (Jul 18, 2019)

So buying expensive high MP camera will make you take pictures like a Pro ?


----------



## Architect1776 (Jul 18, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> Everytime I hear Canon is behind in sensor: please show me a real world comparison (not lab numbers, not the pathetic dxo numbers), real shots, where the 5d4 sensor "ruined" a shot and the Sony "saved" it because of dynamic range. Please just show me one example. Just one. You probably can't. But don't feel bad. No one can. You know why? Because like Alik Griffin said, the internet is one big echo chamber, people just regurgitating the same ol stuff.



I do NOT believe in DXO at all.
I have been shooting Canon since 1971.
I do not under expose my shots by 5 stops and then try to save them with falling back on DR.
I look at things like the animal eye AF and other features like IBIS which is huge to me as I wish to use my old FD, FL and R lenses on the new R mount cameras. Still not there.
It would be nice to have FF 4K though I would not use it much many would. Actually as I have said in the past 4K is outdated and Canon needs to go 8K FF with a global shutter for the video.
The a9 shoots faster than the 1DX MII, why?
High MP would be nice as Canon does make a 120 and 240 mp sensors, so why is this technology not put into a FF sensor? 
So no it is not DXO or anything like that just the overall package.
Canon makes far superior lenses to all including Zeis and Leica.
Canon makes wonderful cameras that are easy to use but seem overall a generation or 2 behind in general.
I have defended Canon for years but it seems with each iteration they fall farther behind both Nikon and Sony feature for feature. Yes some are stupid but many would be very nice to have. I saw the new R as an opportunity to step up. Canon has with incredible lenses, let's hope the bodies will come that match the incredible lenses. I can accept the first gen to be behind but not the second gen to be behind at all.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 18, 2019)

drama said:


> You work in landscape, astro and nature photography? Tell us your secrets, oh wise one!
> Canon have hardly "thrown away" 2019. They've announced and released a ton of RF mount lenses in readiness for a new body, and we're only six months in. If you don't want to wait, Sony just announced a 60mpx 10fps camera for your nature/astro/landscape fast moving work. I guess you're the target market! Either way, I'm sure Canon will heed your demands and immediately release all their R&D for fear of you leaving.


Reread my post and take a deep breath. The RF lenses are only useful to me with a RF body that meets my needs. Current releases don’t. The RF system also significantly impacts my investment in EF lenses (I know you can adapt) and there are significant gaps in the RF current releases. 

As I said, Canon have always had great glass but they are really lagging in their bodies and it has been too many years since the last release of bodies that I use or would buy. Time is not on their side and Sony are ramping up the pressure on me at least with this newest release. I would adapt some of my glass to Sony if I converted to them (11-24, Sigma 14 1.8) and would switch out to some of the longer lenses Sony are releasing as we speak.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 18, 2019)

RobbieHat said:


> ...they are really lagging in their bodies and it has been too many years since the last release of bodies that I use or would buy.



Wait...what? Canon is "lagging" in their bodies but it "has been too many years since the last release" that you use or would buy. So, if you haven't bought or used a new Canon body for years on what authority are you claiming they are "lagging?" 



RobbieHat said:


> Time is not on their side and Sony are ramping up the pressure on me at least with this newest release. I would adapt some of my glass to Sony if I converted to them (11-24, Sigma 14 1.8) and would switch out to some of the longer lenses Sony are releasing as we speak.



No one is stopping you. If you prefer to switch to Sony, by all means, do so. But, just commenting on the forum to complain is pointless. "We'd like to talk you out of switching" said no one, ever on this forum.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2019)

unfocused said:


> "We'd like to talk you out of switching" said no one, ever on this forum.


True, but what has been said is, “Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.”


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 18, 2019)

tmc784 said:


> So buying expensive high MP camera will make you take pictures like a Pro ?



Only with the right batteries and lens caps.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Jul 18, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Eh...I may be forgetting a Sony PR, but I believe it's their fans who have been claiming 15 stops DR.
> 
> Every since the D800 came out fanboys have been acting as if ALL Sony sensors could deliver 15 stops (rounding up) of DR. This was never the case. The D8x0 series always stood out as the highest DR bodies, with a few other Nikon sensors delivering similar performance, all of them in the 14-15ev range. Most Sony sensors have been at or below the 5D4 (i.e. 13-14ev range). There are some notable exceptions where a Nikon or Sony sensor delivers 12s.
> 
> ...


I agree that the DR of the 5D Mark IV is excellent. I've been using mine to duplicate 35 mm slides for the last few months and it's been performing much better than I expected. My slides are very dense and I've made many thousands of exposures that require very wide DR to capture. Some images have to be composited with HDR stacks but the 5D4 has been able to capture a great number of slides in a single image. My previous 5D's could never have handled many of those. The 5D4 also has a vastly improved ability to lift shadows relative to the other 5D's I've owned. I'm not sure the 5D4 sensor quite gets down to the noise floor that some of the best Sony sensor's achieve but it's certainly very good. 

Had Canon put out that sensor a few years earlier we wouldn't have had to endure all the bitching and the negative perception of Canon sensors that still persists. But, as annoying as the Sony trolls are, it was Canon that resisted the need to upgrade their sensors when it was obvious to everyone that they were behind.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> But, as annoying as the Sony trolls are, it was Canon that resisted the need to upgrade their sensors when it was obvious to everyone that they were behind.


Was it, though? Did more low ISO DR help Sony sell more cameras? Did Canon lose market share because they had less low ISO DR? The answers are no and no. So, either it wasn’t remotely ‘obvious to everyone’ or, if it was, the majority of camera buyers didn’t give a damn. 

Just more evidence of the disconnect between forum folk and measurebators, and the camera-buying public out there in the real world.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Jul 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Was it, though? Did more low ISO DR help Sony sell more cameras? Did Canon lose market share because they had less low ISO DR? The answers are no and no. So, either it wasn’t remotely ‘obvious to everyone’ or, if it was, the majority of camera buyers didn’t give a damn.
> 
> Just more evidence of the disconnect between forum folk and measurebators, and the camera-buying public out there in the real world.


It's pretty obvious that you are only interested in enforcing your viewpoint on everyone else in this forum and couldn't care less what is going on in the "real world".


----------



## maves (Jul 18, 2019)

People keep talking about Canon not listening to pro's, but pretty much all the pro's I know (and it's quite a few) are out taking amazing photographs, not sitting on forums. They use their spare cash on workshops and travel, things that actually WILL make you a better photographer. They upgrade when their gear dies. Their photographs are brilliant and they are booked out for months.


----------



## sdz (Jul 18, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> snip....
> 
> *I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development.* The writing is on the wall, especially if they have no desire to make class leading products. at that end, whats the point?



Canon sensor technology lags behind Sony's. This is one area in which Canon is lacking. Are there any other areas? 

*Crickets!*

Canon may find it difficult to manufacture sensors that rival's Sony's. This need not be a matter of desire. The cause is economic. Canon currently lacks the competitive advantages Sony enjoys with its sensor business. One would need a true "all things being equal" clause to claim that Canon lacks the desire to produce class leading cameras. But, things are unequal. Canon is conservative. It is not complacent and incompetent.

Sensible persons would hope that Canon can improve the technology in its sensors and in the making of its sensors. There are few benefits for consumers when one company has a monopoly in a key component.

That said, I doubt Canon would abandon its camera development business. Why would it? What may happen is Canon may choose to use Sony sensors in its FF cameras. Why would it make this choice? A key reason: The costs of developing sensors could become so great and Sony's advantages so significant that competing with Sony in processor development would be uneconomic for Canon -- which is to say, unprofitable. If that point were to come, Canon would act irrationally if it attempted to compete with Sony. This situation is common. In the past, DEC, Motorola and HP abandoned computer processor development. It is not as though they failed to produce innovative products. They did. Rather, the economics of the situation favored Intel because Intel produced processors for a commodity product, personal computers. Intel had economies of scale the others lacked. It had the massive revenue stream needed to build fabs, to take risks, etc. Intel became the leading oligopoly provider of CPUs.

Sony, thanks to the expertise in and income from its cell phone businesses, now has a competitive advantage with respect to Canon, Nikon and other sensor chip makers. It remains to be seen whether Sony can translate this advantage into market share in full frame cameras. It could, but consumers find system switches costly. It also remains to be seen if Canon can improve its sensors to a degree needed to compete with Sony as an equal -- if only to preserve the expertise it has gained over the last half-century and to prevent Sony from becoming a monopoly provider of image sensors for FF and ASP-C cameras. Monopolies supress innovation.

Finally, Canon sensors continue to produce high-quality images in its cameras. We need to remind ourselves of this fact. Sony has not made Canon cameras obsolete. Camera sensors are a mature technology. The leader and the led are not so different that using Canon cameras is irrational. But, Sony is the leader. That's a fact.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> It's pretty obvious that you are only interested in enforcing your viewpoint on everyone else in this forum and couldn't care less what is going on in the "real world".


So in your world, Canon ‘needed to upgrade their sensors’ because ‘they were behind’. And you think that’s the real world? LOL. 

I’d just like people to be aware of the facts, and ideally be able to use those facts as a basis for logical deduction. I suppose that’s expecting too much from some people here.


----------



## CDR (Jul 18, 2019)

I think that these Sony improvements only help's raise the bar for all - as a wildlife hobbyist I can't justify switching systems just as and when somebody gets an advantage - I have been shooting Canon since the Canon 300D with DSLR's right through to a 1DX (second hand) and now on an EOS R. What is 100% clear to me is mirrorless is the future and whilst the R has been lambasted it is a sleeper - its much, much better than just the tech specs but has limitations. Having used for a while what would I want - just a mirrorless FF 7D11 replacement with a decent crop, IBIS and better tracking speed and especially faster EVF refresh rates but cheaper than a 1D replacement. The way that the AF accuracy of my R has revitalized some of my lenses and the tracking capability for stills / video (with decent contrast) is actually superb and the DR on what is really the 5D4 sensor is really very good!

People say no Canon leading-edge recent technologies - what about DPAF which was the first to allow eye tracking on video and still has the best / most natural way of changing focus? And of course, the new R mount is a big change which I believe will bring big advantages to weight/length of longer lenses ahead - check out 70-200 2.8 as an example. I am sure the next bodies will have synchronized IBIS included etc. but I think more importantly Canon should look to reduce its model spread and extend life through firmware updates rather than restricting access to features - but that I think will be unlikely..

However at the end of the day it's much more about the subject / framing / lighting and the moment than the tech which people keep forgetting - after all some of my best shots to this day were taken with a 30D and Sigma 100-300 F4 (right place right time).


----------



## Timedog (Jul 18, 2019)

Not super excited about 60+ MP. At that pixel density you're just dealing with huge file sizes, diffraction limits, and optics limits. I mean, I have the RF 50mm which is insane at 30mp on my EOS R, but I doubt I'll get enough out of doubling the MP to really care?

Seems like the areas where super high MP is needed are also areas where you use small apertures (landscape, macro), so you're not even seeing the full benefit of that extra detail due to diffraction limited aperture.


----------



## ozturert (Jul 18, 2019)

6degrees said:


> F4 or even F2.8 lenses can’t generate artistic bokeh effect. Period. They are only good if the purpose is to take snapshot with everything clear and no emphasized main focus in the photo. Those everything clear snapshot photos, taken by F4 or even F2.8 lenses, will not have popup effect which separating main focus/object from backgrounds, as those taken by F2, F1.4, or F1.2 pro lenses.
> 
> To make artistic photography, larger aperture lenses are the must.


Artistic photography = Blurred background? Really?


----------



## ozturert (Jul 18, 2019)

SteB1 said:


> Yes, I have to admit I've been looking at these. Currently I used a 7D mkII and 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS II as my main walk around set up, plus a number of other lenses and bodies. The 200-600mm f6.3 looks amazing. The internal zoom is the main feature, because in practise it's almost impossible to zoom in an out when something like a flying bird comes closer than expected. It seems sharp at 600mm, and there are other little features like the tabs either side of the lens for carrying it. This A7R IV gives 26.2mp in crop mode and it gives the buffer 3x the limit. With the high resolution EVF this is going to make an incredible portable wildlife set up.
> 
> I'd like to think Canon were going to match this because I'm very invested in the system, for instance I have 7 Canon fit macro lenses. However, there seems no good reason to think that Canon are going to introduce something competitive in the next few years. Like yourself 10k+ lenses are out of the question, not just on price, but on portability.


I think A7R IV's buffer decreases considerably in APS-C mode, like to 3 seconds only. Don't know why, I'd expect an increase.


----------



## caffetin (Jul 18, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> I switched to an a7r iii from a 1Dx II last year and after 18 years of Canon "1" bodies. I could never go back. It's the best thing that ever happened to me. I can do.thjngs I never thought possible before and at half the price, half the weight and with 99% AF accuracy and lot more DR.
> I don't do wild life but I have shot birds in flight just for fun and thos thing doesn't let go of the subject. Perfect AF every time. Rent one and try it for a few days. You willrnever go back. Just my opinion. Cheers!


lucky you


----------



## AlanF (Jul 18, 2019)

Timedog said:


> Not super excited about 60+ MP. At that pixel density you're just dealing with huge file sizes, diffraction limits, and optics limits. I mean, I have the RF 50mm which is insane at 30mp on my EOS R, but I doubt I'll get enough out of doubling the MP to really care?
> 
> Seems like the areas where super high MP is needed are also areas where you use small apertures (landscape, macro), so you're not even seeing the full benefit of that extra detail due to diffraction limited aperture.


They said the same about the slightly lower pixel density 5DS and 5DSR. My 5DSR really beats my 5DIV for the fine detail I can get - it's like having 30% more reach, and all of my lenses are up to it. You don't have to care about increasing pixel density, and I respect that. But, int turn you should appreciate that there are those who do want crop levels of detail on an FF, especially nature photographers.


----------



## djack41 (Jul 18, 2019)

Sony's aggressive pace is a nightmare for Canon. Here is why:

(July 17) Nikkei reports that Canon's profit is likely to slide 40% on European slowdown:



> Canon's operating profit is on track to sink 40% this year to slightly over 200 billion yen ($1.85 billion), Nikkei has learned, amid a slowing European economy and slumping chip market.
> The shrinking camera market continues to hurt Canon. Deliveries of digital cameras worldwide tumbled 24% on the year during the first five months of 2019, according to the Camera & Imaging Products Association, based in Tokyo. Sales of Canon's single-lens reflex camera, a high-margin product, have declined in China and elsewhere.
> For the second half, the company aims to expand revenue by rolling out new offerings such as additional lenses for the popular mirrorless cameras.





Read more: https://photorumors.com/2019/07/17/report-canons-profit-is-likely-to-slide-40/#ixzz5u1Rg4qXK


----------



## Kit. (Jul 18, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Sony's aggressive pace is a nightmare for Canon. Here is why:
> 
> (July 17) Nikkei reports that Canon's profit is likely to slide 40% on European slowdown:
> 
> Read more: https://photorumors.com/2019/07/17/report-canons-profit-is-likely-to-slide-40/#ixzz5u1Rg4qXK


"Sony's aggressive pace" is responsible for slowdown of office equipment sales in Europe? Europeans stopped buying copiers because they are buying Sony cameras instead?


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jul 18, 2019)

Wow, this does sound very impressive!

If Canon were to match the readout specs and performance of this camera, even with 40MP, there’d be a lot of happy Canon fans.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Sony's aggressive pace is a nightmare for Canon. Here is why:
> 
> (July 17) Nikkei reports that Canon's profit is likely to *slide* *40% *on European slowdown:


Sony’s latest IR presentation forecasts a *45%* *drop* in net income for FY19. So yeah, your logic makes sense. 

But, credit where credit is due — at least you’re consistent in your illogical forum trolling. Slow clap for you.


----------



## ewg963 (Jul 18, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I finally see a camera that will make me an awesome photographer and turn me into a "pro" !!!!


Yep you all heard it from the mouth of CanonFanBoy


----------



## unfocused (Jul 18, 2019)

Kit. said:


> "Sony's aggressive pace" is responsible for slowdown of office equipment sales in Europe? Europeans stopped buying copiers because they are buying Sony cameras instead?


Great answer. This exchange between you and djack41 ought to be copied and pasted into all the other threads talking about Canon's revised forecasts.


----------



## ken (Jul 18, 2019)

6degrees said:


> F4 or even F2.8 lenses can’t generate artistic bokeh effect. Period. They are only good if the purpose is to take snapshot with everything clear and no emphasized main focus in the photo. Those everything clear snapshot photos, taken by F4 or even F2.8 lenses, will not have popup effect which separating main focus/object from backgrounds, as those taken by F2, F1.4, or F1.2 pro lenses.
> 
> To make artistic photography, larger aperture lenses are the must.


So landscape photography doesn't qualify as art?


----------



## 6degrees (Jul 18, 2019)

ken said:


> So landscape photography doesn't qualify as art?



Sure qualified. Even iPhone’s photos can be qualified, . Giving that fact, why do we care about pro cameras and lenses?


----------



## 6degrees (Jul 18, 2019)

ozturert said:


> Artistic photography = Blurred background? Really?



Then go get your F4 lenses. Save your money and it is good for you.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 18, 2019)

6degrees said:


> Then go get your F4 lenses. Save your money and it is good for you.


Do you think that you will have stronger background separation with your 16-28/2 than I can get with my 100-400/4.5-5.6?


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 18, 2019)

Wait...what? Canon is "lagging" in their bodies but it "has been too many years since the last release" that you use or would buy. So, if you haven't bought or used a new Canon body for years on what authority are you claiming they are "lagging?"


I shoot with a 5DSR since it was first released. I also have an older 5D Mark III and a lot of Canon glass. I have been shooting with Canon for over 20 years and upgraded my bodies when I felt like there was enough progress to warrant the investment. I am also a CPS member and loyal Canon advocate on a number of forums. 

The 5DSR is a great camera, but this new Sony beats it in almost every meaningful technical manner. There are always differences in ergonomics, weather sealing, user interface and service support that make me want to stay with Canon, but this is an incredibly compelling offering from Sony and I am just acknowledging that. 

My point is not to whine and have someone talk me out of switching (I will make my own decision and live with the consequences) but to point out on a Canon rumors forum that posted a Sony release notice that Canon has lost focus on my needs (not anyone elses). Interesting that my original post received 10 likes and your critique quite a few less. Apparently there are other like minded people on this forum that might be feeling the same frustration. 

What do you shoot with and how long have you been a Canon shooter? It is interesting that you are so willing to shout anyone down that raises anything slightly anti-Canon. We are not all sycophants to Canon on this forum. At least I don't think that is the price of entry to be a member. Some of us have the ability to independently think and evaluate.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2019)

6degrees said:


> Then go get your F4 lenses. Save your money and it is good for you.


My 600mm f/4L IS II didn’t save me much money.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> My 600mm f/4L IS II didn’t save me much money.


Aint that the truth. And talk about out of focus images! At F4 my 600mm DOF is about 1 inch or less from 50 feet. I have to open it up to get the beak and tail in focus for a baby seagull!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 18, 2019)

RobbieHat said:


> Aint that the truth. And talk about out of focus images! At F4 my 600mm DOF is about 1 inch or less from 50 feet. I have to open it up to get the beak and tail in focus for a baby seagull!


Can’t be. Our resident artist expert-exrordinaire, @6degrees, positively assured us that, “F4 or even F2.8 lenses can’t generate artistic bokeh effect. Period.” Apparently our 600/4 lenses, “...are only good if the purpose is to take snapshot with everything clear and no emphasized main focus in the photo.”

Obviously, even a short focal length f/4 or f/2.8 lens can provide excellent subject isolation, if used properly for that purpose. 

I wonder if @6degrees regrets making that comment? As has been stated, “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.’


----------



## ozturert (Jul 18, 2019)

6degrees said:


> Then go get your F4 lenses. Save your money and it is good for you.


Can you show me some of your artistic photos with 50mm f1.8? Somehow you make art automatically with wide aperture lenses but f4 lenses are hopeless... No way anyone can make art with f4 lenses.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 18, 2019)

RobbieHat said:


> Wait...what? Canon is "lagging" in their bodies but it "has been too many years since the last release" that you use or would buy. So, if you haven't bought or used a new Canon body for years on what authority are you claiming they are "lagging?"
> 
> 
> I shoot with a 5DSR since it was first released. I also have an older 5D Mark III and a lot of Canon glass. I have been shooting with Canon for over 20 years and upgraded my bodies when I felt like there was enough progress to warrant the investment. I am also a CPS member and loyal Canon advocate on a number of forums.
> ...



Sony wins on senors. The 80D and 5D4 sensors closed most of the DR gap, but Sony went to BSI/stacked sensor technologies that gave it an advantage in video and frame rates. With Nikon and Fuji now using Sony sensors, Canon is the only major playing making its own. The G-series cameras use Sony sensors, and people still complain because they don't have DFAP (a Canon technology). For the short term, Canon is at a disadvantage, but I'd rather Canon do it this way than let Sony *monopolize* the ILC sensor market. Do you honestly think that Sony will allow other manufacturers to use chips better than their own before they launch them on their products?

Nikon: I want a new sensor.
Sony: You can have it two years after we put it in A7R Mark x.
Nikon cries as Sony passes it the 2nd ILC manufacturer because it doesn't have the technologies to compete on its own.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 18, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> Sony wins on senors. The 80D and 5D4 sensors closed most of the DR gap, but Sony went to BSI/stacked sensor technologies that gave it an advantage in video and frame rates. With Nikon and Fuji now using Sony sensors, Canon is the only major playing making its own. The G-series cameras use Sony sensors, and people still complain because they don't have DFAP (a Canon technology). For the short term, Canon is at a disadvantage, but I'd rather Canon do it this way than let Sony *monopolize* the ILC sensor market. Do you honestly think that Sony will allow other manufacturers to use chips better than their own before they launch them on their products?
> 
> Nikon: I want a new sensor.
> Sony: You can have it two years after we put it in A7R Mark x.
> Nikon cries as Sony passes it the 2nd ILC manufacturer because it doesn't have the technologies to compete on its own.


Agreed with the logic and it certainly puts a lot of pressure on Canon to up their sensor game. Not an easy task when you don't have the committed sales pipeline that Sony has. Wonder is partnering with other innovators in the space has been considered (Samsung, etc.)?


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jul 18, 2019)

RobbieHat said:


> Agreed with the logic and it certainly puts a lot of pressure on Canon to up their sensor game. Not an easy task when you don't have the committed sales pipeline that Sony has. Wonder is partnering with other innovators in the space has been considered (Samsung, etc.)?



Seeing Canon gained market share last year while Sony declined, I'm sure they are not mesmerized with the same panic novel others may speculate from.

I think Canon bodies take some very good photos right now. And if they care to plug along at a slow steady pace, more power to them. Probably best Canon makes it's own sensors to avoid indirect manipulation.


----------



## Otara (Jul 18, 2019)

No probs with the IQ of Canon, but I do want some of that fancy stuff the Sony A9 has, ie readout speed etc.


----------



## Stereodude (Jul 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> From your comments, I infer that you wouldn’t know a fact if it bit you on the ass. Could be a tough way to go through life.


Well, I guess it's a good thing facts don't bite people on the ass. That doubly applies for the your opinions that you try to present as "facts". Keep on making assumptions with your inferences though. They're entertaining to read.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 18, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> Sony wins on senors.


I'm not sure. Actually, 5D4 sensor _is_ a 61 megapixel sensor, it just has pairs of pixels covered by the same microlens, which enables DPAF but lowers effective resolution.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> Sony wins on senors.



Sony wins on specs sites like dpreview want you to focus on. Canon was first to 50mp and held the high resolution title until a couple days ago (4 years). We know their hi rez R will be >61mp. Canon has DPAF and great color science. And while I don't think this is a sensor issue per se, Sony can't get above 100 Mbps with video.

Sony is not the clear winner unless you're dpreview and you hold your hands to your eyes to make sure you only see one or two metrics.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> Well, I guess it's a good thing facts don't bite people on the ass. That doubly applies for the your opinions that you try to present as "facts". Keep on making assumptions with your inferences though. They're entertaining to read.


Let’s look at my initial response, shall we?



neuroanatomist said:


> The thing that many people, including yourself, apparently fail to grasp is that the views expressed on this forum really don’t represent the market as a whole.


The membership comprises a self-selected group of ~16,000 people interested in rumors about Canon. There were nearly 11,000,000 ILCs sold last year alone. Pick up any textbook on population sampling. <0.15% cannot be representative if that small a fraction is self-selected. Verdict: fact, not opinion.



neuroanatomist said:


> That fact should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, because comments like yours have been made here for close to a decade, and over that decade the only thing that has happened to Canon’s market dominance is a slight increase.


Read back forum posts, the comments are there. Check market share data for the past decade, Canon has gained slightly. Verdict: fact, not opinion. 



neuroanatomist said:


> But hey, maybe that will change someday.


Clearly speculative, stated as such. 

The only opinion I stated (which was phrased as ‘should be’ was that someone with a modicum of intelligence could grasp simple, verifiable facts. Facts which you’re calling opinions, suggesting you can’t grasp them. 

This has provided a modicum of entertainment. Better luck next round.


----------



## PVCC (Jul 19, 2019)

AlanF said:


> You claim it is not so difficult at all to get the quality control and you know lensrentals. Here is their take on it, a good read that explains the problems: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/02/optical-quality-assurance/



Hey!

That's a great post indeed. I know some of the problems they tell.
I also know about optics tolerance manufacturing problems and their costs when trying to minimize them.

But besides that, Roger Cicala (at Lens Rentals) also agree that companies should improve Quality Control.

And also says "If your assembly line is churning out 5,000 lenses a week you will need a lot of benches. Any way you slice it, the equipment and the operators to run it are going to add something to the price of the lens. I think a company being really efficient could do it for an additional $20 per prime lens, $60 per zoom. (I couldn’t break even at that cost, but I’m assuming they have economies of scale that I don’t have.) "

Who is not willing to pay a bit more for better (Reasonable) quality assurance? At least I do.

As I said, and also Roger, we don't expect perfection, error-free, or that the lens resolution is exactly as the manufacturer's MTF...

But after many L (multi-thousand dollars) lenses, having terrible missalignement problem delivering blurred zones, I really want better QC and am willing to pay an extra for it to avoid the hassle of returning the copy many times. That's when I CAN, because if I'm not in US, CA or Europe, then I will have to keep the bad lens... and that means a multi-thousand dollars risk that I do not really like...

In fact I don't live in those countries, so I have to take huge precautions and spend a huge amount of time to ensure that I'll get something near to good-copy.

As I said, most people don't understand this huge problem if they live in above mentioned countries, because they can return until they get the good copy that meets their expectations... Go away from there and you'll remember me


----------



## PVCC (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Have you had Canon test your body mount for an alignment issue?
> 
> Both the mount (relative to the film or sensor plane) and the lens have to be within a certain range of each other in terms of alignment. A lens can test just within acceptable range on one side of the range, and a body on the other, and the combination will show a problem. Yet the same lens on a different body can be fine, and the same body with a different lens can be fine.
> 
> ...



Hey!

Thanks for your detailed reply! Very interesting and to keep into account indeed!

Short answer: No. Because the "bad" (very bad indeed) lenses worked bad on different cameras (checked that), and the other (good) lenses have no problem on my cameras.

So the possibility of a mount-related issue was discarded. The problems were the lenses (some copies were blurry at left, others at right).

Thanks once again. Cheers!


----------



## ivan11 (Jul 19, 2019)

Cryve said:


> As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.
> 
> sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.
> 
> i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/


I'm waiting a little to see if Canon delivers... in the mean time i do wath i can with my gear.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2019)

PVCC said:


> Hey!
> 
> That's a great post indeed. I know some of the problems they tell.
> I also know about optics tolerance manufacturing problems and their costs when trying to minimize them.
> ...


You are right that you should test every lens before buying. Fortunately, I am friendly with the local camera shop and they allow me to borrow and test before buying. Otherwise, I use the mail order laws that give you the right to return before 14 days. The only lens test that matters is the one you did yourself on your own lens. What I dispute is that Canon is terrible as they are among the better for quality control.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2019)

PVCC said:


> But after many L (multi-thousand dollars) lenses, having terrible missalignement problem delivering blurred zones, I really want better QC and am willing to pay an extra for it to avoid the hassle of returning the copy many times. That's when I CAN, because if I'm not in US, CA or Europe, then I will have to keep the bad lens... and that means a multi-thousand dollars risk that I do not really like...


Maybe you’re really unlucky, or maybe you’re ordering online and your UPS delivery person hates you?

Personally, I currently have 20 lenses including 10 L-series lenses ranging from 11mm to 600mm (plus two MkIII TCs not counted in the 20), and I’ve previously bought and subsequently sold another ~10 lenses, I think 6 were L-series (plus the two MkII TCs also not counted). Of all those lenses, I’ve had to exchange only one as a bad copy, and that one was the only 3rd party lens I’ve ever bought (a Rokinon/Samyang 14/2.8 for astro).

So from my perspective, Canon’s QC is excellent. Lest you think it’s a question of different standards or not knowing how to discern a poor copy, I’ll say that I evaluate lenses carefully and thoroughly. Among other things, I use an enhanced ISO 12233-type chart to evaluate new lenses (the same AI-QA77 chart that Bryan/TDP uses for his lens tests), along with Reikan FoCal. Along those lines, I wrote most of the EF-M lens reviews posted on TDP. Point being, when I say my lenses are performing well, it’s because I’ve tested them rigorously.

It’s unfortunate that you’ve had so many bad lenses and the hassle of exchanging them. I said maybe you’re really unlucky, but obviously it’s also possible that I’m just really lucky. Bryan has gotten bad copies of lenses...IIRC, he tested 4 copies of the 24-70/2.8 II whereas mine was great from the start, and after seeing my results with the EF-M 18-150, he ordered another copy and re-shot his ISO 12233 tests with much improved performance. I hope my experience is more typical than yours!


----------



## drama (Jul 19, 2019)

RobbieHat said:


> Reread my post and take a deep breath.



I took several. 



RobbieHat said:


> Time is not on their side and Sony are ramping up the pressure on me at least with this newest release.



Bye then! 

What you _said_ was that Canon has wasted a year. They have not. They've spent the year announcing and then releasing a ton of top of the line glass, because people like you would have bitched had the body come first and there were no lenses for it. If you'd like a Sony, go and buy one. My issue was only to do with the ludicrous level of threatening language you used, as if people from Canon read the comments here and might think "Oh no, RobbieHat is unhappy, quick chaps, let's release the megabeast!". Get over yourself. Better yet, go buy a Sony.


----------



## caffetin (Jul 19, 2019)

I just saw the video of tony Northrup abou this camera.if this is true what I saw than this camera is not worth for the money.there is,on my opinion,no big difference with a7r3 which can blow me up.wasting time.as I sad and mean,sony is no camera company with tradition.they are just problem maker.i respect the competition but not the way of sony and Nikon as they put sony sensors.fuji,canon go ached,and am not planning to leave canon.
maybe 60mp is too much for dslr(according of images of tony video)and probably is better to go with less mp(40-50 like as 5ds)but with better improvement,performance ,and the rest is software.
good luck to sonikon users.
ENDE.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2019)

caffetin said:


> I just saw the video of tony Northrup abou this camera.if this is true what I saw than this camera is not worth for the money.there is,on my opinion,no big difference with a7r3 which can blow me up.wasting time.as I sad and mean,sony is no camera company with tradition.they are just problem maker.i respect the competition but not the way of sony and Nikon as they put sony sensors.fuji,canon go ached,and am not planning to leave canon.
> maybe 60mp is too much for dslr(according of images of tony video)and probably is better to go with less mp(40-50 like as 5ds)but with better improvement,performance ,and the rest is software.
> good luck to sonikon users.
> ENDE.


Unfortunately, I wasted my time watching two of his most recent reviews hoping he had improved - his ones on the Sony 600mm and and especially the 200-600mm were just nonsense, just wanting to get anything out to create a presence. I would not take seriously anything on his YouTubes or what he writes until backed up elsewhere. If you think 60mp is too much for DSLR (and the Sony A7RIV is not a DSLR - it is mirrorless) then you had better give up on Canon as well since they will be bringing out higher resolution 60+ sensors according to the rumours here.


----------



## caffetin (Jul 19, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Unfortunately, I wasted my time watching two of his most recent reviews hoping he had improved - his ones on the Sony 600mm and and especially the 200-600mm were just nonsense, just wanting to get anything out to create a presence. I would not take seriously anything on his YouTubes or what he writes until backed up elsewhere. If you think 60mp is too much for DSLR (and the Sony A7RIV is not a DSLR - it is mirrorless) then you had better give up on Canon as well since they will be bringing out higher resolution 60+ sensors according to the rumours here.


sorry,my mistake about that.yes I meant mirrorless cameras.i don't take him seriously but the images he showed were the point.just watched them.no difference for me in regular size.croping them 300%,yes we can see some difference.
and according to that my thoughts were in way of mp.dslr or mirrorless not more then 40-50 mp(for more mp better to swich on medformat).
and yes,i am excited about canon new cameras(mirror and dslr)with more mp.maybe thay have some new formula which will deny me in my convictions about it.


----------



## PVCC (Jul 19, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maybe you’re really unlucky, or maybe you’re ordering online and your UPS delivery person hates you?
> 
> Personally, I currently have 20 lenses including 10 L-series lenses ranging from 11mm to 600mm (plus two MkIII TCs not counted in the 20), and I’ve previously bought and subsequently sold another ~10 lenses, I think 6 were L-series (plus the two MkII TCs also not counted). Of all those lenses, I’ve had to exchange only one as a bad copy, and that one was the only 3rd party lens I’ve ever bought (a Rokinon/Samyang 14/2.8 for astro).
> 
> ...



Hey!

Yes, I know Bryan tested 3-4 24-70 2.8L II...

That's was, in fact, one of the problematic lenses...
I talked to him many times about the problem.

I think you're very lucky if you got a very good copy at once! Especially because that lens has noticeable variations in performance (I didn't know this matter when I purchased my 24-70 L mark 1, and I got a good one! Never thought the mark 2 would be so complicated...)

BTW, mine were purchased/exchanged at BH and sent via 2 days air delivery.

I honestly don't think the FedEx/UPS guy had anything to do with my bad luck.

But, well... the REALLY BIG problem is when you're in a country where stores don't offer you the option to exchange a bad copy. Stores don't even recognize as "bad" copy unless a big problem in AF, stuck ring o something similar.

US/CA customers usually think that "everyone" has that chance to return, but sadly it's very far from reality if you live in other regions...

Cheers!


----------



## -pekr- (Jul 19, 2019)

drama said:


> I took several.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Drama, just stop being so dramatic


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Sony wins on specs sites like dpreview want you to focus on. Canon was first to 50mp and held the high resolution title until a couple days ago (4 years). We know their hi rez R will be >61mp. Canon has DPAF and great color science. And while I don't think this is a sensor issue per se, Sony can't get above 100 Mbps with video.
> 
> Sony is not the clear winner unless you're dpreview and you hold your hands to your eyes to make sure you only see one or two metrics.



If Sony doesn't win on sensors, what was its success built on? Canon has better support, a wider product line, but Sony's main advantages are related to sensors. It's true that Canon got to 50MP first, but Sony pushed DR, face/eye detect, and higher video specs. The A9 is a serious bit of engineering. 

The R is a good camera, but it was not a Sony beater. I bought one knowing exactly what the limitations are, and I'm hoping that Canon's next bodies will be truly "pro". I don't need the best video specs, but I do want AF that is capable of BIF (not because I bird, but because that type of AF can keep up with kids on the soccer field, which I do shoot a lot of... with a 5D4). As an overall camera, I still like the 5D4 better than the R, but I fully expect the pro R to make the 5D4 obsolete as it should.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I'm not sure. Actually, 5D4 sensor _is_ a 61 megapixel sensor, it just has pairs of pixels covered by the same microlens, which enables DPAF but lowers effective resolution.



Only if you want your pixels to be rectangular rather than square. It's too bad Canon didn't more with dual pixel RAW. Even "adding" the values from the two RAWs to make one RAW automatically would have boosted DR at the cost of more processing... which I think many of us would have taken advantage of.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> If Sony doesn't win on sensors, what was its success built on?


What success? Last year, Sony had about 14% of the ILC market share, and Canon had just under 50%. A decade ago, around the time Sony launched the Exmor sensor and was still heavily focused on DSLRs, Sony had about 14% of the ILC market share, and Canon had just under 45%. Personally, I don’t define maintaining the status quo as success, but I suppose it’s better than having your marketshare drop like a stone and bailing out of the market (can you say Vaio?). 

Now, maybe you mean success in terms of Internet buzz created by paid influencers and the fanboys at DPR. In that case, you’re totally right that their ‘success’ is built on their sensors.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> If Sony doesn't win on sensors, what was its success built on?



Their strategy of diminutive cameras that much of the market likes? If sensors are the primary offset, why isn’t nikon dominating with Sony sensors?


----------



## Kit. (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> If Sony doesn't win on sensors, what was its success built on?


Sony's main business is selling fiction.



Random Orbits said:


> Only if you want your pixels to be rectangular rather than square.


Rectangular pixels of the same (in average) density are even harder to produce.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> If Sony doesn't win on sensors, what was its success built on?



I'll chime in as well. 

The question reveals a typical gearhead perspective. Product "A" has the best "X" so therefore, people are buying Product "A" because of "X." But it doesn't work that way in the real world. 

Companies market the whole product, not just one component and they market it based on emotion as much as on fact. Take a look at Sony's (or Canon's or Nikon's or Fuji's or anyone else's advertising.) They aren't selling a dry list of supposed features, they are selling the experience of owning and using the camera. Sony's success, to the extent they have been successful, has been built on convincing buyers that their's in the camera the buyer wants. Yes, that may include convincing a certain percentage of buyers that their sensors are superior, but it includes many other things as well. And, in the case of the sensors, marketing that they have a superior sensor appeals to buyers who want to feel good about owning a camera that they think has a superior sensor. In fact, just because they market their cameras as having superior sensors, that doesn't mean they really are superior in any practical or discernible fashion, it just means their marketing worked on you.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I'll chime in as well.
> 
> The question reveals a typical gearhead perspective. Product "A" has the best "X" so therefore, people are buying Product "A" because of "X." But it doesn't work that way in the real world.
> 
> Companies market the whole product, not just one component and they market it based on emotion as much as on fact. Take a look at Sony's (or Canon's or Nikon's or Fuji's or anyone else's advertising.) They aren't selling a dry list of supposed features, they are selling the experience of owning and using the camera. Sony's success, to the extent they have been successful, has been built on convincing buyers that their's in the camera the buyer wants. Yes, that may include convincing a certain percentage of buyers that their sensors are superior, but it includes many other things as well. And, in the case of the sensors, marketing that they have a superior sensor appeals to buyers who want to feel good about owning a camera that they think has a superior sensor. In fact, just because they market their cameras as having superior sensors, that doesn't mean they really are superior in any practical or discernible fashion, it just means their marketing worked on you.



So the A9 doesn't have REAL advantages over a 5D4 or the R? No viewfinder blackout, higher frame rate, better AF than the R? Those aren't concrete and usable advantages? Sustained success is based on fulling what buyers want, and Sony is leveraging its advantages as any company should. Without Sony's advantages in sensor/processing tech, Sony would have been relegated to Pentax/Ricoh status and no jockeying with Nikon for #2.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 19, 2019)

drama said:


> You work in landscape, astro and nature photography? Tell us your secrets, oh wise one!
> Canon have hardly "thrown away" 2019. They've announced and released a ton of RF mount lenses in readiness for a new body, and we're only six months in. If you don't want to wait, Sony just announced a 60mpx 10fps camera for your nature/astro/landscape fast moving work. I guess you're the target market! Either way, I'm sure Canon will heed your demands and immediately release all their R&D for fear of you leaving.


Isn't there an adaptor so he can use his Canon lenses on his new Sony? So shouldn't that be a relatively painless transition, using the old lenses until they can be sold and replaced with the latest and greatest from Sony?


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> What success? Last year, Sony had about 14% of the ILC market share, and Canon had just under 50%. A decade ago, around the time Sony launched the Exmor sensor and was still heavily focused on DSLRs, Sony had about 14% of the ILC market share, and Canon had just under 45%. Personally, I don’t define maintaining the status quo as success, but I suppose it’s better than having your marketshare drop like a stone and bailing out of the market (can you say Vaio?).
> 
> Now, maybe you mean success in terms of Internet buzz created by paid influencers and the fanboys at DPR. In that case, you’re totally right that their ‘success’ is built on their sensors.



Increased profitability. Sony is in a better position now than was a decade ago. It's lens lineup is better and the ecosystem is better fleshed out and it is able to sustain future development (unlike Pentax). Without their sensors, do you think Sony would have been able to maintain the status quo. I don't think so -- it would have fallen behind Fuji into Ricoh/Pentax status.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Their strategy of diminutive cameras that much of the market likes? If sensors are the primary offset, why isn’t nikon dominating with Sony sensors?



Nikon has a whole host of other problems besides sensors. Unless you honestly believe Nikon would be better now if it didn't have Sony tech in its D8xx line? Imagine Nikon without the D800/D810/D850. You can't honestly believe that Nikon would be better off without those Sony sensors, or perhaps you do. Or perhaps you believe Sony would have been just as successful if it hadn't developed sensors for A7 and A9 series? Hmmm????


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2019)

Etienne said:


> We've been holding our hats for many years, and each year it's the same... wait a little longer and Canon will catch up. And with every release Canon crimps their cameras to protect the top of the line. Oh, joy ... keep the faith... Canon is coming. But Sony isn't sitting on their hands. Canon should become a lens company, and release their lenses in sony, nikon, panasonic mounts.... we'd have the best of both worlds, great lenses on great cameras


I hear the sky is falling at 7pm tonight (GMT). Canon can't make cameras anymore. They are going into the spec sheet printing business instead.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> If Sony doesn't win on sensors, what was its success built on?



Success at being third? Was that even an improvement over Minolta, the company they bought?

Sony really couldn't compete in DSLRs. They made a bit of a splash with APS-C mirrorless. Their main accomplishment was offering the only FF mirrorless bodies for a few years. The A7's and A9 are what they are known for. You hear 'Sony, Sony, Sony!' so much from certain sites and 'influencers' that it's difficult to imagine the EOS M series out sells Sony in the only market where mirrorless out sells DSLRs, Japan. Yet it does. The mocked, derided, limited lens catalog, 'old Canon sensor' M series kick's Sony's butt in the most important MILC market in the world.

Neuro nails it every time he points out that the things we think about and debate on this forum are not the things that concern the average consumer or probably even the average professional. "DR, DR, DR!!!" yet what percentage of photographs are exposed ETTR RAW, processed for maximum DR, then printed to 16x20 or larger? 1%? 0.1%? 0.01%? I can count on one hand the times a freaking 11 stop 7D failed to capture what I wanted in a single frame, yet thanks to DxO and dpreview sensors are now judged ONLY by DR and Sony is 'so far ahead.' Give me a break. The R is sharper/more detailed than the A73 despite having an AA filter (something even Tony Northrup pointed out). This impacts every image taken. But 'Sony is ahead' because of a DR difference that would be nearly impossible to exploit. DxO biases their score to this tiny DR difference while *completely ignoring* resolution and sharpness.

A number of Sony sensors, including the A9, have less DR than the 5D4/R but 'Sony is ahead.' The A72 had particularly poor high ISO for a FF sensor, well behind a 6D/6D2/RP, but 'Sony is ahead.' The first and second generation A7's suffered from off sensor flare, compressed RAW artifacts, and eating stars but 'Sony is ahead.' Both Canon and Fuji 4k footage grades far better than Sony's due to Sony's 100 Mbps limit but 'Sony is ahead.'

No, Sony is not ahead on every metric even when we look strictly at sensors.



> The A9 is a serious bit of engineering.



It has a few very impressive specs but with Sony's typically poor ergonomics and poor weather sealing. It also has less DR than a 5D4 or 1DX II so clearly it's junk and Canon is ahead 



> The R is a good camera, but it was not a Sony beater.



Its competition is the A73. It has better stills IQ. It produces video that grades better but is worse at high ISO (due to the crop factor; stills high ISO is on par). Despite the fact that we Canon users complain a bit about the ergonomics, it has better ergonomics than the A73 (showing how spoiled Canon DSLR users really are by Canon ergonomics). It's better weather sealed. It has better/worse AF depending on the situation. It lacks some of the cool features of the A73 (like IBIS).

And at the end of the day, the differences are not going to matter in the hands of competent photographers / videographers. The guy who really wants IBIS for adapting old glass, or maybe high ISO 4k footage, is going to get the Sony. The guy who wants weather sealing and a touchscreen is going to get the R. Some other guy will decide based on what's on sale that week.

Small differences in select sensor metrics don't matter nearly as much as you imagine.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> Nikon has a whole host of other problems besides sensors. Unless you honestly believe Nikon would be better now if it didn't have Sony tech in its D8xx line? Imagine Nikon without the D800/D810/D850. You can't honestly believe that Nikon would be better off without those Sony sensors, or perhaps you do. Or perhaps you believe Sony would have been just as successful if it hadn't developed sensors for A7 and A9 series? Hmmm????


That’s not what I meant at all.

No, I don’t think nikon would necessarily be better off without Sony sensors and didn’t imply anything of the sort.

If Sony “wins” due to sensors (the post I replied to), then Nikon should dominate Sony camera sales since the use Sony sensors in better cameras with a more fleshed out system. They don’t, ergo an image sensor is not the primary offset (aka differentiator) in a camera purchase decision.


----------



## Stereodude (Jul 19, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Let’s look at my initial response, shall we?


If you insist.



> The membership comprises a self-selected group of ~16,000 people interested in rumors about Canon. There were nearly 11,000,000 ILCs sold last year alone. Pick up any textbook on population sampling. <0.15% cannot be representative if that small a fraction is self-selected. Verdict: fact, not opinion.


Verdict: Strawman. I didn't say the membership here was representative of anything.



> Read back forum posts, the comments are there. Check market share data for the past decade, Canon has gained slightly. Verdict: fact, not opinion.


Verdict: Strawman. I didn't say that Canon had lost market share.



> Clearly speculative, stated as such.


Yes, when taken literally, ignoring the sarcasm you wrote it with, or the way with which you present and defend it.



> The only opinion I stated (which was phrased as ‘should be’ was that someone with a modicum of intelligence could grasp simple, verifiable facts. Facts which you’re calling opinions, suggesting you can’t grasp them.


I didn't call the strawmen ancillary talking points that you used as the backing and foundation of your "opinion" that Canon can't lose an opinion. Regardless of the disclaimer, you present and defend your opinion that Canon can't lose as a fact. You climb all over anyone who holds a different opinion from yourself and attempt to beat them into submission with strawmen as if they has posted 2+2=5 because you hold a different opinion. An opinion which you defend with the fervor of a zealot's most foundational belief. When challenged and called out you fall back on the highly disingenuous disclaimer of, "Well, I said it was speculative not a fact". When you present and defend it like an opinion, I'll respond to it as such.

Good day...


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> ... The R is sharper/more detailed than the A73 despite having an AA filter (something even Tony Northrup pointed out). ...


As soon as Tony Northrup is mentioned, my BS detector begins to scream. So I checked this "fact" with the people who actually measure the sharpness of sensors https://www.optyczne.pl/413.4-Test_aparatu-Canon_EOS_R_Rozdzielczość.html
And sure enough, proper measurement contradicts eyeballing and hand waving.


----------



## ashmadux (Jul 19, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> And inability to supply spare parts for a three years old (only) high cost large screen TVs.
> No stock, no support. The tech is good until it fails and when it fails you better be prepared to fork out mega dollars for a replacement “toy”.
> Just great.




this....this is the only reason i woudl hesistate to buy a sony. Nut for minimal budgets where support is een more crucial


dtaylor said:


> Success at being third? Was that even an improvement over Minolta, the company they bought?
> 
> Sony really couldn't compete in DSLRs. They made a bit of a splash with APS-C mirrorless. Their main accomplishment was offering the only FF mirrorless bodies for a few years. The A7's and A9 are what they are known for. You hear 'Sony, Sony, Sony!' so much from certain sites and 'influencers' that it's difficult to imagine the EOS M series out sells Sony in the only market where mirrorless out sells DSLRs, Japan. Yet it does. The mocked, derided, limited lens catalog, 'old Canon sensor' M series kick's Sony's butt in the most important MILC market in the world.
> 
> ...




What is this 'average consumer nonsense? Not a single person in here can say what canon's average consumer actually is.
Just like in other industries, there are professional, semi pros, and amateurs...and there are "whales"- those people that spend a ton on gear regardless of their status.

Consumers - pro or not- on forums like these are OBVIOUSLY more well informed than most. And it is OBVIOUS that canon has been dragging their feet for years. I dont get the point of "but they still have profits" responses, because...that isn't even what we are discussing here.

The main points are that Canon's getting drop-kicked by Sony. If you cant find in your tech heart to believe it, then thou must be quite foolish. Everyone can see it, and if you cant then you're the problem. Canons sensor tech is NOT as good as Sony. Spin it however you want, you cant make that untrue. Every time canon brings out a camera, we sit back and see that's still the same (lame sensor tech) and whats missing (ALWAYS something critical). Its been this way for YEARS, so come on, give us all a break. Sony's AF is a game changer. AF is critical to cameras and is better than canon by far. 

The problem is I want those features on CANON BODIES. But Canon wont give them to us. At this point the reasons dont matter - its embarrassing and worrisome to us, the customers. If my 5d3 ever goes belly up, it would be great to have a modern mirror-less that is not all kinds of 'meh'. Market share...who cares.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

AlanF said:


> As soon as Tony Northrup is mentioned, my BS detector begins to scream.



He had images to back up his claim.



> So I checked this "fact" with the people who actually measure the sharpness of sensors



They are not 'the people' who test anything. They're just another site on the web. Their data must stand or fall on its own, and not on any claim to authority made by them, or by you on their behalf.

And it falls. They say they tested three lenses multiple times and chose 'the highest results' but they do not state which lens produced the highest results. I don't know what lens those data points are from, or if they're even all from one lens!

More importantly, they don't tell you what lenses were used on the other cameras. We know they're not adapting the two Canon lenses to the K-1, nor the RF lens to anything. So they weren't using the same lens on each body. How were the other cameras tested? What lenses used, and which ones produced 'the highest results'? Where does each square on the graph come from? I don't know and neither do you. Which means the graph is useless.

I can post sample images that agree with Tony's claim, but you'll hand wave them as "eyeballing." Problem is you can shop the web for a graph proving anything you want, including that men never landed on the moon and that the Earth is flat. Between a 'guess which lens produced this data point' graph and my lying eyes, I'll trust my lying eyes. Heck, I'll trust Tony's lying eyes over sharpness graph bingo.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> That’s not what I meant at all.
> 
> No, I don’t think nikon would necessarily be better off without Sony sensors and didn’t imply anything of the sort.
> 
> If Sony “wins” due to sensors (the post I replied to), then Nikon should dominate Sony camera sales since the use Sony sensors in better cameras with a more fleshed out system. They don’t, ergo an image sensor is not the primary offset (aka differentiator) in a camera purchase decision.



If that isn't what you meant at all, you shouldn't cherry pick other people's posts, right (read the entire post I copied below)? Nikon doesn't get the best of Sony's tech -- at best is a delayed version. Sony led with the 40+ MP sensors in their own cameras for years before it was available to the D850. That is what happens when you're not in charge of a key component in your product. And a "win" in sensors doesn't mean that it has to dominate because, as you imply, there are other factors that influence the choice of camera system. But a win can translate into a competitive advantage that helps sales and profitability. Do you really think something else besides sensor technology is the primary advantage for Sony and a reason why Nikon isn't really hurting (imagine the D850 with a 5DR sensor?!).

You responded with "Their strategy of diminutive cameras that much of the market likes?" I don't think so. If it were true then this Sigma FP is going to be a best-seller, but I don't think it will... If camera size was the number one factor, then u4/3 and APS-C cameras would be doing better.



> If Sony doesn't win on sensors, what was its success built on? Canon has better support, a wider product line, but Sony's main advantages are related to sensors. It's true that Canon got to 50MP first, but Sony pushed DR, face/eye detect, and higher video specs. The A9 is a serious bit of engineering.
> 
> The R is a good camera, but it was not a Sony beater. I bought one knowing exactly what the limitations are, and I'm hoping that Canon's next bodies will be truly "pro". I don't need the best video specs, but I do want AF that is capable of BIF (not because I bird, but because that type of AF can keep up with kids on the soccer field, which I do shoot a lot of... with a 5D4). As an overall camera, I still like the 5D4 better than the R, but I fully expect the pro R to make the 5D4 obsolete as it should.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> And it is OBVIOUS that canon has been dragging their feet for years.



Given Canon's many innovations over recent years I would say the opposite is obvious.



> I dont get the point of "but they still have profits" responses, because...that isn't even what we are discussing here.



What are we discussing then? The selective set of metrics where Sony is ahead? Because that's what it feels like any time someone cries about Sony innovation on this forum. Should I go to a Sony forum and insist that we only discuss weather sealing, DPAF, color science, and super fast lenses? In that case it's obvious that Sony has been dragging their feet for years.



> The main points are that Canon's getting drop-kicked by Sony.



So in a basketball game the team that scores 18 points "drop kicks" the team that scores 40?



> Every time canon brings out a camera, we sit back and see that's still the same (lame sensor tech) and whats missing (ALWAYS something critical).



What's the critical thing that's missing again? A fraction of a stop of DR at ISO 100?



> Sony's AF is a game changer. AF is critical to cameras and is better than canon by far.



Sorry. I've shot with an A9. It was not a game changer. I can see how it would be very nice for a newbie. I cannot say that its keeper rate overall would be better than the keeper rate of someone who knows how to use a DSLR's AF system. I felt like it was less work, but I also felt less confident in it. Kind of like an auto versus manual transmission.



> If my 5d3 ever goes belly up, it would be great to have a modern mirror-less that is not all kinds of 'meh'. Market share...who cares.



If the A9's AF was truly a game changer...like the difference between AF and no AF, or Canon USM lenses vs in body AF motors in the 90s...you would have already sold the 5D3 for an A9. Intelligent subject tracking is a 'nice to have' feature. The R has it, but it's not as fast as Sony's. By the time your 5D3 goes belly up it probably will be.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> He had images to back up his claim.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


For the Matrix Tests (ie the sensor) quote:
_The resolution of the matrix is based on the MTF50 function, and the measurements are standard on non-focused RAW files, which we have previously converted to TIFF format using the dcraw program. To escape from optical aberrations, we measure MTF50 values only for the f / 4.0-f / 16 aperture range, in which the main factor limiting the lens's performance is diffraction. It is also worth reminding that on each aperture we make from a dozen to several dozen pictures (both with autofocus and with manual focus), then we choose the best ones. In this part of the test we used three lenses: Canon EF 100 mm f / 2.8 L Macro IS USM, Sigma A 35 mm f / 1.4 DG HSM (attached by the adapter) and RF 24-105 f / 4.0. The highest results obtained with the use of these lenses are presented in the graph below._
In other words, they are minimising the effect of optical aberrations by using small apertures where diffraction is limiting the lens resolution and even then checking further by using different lenses to make sure that there are not residual aberrations. This is far more rigorous than using the images produced by people where the lens itself is contributing to the overall resolution.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Success at being third? Was that even an improvement over Minolta, the company they bought?
> 
> Sony really couldn't compete in DSLRs. They made a bit of a splash with APS-C mirrorless. Their main accomplishment was offering the only FF mirrorless bodies for a few years. The A7's and A9 are what they are known for. You hear 'Sony, Sony, Sony!' so much from certain sites and 'influencers' that it's difficult to imagine the EOS M series out sells Sony in the only market where mirrorless out sells DSLRs, Japan. Yet it does. The mocked, derided, limited lens catalog, 'old Canon sensor' M series kick's Sony's butt in the most important MILC market in the world.
> 
> ...



It's funny, you take specific issues with individual sentences and debate them. Why don't you debate the second sentence too ("Canon has better support, a wider product line, but Sony's main advantages are related to the sensors.")?

How about commenting on the entirety of a post rather than just one sentence at a time with different assumptions/bases for each reply? Here I copied it below for you. So Sony's camera division is profitable because of something besides sensors? Sony is able to develop and grow their A7/A9 offerings because of something else besides their sensors? So Sony is able to fund development of there GMaster line because it is profitable due to something else besides sensors? Nikon and Fuji and using Sony sensors instead of their own -- why? Why don't you tell me what you think is the reason behind Sony's success BESIDES sensor technology?



> If Sony doesn't win on sensors, what was its success built on? Canon has better support, a wider product line, but Sony's main advantages are related to sensors. It's true that Canon got to 50MP first, but Sony pushed DR, face/eye detect, and higher video specs. The A9 is a serious bit of engineering.
> 
> The R is a good camera, but it was not a Sony beater. I bought one knowing exactly what the limitations are, and I'm hoping that Canon's next bodies will be truly "pro". I don't need the best video specs, but I do want AF that is capable of BIF (not because I bird, but because that type of AF can keep up with kids on the soccer field, which I do shoot a lot of... with a 5D4). As an overall camera, I still like the 5D4 better than the R, but I fully expect the pro R to make the 5D4 obsolete as it should.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

AlanF said:


> In other words, they are minimising the effect of optical aberrations by using small apertures where diffraction is limiting the lens resolution...



Lenses do not magically become identical at the so-called "diffraction limited aperture" because DFA is not a hard line. Diffraction does not take over at that line, it merely becomes apparent alongside all other factors. DFA is very much a misnomer. And btw, f/4 and f/5.6 are well below the DFA for a 30mp FF sensor.

Also: we were discussing sharpness, not resolution. The author(s) at that site confuse the two repeatedly, but we're not going to do that here. There's no question that a 30mp sensor can out resolve a 24mp one in the same format. _All other things being equal_ one would expect a sharper image out of the 30mp sensor as well _at the same view size._

So again, which lenses produced the data points on that graph? You don't know because they don't say for any of the cameras.



> This is far more rigorous than using the images produced by people where the lens itself is contributing to the overall resolution.



They weren't testing for resolution, they were testing for sharpness (MTF50). Are you now claiming that the lenses used in their tests did not contribute to the overall sharpness results?


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> It's funny, you take specific issues with individual sentences and debate them. Why don't you debate the second sentence too ("Canon has better support, a wider product line, but Sony's main advantages are related to the sensors.")?



I reply to the stuff I disagree with. You want me to disagree with everything for the sake of disagreeing?



> Why don't you tell me what you think is the reason behind Sony's success BESIDES sensor technology?



I already did. They bought Minolta (inertia and tech portfolio) and were the first and only FF MILC manufacturer for a few years. The former got them the #3 spot which they held onto, and the latter has gotten them a ton of press and good profitability in a subsegment of the market.

Now they do sell sensors as a separate business. That business obviously relies on them producing sensors people want to buy. But the sensor metrics that are hyped to the moon are not all that important in terms of their position in the ILC market.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Lenses do not magically become identical at the so-called "diffraction limited aperture" because DFA is not a hard line. Diffraction does not take over at that line, it merely becomes apparent alongside all other factors. DFA is very much a misnomer. And btw, f/4 and f/5.6 are well below the DFA for a 30mp FF sensor.


I've been analysing data like those for years. Here are plots for good lenses on the 5DIII, measured by lenstip (top), on the 5DII by photozone (opticallimits) (middle) and 5DSR by ePhotozine (bottom) from my files. You can see how the different lenses MTFs converge as the f/number increases. There is still some variation and so Optyczne uses data from the higher f-numbers and the best values to measure the resolution of the sensor.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> I reply to the stuff I disagree with. You want me to disagree with everything for the sake of disagreeing?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No, but context is lost when you respond to individual sentences and take a different basis to address each sentence.

It's true that Sony bought Minolta and it was one of the earlier manufacturers of FF MILCs that were affordable, but I don't think that was the main reason for the A7/A9 series' success. The original A7 didn't have IBIS, had horrible battery life, subpar AF, horrible warranty/support, limited lens selection, etc. and yet people bought them. Back then, DSLRs did a lot better than Sony's A7, but Sony had advantages with their sensors. People adapted Canon and Nikon glass to Sony bodies because of Sony sensors. Without the sensors, I don't think Sony would have maintained its #3 spot nor would it be within striking distance of #2, Nikon.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I've been analysing data like those for years. Here are plots for good lenses on the 5DIII, measured by lenstip (top), on the 5DII by photozone (opticallimits) (middle) and 5DSR by ePhotozine (bottom) from my files. You can see how the different lenses MTFs converge as the f/number increases.



They're not even fully converged at f/20! The original graph you posted had plot points for f/4, f/5.6, and f/8. Stop pretending that the lens doesn't matter, it absolutely matters. And they didn't state which lenses they used. Which means their graph is unusable and does not support your claim in the least.



> There is still some variation and so Optyczne uses data from the higher f-numbers and the best values to measure the resolution of the sensor.



Whether you're testing resolution (MTF10) or sharpness (MTF50, what they were testing) you cannot equalize lenses this way.

And you want to criticize Tony Northrup? The man is a paragon of scientific integrity by comparison to your sleights of hand here.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> It's true that Sony bought Minolta and it was one of the earlier manufacturers of FF MILCs that were affordable, but I don't think that was the main reason for the A7/A9 series' success. The original A7 didn't have IBIS, had horrible battery life, subpar AF, horrible warranty/support, limited lens selection, etc. and yet people bought them. Back then, DSLRs did a lot better than Sony's A7, but Sony had advantages with their sensors.



The most often cited Sony sensor advantages are DR, FF 4k, and fast on sensor AF. The A7 only had one of those, good DR, and it was behind Nikon on that metric. And yet people bought them, indicating sensor metrics were less of a factor than simply having a FF mirrorless camera, EVF, lens adaptability, etc.



> People adapted Canon and Nikon glass to Sony bodies because of Sony sensors.



The Nikon D8x0 sensors have always been excellent and have set the bar for DR. It was only the generation 3 A7's that finally stood toe-to-toe with the D8x0 series on DR. So why would someone adapt Nikon glass to a lower spec'd Sony sensor? Again, it's more likely they just wanted mirrorless and whatever features the Sony had that the Nikon didn't (i.e. video related; exposure preview; etc).

Also, when you say 'people adapted their lenses' there was no mass movement. Sony's "success" has been in holding #3. But who was the challenger to them from below? Pentax? Fuji? Would they really have lost the #3 spot had they been shipping cameras with sensors made by someone else?


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> They're not even fully converged at f/20! The original graph you posted had plot points for f/4, f/5.6, and f/8. Stop pretending that the lens doesn't matter, it absolutely matters. And they didn't state which lenses they used. Which means their graph is unusable and does not support your claim in the least.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No they have not fully converged, that is why optyczne take the consensus highest values, which I have plotted. Yours and Northrups images are fully dependent on lens quality, whereas optyczne attempts to minimise the contribution of the lens. I have no wish to discuss this any further and will not be doing so.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> Increased profitability. Sony is in a better position now than was a decade ago. It's lens lineup is better and the ecosystem is better fleshed out and it is able to sustain future development (unlike Pentax). Without their sensors, do you think Sony would have been able to maintain the status quo. I don't think so -- it would have fallen behind Fuji into Ricoh/Pentax status.


So ‘success’ = not falling behind. Okidokee. 

Can you really say that sensors increased profit, any more than say reducing personnel or manufacturing expenses?

Incidentally, two of the drivers of market share are brand loyalty/familiarity and popularity. I have Brand X so I’ll buy another one of them when the time comes. Particularly true when accessories (e.g. lenses) help lock in users. Plus if my friends use it, maybe I should too. Point being, barring a paradigm shift (Sony sensors aren’t, nor is removing the mirror from an ILC) or a manufacturer truly screwing things up, market share shifts slowly. Sony was (and remains) 3rd, well ahead of Fuji/Pentax/etc. They didn’t need great sensors to maintain that lead over Fuji/Pentax. 

If a better sensor actually had the impact on the market that you seem to think it does, Sony would have gained some market share over time, as would Nikon for putting Sony sensors in their bodies. Instead, Sony stagnated and Nikon lost while Canon (without ‘great sensors’) gained.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

AlanF said:


> No they have not fully converged, that is why optyczne take the consensus highest values, which I have plotted.



You simply cannot eliminate lenses as a factor this way. It's stupid to try when the obvious course would be to test the same lens on all bodies. Regardless I will believe my 'lying eyes' over some graph on a random website.

*Edit:* to be clear, I don't think the MP difference or sharpness difference (due to MP) is any reason to choose one or the other. I think the hairsplitting over sensor metrics has reached the point of being ridiculous. I brought it up in reply to yet another post proclaiming how far ahead Sony is in sensors.


----------



## ashmadux (Jul 19, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Given Canon's many innovations over recent years I would say the opposite is obvious.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Even going point by point, you're replies are a mix of wrong, wth, and just straight on nonsense.

Just like this here: _"you would have already sold the 5D3 for an A9."_

*This is so dumb, I'll just leave it here to mention that its dumb. Because you do know how I make my hardware decisions. *

and this keeper: _"So in a basketball game the team that scores 18 points "drop kicks" the team that scores 40?"_

*You're trying to make a point I'm not even arguing. Critical thinking, look it up. Its the deflectors in here that want to tall about market-share...red-herring. *

"I can see how it would be very nice for a newbie."

*Newbies? Wow. A9. Really...wow. Where's the canon equivalent......(crickets). And I'm a canon fan. But I dont live under a rock. The A9 "isn't(wasn't) a game changer.." Because YOU said so, riiiight *

At the end of the day, Canon is taking too many punches in the gut (more like b*tch slaps up and down the street). They have the worst bodies on the market. Years old nikons DSLR's are still more capable than recent canons. The old d500...canon likely wont even reach that level. Years of ho-hum products are supposed to produce big sales? Of course not. They made this grave, and they dont have the tech to dig themselves out.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 19, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> The original A7 didn't have IBIS, had horrible battery life, subpar AF, horrible warranty/support, limited lens selection, etc. and yet people bought them. Back then, DSLRs did a lot better than Sony's A7, but Sony had advantages with their sensors.


No, back then Sony was selling an idea that mirrorless is "cool" because it's small. A7 was a fashion item.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 19, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> This is so dumb, I'll just leave it here to mention that its dumb. Because you do know how I make my hardware decisions.



A "game changer" means _you're missing shots that the other guy is getting and it's entirely due to equipment._ When that actually happens you typically upgrade. That kind of a change has been rare in photographic history, despite the hype associated with every change.



> You're trying to make a point I'm not even arguing. Critical thinking, look it up.



If you looked it up you might realize you have completely failed to support your claim that Sony is 'drop kicking' Canon. Just because there is a feature Sony has that you really want does not mean that in the grand scheme of things, all technology considered, A is drop kicking B.



> Newbies? Wow. A9. Really...wow.



Yes, my opinion is that intelligent tracking features (like eye AF or animal AF) are most beneficial to newbies. They may reduce the workload of an experienced shooter, but they're not necessarily the difference between getting/missing the shot for experienced shooters.



> The A9 "isn't(wasn't) a game changer.." Because YOU said so, riiiight



But it is a game changer because you said so?



> At the end of the day, Canon is taking too many punches in the gut (more like b*tch slaps up and down the street).



At the end of the day you have a lot of emotional rhetoric ('b*tch slaps', 'made this grave') and empty assertions ('worse bodies on the market'). And that's all.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> You simply cannot eliminate lenses as a factor this way. It's stupid to try when the obvious course would be to test the same lens on all bodies. Regardless I will believe my 'lying eyes' over some graph on a random website.
> 
> *Edit:* to be clear, I don't think the MP difference or sharpness difference (due to MP) is any reason to choose one or the other. I think the hairsplitting over sensor metrics has reached the point of being ridiculous. I brought it up in reply to yet another post proclaiming how far ahead Sony is in sensors.


Optyczne.pl is the mother site of lenstip, one of the most respected photographic sites on the web. The lenstip reviews are the English translation of the optyczne ones. If you just write them off as a “random site” because their considered reviews and careful measurements conflict with your eyeballing, then there is no point in having discussions with you. You should not be accusing others of emotional rhetoric.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Optyczne.pl is the mother site of lenstip, one of the most respected photographic sites on the web. The lenstip reviews are the English translation of the optyczne ones. If you just write them off as a “random site” because their considered reviews and careful measurements conflict with your eyeballing,



No, I wrote off the graph you copied here because it does not prove what you think it proves. I made a snarky general comment about my eyes and web sites, but my dismissal of your graph has nothing to do with that.

And if 'careful measurements' repeatedly conflict with simple, direct observations, then it's time to question the more complex process. Both your understanding of it and what it means, and the actual measurements themselves if need be.


----------



## PVCC (Jul 20, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Optyczne.pl is the mother site of lenstip, one of the most respected photographic sites on the web. The lenstip reviews are the English translation of the optyczne ones. If you just write them off as a “random site” because their considered reviews and careful measurements conflict with your eyeballing, then there is no point in having discussions with you. You should not be accusing others of emotional rhetoric.



I like Lenstip reviews.

The only problem I see with this and several other review sites, is the fact that they only review one copy of the lens.

This is VERY important to keep in mind.

If they get a good (or bad) copy the results will be completely different from other ones.

I noticed it with a lens review they posted long ago (don't remember the lens).

So, for me, *only sites that test many lenses copies are useful when considering a review of expensive lenses*.

Otherwise it's kind of lottery...


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 20, 2019)

Jist had a quick look at the TN image quality video. At one point he is doing the whole 5 stop pushing BS and comparing the quality between the a7r3 and a7r4. To my eyes the 4 was far far worse but he straight up said the 3 was worse. Either I need to go to the eye doctor or TN is on drugs. Anyone else seen it?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 20, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> If that isn't what you meant at all, you shouldn't cherry pick other people's posts, right (read the entire post I copied below)? Nikon doesn't get the best of Sony's tech -- at best is a delayed version. Sony led with the 40+ MP sensors in their own cameras for years before it was available to the D850. That is what happens when you're not in charge of a key component in your product. And a "win" in sensors doesn't mean that it has to dominate because, as you imply, there are other factors that influence the choice of camera system. But a win can translate into a competitive advantage that helps sales and profitability. Do you really think something else besides sensor technology is the primary advantage for Sony and a reason why Nikon isn't really hurting (imagine the D850 with a 5DR sensor?!).
> 
> You responded with "Their strategy of diminutive cameras that much of the market likes?" I don't think so. If it were true then this Sigma FP is going to be a best-seller, but I don't think it will... If camera size was the number one factor, then u4/3 and APS-C cameras would be doing better.



I didn’t cherry pick; I responded to a post without quoting it all.

Yes, I suspect sony’s camera size has affected its sales over the past several years. Part of the market craves small. I am not among that market; I owned an a7rii for a while and didn’t like using it - I prefer 5D size. However the market is there and for some time Sony alone was selling small 135-format ILCs. I’ll also note Sony leadership listed the ability to be small as the primary advantage of their system. If it were sensor first, I do indeed think nikon would substantially outsell Sony even if there were a year-ish delay between good and slightly better. There are multiple brands now selling small 135-format ILCs, and I expect that will impact Sony camera sales more than if Canon or Nikon put an a9 sensor into a 1D or D6 form factor.

I also question the assertion that Sony withholds sensors from customers like nikon. I don’t really follow APSC, but as far as I know the last time Sony and Nikon both used the same full frame sensor, Nikon was first to market.


----------



## sdz (Jul 20, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Jist had a quick look at the TN image quality video. At one point he is doing the whole 5 stop pushing BS and comparing the quality between the a7r3 and a7r4. To my eyes the 4 was far far worse but he straight up said the 3 was worse. Either I need to go to the eye doctor or TN is on drugs. Anyone else seen it?



I saw it too.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Jist had a quick look at the TN image quality video. At one point he is doing the whole 5 stop pushing BS and comparing the quality between the a7r3 and a7r4. To my eyes the 4 was far far worse but he straight up said the 3 was worse. Either I need to go to the eye doctor or TN is on drugs. Anyone else seen it?


Obviously the 4 must be better. If the 3 is better, people don’t buy the 4 and TN loses affiliate income.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2019)

PVCC said:


> I like Lenstip reviews.
> 
> The only problem I see with this and several other review sites, is the fact that they only review one copy of the lens.
> 
> ...


I have written the same here many times and so fully agree with you. Lens rentals are of course the best by far for measuring MTFs because they have both the best equipment and look at many copies. Other sites like opticallimits and lenstip measure properties of lenses that lensrentals don’t, like efficiency of IS, consistency of AF and variation of MTFs with f-number. Too many Youtubers just wave arms around. Anyway, my message is the only copy of the lens that matters is the one you buy and you have to test it yourself. And we both agree on that as well.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> I can do.thjngs I never thought possible before



I'm genuinely curious - what sort of things?


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2019)

So 15 pages and all too predictable. Every time a competitor (especially with a Sony sensor) releases a new camera, it's the game changer that will transform the market, and Canon absolutely must respond right now, if it isn't already too late. And yet nothing happens, the sky doesn't fall, and relative sales don't change much in the medium to long term. I've been on this forum for a few years and nothing has altered in that regard. Perhaps one day it will, but this camera - which I don't doubt is very competent in many ways - is not the turning point for anything.


----------



## ashmadux (Jul 20, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> A "game changer" means _you're missing shots that the other guy is getting and it's entirely due to equipment._ When that actually happens you typically upgrade. That kind of a change has been rare in photographic history, despite the hype associated with every change.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Yikes.* You're making some kind of bizarre side argument with lazy beliefs about what can be done with what, blah blah blah.

Look, Canon is getting *MERCILESSY DDT'ED* (jake the snake!!) by sony. If you dont believe that, tough wiggles.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> Look, Canon is getting *MERCILESSY DDT'ED* (jake the snake!!) by sony. If you dont believe that, tough wiggles.


You can believe whatever you want. The fact is that Sony’s market share has remained *MERCILESSLY STAGNANT* (actually it fell a bit last year).


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2019)

I have been looking at some Sony forums for the response there. Some are thinking of jumping ship to the Panasonic S1R for its multi-shot mode that gives 187mpx! That gives 3x more resolution than a 1DXII or 2x more than a 5DSR. If a bird remained still for long enough, what fantastic resolution we'd get. So Sony, eat your heart out.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jul 20, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> You can believe whatever you want. The fact is that Sony’s market share has remained *MERCILESSLY STAGNANT* (actually it fell a bit last year).



Sony market share fell a bit last year but they've increased their camera sales value by quite a bit while Canon gained market share but their camera sales value dropped a fair bit. Canon does exceptionally well in the entry level space, and a fair part of their market share is driven by this. Sony, on the other hand is weak in this space, and at the same time have transitioned into premium FF products of late. Canon's market share in aggregate doesn't mean the success of any one product or line and I would be at least curious to see how well Sony does in perhaps just the FF space..

The only data I can find so far is that BCN reported in May that the A7III had 40+% market share while both the R and RP were at ~13% with a large drop in the RP's market share while the R was pretty flat. The A7III also popped up a few times on the BCN top 50 list a few times amidst entry level cameras costing much less. It would be interesting to see if Sony's recent efforts have had any impact on Canon's FF market share at all.

I would like to at least surmise that people buying into FF are more discerning where things like IBIS, 4K, readout and a number of other specs that might not be important to the mainstream entry level consumer would matter to the FF buyer and if Sony is making an impact.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I have been looking at some Sony forums for the response there. Some are thinking of jumping ship to the Panasonic S1R for its multi-shot mode that gives 187mpx! That gives 3x more resolution than a 1DXII or 2x more than a 5DSR. If a bird remained still for long enough, what fantastic resolution we'd get. So Sony, eat your heart out.



I do love the idea of that, for macro work for instance. Not enough to buy a new camera, mind you.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 20, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I have been looking at some Sony forums for the response there. Some are thinking of jumping ship to the Panasonic S1R for its multi-shot mode that gives 187mpx! That gives 3x more resolution than a 1DXII or 2x more than a 5DSR. If a bird remained still for long enough, what fantastic resolution we'd get. So Sony, eat your heart out.


Not sure if this is a serious post or not, but a7r4 does 240MP pixel shift. One would think said Sony forum users would know that.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Not sure if this is a serious post or not, but a7r4 does 240MP pixel shift.


It is a serious post. The Sony forum dwellers are battling out. Apparently, this https://diglloyd.com/blog/2019/20190621_1710-PanasonicS1R-UltraHighResolutionImagery.html got them going, where he describes the Sony pixel shift as worthless in the field because of the checkerboard effect.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 20, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> So ‘success’ = not falling behind. Okidokee.
> 
> Can you really say that sensors increased profit, any more than say reducing personnel or manufacturing expenses?
> 
> ...



If you go by total profit, then all major camera manufacturers have failed. And yes, I'd infer that Sony has increased its profit by product mix and not by reducing personnel and manufacturing expenses. Sony has launched many products in the last few years. Unlike Nikon, where the contraction continues in sales, profit and market share.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 20, 2019)

Kit. said:


> No, back then Sony was selling an idea that mirrorless is "cool" because it's small. A7 was a fashion item.


Right, there are so many people that buy flawed cameras for 1-2k... but then Sony improved greatly with the R, R2, R3, R4 and their regular A7 and now A9 lines. I'm sure it's still for fashion now... right.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 20, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> I didn’t cherry pick; I responded to a post without quoting it all.
> 
> Yes, I suspect sony’s camera size has affected its sales over the past several years. Part of the market craves small. I am not among that market; I owned an a7rii for a while and didn’t like using it - I prefer 5D size. However the market is there and for some time Sony alone was selling small 135-format ILCs. I’ll also note Sony leadership listed the ability to be small as the primary advantage of their system. If it were sensor first, I do indeed think nikon would substantially outsell Sony even if there were a year-ish delay between good and slightly better. There are multiple brands now selling small 135-format ILCs, and I expect that will impact Sony camera sales more than if Canon or Nikon put an a9 sensor into a 1D or D6 form factor.
> 
> I also question the assertion that Sony withholds sensors from customers like nikon. I don’t really follow APSC, but as far as I know the last time Sony and Nikon both used the same full frame sensor, Nikon was first to market.



D800 was released before the A7R series. A7R announced October 2013 at 36.4 MP, A7R2 announced June 2015 at 42.4MP. D850 announced July 2017 at 45.7 MP. So Nikon was stuck in the 30 MP range for two years after Sony transitioned, and now Sony has transitioned to 61 MP. When will Nikon transition to 60+ MP? I'm guessing 2 years...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 20, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> D800 was released before the A7R series. A7R announced October 2013 at 36.4 MP, A7R2 announced June 2015 at 42.4MP. D850 announced July 2017 at 45.7 MP. So Nikon was stuck in the 30 MP range for two years after Sony transitioned, and now Sony has transitioned to 61 MP. When will Nikon transition to 60+ MP? I'm guessing 2 years...



And you know that’s because Sony withheld something and not due to Nikon’s own timeline how*? I suspect the time between D810 and D850 allowed them to amortize development costs.

Why do they have datasheets for the IMX455 if they don’t intend to sell it? Wouldn’t withholding be counter to the reason Sony group spun the camera and semiconductor businesses into distinct corporations?

Sony has been selling size. Don’t take my word for it, take Kimio Maki’s (Senior General Manager of Sony’s Digital Imaging Business Group). I presume his market research and understanding of Sony customers is better than ours. When asked to summarize the benefit of a7 cameras versus DSLR:

KM: Size. It’s all about size – it’s smaller and lighter. *That’s the main reason of choosing our products.*

Not image sensors. Not mirrorless autofocus algorithms. Size. They’ve been selling small essentially alone. Now they have competitors.

***apologies if that isn’t what you meant. It is a sentiment I see often expressed directly.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 21, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> And you know that’s because Sony withheld something and not due to Nikon’s own timeline how*? I suspect the time between D810 and D850 allowed them to amortize development costs.
> 
> Why do they have datasheets for the IMX455 if they don’t intend to sell it? Wouldn’t withholding be counter to the reason Sony group spun the camera and semiconductor businesses into distinct corporations?
> 
> ...



And you don't think Nikon would have asked for something than just a 45 MP sensor? Why is Sony the first out with a 60 MP sensor? How long does it take to develop product? Most likely more than a year. IMX455 was announced December 2018. You must think Sony only started developing the A7R4 after that, but I don't think so.

People aren't buying Sony just because of size anymore. It was their first advantage TOGETHER with sensors. GM lenses are not light. That is not why people buy Sony now.


3kramd5 said:


> And you know that’s because Sony withheld something and not due to Nikon’s own timeline how*? I suspect the time between D810 and D850 allowed them to amortize development costs.
> 
> Why do they have datasheets for the IMX455 if they don’t intend to sell it? Wouldn’t withholding be counter to the reason Sony group spun the camera and semiconductor businesses into distinct corporations?
> 
> ...



Do you know that Sony A7R4 is using IMX455 or is it using a higher version of the chip, IMX551 (from Sonyalpharumors, so take that as you will)? And the earliest pages I find about the IMX455 are from December 2018. So you're telling me, that Sony started developing the A7R4 after December 2018 and already has it as a product. Nikon signed on to buy IMX455 (per nikonrumors) in April 2019. Yup, real level playing field. And as far as Sony is concerned, Nikon isn't the the target competitor as it is starting to pass Nikon as the #2 manufacturer. The target is Canon, who still makes its own chips for its higher end cameras.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 21, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> And you don't think Nikon would have asked for something than just a 45 MP sensor?



I suspect they asked for that sensor specifically. They’re the only user. My best guess is that Nikon flowed Sony key design characteristics, including resolution. If Nikon wanted more at that time, they could have purchased from AMS (70MP full frame), but they evidently wanted something custom.



Random Orbits said:


> Why is Sony the first out with a 60 MP sensor?



In a full frame camera you mean? I dunno, maybe because Sony is aggressive and Canon has not opted to cut their 250MP APS-H sensor in a larger format.



Random Orbits said:


> How long does it take to develop product? Most likely more than a year.


My only frame of reference is military electronics. Since this is commercial, I’d guess probably 18 months, maybe less. Sensors more like 2 years minimum.



Random Orbits said:


> IMX455 was announced December 2018. You must think Sony only started developing the A7R4 after that, but I don't think so.



I must? No, I must not and I don’t.


Random Orbits said:


> People aren't buying Sony just because of size anymore. It was their first advantage TOGETHER with sensors. GM lenses are not light. That is not why people buy Sony now.



Of course they aren’t buying _just because of size._ Note the words used above. “Main reason” clearly does not exclude other reasons.



Random Orbits said:


> Do you know that Sony A7R4 is using IMX455 or is it using a higher version of the chip, IMX551 (from Sonyalpharumors, so take that as you will)?



I don’t think anyone knows that outside Sony. Guess: the cheaper one; they probably won’t put or be able to put sufficient processing in that form factor to make use of 551. I suspect if they package that in a camera at all, it will be in the Cinema lineup.


Random Orbits said:


> So you're telling me, that Sony started developing the A7R4 after December 2018 and already has it as a product.



I’m telling you nothing of the sort. What I’m saying is that I don’t believe Sony withholds sensors from Nikon.



Random Orbits said:


> And as far as Sony is concerned, Nikon isn't the the target competitor as it is starting to pass Nikon as the #2 manufacturer. The target is Canon, who still makes its own chips for its higher end cameras.



As far as Sony is concerned, or should be, Nikon is a great customer. It’s in their best interest that Nikon remains a viable vendor.


----------



## Pape (Jul 21, 2019)

AlanF said:


> It is a serious post. The Sony forum dwellers are battling out. Apparently, this https://diglloyd.com/blog/2019/20190621_1710-PanasonicS1R-UltraHighResolutionImagery.html got them going, where he describes the Sony pixel shift as worthless in the field because of the checkerboard effect.


I wonder how that works as handhold. HDR mode seems work ok on canon handhold so why not this too ?
would be cool if they could merge those two together.Shooting pixel shifts with different shutter speeds and somehow compute it all together.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 21, 2019)

Pape said:


> I wonder how that works as handhold. HDR mode seems work ok on canon handhold so why not this too ?
> would be cool if they could merge those two together.Shooting pixel shifts with different shutter speeds and somehow compute it all together.


It needs a very good tripod, unfortunately.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 21, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> Right, there are so many people that buy flawed cameras for 1-2k... but then Sony improved greatly with the R, R2, R3, R4 and their regular A7 and now A9 lines. I'm sure it's still for fashion now... right.


There are more people that buy flawed cameras for 1-2k than there are people that buy flawed cars for 100-200k.


----------



## clicstudio (Jul 22, 2019)

scyrene said:


> I'm genuinely curious - what sort of things?


Take Real estate interior photos of an apartment with a window in mid day without bracketing or additional lights for example. Take good sunset photos. Take moonlight over the ocean photos. Beach portraits in the shade with just a little flash fill. I couldn't do it with Canon...


----------



## scyrene (Jul 22, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> Take Real estate interior photos of an apartment with a window in mid day without bracketing or additional lights for example. Take good sunset photos. Take moonlight over the ocean photos. Beach portraits in the shade with just a little flash fill. I couldn't do it with Canon...



That's interesting. I've not done real estate work (though there are other forum contributors who do), but as I understand it the DR in a scene with an interior and bright outside view is greater than any current camera can manage. Moonlight over the ocean... is that a high ISO scene, where Sony has no advantage over the 1Dx2? Or am I missing something there. Beach portraits with flash... surely if you're using flash you can control the difference in light between background and subject so that any camera could get the exposure right?

If you have some examples it might help us understand. I can certainly believe your new kit makes it easier to get the shots you want. But you _couldn't_ get those shots with a 1Dx2? How does everyone else manage then? Is this just a matter of hyperbole?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 22, 2019)

scyrene said:


> But you _couldn't_ get those shots with a 1Dx2? How does everyone else manage then? Is this just a matter of hyperbole?


It’s mind over camera. Buy a Sony, drink the Kool-Aid, anything is possible!


----------



## SteB1 (Jul 22, 2019)

ozturert said:


> I think A7R IV's buffer decreases considerably in APS-C mode, like to 3 seconds only. Don't know why, I'd expect an increase.


According to the Sony press release.



> The innovative new Alpha 7R IV full-frame mirrorless camera can shoot full resolution images at up to 10 fps[iv] with continuous, accurate AF/AE tracking for up to approximately seven seconds[v] in full-frame, full-resolution mode (JPEG / RAW), and approx. three times as long in APS-C crop mode delivering 26.2MP[ii] images.



It quite clearly says "three times as long in APS-C crop mode". I have no idea if this is correct, in what bit mode, compressed or uncompressed mode, only that it says three times as long. The explanation is obvious, because the camera is saving files that are around a third of the size.


----------



## ozturert (Jul 22, 2019)

SteB1 said:


> According to the Sony press release.
> 
> 
> 
> It quite clearly says "three times as long in APS-C crop mode". I have no idea if this is correct, in what bit mode, compressed or uncompressed mode, only that it says three times as long. The explanation is obvious, because the camera is saving files that are around a third of the size.


Yes I saw this after my comment. It is actually 3 times more.


----------



## flip314 (Jul 22, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> Take Real estate interior photos of an apartment with a window in mid day without bracketing or additional lights for example.



Why bother, when you're going to badly photoshop a fake sky into every photo? Based on my house-hunting, that seems to be what everyone in the industry does.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 22, 2019)

scyrene said:


> as I understand it the DR in a scene with an interior and bright outside view is greater than any current camera can manage.



There are probably cases where the extra .7ish stops of range in the Sony camera is enough to sample a scene for which a Canon camera would be blown out in the sky region. Whether there will be a visible difference in the image of an ETTR capture is unclear. Maybe if the goal is to flatten the image (bright shadows).



scyrene said:


> Moonlight over the ocean... is that a high ISO scene, where Sony has no advantage over the 1Dx2? Or am I missing something there.



Personally I’d probably shoot that at low sensitivity, or brackets Increasing ISO is a great way to overexposed an object as bright as the moon.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 22, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> Take Real estate interior photos of an apartment with a window in mid day without bracketing or additional lights for example. Take good sunset photos. Take moonlight over the ocean photos. Beach portraits in the shade with just a little flash fill. I couldn't do it with Canon...



Yeah, I'm calling this out. You never actually put the two together under the same exact lighting conditions to find out how they compared after post processing. So if you had trouble with harsher lighting at one time with Canon, then had success with softer lighting another time with Sony, it becomes "Sony has such great DR!" That and you've resorted to shear hyperbole with statements like "take good sunset photos" (Flickr is full of good sunset and moonlight ocean photos from every digital camera made along with E6 slide film).

There's 1ev of difference between an A7r III and a 1DX II. That cannot account for the differences you claim.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 22, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> There are probably cases where the extra .7ish stops of range in the Sony camera is enough to sample a scene for which a Canon camera would be blown out in the sky region. Whether there will be a visible difference in the image of an ETTR capture is unclear.



There would be a noise difference in the deepest shadow regions visible while pixel peeping, and possibly on a large print before NR. With a little NR there wouldn't really be a difference.

Admittedly Canon makes a lot of cameras where you can't necessarily recover the darkest shadow detail due to noise. I've said before on this forum that if I did RE for a living (rather than on occasion) I would probably have chosen a 5D4 over a 5Ds. There are RE scenes that will easily blow out any camera and scenes that would fit on any camera, but in the middle you'll be blending exposures less often with a Nikon, Sony, 5D4, 1DX II, or R.

But the 1DX II is one of the cameras that's very close to the best offered by Nikon/Sony. So close it really does boil down to post processing so long as you ETTR.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 22, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> There are probably cases where the extra .7ish stops of range in the Sony camera is enough to sample a scene for which a Canon camera would be blown out in the sky region. Whether there will be a visible difference in the image of an ETTR capture is unclear. Maybe if the goal is to flatten the image (bright shadows).
> 
> Personally I’d probably shoot that at low sensitivity, or brackets Increasing ISO is a great way to overexposed an object as bright as the moon.



Thanks for the insights! Logically, any increase in DR will mean some scenes can be captured in one shot where before they couldn't, but I'd be surprised if there were many in the case of the cameras discussed above. As for the later case, I don't think you one ever capture the face of the moon and a night scene in one exposure. When I've tried it, I've had to use wildly different exposure values (and blending is rarely natural-looking anyhow).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 22, 2019)

scyrene said:


> Thanks for the insights! Logically, any increase in DR will mean some scenes can be captured in one shot where before they couldn't, but I'd be surprised if there were many in the case of the cameras discussed above. As for the later case, I don't think you one ever capture the face of the moon and a night scene in one exposure. When I've tried it, I've had to use wildly different exposure values (and blending is rarely natural-looking anyhow).


The important thing to remember is that if you spend a few thousand dollars switching systems, the new system is going to be significantly better. It’s going to be. It must be. Whether it is or not, it will be.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 22, 2019)

scyrene said:


> Thanks for the insights! Logically, any increase in DR will mean some scenes can be captured in one shot where before they couldn't,



The thing you have to realize is that DxO reported DR is not a matter of "detail present" vs "detail missing." They set an arbitrary noise threshold and when the shadow noise exceeds that value, that's the DR score. So in many cases it's not accurate to say "an increase in DR" when comparing cameras A and B. The correct description is "lower noise in this zone." In other cases it practically is "an increase in DR" because the noise on one camera is so severe you would never bother with the detail at that level. And in the most extreme cases there may literally be a difference in captured detail, i.e. the detail simply doesn't exist that deep in the shadows.

With the 5D4/1DX2/R it's the first case. They're capturing the detail, but there's additional noise.



> As for the later case, I don't think you one ever capture the face of the moon and a night scene in one exposure. When I've tried it, I've had to use wildly different exposure values (and blending is rarely natural-looking anyhow).



No. Not without the moon being heavily attenuated by atmospheric haze. I'll try spot metering both tonight to have actual numbers in hand, but the moon is a sunlit object (Sunny 16 works for a full moon with no haze) and the rest of the scene is night. You're not going to capture lunar surface detail and nighttime landscape detail in a single exposure on anything made today.


----------



## clicstudio (Jul 23, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Yeah, I'm calling this out. You never actually put the two together under the same exact lighting conditions to find out how they compared after post processing. So if you had trouble with harsher lighting at one time with Canon, then had success with softer lighting another time with Sony, it becomes "Sony has such great DR!" That and you've resorted to shear hyperbole with statements like "take good sunset photos" (Flickr is full of good sunset and moonlight ocean photos from every digital camera made along with E6 slide film).
> 
> There's 1ev of difference between an A7r III and a 1DX II. That cannot account for the differences you claim.


Dude. I had both cameras for over a month. For me to switch after 18 years, the difference was huge. I am tired of people.not accepting the reality and defending old technology because they are afraid of trying something new or because the usual BS that they have too much money invested in lenses and stuff. It works for me and I am never going back, still I love canon because it was a great system that produced amazing photos and made me a lot of money but the facts are the facts for me. Sony is just better for me and that's that. It's easy to talk when you don't even have a Sony to compare. Please comment again when you have both cameras in hand side by side for a month and tell me Canon is better...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 23, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> Dude. I had both cameras for over a month. For me to switch after 18 years, the difference was huge. I am tired of people.not accepting the reality and defending old technology because they are afraid of trying something new or because the usual BS that they have too much money invested in lenses and stuff.


I am tired of people who delude themselves into thinking that their personal ‘reality’ is universally applicable. Yours isn’t. Deal with it.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 23, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> Dude. I had both cameras for over a month. For me to switch after 18 years, the difference was huge.



Then you should have no problem posting side-by-side examples so we can all see the huge difference.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 23, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> There would be a noise difference in the deepest shadow regions visible while pixel peeping, and possibly on a large print before NR.



Yes; certainly. You could see the difference by pushing enough, but if the intent isn’t zero shadow maybe you won’t.

Personally I don’t like the look of pushed shadows. There’s no detail there because, you know... they’re shadows. Not much light hit the sensor in those regions. Slightly better DR lets you brighten them more without seeing noise, but they tend to looks flat and lifeless.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 23, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Personally I don’t like the look of pushed shadows. There’s no detail there because, you know... they’re shadows. Not much light hit the sensor in those regions. Slightly better DR lets you brighten them more without seeing noise, but they tend to looks flat and lifeless.



That's a factor which is almost never mentioned in all the "DR DR DR" talk. Even if you can push 5ev without obtrusive noise, you often still get a better result by blending due to tonality issues.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 23, 2019)

scyrene said:


> That's interesting. I've not done real estate work (though there are other forum contributors who do), but as I understand it the DR in a scene with an interior and bright outside view is greater than any current camera can manage. Moonlight over the ocean... is that a high ISO scene, where Sony has no advantage over the 1Dx2? Or am I missing something there. Beach portraits with flash... surely if you're using flash you can control the difference in light between background and subject so that any camera could get the exposure right?
> 
> If you have some examples it might help us understand. I can certainly believe your new kit makes it easier to get the shots you want. But you _couldn't_ get those shots with a 1Dx2? How does everyone else manage then? Is this just a matter of hyperbole?


Yep. I have done some real estate stuff and generally have to bracket anywhere from 3stops under to 3 stops over exposed to manage the difference. That would mean in order to make a bracketing situation manageable in one shot the sony would have to be 5 stops better DR than the canon. Not the case. A moon over water. No way a one or two stop difference can make that photo magically any different. Anyone who canot tale a decent landscape image on a canon is obviously a poor photographer. Evidenced by the fact that i have seen a bazillion amazing landscape images taken on all sorts of cameras. Even lowly entry level canon dslr's. These claims seem a bit ridiculous


----------



## snoke (Jul 23, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Yep. I have done some real estate stuff and generally have to bracket anywhere from 3stops under to 3 stops over exposed to manage the difference. That would mean in order to make a bracketing situation manageable in one shot the sony would have to be 5 stops better DR than the canon. Not the case. A moon over water. No way a one or two stop difference can make that photo magically any different. Anyone who canot tale a decent landscape image on a canon is obviously a poor photographer. Evidenced by the fact that i have seen a bazillion amazing landscape images taken on all sorts of cameras. Even lowly entry level canon dslr's. These claims seem a bit ridiculous



Blending need no motion for perfection. Moon moves. Ocean moves. House not move. No wind, trees still. Then good for blend. Blend not always answer. Try blend Formula 1 car photo when racing: 300kph = 1cm at 1/8000. +2 EV, car move 4cm at 1/2000.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 23, 2019)

snoke said:


> Blending need no motion for perfection. Moon moves. Ocean moves. House not move. No wind, trees still. Then good for blend. Blend not always answer.



Irrelevant to his point that clicstudio's post was nothing but hyperbole. Having said that, manual blends do not require there to be no motion. There simply has to be no motion which crosses a (feathered) boundary. I've done many manual blends involving the ocean.



> Try blend Formula 1 car photo when racing: 300kph = 1cm at 1/8000. +2 EV, car move 4cm at 1/2000.



There is no situation where a Sony could capture a Formula 1 photo but a Canon...or even an older Canon...could not. You do not encounter extremely wide luminance ranges in those scenes. Formula 1 races were shot with original 1D's without blown highlights or blocked shadows for crying out loud.


----------



## clicstudio (Jul 23, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Then you should have no problem posting side-by-side examples so we can all see the huge difference.


I dont need to convince you nor trying to convert you. I can see the the difference and it was clear to me. That's all. I had both cameras with comparable 24-70 F2.8 glass on both. Also I forgot to mention how much better the AF is. I was tired of out of focus photos... Mainly shooting full body portraits, the focus screen doesn't even reach the top of the frame to focus on a face. On the Sony it goes all the way up. When you or anyone else here has both cameras with comparable lenses for a few weeks to compare, then talk to me. Until then, u know what to do.


----------



## clicstudio (Jul 23, 2019)

snoke said:


> Blending need no motion for perfection. Moon moves. Ocean moves. House not move. No wind, trees still. Then good for blend. Blend not always answer. Try blend Formula 1 car photo when racing: 300kph = 1cm at 1/8000. +2 EV, car move 4cm at 1/2000.


Yeap. Agreed. People don't realize that anything is possible with bracketing multiple exposures and multiple focus stacking and lightroom and photoshop only if the subject is stationary. Sony cameras alleviate the need for so much processing with just one raw file. That's what I like about it.


----------



## clicstudio (Jul 23, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> I am tired of people who delude themselves into thinking that their personal ‘reality’ is universally applicable. Yours isn’t. Deal with it.


You do post too much here...


----------



## scyrene (Jul 23, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> I dont need to convince you nor trying to convert you. I can see the the difference and it was clear to me. That's all. I had both cameras with comparable 24-70 F2.8 glass on both. Also I forgot to mention how much better the AF is. I was tired of out of focus photos... Mainly shooting full body portraits, the focus screen doesn't even reach the top of the frame to focus on a face. On the Sony it goes all the way up. When you or anyone else here has both cameras with comparable lenses for a few weeks to compare, then talk to me. Until then, u know what to do.



I think everyone should be glad if you're happy with the decisions you made. But as they say, 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' - to be blunt, your assertions are indeed, as others have said, hyperbolic, and not supported by independent lines of evidence as to the relative capabilities of Canon and Sony cameras in the situations you describe. As for saying nobody's criticism is valid until they have both cameras to hand, well that's just silly, especially as your claims are merely assertions. My conclusion is either you're trolling, or you're foolish (maybe both).


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 23, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> I dont need to convince you nor trying to convert you.



You posted obviously false claims and hyperbole and you got called out for it. There's nothing wrong with a fantastic claim so long as you can back it up. You can't.



> When you or anyone else here has both cameras with comparable lenses for a few weeks to compare, then talk to me. Until then, u know what to do.



I have, so you can stop posturing and appealing to yourself as an expert now.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 23, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> Sony cameras alleviate the need for so much processing with just one raw file. That's what I like about it.


I guess there’s just no limit to what you can do with nearly a whole extra one stop of DR. The DRastic DiffeRences are DownRight DRamatic!


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 23, 2019)

snoke said:


> Blending need no motion for perfection. Moon moves. Ocean moves. House not move. No wind, trees still. Then good for blend. Blend not always answer. Try blend Formula 1 car photo when racing: 300kph = 1cm at 1/8000. +2 EV, car move 4cm at 1/2000.


I never mentioned blending for a moon over ocean image. I said the extra stop of dr on a sony will make no difference in that situation because the dr of the scene is way beyond any possible for a camera to capture. Even a sony.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 23, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> I guess there’s just no limit to what you can do with nearly a whole extra one stop of DR. The DRastic DiffeRences are DownRight DRamatic!



I wanted to take a photo of a black hole and a star in the same frame. With Sony I got detail in both! It doesn't matter that light can't escape the black hole, because with Sony SuperDR I was able to push the shadows until they were as bright as the sun.

Canon. Is. *******!


----------



## deleteme (Jul 29, 2019)

clicstudio said:


> Take Real estate interior photos of an apartment with a window in mid day without bracketing or additional lights for example. Take good sunset photos. Take moonlight over the ocean photos. Beach portraits in the shade with just a little flash fill. I couldn't do it with Canon...


You most likely can't do it with Sony either. It certainly wouldn't in my tests.
If you can, please post samples for us.
I shoot mainly architecture in business and have seen a ton of architectural work by people who shoot all sorts of gear from Sony A6000 to Phase One IQ180. None of them can make a 6stop differential in window brightness work with acceptable results in one shot.
Expose for the window and drag up the interior (the important bit the client is paying for) and the dark tones fall to bits. Not how it's done.
Maybe it works for manky RE pics for someone who can't spend more than 40 minutes in a property. But then why not use a phone? They have HDR.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 29, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> Maybe it works for manky RE pics for someone who can't spend more than 40 minutes in a property. But then why not use a phone? They have HDR.


Maybe that’s it – @clicstudio waa talking about the Sony sensor in his smartphone!


----------

