# SONY A99 ii VS Canon 5div



## deadwrong (Sep 19, 2016)

5div killer?

Sony A99 II finally announced by Sony today, the camera features 42 megapixel CMOS sensor same as of Sony A7R II camera. The standard ISO range of the camera is 100-25600, expandable to ISO 50 – 102,400. And it can also record 4K at 100Mbps (using XAVC S) with full sensor read-out and no pixel binning, both stills and video supported by 5 axis image stabilization system. Sony A99 II Hybrid AF system with 399 + 79 AF points. The camera can shoot upto 12frames per second with continuous AF tracking.

http://thenewcamera.com/sony-a99-ii-announced-press-release-full-specification-and-more/

4000$ Canadian - as opposed to 4600$ for the Canon 5d iv............hmmmm did Canon just get blown out of the water?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 19, 2016)

Lol. :

Now, where'd I put that can of troll repellent?


----------



## deadwrong (Sep 19, 2016)

Seriously? I am looking at that 5d iv and this A99ii looks like the camera everyone wants......it has everything. How will Canon compete with that? 

Glad i didnt pull the trigger on the 5d iv just yet. I will watch the reviews on this one soon and choose.


----------



## sebasan (Sep 19, 2016)

The best camera ever made in the history of DSLR. Period.


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 19, 2016)

sebasan said:


> The best camera ever made in the history of DSLR. Period.



That has yet to be seen. No one other than Sony Employees has ever even seen the thing let alone try it out.


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 19, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lol. :
> 
> Now, where'd I put that can of troll repellent?



I'd rather a can of troll Raid or RoundUp (not sure if a Troll is a pest or a weed) frankly. I'll let you know if I see any at my local General Store.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 19, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> the camera features 42 megapixel CMOS sensor same as of Sony A7R II camera.



I'm surprised that sensor is capable of 12FPS.

Granted the new architecture should facilitate faster read, but the IMX094 (A7R, D800, D810, Pentax K1) maxes out at 4.7 full frame (per Sony). So it's writing out 17% more and doing it 155% faster. Color me skeptical.


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 19, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> Seriously? I am looking at that 5d iv and this A99ii looks like the camera everyone wants......it has everything. How will Canon compete with that?
> 
> Glad i didnt pull the trigger on the 5d iv just yet. I will watch the reviews on this one soon and choose.


Please please choose the A99II... Pretty please..?


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 19, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > the camera features 42 megapixel CMOS sensor same as of Sony A7R II camera.
> ...


There is some text about 12 fps with first image in focus and also no focusing during video with faster aperture. May be some one here educate us this limitations.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 19, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > deadwrong said:
> ...



I'm just surprised it can push that much data through the ADCs regardless of whether any focusing is performed, etc.


----------



## deadwrong (Sep 19, 2016)

IglooEater said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously? I am looking at that 5d iv and this A99ii looks like the camera everyone wants......it has everything. How will Canon compete with that?
> ...



Yawn.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 20, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> 5div killer?
> 
> Sony A99 II finally announced by Sony today, the camera features 42 megapixel CMOS sensor same as of Sony A7R II camera. The standard ISO range of the camera is 100-25600, expandable to ISO 50 – 102,400. And it can also record 4K at 100Mbps (using XAVC S) with full sensor read-out and no pixel binning, both stills and video supported by 5 axis image stabilization system. Sony A99 II Hybrid AF system with 399 + 79 AF points. The camera can shoot upto 12frames per second with continuous AF tracking.
> 
> ...



alot of caveats on that 12fps shooting I noticed.

it uses an EVF. some may like it.

oh .. and there's no new full frame lenses (outside of AF updates) for what.. the last 4-5 years? the SSM II lenses were just AF updates. no element / glass improvement.

you're going to get this serviced at precision camera in the USA? lol...

enjoy.

this is a great camera for Alpha mount users that are still hanging on.. 

but in reality? with no new glass in 4+ years, it's really hard to take Sony A mount seriously.


----------



## Drum (Sep 20, 2016)

Plus whatever cost savings you make on the body, you would loose on buying 1 lens- never mind multiple lenses. The selection of A mount lenses also isn't a tenth of the Canon range even excluding third party lenses - I noticed the new Sigma's didn't mention Sony compatability.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 20, 2016)

fussy III said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > 5div killer?
> ...



You posted this precise reply in another thread (your much contested '5D4 is crippled' one). Bad form.


----------



## emko (Sep 20, 2016)

Wow those specs are insane or we are just used to Canon milking the tech, i was planing to upgrade my 5D3 to the 5D4 now i feel like Canon is ripping us off. I was thinking well the 5D4 is close to what other companies are doing but i forget that Canon just caught up to them and now Sony is blowing them out of the water in specs. 

42mp
12FPS
4K video 120FPS 
4K full frame
SLOG
Clean HDMI

Camera is using 5K image then downsampling it to 4k with out pixel binning making the image even higher quality then directly recording 1:1 pixel 4k like Canon


not going to pay for the garbage Canon is selling maybe by the time 5D5 comes out they will get back to making products like the 5D2, i mean come on how long did it take for Canon to give us in camera intervalometer? something that almost any camera device had for years? and people are still bagging them for Zebras,focus peeking,SLOG,clean HDMI? well here but NO 4K for you because?? well just wait for 5D5 LOL


----------



## candc (Sep 20, 2016)

I don't really see the advantage of this type camera with the translucent mirror. I suppose the mirror is not moving so its not slowing things down but if its in the way of the sensor its going to also block some of the light. How much? There are some advantages to a mirrorless camera in some situations but this thing? Maybe it has some of the advantages of mirroless and some of a dslr but I don't see it as better than either one. 

Make a hot shoe evf for your dslr's canon.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 20, 2016)

emko said:


> Wow those specs are insane or we are just used to Canon milking the tech, i was planing to upgrade my 5D3 to the 5D4 now i feel like Canon is ripping us off. I was thinking well the 5D4 is close to what other companies are doing but i forget that Canon just caught up to them and now Sony is blowing them out of the water in specs.
> 
> 42mp
> 12FPS
> ...



: : :


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 20, 2016)

emko said:


> 42mp
> 12FPS
> *4K video 120FPS *
> 4K full frame
> ...



The A99II only does 1080P at 120fps, not 4K. Also, I wouldn't be so sure that the downsampled 5K will be better than what the 5D4 is putting out. Northrup's video comparing the 5D4 and A7Rii showed the 5D4 to have better detail than the A7Rii in 4K mode which uses the sample downsampling technique.


----------



## fussy III (Sep 20, 2016)

scyrene said:


> fussy III said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



How and when did you to find out?


----------



## njene (Sep 20, 2016)

Sony made some excellent Walkmans ;D


----------



## fussy III (Sep 20, 2016)

njene said:


> Sony made some excellent Walkmans ;D



And if Canon doesn't get their things together, they soon will best be known for dishwasher-proof coffee mugs.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 20, 2016)

Drum said:


> Plus whatever cost savings you make on the body, you would loose on buying 1 lens- never mind multiple lenses. The selection of A mount lenses also isn't a tenth of the Canon range even excluding third party lenses - I noticed the new Sigma's didn't mention Sony compatability.



not to mention that canon takes most of the Zony lineup .. especially the 24-70 and the tele's out back to the woodshed...


----------



## dak723 (Sep 20, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> Seriously? I am looking at that 5d iv and this A99ii looks like the camera everyone wants......it has everything.



What everyone wants?

Hmm...

42 MP - Nope, much prefer keeping things around 20-24 MP. I can already print over 28" with pics form my 6D.
EVF - Nope, prefer the OVF
No AA Filter - Nope, prefer no moire. Can always sharpen Post-Processing if I want.
4K - Nope don't need. If I want video, I will choose Canon due to the fact that they have DPAF.

Not to mention Canon has a better lens lineup.

Sorry, I guess not everyone wants...


----------



## fussy III (Sep 20, 2016)

candc said:


> I don't really see the advantage of this type camera with the translucent mirror. I suppose the mirror is not moving so its not slowing things down but if its in the way of the sensor its going to also block some of the light. How much? There are some advantages to a mirrorless camera in some situations but this thing? Maybe it has some of the advantages of mirroless and some of a dslr but I don't see it as better than either one.
> 
> Make a hot shoe evf for your dslr's canon.



I removed the mirror in my A99 because I was adapting manual 645lenses with a tilt adapter and did not need AF. That measure gained about 0,6 f-stops of light, which I could not afford to waste. But in that fashion, a Sony A99 served only as a sidekick to two other systems (Canon EF and Pentax 645), not as a replacement. This may be different with the A99II: I assume Sony now trusts the ISO-capacities of their current and future sensors enough to believe the loss of 0,6stops of light is eventually fully justified. The benefits: a continous phase-AF, more fps (not limited by mechnics) and the possibility to avoid viewfinder-blackouts (we'll see about that after the A99II has been properly reviewed).

What would be ideal imo is regular phase-AF with slapping-mirror and an optical viewfinder that can be exchanged into an electronic viewfinder as in the new Fujifilm GFX 50S with Dual-Pixel-AF or FUJI-AF, below a flippy as in Canon 80D. 

12fps 42megapixel RAW for 2 seconds or 24 consecutive shots as in the A99II is nice. However I'd prefer an optional 8fps for 3 seconds.

"Dream on, Fussy!", some might say.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

fussy III said:


> I assume Sony now trusts the ISO-capacities of their current and future sensors enough to believe the loss of 0,6stops of light is eventually fully justified.



They may believe that, but it's up to the buyer to decide. I wouldn't put a .6-stop ND on my A7R2 (unless necessary for creative reasons).


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 20, 2016)

raptor3x said:


> emko said:
> 
> 
> > 42mp
> ...


It is going to be 2.0X crop for best quality 4k.


----------



## fussy III (Sep 20, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> fussy III said:
> 
> 
> > I assume Sony now trusts the ISO-capacities of their current and future sensors enough to believe the loss of 0,6stops of light is eventually fully justified.
> ...



Don't get me wrong - I am not advocating here and sceptical myself.

Sorry - have to do this - I just found a better video of the FUJIFILM GFX presentation (Thanks to Matt G.):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuVWsy0A5-Y

What an achievement! Finally some people bringing photography home again. I would feel stupid to tell these engineers why I am so happy because they already know


----------



## deadwrong (Sep 20, 2016)

emko said:


> Wow those specs are insane or we are just used to Canon milking the tech, i was planing to upgrade my 5D3 to the 5D4 now i feel like Canon is ripping us off. I was thinking well the 5D4 is close to what other companies are doing but i forget that Canon just caught up to them and now Sony is blowing them out of the water in specs.
> 
> 42mp
> 12FPS
> ...




I agree. Seems like Canon is throttling their customers. I agree with the Lenses that Canon has and that its most powerful asset. Sadly most people that are with one line of cameras or another are pretty much married to that company since the investment in lenses is higher than the shitty body they have to buy to be in a today camera. Within 1-2 years the 5div body will be outgunned badly by competitors. I can only imagine how badly the 6dii will be stripped down in 6 months.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> emko said:
> 
> 
> > Wow those specs are insane or we are just used to Canon milking the tech, i was planing to upgrade my 5D3 to the 5D4 now i feel like Canon is ripping us off. I was thinking well the 5D4 is close to what other companies are doing but i forget that Canon just caught up to them and now Sony is blowing them out of the water in specs.
> ...



Badly outgunned by...

On a percentage basis, how much better than 5d4 photos do you expect a99ii photos to be?


----------



## unfocused (Sep 20, 2016)

All the angst, trolling and defensiveness is goofy. If you really need or want some feature or features that another brand offers, buy that brand. 

No mass market product is going to be perfectly customized for every individual. All brands study the market and try to match their offerings to a targeted audience. 

Canon and Nikon dominate the market and suceed by offering products that please a majority of buyers. Other companies must focus on niche products because they can't compete for the majority of the market. 

If Canon doesn't make the product you want and someone else does, buy it. But why get upset about it? Even worse, why act like Canon is somehow cheating you personally? Be glad that other companies are offering competitive products, it benefits consumers.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 20, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > deadwrong said:
> ...



5d4 30MP 14bits RAW [email protected] FPS = 33 photo buffer
A992 42MP 14bits RAW [email protected] 12FPS = 54 photo buffer

not suprising 

where u saw the wrong information about 12fps limitation?


----------



## deadwrong (Sep 20, 2016)

unfocused said:


> All the angst, trolling and defensiveness is goofy. If you really need or want some feature or features that another brand offers, buy that brand.
> 
> No mass market product is going to be perfectly customized for every individual. All brands study the market and try to match their offerings to a targeted audience.
> 
> ...



Soon Canon and Nikon will be the niche market if they continue to lag behind.....Thank god for Sony, panasonic, Fuji, Pentax that continue to actually innovate.


----------



## Ryananthony (Sep 20, 2016)

unfocused said:


> All the angst, trolling and defensiveness is goofy. If you really need or want some feature or features that another brand offers, buy that brand.
> 
> No mass market product is going to be perfectly customized for every individual. All brands study the market and try to match their offerings to a targeted audience.
> 
> ...



Because some people are financially invested in a company that doesn't look to be keeping up with the advancements seen in other brands. I understand why people are upset. Telling them to jump to another manufacture isn't the easiest solution for many. With that said, I couldn't be bothered. I don't have the funds or emotions to worry about every new camera release, as fun as it is to read. I'll likely be purchasing another 5d3 as the price falls since it is more then enough camera for most situations.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 20, 2016)

I have to say, the A99II looks like the most complete package on the market, by a lot...
It's like the A7R2 and 1DX all wrapped into one.

If anything is going to deliver "good" 4K, it's going to be this (there's actually room for cooling), plus being SLT means it has the best AF of any videocamera on the market.
Losing half a stop of light to the AF system was a problem five years ago, probably not so much right now, especially since this is BSI.

Now if only Sony can show us that they can build a reliable camera then they might have something worth bragging about.


I think this was the highlight of the A99 II press conference.
https://youtu.be/HCuCON4jdgY?t=22m45s

Sony definitely had the best presentation at Photokina.


----------



## John2016 (Sep 20, 2016)

All this funny "neurotransmitter" in this forum running out of any constructive arguments...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmfMLeB3lJw
5d mkIV White balance shifts (???)

Is this the FAMOUS "Canomatrix" color? 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMcXq1cqo4A







A99II:

Positive:
42MP Full-Frame Exmor R BSI CMOS Sensor
BIONZ X Image Processor & Front-End LSI
Internal UHD 4K Video & S-Log3 Gamma
S&Q Motion in Full HD from 1-120 fps
5-Axis SteadyShot INSIDE Stabilization
Hybrid Phase Detection AF System
0.5″ 2.36M-Dot XGA OLED Tru-Finder EVF
3.0″ 1,228.8k-Dot Tilting LCD Monitor
ISO 102,400 and 12 fps Shooting with AF
Dual SD Card Slots; 14-Bit Raw Output
$3,199





Negative: 
A- Mount

"The Legend goes forth" -ah... fantastic...


----------



## Bennymiata (Sep 20, 2016)

When you've been photographing for over 55 years like I have, you learn to look past the spec sheets.
Look at the photos above.
While the multi-coloured light doesn't make the Canon's colours look fantastic, it's a lot better than looking yellow or completely sunburnt!

I want a camera, with a great system behind it, that works every time and always takes great photos.

I do all sorts of photography from weddings, corporate presentation nights, products, food, BIF, macro, you name it and someone has paid me to photograph it, and Canon is what I've found that can REALLY do it all really well and reliably.

Sure, other companies have advantages in certain areas, but no brand other than Canon is a better all-around camera.
Tens of thousands of pros all over the world seem to agree too!


----------



## turtle (Sep 20, 2016)

There's no doubt Canon can build a seriously reliable and rounded camera. This is one of the many reasons I bought into the brand some years ago. Still, it would be nice to see them push a little harder and not throttle back models so hard in the hope of protecting others in the camera or cine line.

I think we can feel very pleased that Canon has such a good sensor in the 5D IV (trades low ISO DR for high ISO DR compared to Sony/Nikon) and its a steady camera. However, the specs of the memory card slots _appear to be _plain cynical, but I wonder.....

I am very aware of Canon's 'slowly slowly catchy monkey' approach, but this does not mean that they could not have given us better value with the 5D IV. IMHO, on face value, it should either have been much cheaper with the same specs, or offered higher specs for the money. We do not have to reduce this to binary choices, which is how these threads seem to go on this forum: 'you're either with Canon or against us'. One can recognise Canon's merits, while delivering reasoned criticism.

Kudos to Sony for offering a spectacular camera for the price (assuming it focuses like an improved A99 Mk I). Well done to Pentax for the K-1. Both brands are aggressively trying to capture market share and so would naturally push much harder on price, but even somewhere in the middle would have been nice from Canon. The 5D IV at the current price point with IBIS, or as it is with a 8.5 fps and a much better combination of buffer/card slots.

But Canon didn't. I still believe Canon also offers by far the best optics for the money. The build is great, serious decentering is uncommon and they always perform. Hell, for all the fancy fast razor sharp lenses being released now, none can produce a portrait with the sensual feel of the 85mm f1.2 L II. 

These attributes overall mean I still have a foot in the Canon camp, but its getting more uncomfortable by the day. Canon has released a slew of cameras that felt mildly out of date upon release and well out of date 6 months later and this was not the case with the 5D and 5D II. But what about the future?

I wonder if Canon's R&D investment into their new line of sensors has cost them an absolute fortune and economisation on things like memory card slots have allowed them to balance their books. It would make sense. If this is true, it is very possible they will be able to push much harder with new generations now that they are over the huge hurdle of having to close the gap with Sony sensors. The cost must have been staggering and hitting them behind the scenes, with no dividend, for 5-10 years. The upshot is that this will now mean that the market does not become a one horse Sony race, which is good for everyone.

For those saying there are no recent lenses for the A mount, if you look to Sigma and Tamron you can build a very nice kit from those without touching Sony/Zeiss optics. The bigger question is whether A mount will receive further investment in the years to come.


----------



## emko (Sep 20, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > emko said:
> ...





you miss the point, why buy a 5D4 when products like this come out that actually tries instead of Canons milking us, you don't feel like Canon does not give a crap and just wants to make money without trying. I want the 5DII Canon back, but second they seen how well DSLR video is selling, "good lets just now split that and not add any more features to the 5D line other then the utmost basic video capability".

And this really makes me mad i have a large collection of Canon glass i really l like their glass but now it feels like they are using us. Canon would never give us 12 FPS you have to buy the 1DX for that !! want 4K or video with SLOG well go buy our 1DC

and here comes Sony and other companies give the customer what they want, while we Canon glass users have to keep bagging for features


----------



## emko (Sep 20, 2016)

turtle said:


> There's no doubt Canon can build a seriously reliable and rounded camera. This is one of the many reasons I bought into the brand some years ago. Still, it would be nice to see them push a little harder and not throttle back models so hard in the hope of protecting others in the camera or cine line.
> 
> I think we can feel very pleased that Canon has such a good sensor in the 5D IV (trades low ISO DR for high ISO DR compared to Sony/Nikon) and its a steady camera. However, the specs of the memory card slots is plain cynical and indicative of the thought processes going on at Canon HQ.
> 
> ...



i really hope that's true, maybe they will wake up but for me i will stick to the 5D3 for now this Sony A99 is amazing but has nothing to Canons glass for now.


----------



## quod (Sep 20, 2016)

Bennymiata said:


> When you've been photographing for over 55 years like I have, you learn to look past the spec sheets.
> Look at the photos above.
> While the multi-coloured light doesn't make the Canon's colours look fantastic, it's a lot better than looking yellow or completely sunburnt!


If you shoot in RAW, you can adjust the color balance with no problems. Also, with all of that experience, surely you are capable of adjusting your white balance in the camera. That said, the coloring above looks weird. If anything, my A7RII tends to a slightly green cast. Again, easily fixed.



Bennymiata said:


> I want a camera, with a great system behind it, that works every time and always takes great photos.


You're channeling your inner-Neuro. Don't go down that path because it is a failed argument. I shoot all of my Canon glass on my A7RII with zippy AF and very few issues. 500/4 II? Check. 400/5.6? Check. 100-400 II? Check. 70-200/2.8 II? Check. 24-70/2.8 II? Check. 16-35/4? Check. Birds in flight, too. On top of that, I have a sweet Zeiss ZM/Voigtlander prime kit that I cannot shoot on my 5DIII or 7DII cameras. Tiny and freaking awesome. 



Bennymiata said:


> I do all sorts of photography from weddings, corporate presentation nights, products, food, BIF, macro, you name it and someone has paid me to photograph it, and Canon is what I've found that can REALLY do it all really well and reliably.
> 
> Sure, other companies have advantages in certain areas, but no brand other than Canon is a better all-around camera.


I would agree with your points. I think Canon is about as reliable as you can get. I have both systems (Fuji too) and my money is on Canon for reliability and consistency. That said, the image quality out of the Sony 42MP sensor absolutely smokes Canon's offerings. The images have substantially more dynamic range, clean shadow lifting, and they are much sharper out of camera. The problem is that Sony's offerings are not as mature as Canon. I liken Canon to a Toyota Camry. It's a little boring, but it's reliable.



Bennymiata said:


> Tens of thousands of pros all over the world seem to agree too!


This is a fallacious argument.

Two last points. Some people are under the perception that Canon is greedy. All companies are greedy. Fuji is greedy. Sony is super greedy. Sony's cameras, and now their lenses, are very good, but they are premium priced and as far as I can tell, Sony does not lower their prices over time like Canon does. There is no perfect company behind the gear. All companies produce gear that will take superlative photos. Just pick the cameras and lenses that work for you and the type of shooting that you do and have fun.

Also, don't listen to people on these boards who tell you that Canon makes the best glass. It makes great glass, but not necessarily the best. My Zeiss ZE, ZM, and C/Y lenses have so much microcontrast pop missing from pretty much every Canon lens I have shot except perhaps the 16-35/4.


----------



## turtle (Sep 20, 2016)

quod, I am in a similar position to you, owning plenty of Canon and Sony gear. What I would say about your final point, is that not everyone wants lots of 'microcontrast pop'. I personally really like the gentler look of a lot of Canon lenses for certain applications (people, especially). For colour landscapes, I can see why people would more often prefer more contrast and saturation. However, in comparing my 85 1.2L II to the likes of the 'sharp everywhere, always' Nikon 105mm f1.4, I know which I feel it the better lens for shooting female portraits and it isn't the Nikon (for me). The difference is a lot of PP.

Where Canon has Sony smoked is in the consistency of optical construction of their lenses. Sony seems to produce an almost endless stream of decentered lenses and this makes buying lenses a frustrating affair. If only there were a company that was right in the middle of these two huge brands!


----------



## turtle (Sep 20, 2016)

That's not always true. It can help add a few % which in a competitive marketplace is important. Over time that adds up, otherwise we would be seeing photographers shooting pro sports with D2XS and we don't (for a reason). Same goes for wedding shooters, who all benefit from quiet shutters, better tracking, more DR etc etc. Just look at the standard of images being shot today compared to ten years ago and there is no doubt that better cameras are helping, along with advances in PP.

For the average amateur, I would agree however.




kraats said:


> Talking about photography will not get you better pictures. *Switching bodies or brand will not either*.


----------



## candc (Sep 20, 2016)

fussy III said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > I don't really see the advantage of this type camera with the translucent mirror. I suppose the mirror is not moving so its not slowing things down but if its in the way of the sensor its going to also block some of the light. How much? There are some advantages to a mirrorless camera in some situations but this thing? Maybe it has some of the advantages of mirroless and some of a dslr but I don't see it as better than either one.
> ...



I guess .6 stops isn't "too" bad. I would try the camera if you could use canon lenses on it. Sony needs to get lossless raw. Right now on the a7rii you can choose lossy raw (40+ mp files) or uncompressed raw (80+ mp files)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 20, 2016)

John2016 said:


> All this funny "neurotransmitter" in this forum running out of any constructive arguments...



As always, the market will decide. Sony fanbois will drool and salivate, DPR will fawn over it, and the 5DIV will outsell it by a huge margin.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 20, 2016)

fussy III said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > fussy III said:
> ...



Um, I've been replying to that thread and recognised it? Also I clicked on your profile, and your last two posts were all but identical.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > No AA Filter - Nope, prefer no moire. Can always sharpen Post-Processing if I want.
> ...



Or maybe lots of customers get suckered in by the promise of greater sharpness and/or don't know or care about moiré? My assertion has nothing to back it up, but neither does yours. Not to mention how people's precoceived notions can affect their judgment (e.g. 'the AA filter is making my images soft!' - how many people have actually quantified that?). The move towards AA filter-less cameras has been driven at least as much by marketing as anything else. I've seen arguments on both sides. Your 'it's the newer approach so it's obviously better' attitude ignores all of them.

Incidentally, the argument 'the one without the filter sells better, so it must be fine' is precisely the argument you accuse Neuro of making regarding Canon - they sell better so must be the best (that isn't actually what he argues, but I've seen it characterised as such) 

(I've seen plenty of moiré in the 5DsR DPreview test shots; I've not noticed any 'softness' in my 5Ds shots; I wasn't going to spend £200 more for the difference, even if the -R *was* objectively better).


----------



## scyrene (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



I think in truth the difference is small. AA filter softening can be ameliorated with judicious sharpening. Moiré can be mitigated by various means. I object to people claiming AA filters are terrible/any camera with one is crippled, as some on these forums have. Until the D800/D800E, who was even talking about this? The tyranny of small differences.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



devil is in the details, there were no differences outside of the AF and sealing updates.. i recall people quite annoyed at the price jump for the lack of betterment.

the 16-35 may have gotten an actual update - DxO shows a fairly different profile in between the SSM and SSM II or it could just be sample variation. overall the detail scoring is the same between the two.
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-Carl-Zeiss-Vario-Sonnar-T-STAR-16-35mm-F28-ZA-SSM-II-on-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-versus-Carl-Zeiss-Vario-Sonnar-T16-35mm-F2-8-ZA-SSM-on-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99__1537_831_245_831

the 24-70 II shows no optical improvement as an example:
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-Carl-Zeiss-Vario-Sonnar-T-STAR-24-70mm-F28-ZA-SSM-II-on-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-versus-Zoom-Carl-Zeiss-T-24-70-mm-F2.8-ZA-SSM-SAL-2470Z-on-Sony-Alpha-900__1538_831_224_371
even the profiles are nearly identical - enough for sample variation.

however .. ONE lens (potentially) updated in 4+ years? 

welcome to the world of Sony .. MAKE BELIEVE™

Sony hung onto it's lens laurels from the initial designs, especially when compared against ghte original 24-70, 16-35 2.8 and 100-400L .. however, canon (and nikon) have all been continually updating their lens lineup. Sony's no longer really "up there" as far as A-mount.

With Sony's continued push for FE lenses, just how much is the A mount going to get as far as credible updates?

even *IF* we assume that all three of them are new lenses .. that's three in 5 years.

and with examples like this:

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-Carl-Zeiss-Vario-Sonnar-T-STAR-24-70mm-F28-ZA-SSM-II-on-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-versus-Canon-EF-24-70mm-F28L-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III__1538_831_886_795

sony isn't competitive at all with the better optics out there (or even it's very own GM lineup)


----------



## dak723 (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



No, it is nothing like that. As I said (or were you too stupid to understand?) 20-24 MP is plenty for me to print at the largest sizes I will ever need. I also don't need bigger files. I also don't need more MPs which requires higher shutter speeds and/or using a tripod to take advantage of the higher MPS. This has nothing to do with comparing 12MP and 21 MP. I realize from previous posts that you always consider more MPs to be a positive. For many photographers, more MPs are not a positive. In fact, 42 MPS is a deal breaker as far as I am concerned due to the reasons given. As we've seen discussed many times on this forum, very high MPs is a niche market. I am not in that niche. 



> No AA Filter - Nope, prefer no moire. Can always sharpen Post-Processing if I want.



[quote author=dilbert]If all of the big discounts are anything to go by, the 5DsR outsells the 5Ds. Nikon went with no AA in the D810 whereas with the D800 it offered people a choice. Clearly AA filter is not deemed necessary by those shooting with higher megapixel counts. Whilst some (like you) seem to remain scared by it, others clearly are not.
[/quote]

Yes, some folks prefer more sharpness. I think offering the choice is a good one. I am not scared by it - in fact I own a camera with no AA filter. So once again, your assumption (and insult) are completely wrong. Given a choice, I prefer the filter. No fear involved, just don't need extra sharpness and the occasional problems that come with having no AA filter.


----------



## LordofTackle (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Is the absence of the AA filter new? No. Phase One have been doing MFDB's without the AA filter for quite a while now. Somehow professionals that use them shooting models, etc, manage to get their work done without fear of moire. Go figure.



Well, that's exactly the point. These professionals know what they do and they work in a highly controlled environment. Thus they can (and most likely also actually know how to) avoid moiré in their pictures, using hi-res, AA-filter-less cameras. This might be not so easy in uncontrolled situations, i.e. photojournalists and the like.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

emko said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > deadwrong said:
> ...



Canon isn't using anyone. They can't. All they can do is offer products for sale. Consumers decide whether they offer substantial value for the price. I didn't think 5D4 did, so I took that money and bought a slightly used 1Dx.

regardless, you say I miss the point, but I think it's a valid question. Canon cameras are badly ungunned. How does that manifest in making photos? Is it just a data sheet fight or do you expects you'd produce more/better photos with a competitors product?


----------



## d (Sep 20, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> Well, that's exactly the point. These professionals know what they do and they work in a highly controlled environment. Thus they can (and most likely also actually know how to) avoid moiré in their pictures, using hi-res, AA-filter-less cameras. This might be not so easy in uncontrolled situations, i.e. photojournalists and the like.



Correct. In my former studio we'd get moiré fairly frequently shooting fabric with the 5D3. If you noticed in and had time, you'd try to adjust your subject distance a little and take some more shots. Or...you just made it the retoucher's problem to fix 

Actually, capture one has a reasonably effective tool for "painting out" moiré, in its later versions.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Moire for stills shooters is a bit of a "ho hum" issue. For video I *imagine* it's a bigger concern. Are many videocentic people using 5DSR and D800e/D810 and Phase?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > deadwrong said:
> ...



I'm just surprised it can do it. Sony discussed the advantages of BSI as it pertains to readout, but that's far more substantial than I expected.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Any hard data on 5DS/R sales? Do we know this for sure? I'd be curious. 

In my (limited) shooting with the R I have not yet come across moire. Actually, I've seen it in only ONE shot through several years (taken with 5D3) - a bird at close-up range. If viewed at 100%, small amounts of false color can be spotted on sections of the feathers. Even then, to me it's not nearly enough to be distracting or anything.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 20, 2016)

dak723 said:


> No, it is nothing like that. As I said (or were you too stupid to understand?) 20-24 MP is plenty for me to print at the largest sizes I will ever need. I also don't need bigger files. I also don't need more MPs which requires higher shutter speeds and/or using a tripod to take advantage of the higher MPS. This has nothing to do with comparing 12MP and 21 MP. I realize from previous posts that you always consider more MPs to be a positive. For many photographers, more MPs are not a positive. In fact, 42 MPS is a deal breaker as far as I am concerned due to the reasons given. As we've seen discussed many times on this forum, very high MPs is a niche market. I am not in that niche.



Just as a point of order, if you print at the same size, a higher MP camera will not require a higher shutter speed, because at a given output size any camera shake will be magnified by the same amount, regardless of resolution. It's when you view 100% that differences can become apparent (or if you crop more with the higher res image). I'm not advocating high MP for everyone, just thought it important to point that out (the extra storage and processing requirements of higher MP images are obviously a downside for some people, for instance).


----------



## sdsr (Sep 20, 2016)

emko said:


> and here comes Sony and other companies give the customer what they want, while we Canon glass users have to keep bagging for features



I think by "they" and "the customer" you mean "people with preferences similar to mine." Sales figures suggest otherwise, as does the constant whining on Sony forums by A-mount fans furious at Sony for switching its, um, focus from A- to E- mount bodies and lenses. 

I dare say the A99ii will be a good camera, but I have no interest in it, and will stick with my A7s and A7rii - in part because they're fully mirrorless and have no SLT light loss, but mostly because, thanks to the mount, I can use just about any lens ever made by anyone on them (including my Canon lenses). I also have zero interest in video and don't care how many shots a camera can take in a second. Those are some of my preferences, and I don't expect others to share them or companies to cater to them. For now Sony happens to do so, which is why I buy their camera bodies (Olympus too); but that could change.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > ....
> ...



sub scoring, not the overall.

and out of all that you clip it down to nitpicking over that? okay..


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 20, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> Moire for stills shooters is a bit of a "ho hum" issue. For video I *imagine* it's a bigger concern. Are many videocentic people using 5DSR and D800e/D810 and Phase?



not really.

if you're shooting an event and on a tight schedule, do you want to brush all the moire out of every single element of clothing that shows it up?


----------



## deadwrong (Sep 20, 2016)

sdsr said:


> emko said:
> 
> 
> > and here comes Sony and other companies give the customer what they want, while we Canon glass users have to keep bagging for features
> ...




Such a well spec'd camera, but i really wonder why Sony does an A camera with little interest in the A mount. Well, at least you know that they can do such a thing. The A7r3 should be a interesting camera i bet! Love that they are a listening to thier clients, rather than a company that throttles back the tech like Canon does.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Moire for stills shooters is a bit of a "ho hum" issue. For video I *imagine* it's a bigger concern. Are many videocentic people using 5DSR and D800e/D810 and Phase?
> ...



That's exactly as I'd expect.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> Such a well spec'd camera, but i really wonder why Sony does an A camera with little interest in the A mount.



er.... go visit a sony discussion forum. There is a lot of interest in A-mount. Sony has just been largely AWOL given its push to E-mount.


----------



## John2016 (Sep 20, 2016)

http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/09/20/photokina-2016-the-camera-the-5d-mkiv-should-have-been-sonys-4k-a99-ii-has-everything-in-it-but-the-kitchen-sink-in-it/

"Sony have created the camera that most Canon DSLR video lovers would have died for. If the a99 II had an EF mount the internet would probably have melted by now. As it is, the a99 II deserves more attention because Sony have done exactly what Canon have refused to do. If you want a well built S35 shooting 4K hybrid with S-Log3, audio options and the option to shoot full-frame then the a99 II should be top of your list."

Unfortunately Canon 5d MKIV will still sell more...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

dilbert said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Sure, tack that one on there. 

Are there many videocentric people shooting 5DSR and D800e/D810 and Phase and a7r2?

Of the latter, I've only ever seen one in person, and I own it.


----------



## RunAndGun (Sep 20, 2016)

In my professional life(video), I have cameras from Sony(2 Betacams from the SD days and an F55, now), Panasonic(3 VariCams) and Canon(C300). In the stills world(play) I have five Canons- an EOS-3, 2x 5D II's, a 5D III and a 5D IV. The Sony sounds great on paper, but what the heck are you gonna put in from of it? Every camera is capable of producing good or even great images today, but it's ALL ABOUT THE GLASS. Canon's lens selection is probably what attracted me more than anything to going with them over Nikon when I bought my first DSLR. I loved Canons color even from their P&S's, but at that point it really became about lenses, lenses and lenses.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

RunAndGun said:


> The Sony sounds great on paper, but what the heck are you gonna put in from of it?



Basically any full frame or larger lens ever made


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 20, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> RunAndGun said:
> 
> 
> > The Sony sounds great on paper, but what the heck are you gonna put in from of it?
> ...



On Sony's A-mount? With a flange focal distance longer than Canon EF? Yeah, good luck with that. Let us know how it works out for ya...


----------



## d (Sep 20, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > RunAndGun said:
> ...



3kramd5, you'll need the A-mount universal adaptor (not included in the basic A99II kit):


----------



## Refurb7 (Sep 20, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Moire for stills shooters is a bit of a "ho hum" issue. For video I *imagine* it's a bigger concern. Are many videocentic people using 5DSR and D800e/D810 and Phase?
> ...



I shoot events and I don't want to see any moire ever. Moire is not ho hum. Having to brush out moire on a bunch of pics means needless extra work, which means less time, which means less money. And a more tired and annoyed photographer.


----------



## Refurb7 (Sep 20, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> 5div killer?
> 
> Sony A99 II finally announced by Sony today, the camera features 42 megapixel CMOS sensor same as of Sony A7R II camera. The standard ISO range of the camera is 100-25600, expandable to ISO 50 – 102,400. And it can also record 4K at 100Mbps (using XAVC S) with full sensor read-out and no pixel binning, both stills and video supported by 5 axis image stabilization system. Sony A99 II Hybrid AF system with 399 + 79 AF points. The camera can shoot upto 12frames per second with continuous AF tracking.
> 
> ...



If someone is interested in a Sony based on those specs alone, why would they bother posting that on a Canon forum? Just buy the camera you want ... no one cares what you buy. No one is getting "blown out of the water". What a dumb, useless phrase that is.


----------



## njene (Sep 20, 2016)

d said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > 3kramd5 said:
> ...



The biggest bonehead comment from 3kramd5, followed by the best picture reply LOL
You sir, just won the interweb...


----------



## njene (Sep 20, 2016)

Refurb7 said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > 5div killer?
> ...



For some people $600 means an extra months worth of collecting money back bottles...


----------



## Hang (Sep 21, 2016)

dilbert said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > deadwrong said:
> ...



It does 4K 30p, not 60.


----------



## Hang (Sep 21, 2016)

dilbert said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...


All these lenses share the same design of the previous versions as shown in Sony's website. Optical updates they claimed may refer to new coatings applied.

http://www.sony.com/electronics/camera-lenses/sal1635z2

http://www.sony.com/electronics/camera-lenses/sal1635z


----------



## pokerz (Sep 21, 2016)

Wish Canon could buy that BSI FF sensor for future products


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 21, 2016)

pokerz said:


> Wish Canon could buy that BSI FF sensor for future products



Why?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > RunAndGun said:
> ...



My bad; given posting order I read it as an immediate reply to my reply to dilbert (i.e. A7R2).


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 21, 2016)

njene said:


> d said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



+1


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 21, 2016)

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ns=p_POPULARITY%7c1&ci=274&setNs=p_POPULARITY%7c1&N=4288584247+4108103563+4291220258&srtclk=sort

All of the Sigma Art lenses are on the A mount.
While we know Sony is sharing the E-mount AF algorithm it's hard to say how much they're opening up the A mount, but if they're smart they should get Sigma lenses working as well as possible.

It's interesting that Sigma only released their (stunningly sharp) 30mm f1.4 DN lens on M4/3 and E-mount.
http://www.lenstip.com/477.4-Lens_review-Sigma_C_30_mm_f_1.4_DC_DN_Image_resolution.html


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> John2016 said:
> 
> 
> > All this funny "neurotransmitter" in this forum running out of any constructive arguments...
> ...



Which might tell us that the Canon marketing approach is (currently?, still?) more successfull - which is not the same as the product being superior.


----------



## John2016 (Sep 21, 2016)

*BOOM:* "We sell replacement mounts to use Nikkor,Voigtlander SL II and Zeiss ZF lenses on Sony cameras."
http://leitax.com/Voigtlander-lens-for-Sony-cameras.html


----------



## njene (Sep 21, 2016)

This kit comes with glue and everything for a professional finished mount 

BOOOM!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > John2016 said:
> ...



It might, if you assume that people are basically sheep who let advertisements lead them by the nose, and don't give a thought to which product(s) would best meet their needs before spending thousands of dollars.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Marketing and Advertisements are not the same...


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 21, 2016)

John2016 said:


> *BOOM:* "We sell replacement mounts to use Nikkor,Voigtlander SL II and Zeiss ZF lenses on Sony cameras."
> http://leitax.com/Voigtlander-lens-for-Sony-cameras.html


Yawn?


----------



## scyrene (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > John2016 said:
> ...



Well it ought to be a reminder that 'superior' is a subjective judgment. Even on stats which can be quantified, like resolution, some people want more, others don't. They'd differ on what constitutes superiority. Let alone harder to compare things, like ergonomics, AF systems, etc.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

scyrene said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Exactly. In general, people buy products that best meet their needs. Certainly, everyone's needs vary...in some cases, cost or compatibility with existing gear is most important. 'Best' and 'superior' are subjective, sales data are objective. Based on those data, we know Canon has led the ILC market for >13 years, and that's most likely because the majority of ILC buyers think Canon's products best meet their needs.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...



Which doesn't imply these people are excited with individual products, but they might just consider the switching cost being too high and thus hang on in...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



Nor does it imply that people are _not_ excited with say, the 5DIV. Ultimately, excitement (particularly buzz on the Internet) over a product is irrelevant. What matters is what people actually purchase…and as far as that top line objective measure goes, Canon is vastly superior to Sony in the ILC market.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



This is what matters right now, which is shortsighted. Excitement about a current purchase will have an impact on future purchase decisions.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...



You've made a small but significant leap in logic there. Excitement about a product does not necessarily translate to excitement about a _purchase_. Lots of people were 'excited' about the Sony a7 series when it launched in 2013, since then Canon has _gained_ market share. Also, keep in mind that excitement about a purchase can turn sour if the product doesn't perform as expected (e.g. it overheats while shooting video), particularly if the service experience is as horrible as Sony's reputation suggests.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



The relevant point here is if i buy a camera now, will i be excited about this - or let down by it - either immediately or x weeks/months after, and how will this translate into my next purchase decision.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> The relevant point here is if i buy a camera now, will i be excited about this - or let down by it - either immediately or x weeks/months after, and how will this translate into my next purchase decision.



Now, put that in context of the fact that Canon has dominated the ILC market for >13 years, and that Canon was #3 in the MILC segment last year and is likely to move into #2 this year. It would seem a lot more people continue to be excited by Canon products...


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > The relevant point here is if i buy a camera now, will i be excited about this - or let down by it - either immediately or x weeks/months after, and how will this translate into my next purchase decision.
> ...



I could have ghostwritten that reply for you to be honest. I am fascinated how in every second post you praise Canon over Sony, where I'm trying to make the general point that current sales is not a perfect indicator for customer satisfaction and hence furure sales.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...



Current and historical sales certainly do affect future purchases...not a perfect indicator, as you state, but a strong one. That's not true for all product classes, but for ILCs, system 'buy-in' is a key factor in future purchase decisions. 

Seems you are having trouble distinguishing between praise and statement of fact. Praise: Canon is better than Sony. Fact: Canon has sold more ILCs than Sony or any other manufacturer for well over a decade. Which one sounds more like my statements?


----------



## unfocused (Sep 21, 2016)

This forum is hilarious. It's dominated by gear heads who equate specifications with success. 

This is like watching American football and judging winners and losers by how many first downs each team scores. It's not irrelevant but not accurate either. The competitors and the people who count determine wins based on the scoreboard. In the business world, its profits and return on investment. As long as Canon dominates those areas they'll keep bringing home the championship rings.

As far as I'm concerned, nothing Sony produces interests me.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...



it's an indicator of stability of sales - especially in a market where people tend to buy into systems - especially at this level.

so while the A99II body looks amazing, the ecosystem surrounding it wanes in comparison .. badly.

no real lenses created in the last 4+ years, the ecosystem is at a standstill.

the most common workhorse lenses are not best of class, and are the most expensive of the three main players.

the entire A mount has only had 3 cameras out for it including the A77II in the last 2.5 years. APS-C, lower tiered cameras, everything, and just a smattering of DX lenses if that. four cameras from the A58 lower tiered camera in 2013. so basically in the last 4 years, only 4 cameras.

During that time, canon has released 13 APS-C/Full frame cameras. and 11 new lenses.

a difference?

Heck canon has done more on the EF-M mount since 2013 than Sony has done on the A mount, and Sony wants 3K for the camera.

it's easy to see that Sony is rolling the hard six on FE / E mount - and why would I spend 3,000 and countless of $$$ to switch to a more expensive SYSTEM when there's not even a likihood that sony will continue to augment it or improve in the future?

Then you have support .. looking through the dpreview forums.. most are repairing their own, buying parts from sears. precision camera is a joke as is their professional services (would you believe the call center for pro services is only monday through friday, 9 to 5?)

Just ILC Cameras don't take pictures.. lenses, camaras and the entire systematic workflow does and pros need and want a company to back you up.

Canon isn't perfect, there's horror stories there .. however they have a better record than most .. especially after the wake up call of the Mark III.


----------



## Sabaki (Sep 21, 2016)

Does anybody know the percentage of Canon sales being done in the US, Japan and England versus the rest of the world?


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 21, 2016)

Sabaki said:


> Does anybody know the percentage of Canon sales being done in the US, Japan and England versus the rest of the world?



it's bound to be higher in EU and NA because DSLR's are more popular there than Asia. but it's hard to tell such a breakdown because of their mirrorless amount in Asia as well.

Canon doesn't break it down, heck Canon doesn't even usually in their annuals attempt to brag about marketshare (unlike some that make up stats)


canon has around a 41% marketshare in a normal year of ALL ILC sales. this year because of the earthquake and Sony problems, canon has a 49% marketshare in the first half of the year


----------



## meywd (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...



And when the time comes, you will not care about the future sales because BOOM they are now current sales.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



to me you sound like a sheer fanboy. everytime there is remote criticism or other brand praise you pull the "canon is selling more cameras than sony" card. to me this sometimes just sounds like self-confirmation that one is betting on the right horse. this is fine with me, since i have my own way of making my mind.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...


Excalty, and if Canon is really that good, why android and iphone dont use canon lens or sensors? The answer is simple.

8)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> to me you sound like a sheer fanboy. everytime there is remote criticism or other brand praise you pull the "canon is selling more cameras than sony" card. to me this sometimes just sounds like self-confirmation that one is betting on the right horse. this is fine with me, since i have my own way of making my mind.



You are, of course, welcome to your own opinion. To me, it's interjecting some real-world facts and objective data in the face of the often ridiculous assertions made on these forums, e.g. the one that started this thread: "_5div killer? ...did Canon just get blown out of the water?_" When Sony started using on-die ADCs (6 years ago?) and Nikon started buying Sony sensors, DxO scores started to separate and people claimed that the 'better IQ' of SoNikon (there's that subjectivity again) was a looming disaster for Canon. So, where are we now, 6 years later? Right where we were then, with Canon leading the ILC market.

As for the 'canon is selling more cameras than sony' card, when comparing brands on anything but the level of individual, personal preference, that's the only card that really matters. Conversely, when comparing on the level of individual preference, that card is essentially irrelevant. But, you cannot compare individual preferences objectively since they by are, by definition, unique to individuals. Thus, it's meaningful to look at sales data as an aggregate measure of individuals' buying choices.


----------



## turtle (Sep 21, 2016)

I agree with much of this; however, Canon has immense market momentum and brand reputation (and great marketing) that can generate sales long after the products have waned. I am not suggesting that Canon products have waned entirely, but I am suggesting that sales today are not necessarily an indication of the future health of any company. Just look at Mercedes 15 years ago! They had a decade of awful build quality and frankly ugly designs. It took time, but consumer confidence in the brand did slowly erode and they had to work hard to rectify matters. I don't think Canon is in quite the same position, but I do think the relative lack of innovation will end up hurting them if they cannot start knocking it out of the park again. The EOS M5 looks like a fair crack at reinvigorating the EOS M line, but it isnt cheap and the competition is fierce. Too little too late? We'll see and I dont pretend to know.

Canon's can now manufacture its own top quality sensors that are up to today's best standards and that's a great position to be in. It also means we get healthy competition to the Sony sensor monopoly.



neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > ....
> ...


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> As for the 'canon is selling more cameras than sony' card, when comparing brands on anything but the level of individual, personal preference, that's the only card that really matters. Conversely, when comparing on the level of individual preference, that card is essentially irrelevant. But, you cannot compare individual preferences objectively since they by are, by definition, unique to individuals. Thus, it's meaningful to look at sales data as an aggregate measure of individuals' buying choices.



I guess I understand where you're trying to go. I however don't think the sales numbers are a relevant figure when people try to compare products to each other from a technical point of view. History has proven often enough that it is not the technically "best" product that wins in the market place but that many other parameters decide over market success. So it might very well be that other manufacturers camera bodies currently have an edge over Canon's but that other circumstances still lead to Canon selling more bodies. In such situation it is valid to "criticize" or dislike parameters of Canon's offering. And the sales numbers do not make these "technical facts" go away. Hence I think the "Canon still sells more thus is right" argument doesn't really do the trick...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

turtle said:


> I don't think Canon is in quite the same position, but I do think the relative lack of innovation will end up hurting them if they cannot start knocking it out of the park again.



Tell me about this 'relative lack of innovation'. How do you define that? Is DPAF not innovative? Dual-pixel RAW with the ability to correct (minor) focus issues and adjust the appearance of bokeh in post...not innovative? Adding IR data into the metering sensor to help with scene analysis...no innovation there? Sony's new wireless flash system that copies what Canon released four years ago...is that Sony innovation?

It seems that you're defining innovation as 'things I personally like or want to see,' and that's highly subjective. Moreover, while it may not be 'innovative' to make well-designed, robust products and service them quickly and efficiently when they break, that sort of thing does help sell cameras.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > As for the 'canon is selling more cameras than sony' card, when comparing brands on anything but the level of individual, personal preference, that's the only card that really matters. Conversely, when comparing on the level of individual preference, that card is essentially irrelevant. But, you cannot compare individual preferences objectively since they by are, by definition, unique to individuals. Thus, it's meaningful to look at sales data as an aggregate measure of individuals' buying choices.
> ...



We're saying the same thing. I am not contending that the fact that Canon sells more cameras means those cameras are 'better', it just means that more people choose to buy them becuase those cameras meet their own needs better than the alternatives. As pointed out above, some people may choose a 5DIV over an a7DII or a99II because 40+ MP is too high. For them, a lower MP count is technically better. Maybe you feel differently, maybe not...the point is, that's individual decision with no objective measure. 

It's always valid to criticize Canon – or any manufacturer – if you dislike their offering(s) or their features. The problem is when people take their own personal dislike as evidence that Canon as a brand is somehow in trouble.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



I dislike the "Canon is *******" prayers as much as you do. Let's leave them out of this discussion. They are not the point. 

There is a difference, however, between Canon's capability of maximizing their business economically (which is their primary target, and rightly so) vs. if their products are (perceived as) maxing what's technically possible in an attempt to put a leading edge latest and greatest product in customers hands. There is a widespread feeling that Canon doesn't need to provide to their customers what they technically could to reach the economic targets. Economically this might even be a necessity to prevent cannibalization within the own product range. And there is also benefits from that for instance when it comes to reliability. 

However there are sometimes features which feel crippled and where same price point competitor products are by objective measure superior. These cases should not be played down to "personal dislike".


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> There is a difference, however, between Canon's capability of maximizing their business economically (which is their primary target, and rightly so) vs. if their products are (perceived as) maxing what's technically possible in an attempt to put a leading edge latest and greatest product in customers hands.



Nice strawman. Who is arguing that Canon is or even should be attempting to maximize 'what's technically possible in an attempt to put a leading edge latest and greatest product in customers hands'? Sure, technogeeks love that stuff, DPR gobbles it up like candy. But for many photographers, a robust and reliable _system_ is what matters. By some objective measures, Sony is lagging on that front.




romanr74 said:


> There is a widespread feeling that Canon doesn't need to provide to their customers what they technically could to reach the economic targets.



A 'widespread feeling'? "Me and some people on the Internet think this?" Wow, that's not exactly definitive evidence, is it?  Still, it's quite reasonable...techincally, Canon could charge only a little more for a 7DII than for a T6i, the production costs likely aren't too different...or heck, Canon could just put all the 7DII features into the T7i. Why not? It's technically feasible. 

These are business decisions, and treated as such. Other companies make different business decisions, and certainly a company's position in the market (leader vs. #3, for example) affects the factors influencing those business decisions.




romanr74 said:


> However there are sometimes features which feel crippled and where same price point competitor products are by objective measure superior. These cases should not be played down to "personal dislike".



Perhaps. 

Is it objectively superior to offer 4K video, when the implementation causes overheating? Is it objectively superior to offer a choice between lossy RAW compression and uncompressed RAW with the concomitant hit against buffer depth? 

One could argue that 42 MP is objectively superior to 30 MP, but there are trade-offs for that, e.g. image storage and processing hardware requirements. One could argue that a dedicated PDAF sensor with 79 AF points is objectively superior to one with 61 AF points, if one is willing to ignore the geometry (line vs. cross) and accuracy (f/2.8 vs. f/5.6 baseline) of those AF points. So, I think you need to be careful how you define 'objective measures'. 

Moreover, in general, features are not free – there's a cost to developing and testing them, even for 'firmware-only' features.


----------



## zim (Sep 21, 2016)

Sabaki said:


> Does anybody know the percentage of Canon sales being done in the US, Japan and England versus the rest of the world?



England? or by US do you mean Texas?


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

Neuro, I dont know what it is, but something keeps your brain from even considering that Canon is not always on the perfect sweet spot with their decisios and choices - and there is an impressive fixation on Sony (coming thrugh in every second post even when not mentioned or related to by the peer in the discussion).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> Neuro, I dont know what it is, but something keeps your brain from even considering that Canon is not always on the perfect sweet spot with their decisios and choices - and there is an impressive fixation on Sony (coming thrugh in every second post even when not mentioned or related to by the peer in the discussion).



That's an overinterpretation at best, closer to an outright misrepresentation. As for repeated mentions of Sony, glance up at the topic title and try to let your brain acknowledge the attempt to keep somewhat on topic.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 21, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > Neuro, I dont know what it is, but something keeps your brain from even considering that Canon is not always on the perfect sweet spot with their decisios and choices - and there is an impressive fixation on Sony (coming thrugh in every second post even when not mentioned or related to by the peer in the discussion).
> ...



amen


----------



## xps (Sep 21, 2016)

Positive: The AF system looks like taken from an (I do think you call that so) ego-shooter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrcpJLjpVjU


But impressive fast and silent shutter.


----------



## xps (Sep 21, 2016)

As I am "family-biased" we met some Sony salesmen after Photokina in the evening.
The are really happy with their A99II, as they thought the A-mount would have been dead too.
They think that in some month the A9 will follow. About the price of the Pro models of Canon/Nikon, but with the same resolution as the A7Rii and with about 1-5fps and an superfast and wider AF system. Packed full with the newest inventions. Let us wait, if this will be just hot air, or will cme true.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 21, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...



Are you suggesting buzz/excitement is a better indicator of future sales than past sales?


----------



## xps (Sep 21, 2016)

Oh, and I was listening interested about their rumors. But I think, I cornerd them, when I asked, when they will open the first pro-service-center here in Germany.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 21, 2016)

xps said:


> As I am "family-biased" we met some Sony salesmen after Photokina in the evening.
> The are really happy with their A99II, as they thought the A-mount would have been dead too.
> They think that in some month the A9 will follow. About the price of the Pro models of Canon/Nikon, but with the same resolution as the A7Rii and with about 1-5fps and an superfast and wider AF system. Packed full with the newest inventions. Let us wait, if this will be just hot air, or will cme true.



1-5fps would be silly, especially if the sensor readout is fast enough for 12.


----------



## deadwrong (Sep 22, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > As I am "family-biased" we met some Sony salesmen after Photokina in the evening.
> ...



Kinda wonder if he typoed and meant 15.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 22, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > xps said:
> ...



Or 1-5 FPS faster than a7rii.

Clearly erroneous.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 22, 2016)

All these cameras are beyond my capability and skill. I never used this camera. Someone please correct if it is wrong. Sony still has those old video AF limitations (no AF with faster aperture (f/3.5) and AF only in P mode) right? I use f/2.8 Aperture with Sony 17-50mm lens and adjust it during video with my 70D without any AF issue. Even if someone use f1.4 lens with Sony, it is still going to use f3.5 in video. That seems to be ridiculous. 


Looks like Sony intentionally crippling this camera to protect E mount.

https://www.cinema5d.com/unraveling-sony-a99-ii-4k-as-good-a7-line/


----------



## weixing (Sep 22, 2016)

Hi,
Saw this in the A99II brochure: "Furthermore, when “Continuous Shooting: Hi+” is selected, focus will be fixed at the first frame shot when Hybrid Phase Detection AF is active at aperture settings of F9 or higher, or when Hybrid Phase Detection AF is not active at aperture settings of F4 or higher."
Err... any idea what does this mean? "F9 or higher"?? Does "higher" mean larger or smaller aperture??

Have a nice day.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 22, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > As for the 'canon is selling more cameras than sony' card, when comparing brands on anything but the level of individual, personal preference, that's the only card that really matters. Conversely, when comparing on the level of individual preference, that card is essentially irrelevant. But, you cannot compare individual preferences objectively since they by are, by definition, unique to individuals. Thus, it's meaningful to look at sales data as an aggregate measure of individuals' buying choices.
> ...



I remember when the 7Rii came out and people said that its ability to use Canon lenses and still maintain decent AF would be the advent of brand agnostic systems and would lead to a paradigm shift and spell trouble for the big 2. I am still waiting...
Fact is, the Sony 7Rii was made able to use Canon lenses because the Sony stable was so bare and was the only real way to attract people to effectively sort-of-switch systems.

The fact is that camera bodies were commodotised long ago and nowadays even the basic sensors far exceed the IQ requirements of a vast majority of users - and in that I include professionals most of the time. And if you are using having to use Canon lenses on a Sony body, how much are you really saving in size/weight over using a Canon body? So given that, there is a strong psychological pull to having a Canon body with Canon lenses. And that is where Sony falls short. Then you have the after-sales service and its appalling reputation...
I am wondering if Sony is a great proof-of-concept platform in that it produces very good bodies that have functions that very few find they actually need, but having little real leverage in the market.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 22, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Canon 5D Mark IV burst: 21 @ 7fps = 3 seconds
> Sony A99 II burst: 54 frames @ 12fps = 4.5 seconds
> 
> Both represent raw images.


Problem is with the Canon there is high probability of getting subject in focus for all 21 frames. With Sony you are only guaranteed to get 1st image in focus. Can you check few posts above where someone posted continuous shooting limitations with aperture setting. How does it affect in real life shooting?
Sony also has in built black hole active during video shooting. Any lens with f/1.8 or any faster aperture is going to work like f/3.5 during video. Black Hole eats rest of the light.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 22, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Canon 5D Mark IV burst: 21 @ 7fps = 3 seconds
> ...



Expecting dilbert to check and then interpret the implications of facts before posting? That's the real black hole...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 22, 2016)

weixing said:


> Hi,
> Saw this in the A99II brochure: "Furthermore, when “Continuous Shooting: Hi+” is selected, focus will be fixed at the first frame shot when Hybrid Phase Detection AF is active at aperture settings of F9 or higher, or when Hybrid Phase Detection AF is not active at aperture settings of F4 or higher."
> Err... any idea what does this mean? "F9 or higher"?? Does "higher" mean larger or smaller aperture??
> 
> Have a nice day.



Smaller.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 22, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Canon 5D Mark IV burst: 21 @ 7fps = 3 seconds
> ...


We keep talking about photo buffers.
We have to accept that 5d4 cannot handle that much data than sony a99M2


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 22, 2016)

pokerz said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



True. But data quantity ≠ data quality. For example, would you consider a buffer filled with 1 in-focus image followed 53 out-of-focus frames to be useful? I wouldn't...I'd far prefer only 21 images with most or all of them in focus.


----------



## weixing (Sep 22, 2016)

dilbert said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...


Hi,
So the Hybrid Phase Detection had to be turn on to get F4 and slower lens to shoot at 12fps with AF. 

"Approx. 390 shots (Viewfinder) /approx. 490 shots (LCD monitor) (CIPA standard)"
Just realised that A99II use an EVF, so no wonder using the viewfinder use up more power than the Live View Shooting... 

Have a nice day.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 22, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Canon 5D Mark IV burst: 21 @ 7fps = 3 seconds
> Sony A99 II burst: 54 frames @ 12fps = 4.5 seconds
> 
> Both represent raw images.



except people are getting 35+ with the 5D Mark IV.


----------



## dak723 (Sep 22, 2016)

Refurb7 said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > 5div killer?
> ...




Exactly! If you think Sony makes a superior product, go buy one. Why post on a Canon forum unless you are basically trying to rile up people's emotions? This kind of post is nothing but a troll post. It asks no serious questions. It starts no meaningful discussion. Just buy the camera you want and let others do the same. Form whatever opinion you want on who makes the best camera for you - AND LET OTHERS DO THE SAME.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 23, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> pokerz said:
> 
> 
> > ritholtz said:
> ...



1 in-focus image followed 53 out-of-focus frames to be useful? 
Show us your 54 sample photos in your test if u have any


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2016)

pokerz said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > pokerz said:
> ...



I'd be happy to test it, if you'll let me borrow your a99 II. Or your time machine. : 

But, I do know what happens if your subject is changing distance during burst shooting, but your camera only focuses before the first frame and not continuously (between frames) during the burst (as happens in some cases with the a99 II). I trust you can work that one out for yourself...


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 23, 2016)

dilbert said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...




http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=18912

_Reducing any concerns about the buffer depth: using a Lexar 64GB Professional 1066x UDMA 7 Compact Flash Card (Max. Read/Write Speed: 160/155 MB/s)*, the 5D Mark IV captured 36 frames in 4.98 seconds to precisely match the rated speed and, great news, far exceed the rated buffer depth.*
_


----------



## deadwrong (Sep 23, 2016)

dak723 said:


> Refurb7 said:
> 
> 
> > deadwrong said:
> ...




LOL, the whole idea here is too debate the real value of the 5div and how long this camera has before its totally obsolete within 2 years. If you dont like this post, then i suggest you dont read it and keep blind to what other manufacturers are doing to better Canon. I want to buy the 5d too, but shelling out 5k on a this camera, i am sitting on the fence for abit. I am not a Sony fan boy, thats forsure. There is no denying that Sony has the better camera body these days, just a matter of time before the lenses catchup.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 23, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> There is no denying that Sony has the better camera body these days, just a matter of time before the lenses catchup.



How can you be so sure? I believe earlier in the thread people discussed lenses for this mount, and that little had been released for it in recent years. You assume Sony will address the areas where it is weaker, but not Canon? Where is your evidence for that?


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 23, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> There is no denying that Sony has the better camera body these days, just a matter of time before the lenses catchup.



They haven't done a new full frame lens in 4 years. just how much time do you expect that to take?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> There is no denying that Sony has the better camera body these days, just a matter of time before the lenses catchup.



No denying for you, maybe. Are 15 cross-type AF points superior to 41 cross-type AF points? Is one f/2.8 AF point better than five of them? Is no GPS better than having GPS? Do you believe the UI is part of a camera (granted, Sony is at least trying to improve it, but when starting from so far in the hole...)? 

At the rate Sony is releasing A-mount lenses, it's 'just a matter of time' in the same way that it's 'just a matter of time' before the sun becomes a red giant and destroys life on Earth. You have been warned... :


----------



## Sdiver2489 (Sep 23, 2016)

I keep looking at the A7RII as a potential switch option and I keep coming to the same conclusion. Sony doesn't have lenses that are equivalent to what I have on Canon and/or aren't of the same quality. Until they fix this issue...I just can't switch.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 23, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> LOL, the whole idea here is too debate the real value of the 5div and how long this camera has before its totally obsolete within 2 years. If you dont like this post, then i suggest you dont read it and keep blind to what other manufacturers are doing to better Canon. I want to buy the 5d too, but shelling out 5k on a this camera, i am sitting on the fence for abit. I am not a Sony fan boy, thats forsure. There is no denying that Sony has the better camera body these days, just a matter of time before the lenses catchup.



If the whole idea really was to debate the real value of the 5D IV, then I suggest you actually read the 10 pages of responses because contained within those posts are any number of good arguments as to why the 5D IV is a better camera. 

"Totally obsolete within 2 years" What does that even mean? Will it still take pictures? Will it still use cards that are readily available? Will you still be able to download, edit and print the photos? Then it's not obsolete.

"There's no denying Sony has the better body these days." Except a lot of people do deny that. Again read the thread if you actually want to learn something, instead of just trolling. There are many good reasons people believe Canon is superior and that's based on people who actually use cameras instead of sitting in their Mom's basement reading spec sheets, 

"Just a matter of time before the lenses catch up." It's good that you are willing to risk your money on blind faith in Sony, but others look at past performance and what is available today and would rather not take that risk, especially since Canon doesn't sit still as far as lens development. Sony may someday catch up with what Canon offers today, but will they ever catch up with what Canon may offer in the future. Past performance says "no."

You say you wanted a debate. You got it. You just can't live with the fact that your side lost the debate.

If,you still want the Sony, go ahead. I think Canada is still a free country for the time being, so go ahead. Just know that in the objective world of the marketplace, you are in a small minority in thinking it is a better camera.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 23, 2016)

Sdiver2489 said:


> I keep looking at the A7RII as a potential switch option and I keep coming to the same conclusion. Sony doesn't have lenses that are equivalent to what I have on Canon and/or aren't of the same quality. Until they fix this issue...I just can't switch.



actually the FE mount is in far better shape with the GM lenses.

But.. on the A-mount? so they release a lens that can be used for sports.. they have what .. a 300 and a 500? both of which are outclassed by canon and nikon primes .. AND are more expensive than the canon and nikon primes.


fun fact .. 
Sony 500mm is 13K at bh, A99 II is 3.2K = 16.2K
Canon 500mm is 9K, 1Dx Mark II is 6K = 15k


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 23, 2016)

of course here's some other fun .. 

sony 24-70mm - 2K
sony 70-200mm - 2.9k
sony 16-35mm - 2.2k
You must add two A99II's to this to get into Sony's "PRO" service. they do not accept APS-C as valid for their "pro" support requirements. So you have to pony up for two full frame Alphas, otherwise you are stuck with non-Precision Camera service. (lol)

canon 24-70mm II 1.75k 
canon 70-200mm II 2k 
canon 16-35mm III 2.2K 
** this is enough by far to get into Canon Gold CPS program (36 points, 20 points required)

And Sony wonders why they are never taken seriously, not to mention they are literally schooled on performance for the professional trinity zooms (comparing the 16-35 mtf's .. it's not going to be pretty for Sony).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2016)

Now there you go, bringing facts into a debate. Good thing this isn't a US politics forum!


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 23, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> There is no denying that Sony has the better camera body these days



With nobody actually shooting with the body yet, any claims that it is better or worse are based entirely on spec sheets, which never tell the whole tale.


----------



## Sdiver2489 (Sep 23, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> Sdiver2489 said:
> 
> 
> > I keep looking at the A7RII as a potential switch option and I keep coming to the same conclusion. Sony doesn't have lenses that are equivalent to what I have on Canon and/or aren't of the same quality. Until they fix this issue...I just can't switch.
> ...



I know! Isn't that sad when I find even those options sub par? The "typical" lenses I use (i.e. 35mm, 24-70, 16-35mm) are not nearly as good as the Canon equivalents and they are on par if not more expensive.

I like my A6000...it does a good job for what it is. There are some things it does better than my 5D Mark III. But those things are definitely not related to fast and intuitive control and lens selection.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 23, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> pokerz said:
> 
> 
> > ritholtz said:
> ...



What does buffer have to do with the amount of pictures in focus?


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 23, 2016)

unfocused said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > LOL, the whole idea here is too debate the real value of the 5div and how long this camera has before its totally obsolete within 2 years. If you dont like this post, then i suggest you dont read it and keep blind to what other manufacturers are doing to better Canon. I want to buy the 5d too, but shelling out 5k on a this camera, i am sitting on the fence for abit. I am not a Sony fan boy, thats forsure. There is no denying that Sony has the better camera body these days, just a matter of time before the lenses catchup.
> ...



i'd love this forum if there were 10 pages of good arguments - yet there is plenty of trolling from the canon end too... (including this particular post)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> What does buffer have to do with the amount of pictures in focus?



Context. The situations in which buffer depth is a relevant spec frequently involve fast-moving subjects. If a camera locks focus at the first frame of a high-speed burst, the buffer depth is irrelevant.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 23, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > What does buffer have to do with the amount of pictures in focus?
> ...



hence nothing! yet it just has to be irrelevant, because otherwise a non-canon camera would actually have a better spec than a canon camera, which cannot be, at least not here...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...



Plenty of non-Canon cameras have certain individual specs that are better than Canon, and vice versa. Point being, it's important to consider those specs in the context of their use.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 23, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



where only canon is finding the sweet spot... stupid me.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2016)

romanr74 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > romanr74 said:
> ...



If that's what you choose to believe. Feel free to ignore my frequent statements (prior to the 5Ds and Canon 11-24) that if I shot primarily landscapes, I'd use a D800/810 or a7R wtih a 14-24G.


----------



## romanr74 (Sep 23, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> romanr74 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



it's not what i believe, but what i constantly read here...


----------



## dak723 (Sep 23, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Refurb7 said:
> ...



Sorry, but your premise is ridiculous. The camera will not be obsolete in 2 years. It will not be obsolete in 10 years. There are still photographers using the original 5D and the 5D II and producing wonderful photos. If you can't understand this basic fact - and I am referring not just to you, but all those folks who seem enamored purely by specs - then all your arguments lose credibility.

I am not blind to what other manufacturer's are doing. I own non-Canon cameras. I bought a Sony A7 and also an A7 II to replace my Canon 6D. Turns out, I liked the results of the Canon pics better and the Sonys were returned. Yes, my preference of the Canon pics is just my individual interpretation - and so is your statement that "there is no denying that Sony has the better camera bodies these days..." I presume you actually mean "sensor" - but that doesn't mean that the end resulting photos are better. There are lots of elements involved in taking photos - color, contrast, sharpness, ability to focus accurately (and sometimes quickly). Lenses play a part. Some of these aspects can be measured and compared, such as focusing speed. Most are subjective - which camera (and lens ) give me "better" color, "better" contrast. So, yes, there is denying it. Because there is no better - too much of the analysis is subjective. 

Point is - you cannot debate personal opinion and subjectivity. So, if you prefer the results of what Sony produces, get a Sony. If I prefer the results of what Canon produces, I will get the Canon. No debate. I welcome discussion comparing cameras, but that is not what normally happens on CR.


----------



## Josh Denver (Sep 23, 2016)

Astonished about all this talk for video on this stills forum but if you want to talk video it's my play field.

The A99II doesn't add anything over current Sony's capability. It just fixes overheating (I hope and guess)

So what the hype? The A7rII had S-LOG2/3, peaking/Zebras/4K FF/4K S35/120p/etc. 

And people were and are still shooting on Canon cameras, nikon cameras, panasonics. 

Why? Specs mean SQUAD. ZERO. O. 

So you like having S-log and crucify the 5Div for not having it? TRY the damn thing. Shoot a gig in S-Log and see how it renders colours on faces and highlights, absolutely horrible. A Canon 5DII would have shown better colours! People on S-log have jaundice or if you're a skilled colourist, you'll make them just anemic stage. 

Canon 1DC 500Mbps 422 C-LOG footage DESTROYS anything this camera can give, based on the a7rII. The 1DC gives you what a cinematographer wants, a colour rendition to love, it gives you much much higher bitrate so zero artefacs and macroblocking as all these 100mbps do, and the 4:2:2 chromasamplinh simply gives the Canons much more fedlity. Lowlight performance is better on the Canon 1D because it doesn't apply heavy NR in-camera over 6400 ISO and squishes detail rather than the organic grain and detail the 1DC Retains.

The 5D MKIV is a s35 versio of that, and the 1DX is a newer DPAF version of that also. 

When the hell did we cinematographers stopped caring about THE IMAGE. 

See when it comes out, put this A99ii on it's highest quality video mode: S35 S-LOG3 100mbps XAVC-S and put the 5D IV on it's highest quality mode: S35(ish), Prolost, 500mbps 422. 

Tell me what you'll see.

Hint, one will have a heavily compressed image with macroblocking, horrid skin tones that need hours to correct, and one will give you ProRes HQ quality files with RICH and faithfull rendition. And it will be soft because this one doesn't add artificial sharpening as an attempt to wow those who know no better and don't know RED 6k files are soft. 

There are just KEY points in Canon system for me as a cinenatigrapher that makes me stay:

-COLOUR rendition
-IMAGE Robustness
-High-end codecs
-DPAF

and i am not giving uo on getting pretty images for zebras or peaking, I've learnt to deak eith the 5D a LOONG time ago. 

And don't get me started about the headline in-camera stabilisation versus Canon optical IS in L and STM glass for video. A robot motion artefact is NOT acceptable by me in a frame. Canon IS, perfectly smooth. (it might be robotic to offer stronger stills IS)

So with a 5D IV + Zucoto loup + Zoom recorder what am I missing vs this? S-Log, 5axsis stabilization, 100mbps ff 4K? NO thank you. I'll take my beautiful images, not specs that in real life are no better than current technology. 

Why are people buying more C100MKII (1080p only at 8 bit 4:2:0) than sony FS5 (4K, Slog, Raw out) at the same price? 

Because the damn image looks better. No specs will change that. 

When did we stop caring about the image produced and only cared for little cool toys in specs ?! I sure as hell didn't. And i'll be buying a mark iv for my video company over this camera. 

An APS-C 4k Canon DSLR with DPAF and 500mbps and 4:2:2? That's exactly what checkx my boxes.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 23, 2016)

Now that is the sort of practical hands-on stuff that should end a lot of argument! ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> Now that is the sort of practical hands-on stuff that should end a lot of argument! ;D



But...but...I've read all the specs, and the Sony is better!


----------



## njene (Sep 23, 2016)

But..but..they still made excellent Walkmans...


----------



## pokerz (Sep 24, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> pokerz said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


So your conclusion comes from nth, no proof at all.
Not even reading menus. :-\


----------



## pokerz (Sep 24, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Now that is the sort of practical hands-on stuff that should end a lot of argument! ;D
> ...


At least Sony is better in Low light AF, 4k performance, buffer and burst rate.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 24, 2016)

pokerz said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > pokerz said:
> ...



Yeah, the information about the camera that Sony published on their website isn't proof, heck it's probably wrong anyway. It's not like they designed the camera or anything. If I give you a dollar, will you use it to go buy a clue?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 24, 2016)

pokerz said:


> At least Sony is better in Low light AF



Has anyone used the Sony's AF system and reported on it? Or are you conflating sensors which register in a darker environment with the AF performance in low light being better? The latter doesn't necessarily follow from the former.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 24, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> pokerz said:
> 
> 
> > At least Sony is better in Low light AF
> ...



What a silly question...don't you get that only the stated specification matters? _Actual_ performance is worth nth.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 24, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> What a silly question...don't you get that only the stated specification matters? _Actual_ performance is worth nth.



Sweet, my a7r2's AF system just got a lot better (by the delta between how it works for me and what the marketing/datasheets suggest)!


----------



## d (Sep 24, 2016)

dilbert said:


> This is a very dishonest test by TDP because it leads people (such as yourself) to think that the buffering is more capable than it really is.



How is it dishonest if he is prominently stating that those are the test configurations he was using, and even includes the disclaimer, "These buffer capacities should be considered best-possible for the referenced cards and your in-the-field results will likely vary"?

Bit of a mischaracterisation on your part, Dilbert, to call him "very dishonest". You might disagree with his testing methodology (as might I), but to attack his integrity is ridiculous.

d.


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 24, 2016)

dilbert said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Duh.
How do you think canon and Sony come up with those numbers?

Take a look at the 5d mark iii numbers and what people were getting in reality.


----------



## foo (Sep 24, 2016)

dilbert said:


> The most important part of what's missing in TDP's measurements is a statement on the size of the "lens cap on" file sizes.



Lens cap on raw files are approx 26MB on the 5DIV for me. Real world images range from ~29MB up to 56MB in the stuff I've taken so far.
Average size seems to be ~34MB and that gives approx 22 frames before the buffer fills.



> The buffer is anywhere from 7 (RAWPR) to 110 (Large/Fine with standard CF/SD.)



That's not the whole story either. Turn on DLO in the camera and buffer depth as shown in the VF drops to 1. What you get with DLO turned on is around 0.5fps

The buffer will be some fixed number of megabytes. What's dishonest is trying to measure buffer depth in number of shots at all as that's very subjective and depends largely on what's in the photo - camera settings and card type playing an additional role.


----------



## Josh Denver (Sep 24, 2016)

pokerz said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



I'll leave the stills stuff to you but sorry, ''better 4K performance''? 

Where did you get that? Read it on another forum? Read it in a spec sheet? On Dpreview?

It's strange because it's completely the opposite. The Sony in S35 4K mode vs Canon S35 4K mode what do we have in their best quality modes?

-Resolution? Technically both pretty much the same, but Canon has a bit higher resolution as it does cinema 4K 4096 pixels wide vs 3840 TV standard,

But what's important here is not resolution actually, it's sharpness. Canon is indefinitly better because of one huge element, Sony adds in-camera sharpening. While Canon at zero, while soft, retain than same resoluton, and that alone makes the 5D image more filmic and sony videoish.

-Colors Science?

Won't talk about this one!

-Colour weight? 

4:2:2 vs 4:2:0 

-rolling shutter? 

Identical

-lowlight

Identical with Sony adding heavy NR above 6400

-Codec?

500mbps vs 100mbps, translates into much higher compression quality. 

The only one where Sony goes ahead of The Canon is luminance range, and I say luminance not DR because Sony has restricted colour space and clips lots of colours in the highlights.

Sorry really how Sony has better 4K where Canon's 4K trumps it in everyway? 

The thing is that Canon didn't shoot 4K until recently with the 1DXII and 5DIV but when it did it, it did it right, in cinema-quality specs (500mbps 4:2:2 Full DCI - not consumer 100mbps 4:2:0 UHD), with no reliability issues whatsoever. 

Canon 1DC, 1DXII & 5DIV simply make better video IMAGES than Sonys. But yes, the sony's help you expose and focus with features like zebras and peaking (which are being implemented in the Mk4 as we speak by ML along with 1080p 14bit Raw video)


----------



## pokerz (Sep 24, 2016)

Josh Denver said:


> pokerz said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


We are talking 5d4 and a99II. 5d4 can't have S35 mode, its FOREVER 1.74x crop 4k.
Also, 5d4 does only 1080 HDMI output, never on 4k.

ML is almost dead in dual pixel cameras (760D, 70D & 80D).

Let's wait 5d5 in 2020 and see how Canon will react.


----------



## LordofTackle (Sep 24, 2016)

Josh Denver said:


> (which are being implemented in the Mk4 as we speak by ML along with 1080p 14bit Raw video)



Interesting. Where did you get that information?


----------



## pokerz (Sep 25, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> Josh Denver said:
> 
> 
> > (which are being implemented in the Mk4 as we speak by ML along with 1080p 14bit Raw video)
> ...


I bet he made his own ML hack for 14bits Raw video ;D


----------



## Josh Denver (Sep 25, 2016)

The image crop is 1.64x. Like Canon APS-C. Lower than Aja Cion and BM4K, all camera we call s35. So get past that please

HDMI Out is 4K on the Sonys to walkaround the low-end consumer codec internally (that's unusable in professional environments) with a bulky external recorder, a 5DIV has an internal high-end codec. ProRes quality. People even always transcode it to ProRes upon ingesting and all report it's the same quality. We're taking about ProRes quality here, 4:2:2 500mbps vs h.264. 

And yes, Magiclantern is active. I don't know where you got that DPAF has something to do with RAW ML. The 70D is working perfectly in raw with DPAF touch.

www.eoshd.com/2015/04/magic-lantern-now-working-on-canon-70d-both-versions/

The 7DII is actively having worked upon and veery close to getting it (s35 14bit 1080p). And the 5DIV while just got released, implementing ML process has started, it will take some time and at some point it WILL be doing 14raw 2K in FF just like the 5DIII as a bonus mode. 

5div will make better images than a99ii just like a7rii. This is an important spec for me, you know, image quality of the camera


----------



## tomO2013 (Sep 25, 2016)

The a99ii is a great camera. In fact I'd say that about pretty much most cameras available today. It's really hard to buy a bad camera!
On my sub 4k retina mac monitor, with it's 8bit colour I'm sure the 42mp of a Sony or the 30mp of a 5div will look lovely down sampled . That holds true on almost any 8-10bit 4k monitor that you can buy today. 
Personally what I care most about is print output quality, and the largest I can afford to print and also reasonably have any wall space for is 20X30. Even for gallery size, I'd probably stick to that as a limit as the market for people who will buy your work if it is larger is quite small i.e. somebody must REALLY REALLY love your work to buy something that is greater than 20X30 as when matted and framed it will take a huge amount of space up on their wall.
Which brings me back to why I shoot Canon, Sony and Pentax and why I have gone back to Canon.
Color. Yes you can get color checker passport, however that is simply adjusting lightroom channels , saturation, hue to get closer to accurate colour. When you massage colour in this way it can affect tonal transitions in the mid tones - subtle but noticeable in say a 20X30 portrait print. Also partly why some large advertising firms shoot 16bit medium format for large print sizes. The best prints in terms of color tonality are what I get from the Canon with big fat mid tones and a nicer highlight roll off out of camera to my a7 series. I have to do less to get it to where I want it to be. Ming Thein made mention of these qualities when he reviewed the 5dsr, that the camera had as close to 'right' out of camera colors as anything out there. 
Circling back around, the a99ii spec sheet reads very very good. I read a thread on DPReview where it was mentioned that Sony only use 12bit raw in continuous, bulb and bracket for their a7rii, a7sii, a6300, a77ii so it is quite likely that the a99ii does the same. Regardless of whether compressed or lossy is selected. 
I think when people compare raw numbers on a spec sheet, it isn't always comparing apples with apples.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 26, 2016)

Josh Denver said:


> The image crop is 1.64x. Like Canon APS-C. Lower than Aja Cion and BM4K, all camera we call s35. So get past that please
> 
> HDMI Out is 4K on the Sonys to walkaround the low-end consumer codec internally (that's unusable in professional environments) with a bulky external recorder, a 5DIV has an internal high-end codec. ProRes quality. People even always transcode it to ProRes upon ingesting and all report it's the same quality. We're taking about ProRes quality here, 4:2:2 500mbps vs h.264.
> 
> ...


High bitrate doesnt mean better quality, and pro use external recorders instead of internal 
5d4 FOREVER 1080 hdmi output nomatter how u good at hacking.

Can u suggest which video/ movie is made by ML hack? ;D


----------



## Josh Denver (Sep 26, 2016)

pokerz said:


> Josh Denver said:
> 
> 
> > The image crop is 1.64x. Like Canon APS-C. Lower than Aja Cion and BM4K, all camera we call s35. So get past that please
> ...




No higher butrate does mean better quality. With a high bitrate you get finer shadow detail, and you get no compression blocks, but most importantly you get no compressiom artefacting with moving subjects (what people like to call ''filmic motion cadence'' is poor with an a7rii and filmic cadence with 1Dc). When low enough, it can make the image go mushy and reduce 4K resolution to 480p. But it's not that low on Sony's. 100mbps is just about enough to deal with normal image capture, but 500mbps 4:2:2 and ProRes is enough for Teir 1 HD broadcast aquisition and heavy image manipulation/grading. 

Pros use external recorders? What about RED epic/weapon shooters? Sony f65, f55, f5, fs7, C300ii, C300, Varicam 35 and lt, ARRI Amira/alexa, Blackmagic cinema cameras i.e., virtually all professional cinema/video cameras are used to record internally. I guess those are not pro enough for you?

External recorders are needed when the cameras have a poor codec like all the Sonys, gh4, c100, etc. 

It's just a simple fact that the 5DIV has a MUCH higher end recording format. And to get anything similar from the the a99ii you'd have to carry a huge 7'' 2000$ external recorder. 

-No I do not have links for the 5dIV raw footage, as it's borrowed currently by my neighbour. As soon as he finishes up I'll get you some 5DIV raw footage. 

In the mean time watch 5d3 raw 14 bit footage because that's exactly how it will look once a nightly build is released for the 5div.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 26, 2016)

Josh Denver said:


> pokerz said:
> 
> 
> > Josh Denver said:
> ...


Mjpeg just a gimmick, thats the reason why Canon new flagship EOS C700 $30000 uses XF-AVC instead of Mjpeg. 8)


----------



## emko (Sep 27, 2016)

Josh Denver said:


> The image crop is 1.64x. Like Canon APS-C. Lower than Aja Cion and BM4K, all camera we call s35. So get past that please
> 
> HDMI Out is 4K on the Sonys to walkaround the low-end consumer codec internally (that's unusable in professional environments) with a bulky external recorder, a 5DIV has an internal high-end codec. ProRes quality. People even always transcode it to ProRes upon ingesting and all report it's the same quality. We're taking about ProRes quality here, 4:2:2 500mbps vs h.264.
> 
> ...



"5div will make better images than a99ii just like a7rii. This is an important spec for me, you know, image quality of the camera " WHAT? where can i see this ?

or are you just HOPING on a 3rd party to make the 5D4 better?


----------



## Josh Denver (Sep 27, 2016)

emko said:


> Josh Denver said:
> 
> 
> > The image crop is 1.64x. Like Canon APS-C. Lower than Aja Cion and BM4K, all camera we call s35. So get past that please
> ...



I am speaking if the already implemented 500Mbps 4:2:2 4K vs Sony's 100mbps 4:2:0 UHD. But raw will give a pretty good 1080p mode too. 

I mistyped. Someone was askung for 5D4 RAW footage so I said -Sorry my time machine is currently borrowed by my neughbour. I'll get you some raw footage as soon as I get it back. 

Let me be clear: There still is NO Magic Lantern versiin compiled for the new 5D that the public can download. But as soon as there is, links to the nightly built will be given. 

ML raw on the 5DIV isn't as important as it was on the MKIII because it only shot soft footage. And one more thing, the 30mp downsample to 1080p fullframe on the 5d4 seems to provide a hair more aliasing and more detail, so it will be just like the 5D RAW with a tiny hair of aliasing and slight hair of detail. Better seen on resolution charts than footage. 

Anorher note: 4K raw is not a possibility due to the data rate vs CF card slot bottleneck. If it was a CFast 2 slot, maybe but it would still be aps-c crop. ML does not have access to windowing the sensor. 

**I am just as sad as you are to see the 5D 30mp resolution, I wanted it to stay in the mkiii/1DxII/1DC territory. But of course video shooters like us are a MUCH smaller target than stills photographers who will be pleased with the resolution increase. 

***I wish Sony was just all around better. I'd be shooting on an a7rii and not fighting canon's lack of features. Canon just has a better image. I can accept panasonic gh4 image especially with the SB, pany can make some lovely colour and their varicam cameras were always famous for their colour rendition. But Sony, jesus christ. What makes me wonder is that Sony has great colours and great video colours overall on their higher end line, starting from the fs5.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 27, 2016)

When you say "makes a better image" I presume you are meaning individual frames of the video feed given the effects of the compression scheme.

Or are you speaking in general? If so, care to look at two images side by side from my color calibrated workflow, one shot with a 5D(3) and the other with an A7R2 each using the same lens and point out which is which and why?


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 27, 2016)

Josh Denver said:


> emko said:
> 
> 
> > Josh Denver said:
> ...


If some one wants video AF, probably Canon is better between these two. Sony can only video AF in P mode ( No AF in M, A, S modes) and with aperture fixed at f/3.5. If you want to video AF with f//1.4 lens, it is going to work like f/3.5 lens. In contrast, Canon can video AF fine with faster apertures and all exposure modes.


----------



## Jopa (Sep 27, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> If some one wants video AF, probably Canon is better between these two. Sony can only video AF in P mode ( No AF in M, A, S modes) and with aperture fixed at f/3.5. If you want to video AF with f//1.4 lens, it is going to work like f/3.5 lens. In contrast, Canon can video AF fine with faster apertures and all exposure modes.


Canon offers *usable video AF*. That's much bigger than just _video AF_.


----------



## pokerz (Sep 29, 2016)

Jopa said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > If some one wants video AF, probably Canon is better between these two. Sony can only video AF in P mode ( No AF in M, A, S modes) and with aperture fixed at f/3.5. If you want to video AF with f//1.4 lens, it is going to work like f/3.5 lens. In contrast, Canon can video AF fine with faster apertures and all exposure modes.
> ...


Thats why Canon upgrading their Lens, wish to see STM and nano USM lens.
And eventally stop supporting all old USM lens.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 29, 2016)

Jopa said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > If some one wants video AF, probably Canon is better between these two. Sony can only video AF in P mode ( No AF in M, A, S modes) and with aperture fixed at f/3.5. If you want to video AF with f//1.4 lens, it is going to work like f/3.5 lens. In contrast, Canon can video AF fine with faster apertures and all exposure modes.
> ...


Yes. It has best video AF with DPAF.


----------



## hajiaru (Oct 1, 2016)

My Experience with Sony Customer Service - a7s ii.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8V5dyFJzV8g&feature=youtu.be


----------



## deadwrong (Oct 4, 2016)

Could you just imagine if this sort of rumour came true on the A9? It would blow the camera industry up.

http://thenewcamera.com/sony-a6500-and-sony-a9-rumors/


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 4, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> Could you just imagine if this sort of rumour came true on the A9? It would blow the camera industry up.
> 
> http://thenewcamera.com/sony-a6500-and-sony-a9-rumors/



Resolution isn't much better than the 5DS/R.

When it says "unlimited burst mode till the card last / No buffer limitation." I assume that is JPEG. Canon can do that.


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 4, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> Could you just imagine if this sort of rumour came true on the A9? It would blow the camera industry up.
> 
> http://thenewcamera.com/sony-a6500-and-sony-a9-rumors/



you are really sounding like a sony fangirl.

people THINK that sony shakes the industry.. i think some have been saying that since the dawn of Alpha.

however, they really don't.

however an E-mount A99II would be certainly intriguing. they obviously have it right. there. waiting. just change the mount, and move the SLT.


----------



## xps (Oct 4, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> Could you just imagine if this sort of rumour came true on the A9? It would blow the camera industry up.
> 
> http://thenewcamera.com/sony-a6500-and-sony-a9-rumors/



Well, I´m at present healed from Sony. Baaad service.
But 70MP with 20fps and an incredible Bionz sensor - bought with an company related better service & guarentee - would be worth to be one of my last purchases


----------



## Jopa (Oct 5, 2016)

SAR? 0.01% credibility. It may just happen on accident with the same probability. Sony fanboys are the deadly force though.


----------



## tcmatthews (Oct 5, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > Could you just imagine if this sort of rumour came true on the A9? It would blow the camera industry up.
> ...



An earlier rumor states dual QXD cards. If that is true than it would be unlimited RAW. And QXD cards would be capable of doing that. The question is do they degrade it to a 12bit raw like the current A7II and A7rII.


----------



## tcmatthews (Oct 5, 2016)

I would argue that unless you already own lenses for the A99 there is really no comparison. The 5DIV is just better supported. Canon in general has better lenses. If I was a pro I would chose the Canon 5DIV over the A99 II any day. But I would not hesitate to buy a A7rII. This is because most of the great Canon will work great on the A7rII. It is useless with an A99 II. Sony's long telephoto A mount lenses are grossly over priced. Good luck getting a third party lens with image stabilization. Tamron removes it from most of their offerings. 

If your main goal is video and stills in the same camera then you are going to have to compromise somewhere. If you shoot primarily video you should just buy a video camera.

If Sony makes the A9 and it is not outrageously expensive it will be my next camera. But the A99 II just does not make any sense to me except for the existing A mount faithful that are still clinging to their Minolta lenses.


----------



## deadwrong (Oct 5, 2016)

rrcphoto said:


> deadwrong said:
> 
> 
> > Could you just imagine if this sort of rumour came true on the A9? It would blow the camera industry up.
> ...



Actually i really like Canon, i have alot of Canon products other than Cameras even. But i cant help but put the props out for a company like Sony that is seemingly advancing and pushing these other big guys around abit.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 5, 2016)

deadwrong said:


> Actually i really like Canon, i have alot of Canon products other than Cameras even. But i cant help but put the props out for a company like Sony that is seemingly advancing and pushing these other big guys around abit.



Sony pushing CaNikon around? With their market share....?
Still, its nice for the 'big boys' to have a proof-of-concept platform to test the waters for them while they concentrate on things that matter to photographers in the real world.


----------

