# Off Brand: Sony Announces the Full-frame a7R III



## xps (Oct 25, 2017)

The new Sony Alpha 7RIII is announced:
- A lot of improvements , but now really "big bump" in specs like MP. 


Cited from the Sony alpha Rumor site:

"A7rIII key specs (via ThePhoBlographer):

BSI 42.2 MP full frame sensor same sensor
4K HDR video
ISO 100 to 32000
10fps
14 bit raw for everything including continuous shooting
5 axis stabilization to 5.5 stops
Physical dimensions are identical to the Sony a7r II
All the new stuff is inside with the exception of the Joystick from the Sony a9
15 stops of dynamic range due to the processor of the camera. This is only at low resolution but they’re not sure how high of an ISO that will extend to
Autofocus from a9
Eye AF operates at double the speed
No optical low pass filter
Highest picture quality of any camera they’ve made
Low vibration shutter, completely new shutter
Bionz X processor
Raw compressed buffer at 87 photos and uncompressed is 28
Pixel shift multi shooting to capture more color.
399 phase detection AF points
Contrast AF points: 425
68% of the sensor area covered with AF points
2x faster autofocus than the previous camera
Subject tracking performance has doubled in effectiveness
Touch functions on the screen: AF-on, multi selector and anti-flicker
Fast AF and exposure tracking at 10fps
8fps shooting continuous Live View
Full HD video at 120p
4K video at 24p and 30p
USB 3.1
Dust and moisture resistant
Two card slots
3.69 million dot OLED tru-finder
The A9 battery
PC sync port
You can externally power the camera via USB
No mirror shock no shutter shock and silent shooting
10fps no black out. At 8fps there is momentary blackout
No time lapse mode
$3,199.99 in market at end of November
Europe pricing about 3500€

Some hot new A7rIII features:

The α7R III can capture outstanding 4K high resolution motion images with 5K (15MP) oversampling, as well as a new HLG (Hybrid Log-Gamma) image configuration file,
Support real-time HDR workflow, can capture a wide dynamic range of high-precision fresh dynamic images, no color gradient processing.
In the α7R III on the new pixel conversion multiple shooting mode, make full use of the fuselage 5-axis anti-shake function, to achieve high-resolution images. In this mode, the camera moves in 1 pixel increments and shoots four separate pixel moving images, containing a total of about $ 99.44 million pixel data. The four images can be synthesized and processed using the software from the new Imaging Edge Intelligent Imaging Application Center. This mode allows for higher resolution and color accuracy of still images, which are more ideal for shooting themes with complex details and colors for architecture, artwork, or other still life."


and Dpreview adds an article too: https://www.dpreview.com/news/3426999280/sony-a7r-iii-promises-faster-bursts-better-focusing-and-longer-battery-life


----------



## xps (Oct 25, 2017)

Interestingly no big upgrade in Pixels. Bast maybe in the A9R...

But 15 stops of DR, higher fps.....

"In the α7R III on the new pixel conversion multiple shooting mode, make full use of the fuselage 5-axis anti-shake function, to achieve high-resolution images. In this mode, the camera moves in 1 pixel increments and shoots four separate pixel moving images, containing a total of about $ 99.44 million pixel data" - This function we see in another body from another manufacturer. Interestingly, they copied it.


----------



## xps (Oct 25, 2017)

And the price tag...  No 4K Pricetag....
I hope the rumors are true.

Canon, do you read this announcement? I hope so ;D


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

> 15 stops of dynamic range due to the processor of the camera.



So does this mean that the sensor hasn't actually improved, but it is done by electronic jiggerypokery? If so, I have wondered for some time if this is how Sony have been doing it before.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2017)

> ... Pixel shift multi shooting to capture more color ...



https://youtu.be/6-811lVi0Qc

Dual Pixel Raw on steroids. ( quad pixel RAW? )


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2017)

Mike,
likely this is done by Temporal Noise reduction in Pixel Shift Multi Shooting mode.

https://www.dxomark.com/red-helium-8k-dxomark-sensor-score-108-a-new-all-time-high-score2/

TNR: noise reduction based on sampling multiple sequential image frames. This technique, called temporal noise reduction (TNR), is most commonly used in video, since there are many successive frames to work with . However, temporal correlations across a time axis are not relevant when analyzing the image quality of a single RAW image, as they do not impact any RAW converters.

A.M.: However, Pixel Shift Multi Shooting mode is essentially a multiple sequential image frames and therefore TNR method may work.






Mikehit said:


> > 15 stops of dynamic range due to the processor of the camera.
> 
> 
> 
> So does this mean that the sensor hasn't actually improved, but it is done by electronic jiggerypokery? If so, I have wondered for some time if this is how Sony have been doing it before.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> Mike,
> likely this is done by Temporal Noise reduction in Pixel Shift Multi Shooting mode.
> 
> https://www.dxomark.com/red-helium-8k-dxomark-sensor-score-108-a-new-all-time-high-score2/
> ...



Thank you for the explanation. What you seem to be saying is that this 15-stop DR applies only to video? If so, is this another example of Sony's approach to announcements where the list of caveats is almost as long as the list of features?


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2017)

no, sorry. i am saying that this, likely, applies to Pixel Shift Multi Shooting mode. as TNR cannot be applied to a single image but to image sequence only. PSMS mode is indeed a sequence of multiple images. Hence my hypothesis that TNR __may__ be implemented in Pixel Shift Multi Shooting mode. 





Mikehit said:


> Thank you for the explanation. What you seem to be saying is that this 15-stop DR applies only to video? If so, is this another example of Sony's approach to announcements where the list of caveats is almost as long as the list of features?


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

That makes sense. Thank you again.


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2017)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6YBnjNOi1U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-811lVi0Qc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVjo2G-c01s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmLgLAIX028

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4YqOFsehTc


----------



## dlee13 (Oct 25, 2017)

I was so confused at first when I seen "a7_*R*_ III", I though the A7 III would be next since it needs an update more than the A7RII.


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2017)

I am a tad disappointed with some things. I based this on features on 2017 flagship smartphones and flagship full frame cameras from Sony & Nikon.

* The two SD slots are not both UHS-II
* Would the UHS-II slot read/write at peak 312 MB/s (2000x)?
* LCD is not multitouch
* USB-C should be Thunderbolt 3 so it can combine video (remove micro HDMI), data and charging (remove micro USB) thus allowing for less weight & space.

I am happy Sony released this. May it light a fire under Canon & Nikon to offer better full frame bodies in the future or induce a price war.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

dolina said:


> * The two SD slots are not both UHS-II



Is there any dual-slot camera where both slots operate at the same high performance? If not, it suggests there are design limitations.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

xps said:


> and Dpreview adds an article too: https://www.dpreview.com/news/3426999280/sony-a7r-iii-promises-faster-bursts-better-focusing-and-longer-battery-life



6D -> 6DII, no meaningful improvement in image quality, DPR cries, "It's a travesty, a massively disappointing failure!"

a7RII -> a7RIII, no meaningful improvement in image quality, what will DPR say about image quality?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> Dual Pixel Raw on steroids. ( quad pixel RAW? )



As long as your subject isn't moving. But hey, steroids have some pretty negative side effects, too. 

My Zeiss microscope cameras had pixel shift ('co-site sampling') over 15 years ago.


----------



## BurningPlatform (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> SecureGSM said:
> 
> 
> > Dual Pixel Raw on steroids. ( quad pixel RAW? )
> ...


Not moving, and really static:
"The camera must also wait either 0.5, 1, or 2 seconds between shots for the sensor to settle"

Suitable for product work and still life, not for landscapes that have any moving objects (like grass in wind, leaves, water, clouds).

Seems that Sony has serious vibration issues with their pixel shift technology.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

BurningPlatform said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > SecureGSM said:
> ...



Egad, that really clobbers utility. 

Zeiss' implementation was far better (even though it didn't need to be, because fixed specimens are about as static as things get).


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2017)

apparently, SONY is aware and positioning this feature for architectural, reproduction, product photography, etc.
AFAIK, same can be achieved with Canon multi -bracketed shots.
Canon 5D IV DPRAW files contain extra 1 stop of DR in sub-frame B with no bracketing required. Hence shooting fast moving subjects is possible while the DR is effectively extended to 14+ stops. not bad at all. 

https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/canon-dual-pixel-mode-highlights-are-there

*Q:* Do you think it would be possible in the case that Adobe et al won't use this additional data, to somehow split the RAW file into two separate RAW files with which we could work independently?

*A:* Current version of RawDigger will export separate TIFF files to work with.

bingo!



neuroanatomist said:


> SecureGSM said:
> 
> 
> > Dual Pixel Raw on steroids. ( quad pixel RAW? )
> ...


----------



## OSOK (Oct 25, 2017)

Canon is getting left behind in the dust.

First there was the D850, 7-9fps, 45mp, tilt screen and a ton of bells and whistles and class-leading IQ at $3,200

Now there's a Sony A7R3, with 42mp, tilt screen, 10FPS and a ton of bells and whistles which will likely equal the D850 in IQ - all for $3,200


Where's Canon? What are the chances the 5DSR Mark II is going to have 14+ stops of DR, at least 7 fps, and a flagship level, sports camera level AF system with touch tilt screen, good video features? And come in at $3,200....? I'd say those chances are about ZERO.

The 5D4 was made obsolete by the D850, the A7RIII makes it even worse. Canon should drop the price of the 5D4 to about $2,200 so that the price better reflects its 2013-4 era features and specs and performance. The 6D2 should be $1,300 at best since it doesn't have better IQ than the 2013 6D.


Canon being market leader has become complacent. Going with "what works" for too long is bound to fail against competition trying to get a bigger piece of the pie.


D850 made huge news, and was extremely well received in the industry and across the market. I expect the A7RIII, despite it's somewhat surprise announcement and lack of pre-hype, to be just as well received.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Oct 25, 2017)

Will the a7R III have an 'Astrotracer Mode' like the Pentax K-1? That would get my interest.


----------



## LDS (Oct 25, 2017)

dolina said:


> * USB-C should be Thunderbolt 3 so it can combine video (remove micro HDMI), data and charging (remove micro USB) thus allowing for less weight & space.



How many external monitors for video shooting today support Thunderbolt instead of HDMI?


----------



## woodman411 (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > and Dpreview adds an article too: https://www.dpreview.com/news/3426999280/sony-a7r-iii-promises-faster-bursts-better-focusing-and-longer-battery-life
> ...



DPR will likely heap praise on the a7r3, while they only show trivial Sony cons and gloss over more significant ones. They also seem to have a fetish for dynamic range.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Canon being market leader has become complacent. Going with "what works" for too long is bound to fail against competition trying to get a bigger piece of the pie.



Is there an echo in here? You sound just like lots of posters comparing the D800 and a7R to the 5DIII, when Canon had been the market leader for just 9+ years, instead of the current 14+ years. Canon has _gained_ market share since then. 

But hey, I'm sure you'll get it right this time, Charlie...


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> Will the a7R III have an 'Astrotracer Mode' like the Pentax K-1? That would get my interest.



Well rumour has it that the Sony firmware update from a couple of years ago made the A series pants for astro because it wiped out stars. I don't know if they corrected it but Sony astro users we not happy.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

*A7R III drops: same res as II, but now 10 fps*


A7R III:
https://petapixel.com/2017/10/25/sony-unveils-a7r-iii-42mp-10fps-15-stop-dr-5-5-stop-4k/

Same idiotic grip and proximity to the lens mount, so I can recycle TDP's finger squashing picture.

Looks like the A9 in that it is a bit thicker front to back.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

And now there are three high res / peppy framerate FF rigs out there:

A99 II: 42 x 12
A7R III: 42 x 10
D850: 45 x 9

...while Canon asks you to choose between high resolution _or_ high framerate. 

I'm not saying Canon is in trouble or YAPODFC or anything, but at the top end of the FF portfolios (dismissing gripped sports bodies) there is an offering of cake and eating it too.

I would love to see the market research that told Nikon and Sony that ultra-detail studio/landscape folks wanted a big fps bump more than (say) modest fps with yet more detail.

- A


----------



## krisbell (Oct 25, 2017)

Looks like a nice bit of kit and may well tempt me into an upgrade from my a7r, or at the least push the price of the a7r2 down to a more affordable level.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 25, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Canon is getting left behind in the dust...
> ...Canon being market leader has become complacent. Going with "what works" for too long is bound to fail against competition trying to get a bigger piece of the pie.



Thank you for posting this. I was afraid something was wrong that it took more than a page to get to the obligatory "Canon is *******" posting.


----------



## snoke (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> a7RII -> a7RIII, no meaningful improvement in image quality, what will DPR say about image quality?



You say this as fact. What data use for making fact?


----------



## snoke (Oct 25, 2017)

BurningPlatform said:


> Not moving, and really static:
> "The camera must also wait either 0.5, 1, or 2 seconds between shots for the sensor to settle"
> 
> Suitable for product work and still life, not for landscapes that have any moving objects (like grass in wind, leaves, water, clouds).



Same condition HDR merge.


----------



## traveller (Oct 25, 2017)

"_...It can also do a6500-style 'live view' continuous shooting at up to 8 fps. It's *not the blackout-free shooting of the a9, but the instantaneous 'live' frames at 8 fps* can help you keep up with the action despite this being, in practice, simply 8 live frames per second with black frames inserted in between (which we're told is much like the a6500 we tested)._" [https://www.dpreview.com/news/3426999280/sony-a7r-iii-promises-faster-bursts-better-focusing-and-longer-battery-life]

Very disappointing. This is the main reason why I have never "made the switch to Fuji" after buying my X-T1 -it's horrendous doing any kind of continuous shooting watching a slideshow of your last photo. I guess they are keeping uninterrupted live view during capture a distinguishing feature of the "higher" A9 line (with a new hi-res A9 to follow next year?).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

snoke said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > a7RII -> a7RIII, no meaningful improvement in image quality, what will DPR say about image quality?
> ...



The sensor in the a7RIII is the same as the sensor in the a7RII. Perhaps there will be measurable improvements in the RAW image quality, but claims of a full stop seem unlikely, at best. 




snoke said:


> BurningPlatform said:
> 
> 
> > Not moving, and really static:
> ...



I shoot bracketed shots for HDR with ~83 milliseconds between frames – the lag with the a7RIII pixel shift is 6- to 25-times longer. So, not the same conditions.


----------



## danski0224 (Oct 25, 2017)

I was really hoping for more megapixels. 

I liked the A7RII when I rented one. For my uses, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of difference to justify the extra thousand bucks for the newest version. 

With the rumored A9R, maybe Sony is segregating their product line like a competitor does...


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2017)

what about x2 better battery life? ;D



danski0224 said:


> I was really hoping for more megapixels.
> 
> I liked the A7RII when I rented one. For my uses, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of difference to justify the extra thousand bucks for the newest version.
> 
> With the rumored A9R, maybe Sony is segregating their product line like a competitor does...


----------



## danski0224 (Oct 25, 2017)

I could buy one or two extra batteries out of the thousand buck price difference...


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

danski0224 said:


> With the rumored A9R, maybe Sony is segregating their product line like a competitor does...



*WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT YOU DIRTY BOY!!!*


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2017)

exactly. 



danski0224 said:


> I could buy one or two extra batteries out of the thousand buck price difference...


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

snoke said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > a7RII -> a7RIII, no meaningful improvement in image quality, what will DPR say about image quality?
> ...



I can't believe I'm +1-ing Snoke , but I am.

I would not presume the lack of an MP bump means it has the same sensor. If this thing is one stop better in high ISO, delivers 15 stops base ISO DR, etc. I would that a meaningful improvement in image quality.

- A


----------



## tomscott (Oct 25, 2017)

Unless im mistaken... No GPS?

One of my absolute favorite features of the new canon cameras is low power GPS.

Looks like a great camera, seems again a play by play what else can we cram into a body that most people outside Asia cant grip properly.

I love the direction and look forward to Canons entry, although im sure it will take time to mature.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Was this confirmed in the video, or just presumed by Phoblographer because they saw the same MP count?

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > The sensor in the a7RIII is the same as the sensor in the a7RII.
> ...



Imaging Resource explicitly stated that it's the same image sensor as in the a7RII. The increase in DR is attributed to new supporting circuitry resulting in a lower noise floor.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

I have to say, I would have bet a lot of money that Sony would -- in its Borg-like relentless way -- have addressed the shortcoming of that small A7/A9 body.

Presently, though it is delightfully small in comparison to an FF SLR, the A7 II/A9 design:


Has too small of a grip for the f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 zooms some folks will use on it 100% of the time
Has a grip that is too close to the mount, creating some awkward cramped finger situations
Does not have the real estate for larger batteries due to the size of the grip

Small is great and clearly is driving enthusiasts to the brand. But a larger and appropriately located grip would better handle those big GM lenses, allow room for more controls and a larger battery, and it would only take up more space in your bag with the lens detached (see attached for what I mean). 

- A


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 25, 2017)

Dual SD slots plus more importantly has USB type-C(for tethering) and micro USB(for power) which such a cool feature and really useful.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Wow. Has Sony ever recycled sensors like this inside of one product line? We presume they've used that same 42 MP (or something very close to it) in the RX1R II and A99-II, but to make a generational improvement with a 'III' design and use the heart of the 'II' platform's tech is somewhat surprising.

They've done this on at least one of their RX100 revisions if memory serves, but that's not this class of camera.

- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > Same condition HDR merge.
> ...



One of the unanticipated, but obvious with hindsight, advantages I have found with the 1DX MkII frame rate is the speed with which I can take multiple bracketed images in real world shooting conditions, because it does it so much faster than the 1Ds MkIII used to the stitching/blending software has a much easier time with moving foliage.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> One of the unanticipated, but obvious with hindsight, advantages I have found with the 1DX MkII frame rate is the speed with which I can take multiple bracketed images in real world shooting conditions, because it does it so much faster than the 1Ds MkIII used to the stitching/blending software has a much easier time with moving foliage.



Agreed. But still, most of the situations in which I find the 12 fps of my 1D X to be very useful involve fast-moving subjects. It looks like the a7RIII may not be optimal in those use cases, somewhat reducing the 'immense flexibility'. 

[quote author=Sony]
This high speed 10 fps mode is available with either a mechanical shutter or a completely silent shooting12, adding to the immense flexibility of the camera.

12. Some distortion may occur with fast-moving subjects of if the camera is moved sideways rapidly
[/quote]

Jello is appropriate at suburban block parties and on hospital lunch trays...but not in images of fast-moving subjects.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

I've noticed that Sony dropped a 24-105 f/4 IS lens today as well.

Some folks adore their 24-105L Mk I and had 24-70 f/2.8L II sharpness expectations for the sequel (which is absurd, but whatever). When it turned out the 24-105L mk II was basically similar IQ-wise to the Mk I, a looooot of people got bent out of shape.

But what if this new 24-105 G (not GM) is as sharp as their recent GM offerings optically? How funny would it be that all it took to convert Canonites to Sony was to put out the EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM II that was promised. ;D

- A


----------



## unfocused (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> I've noticed that Sony dropped a 24-105 f/4 IS lens today as well.
> 
> Some folks adore their 24-105L Mk I and had 24-70 f/2.8L II sharpness expectations for the sequel (which is absurd, but whatever). When it turned out the 24-105L mk II was basically similar IQ-wise to the Mk I, a looooot of people got bent out of shape.
> 
> ...



It will be interesting to see the comparisons. 

Since basically all the other manufacturers' comparable offerings perform very similarly, it will be a surprise if Sony can do significantly better, even if they are charging more than anyone else. 

If they do, shame on Canon. 

If it's about the same as the others, then that would lend some credence to my theory that getting to 24-105 and maintaining prime-quality sharpness and affordability is pretty much not possible.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

unfocused said:


> If it's about the same as the others, then that would lend some credence to my theory that getting to 24-105 and maintaining prime-quality sharpness and affordability is pretty much not possible.



...at the price point a 4-5x FL multiplier f/4 zoom could reasonably command.

The 24-105L II _could_ have been sharper but it would have gotten larger, heavier and more complicated. That probably would have taken it out of the 'relatively affordable walkaround zoom' Canon wanted/needed it to be.

But we're OT, my bad. This is a new body thread.

- A


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 25, 2017)

So now, we are seeing incremental changes. The main reason for a new model is that first time buyers want the latest and greatest, and those with 3 or 4 year old cameras are looking for something newer.

Sensors are very close to their maximum efficiency, even incremental improvements get expensive. This means that new models will add software features and faster processors with bigger batteries. It doesn't matter who the manufacturer is, if you want to compete price wise, you are limited in what you can do.

Sony's successes have come from miniaturizing products, thats their legacy. Its good that they are sticking to it, because there is a market for smaller products.

Canon's legacy is producing products that are not necessarily the highest technology, but which give the most value for $ spent. Its also a successful strategy, and when combined with supurb customer service and reliability, they are increasing market share. They are very good at making every part of a design earn its cost. They hold back on new features and hardware until the cost or customer demand forces a change. 

The two different philosophy's - A miniature hard to repair throw-away product (because its cheaper to replace than repair) versus a conservative and repairable one are the distinguishing things and both seem to work for the respective buyers.


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2017)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> So now, we are seeing incremental changes. The main reason for a new model is that first time buyers want the latest and greatest, and those with 3 or 4 year old cameras are looking for something newer.
> 
> Sensors are very close to their maximum efficiency, even incremental improvements get expensive. This means that new models will add software features and faster processors with bigger batteries. It doesn't matter who the manufacturer is, if you want to compete price wise, you are limited in what you can do.
> 
> ...


Canon used to be a technology leader. I remember back in 2003 when the 10D came out that working Nikon shooters were ditching their F mount system for EF mount to remain professionally competitive. Canon's advantage was their ISO sensitivity.

Canon continued to be competitive with the 5D Mark II's video feature and is only rivaled by Sony.

Canon is banking on how complete their EF lens system is and know that it is difficult to switch to a Sony or at the very least rather cumbersome.

Sony's success is financed by money from selling the top half of all smartphone image sensors. Comes out as at least 750 image sensors

Again, younger people have less money to shoot casually. They usd to go with basic point & shoots but see more value with smartphones.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

dolina said:


> Canon is banking on how complete their EF lens system is and know that it is difficult to switch to a Sony or at the very least rather cumbersome.



Canon aren't just folding their arms saying "EF is sweet and the competition can't match up to it _so we don't have to improve anymore_." 

Quite differently than what you said, I believe Canon _isn't banking on horsepower_ (MP, FPS, 4K) to get and maintain business to the same degree that Nikon and Sony are. There's more to a camera than sensors and throughput, and Canon seems to get that better than everyone else.

- A


----------



## transpo1 (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > If it's about the same as the others, then that would lend some credence to my theory that getting to 24-105 and maintaining prime-quality sharpness and affordability is pretty much not possible.
> ...



24-105/4 is a very smart lens for Sony to bring out- it's a great lens for travel and video and makes it easy for people to switch systems- buy one lens and build from there, or- if you're into crystal clear 4K video- buy one native lens and Metabones your EF lenses.


----------



## Ryananthony (Oct 25, 2017)

I'll be selling my 5d3 and some rarely used lenses to help fund this camera. It's more or less everything I wanted in the Sony a7r series to give it a shot. I will not be selling my 1dx and favorite lenses though. 

This should give a good idea how I like mirrorless and a modern EVF. My first and only mirrorless prior was a Fuji xpro1 and I could not sell it fast enough I was so unhappy.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

Ryananthony said:


> I'll be selling my 5d3 and some rarely used lenses to help fund this camera. It's more or less everything I wanted in the Sony a7r series to give it a shot. I will not be selling my 1dx and favorite lenses though.
> 
> This should give a good idea how I like mirrorless and a modern EVF. My first and only mirrorless prior was a Fuji xpro1 and I could not sell it fast enough I was so unhappy.



My jaw continues to drop at the lengths people go (and the lessons they learn) to simply *try* something. Wow.

Dude: did you consider renting first?

- A


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Canon aren't just folding their arms saying "EF is sweet and the competition can't match up to it _so we don't have to improve anymore_."
> 
> Quite differently than what you said, I believe Canon _isn't banking on horsepower_ (MP, FPS, 4K) to get and maintain business to the same degree that Nikon and Sony are. There's more to a camera than sensors and throughput, and Canon seems to get that better than everyone else.
> 
> - A


Yeah, like 1 day turn around for repairs.

That's a lifesaver for working photogs.

Let market forces and competition force improvements. It will only result in better camera systems for all customers.

Unlikely to happen but I hope the memory cards for pro bodies be consolidated to one standard like CFast or XQD.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

dolina said:


> Unlikely to happen but I hope the memory cards for pro bodies be consolidated to one standard like CFast or XQD.



That's queued up for two months following world peace.


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> dolina said:
> 
> 
> > Unlikely to happen but I hope the memory cards for pro bodies be consolidated to one standard like CFast or XQD.
> ...


Most probably!


----------



## traveller (Oct 25, 2017)

dolina said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > dolina said:
> ...



CF Express? God knows when though...


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2017)

traveller said:


> CF Express? God knows when though...


When 8K is available in point & shoots. :


----------



## Mancubus (Oct 25, 2017)

And here I am waiting since 2014 for Canon to make something I could actually buy.

5D4 and 6D2 are a joke. This new Sony has everything I wished for a future 5D series release:

- 4K HDR video (probably uncropped)
- 10fps
- 15 stops of dynamic range 
- Eye AF
- No optical low pass filter 
- Highest picture quality of any camera they’ve made
- Full HD video at 120p
- $3,199.99

Now I'm here waiting forever for a Canon camera that will never have the specs above. Next one will probably be a severely crippled 5DSR2 for around 4000usd.

5D5 will come out maybe in 2020 and will still fall behind these current releases from Nikon and Sony.

Canon never fails to disappoint me on new bodies. And I'm an idiot for tolerating it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 25, 2017)

Mancubus said:


> And here I am waiting since 2014 for Canon to make something I could actually buy.
> 
> 5D4 and 6D2 are a joke. This new Sony has everything I wished for a future 5D series release:
> 
> ...



Yep. If somebody else makes the camera system you want you are an idiot for not buying it.

P.S. How are you supposing they are fitting 15 stops of DR into a 14 bit, at most, file?


----------



## rfdesigner (Oct 25, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> P.S. How are you supposing they are fitting 15 stops of DR into a 14 bit, at most, file?



Log?


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> I've noticed that Sony dropped a 24-105 f/4 IS lens today as well.
> 
> Some folks adore their 24-105L Mk I and had 24-70 f/2.8L II sharpness expectations for the sequel (which is absurd, but whatever). When it turned out the 24-105L mk II was basically similar IQ-wise to the Mk I, a looooot of people got bent out of shape.
> 
> ...



Except that Sigma took a swing at the original Canon 24-105L f/4 and couldn't beat it like the 35A/50A did over the 35L/50L. Canon choosing not to improve IQ for a newer version is plausible (24-105 f/4 II and 50 1.8 STM) but both Canon and Sigma failing to decisively beat the original 24-105L's IQ suggest that the limits of the design have been reached (practically/economically).


----------



## Mancubus (Oct 25, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Yep. If somebody else makes the camera system you want you are an idiot for not buying it.
> 
> P.S. How are you supposing they are fitting 15 stops of DR into a 14 bit, at most, file?



Nobody makes the camera system I want. Sony and Nikon makes bodies I want but that's pretty much it. 

I don't really like mirrorless cameras nor Sony lenses, but Canon is making it so hard to like their latest bodies that makes me wonder why I do this to myself.

The 5DSR2 will probably be the last chance for me. If that sucks for whatever reason, I'm jumping off this ship. It will have to at least match the D850 or A7R3 in most specs for me to consider it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

Mancubus said:


> Nobody makes the camera system I want. Sony and Nikon makes bodies I want but that's pretty much it.
> 
> I don't really like mirrorless cameras nor Sony lenses, but Canon is making it so hard to like their latest bodies that makes me wonder why I do this to myself.
> 
> The 5DSR2 will probably be the last chance for me. If that sucks for whatever reason, I'm jumping off this ship.



So you'll jump from a system with bodies that you don't like to a system where you don't like all the other components. Yeah, that makes just boatloads of sense. Happy landings... 

Time will tell, but like the Canon-hater who just bought himself a 5DIV, I suspect most people who threaten to jump ship are all talk and no action.


----------



## Famateur (Oct 25, 2017)

I'm really excited about the announcement of the A7RIII!

I have no intention of every buying one, but I sure hope a bunch of other people do -- starting with grumblers in this forum. 

The better the competition does, the better it is for everyone...


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

Mancubus said:


> And here I am waiting since 2014 for Canon to make something I could actually buy.
> 
> 5D4 and 6D2 are a joke. This new Sony has everything I wished for a future 5D series release:
> 
> ...



There are indeed some very nice things in that spec sheet, but I've corrected a few omissions for you.

Are you still sure that's the future 5D you wanted? Ferrari guts jammed into a toy with a ton of fine print?

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

Random Orbits said:


> Except that Sigma took a swing at the original Canon 24-105L f/4 and couldn't beat it like the 35A/50A did over the 35L/50L. Canon choosing not to improve IQ for a newer version is plausible (24-105 f/4 II and 50 1.8 STM) but both Canon and Sigma failing to decisively beat the original 24-105L's IQ suggest that the limits of the design have been reached (practically/economically).



See your point but Art primes and an f/4 zoom are apples and oranges, and the zeal to which Sigma pursued them was quite different. 

Recall that Sigma 'beat' the 35L (I) and 50L by _throwing out practicality_ and making whopper pickle jar (Otus-like) mega-lenses. The same principle could have worked for a 24-105 f/4 zoom but -- just like every manufacturer -- Sigma believed that a relatively compact size/weight is a must for that type of lens.

So yes, if Sigma saddles 'reasonableness' on its zoom designs, we shouldn't expect eye-popping results from them. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

Mancubus said:


> Nobody makes the camera system I want. Sony and Nikon makes bodies I want but that's pretty much it.
> 
> I don't really like mirrorless cameras nor Sony lenses, but Canon is making it so hard to like their latest bodies that makes me wonder why I do this to myself.



Doing _what_ to yourself, may I ask? Seems like you are logically following value and sticking with Canon. Good call, IMHO.

You'll always lust for something sexier on paper, that's life. That Maserati that just drove me by can corner and accelerate better than my Audi, but my butt hurts driving it (A7 grip), the dashboard is full of buttons with icons I don't understand (A7 menu/interface), and repairs require something arriving by boat in 8 weeks (Sony customer support). Try buying groceries with it (any assignment in the field) and tell me how exhilarating it was.

I'll stick with what I can reliably drive. No alarms and no surprises. I'm highly confident I'll still get where I'm going.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

Famateur said:


> The better the competition does, the better it is for everyone...



+1 (even for all my giggling at their horrible grip)

Between the D500 breathing new life into crop and the storm of high res / fairly high FPS FF rigs coming out (D850 / A7R3 / A99 II), Canon will have to give their incremental '10-20% better specs this time' approach (aka Time to Make the Donuts) a rethink. I'm not expecting a 75 MP x 8 fps super-rig or anything, but improvements will have to come.

- A


----------



## Famateur (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Mancubus said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody makes the camera system I want. Sony and Nikon makes bodies I want but that's pretty much it.
> ...



As an old-school Top Gear fan, I thoroughly enjoyed this (quite apt) analogy.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

Famateur said:


> As an old-school Top Gear fan, I thoroughly enjoyed this (quite apt) analogy.


----------



## woodman411 (Oct 25, 2017)

Mancubus said:


> And here I am waiting since 2014 for Canon to make something I could actually buy.
> 
> 5D4 and 6D2 are a joke. This new Sony has everything I wished for a future 5D series release:
> 
> ...



Take a few minutes to read through this thread and ask yourself if specs are everything: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59526785


----------



## Famateur (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > As an old-school Top Gear fan, I thoroughly enjoyed this (quite apt) analogy.



Hahahaha! Love it...


----------



## OSOK (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > The better the competition does, the better it is for everyone...
> ...




There's nothing Canon can put into a 5DSR2 to make it competitive with the D850 or A7R3 without sabotaging at least the 5D4, the 7D2 and likely 7D3, as well as some Cinema options...just to name a few.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

OSOK said:


> There's nothing Canon can put into a 5DSR2 to make it competitive with the D850 or A7R3 without sabotaging at least the 5D4, the 7D2 and likely 7D3, as well as some Cinema options...just to name a few.



The real weak link in all of this is the 5D4's 7 fps, which I've ranted to no end about. Besides a seemingly good but not great 30 x 7 throughput (which is roughly half of the competitive list I gave earlier), it will indeed make _anything_ a 5DS2 does on the fps front threaten 5D4 sales, I agree.

So play the duo of 'all-arounder' (5D4) and 'super detail' (5DS) to the hilt. Dramatically jack up the 5DS2 MP and leave the burst parked at 5 fps. One for detail and one for speed. Done.

I (sort of) kid, but Canon's hands may be tied here. Between the competition's mad progress on throughput and the 7 fps of the 5D4, it rather terribly boxes in Canon with the 5DS2. If the 5DS2 throughput is jacked up to compete with Sony & Nikon, the 5D4 will look like the 2nd tier option to users and its sales could very well suffer.

- A


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

woodman411 said:


> Take a few minutes to read through this thread and ask yourself if specs are everything: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59526785



Did I read that right? The Sony does not AF wide open?


----------



## OSOK (Oct 25, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > There's nothing Canon can put into a 5DSR2 to make it competitive with the D850 or A7R3 without sabotaging at least the 5D4, the 7D2 and likely 7D3, as well as some Cinema options...just to name a few.
> ...




Sales to new, first time buyers of pro DSLR maybe. They are all going Sony. But the majority of the market is already invested in a system. That's what Canon has been riding on.


----------



## OSOK (Oct 25, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> woodman411 said:
> 
> 
> > Take a few minutes to read through this thread and ask yourself if specs are everything: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59526785
> ...




I like how someone picks out a single negative Sony post on DPR (likely by a Canon troll) and posts it here then people ride it. 

Well played.

Fact is, the superiority of Sony's AF (and Nikon) has been displayed time and time again.

There's plenty to bash Sony on, AF isn't one of them.


----------



## Famateur (Oct 25, 2017)

OSOK said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Famateur said:
> ...



If price point is similar, there's no sabotage or cannibalization if someone chooses the 5DSRII over the 5DIV. They're even both 5D bodies. 

Now, if Canon's aim is to get you to buy both bodies, then yes -- they've gotta have a significant core-feature differentiator.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > woodman411 said:
> ...



Wow! Ask one simple question and you get called a troll. I hope to God you are not a teacher. 

And for what it's worth, if you actually bothered to read that thread, you will see that more than one person commented that (if I read it correctly) it focuses great at f4, but less so when stopped down. That was what prompted my question. 

So instead of jumping on someone's back try taking the post at face value.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 25, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Sales to new, first time buyers of pro DSLR maybe. They are all going Sony. But the majority of the market is already invested in a system. That's what Canon has been riding on.



Problem is, for the first time buyer pro DSLR, they will look at the Sony lens line up and think 'Why....'? 
I know there is all this talk about using adapters for existing Canon/Nikon lenses you already own but surely the way to build brand loyalty is to bring people into the system lower down the scale and have them grow up with your cameras. As an example, one reason I chose Canon instead of Nikon all those years ago was the range of lenses available knowing that whatever line of photography I chose Canon had a lens for it and that still holds.

It seems to me that Sony is relying on picking up the crumbs from people already invested in a system and wanting a new headline functionality instead of creating their own environment.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 25, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Sales to new, first time buyers of pro DSLR maybe. They are all going Sony.



Any data to back up that claim, or are you merely another Internet 'expert' who pulls 'facts' from their nether orifice? I suspect the latter, because your statement has the characteristic odor of BS.


----------



## Famateur (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > Sales to new, first time buyers of pro DSLR maybe. They are all going Sony.
> ...



Two things to keep in mind:


84% of all statistics are inaccurate, and
92% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

;D


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 25, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > Sales to new, first time buyers of pro DSLR maybe. They are all going Sony.
> ...



And the order of operations / scope of OSOK's statement is confusing. Are we talking about...


...people who are buying their first ever (non mobile phone) camera _and that camera happens to be an FF ILC?_ Those people do exist in small numbers, believe it or not, but these are surely moneyed folk. This group represents folks who buy a Ferrari before they get their driver's licenses, so to speak -- think trust fund world-traveling kids on instagram, young tech industry people buying toys, etc.. They'd be far better served with a fixed lens rig with some auto-modes, say an RX1R II. But overall, I'd have no idea what these folks would buy. If money is no object, you're talking Leica M territory, Nikon Df territory, etc. Regardless, I doubt these people represent a large slice of the market.


...people who are buying their first FF ILC but not their first (non mobile phone) camera? These are likely Canonites in healthy numbers as these folks are likely stepping up from crop SLRs, and one would presume they'd routinely opt for a 6D# or 5D#

So the BS may depend on how you slice OSOK's original statement. For instance, _if you own an a6500,_ there's a very very very good chance your first FF ILC will be a Sony. 

- A


----------



## raptor3x (Oct 25, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Wow! Ask one simple question and you get called a troll. I hope to God you are not a teacher.
> 
> And for what it's worth, if you actually bothered to read that thread, you will see that more than one person commented that (if I read it correctly) it focuses great at f4, but less so when stopped down. That was what prompted my question.
> 
> So instead of jumping on someone's back try taking the post at face value.



Yeah, this is something that people have been complaining about with the A7R2 for a long time. Trying to play it off like it's only a single post by some random troll is a bit disingenuous.


----------



## dolina (Oct 25, 2017)

https://youtu.be/Lvah3rPB22k


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 26, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> So the BS may depend on how you slice OSOK's original statement.



Well, for starters he seems to be suggesting first-time pro DSLR buyers are going to Sony. Perhaps he can start by listing the digital single lens reflex cameras currently produced by Sony.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 26, 2017)

dolina said:


> https://youtu.be/Lvah3rPB22k



A9 is the best mirrorless cams so far for me. No doubt, a7rIII will bring extra WOW to market. Native lens selection is good enough to cover many events, especially for wedding pros. Can'r speak for a7rIII, however, the A9 Eye-AF in just SUPER.






I love my Fuji stuff, however, I'm prepare to sell some for up coming A7S III


----------



## danski0224 (Oct 26, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Doing _what_ to yourself, may I ask? Seems like you are logically following value and sticking with Canon. Good call, IMHO.
> 
> You'll always lust for something sexier on paper, that's life. That Maserati that just drove me by can corner and accelerate better than my Audi, but my butt hurts driving it (A7 grip), the dashboard is full of buttons with icons I don't understand (A7 menu/interface), and repairs require something arriving by boat in 8 weeks (Sony customer support). Try buying groceries with it (any assignment in the field) and tell me how exhilarating it was.
> 
> ...



I rented an A7RII, and it took all of 5 minutes to hit the major menu items and set up the camera for my uses. I did have to search how to enable back button focus. 

I wasn't particularly impressed with how Canon lenses worked on the Sony through a Metabones adapter, but my Sigma SA lenses worked just fine with the Sigma MC-11 adapter.

The Sony doesn't fit as nicely in the hand as my Canon, but it fits well enough.

The biggest thing that I do not like is the lack of support from Sony...


----------



## Ryananthony (Oct 26, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Ryananthony said:
> 
> 
> > I'll be selling my 5d3 and some rarely used lenses to help fund this camera. It's more or less everything I wanted in the Sony a7r series to give it a shot. I will not be selling my 1dx and favorite lenses though.
> ...



As I have mentioned in previous threads, the used market where I live is massive. All equipment that I have purchased used, I have no doubt ill be able to sell with out losing money on. I can't say the same for the 5d3, but thats fine as I would be selling it with in the year anyway. I was originally waiting for the A7iii, for the lower initial cost. 

Im not interested in renting. I feel to get to know the product, ill need more then a weekend, or even a month which just doesn't make sense to rent since It is unlikely ill be making money with it while it is rented. 

Ive only ever shot Canon, The grass may be greener. It may not. Thats why I'm not selling all my gear.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 26, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > woodman411 said:
> ...




Yeah, someone like you trolling on a Canon forum, right?


----------



## bhf3737 (Oct 26, 2017)

danski0224 said:


> The biggest thing that I do not like is the lack of support from Sony...



Perhaps the company's policy is that they do not need to provide long term support because their product will probably die out after warranty expires. It is a winning policy for the company but not for the customer. My personal experience with Sony products was that I had a HandyCam and a point-and-shoot and both died a few weeks after their warranty expired. The repair cost was almost the same as buying a new one and newer ones had tons of added features that were quite tempting to buy them instead of settling with a repaired kit. It is a very small sample but speaks out itself. 
My point is that this policy can potentially work for consumer level products an throwing new models with many added features in short cycles. But it will not work for the professional products. Now that the company seems to be targeting professionals, it can only gain my attention to spend my money on it iff it can prove that their cameras and lenses are built well to last (e.g. weather sealing, no over heating, etc.) and a good and efficient service and repair mechanism is already in place. Otherwise, it will be like another entertaining pretty object in a magazine.


----------



## woodman411 (Oct 26, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > woodman411 said:
> ...



Sorry, who are you? I ask respectfully because you must have quite the credentials to brush off two professionals who have used both systems. Can you please show me your website and gallery? Because the OP in my thread link is a professional in NYC, Sung Park, http://www.sungparkphotography.com . The other professional on that thread is Jeff Terrington who also uses both systems, http://www.gr8photography.com

You can live by your facts, I'll trust professionals who have used both systems, and have clearly articulated specific limitations and frustations of using Sonys (notice none of their issues were mentioned by DPR, surprise surprise).


----------



## woodman411 (Oct 26, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> woodman411 said:
> 
> 
> > Take a few minutes to read through this thread and ask yourself if specs are everything: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59526785
> ...



That is correct, even with Sony GM lenses. Just so that this doesn't get taken out of context, the full description of the issue would be "the Sony does not AF wide open when using higher f-stops, like f7.1. Quoting Sung Park:

The only lens I (used to) own that opens up the aperture for focusing is the zeiss distagon 35 f1.4, which unfortunately is a lens that I never use in a studio environment. The G 70-200 f4, GM 70-200 f2.8, GM 24-70 f2.8, Zeiss Planar 50 f1.4, GM 85 f1.4, Zeiss 16-35 f4 all focus stopped down so experience the issues I've described.


----------



## Mancubus (Oct 26, 2017)

OSOK said:


> There's nothing Canon can put into a 5DSR2 to make it competitive with the D850 or A7R3 without sabotaging at least the 5D4, the 7D2 and likely 7D3, as well as some Cinema options...just to name a few.



So despite the fact that other manufacturers released cameras that obliterate the 5D4 at the same price point (slightly cheaper actually), you still defend Canon on intentionally crippling the 5DSR2.

You should send a resume and a copy of this message to Canon, you must be exactly the type of people they've been hiring lately.


----------



## Talys (Oct 26, 2017)

woodman411 said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > woodman411 said:
> ...



Well, I always thought, "of course not". 

Put a Canon onto LiveView One Shot, and crank the aperture to f/14 in a dim room, til almost everything is barely visible. Tap somewhere on the screen or hit the AF button, and the screen will suddenly light up for a second or so while it focuses -- that's the camera going to max aperture when it needs more light to electronically AF. Then it returns to being dark.

Now put it into LiveView AI Servo. Now, when you press the AF button, it doesn't light up anymore. If you tap the screen, I think it lights up ONCE. Then, it tries (usually unsuccessfully) to track it in the dark. 

On a Sony A7RII, the screen or EVF does not change brightness as you AF. I always assumed this meant that the aperture did not open up to AF. Makes sense, right? Otherwise, the screen would need to be artificially and gradually darkened while the diaphragm opened, and lightened as it closed, at exactly the same rate, and since they can't make the EVF look better than jello pudding, I always assumed that this was not possible.

I also assumed that this was by design because electronic viewfinder/live view is all you've got, and the screen is supposed to show you what you're going to shoot (not what you'd shoot at the widest aperture). So if it constantly went between light and dark (even between f/2.8 and f/4), it would drive you bonkers on the screen, and if it were a big jump, like f/1.4 to f/11, it probably give someone a seizure through the EVF if it was constantly tracking and taking pictures. Remember, it MUST darken (aperture blades close) in order to take the shot, so if it were to shoot at wide open aperture, or they'd have to black out the screen, and neither is really desirable.

So they pick the least offensive option, which is to assume that the electronic focusing is good enough to focus any time you have enough light that you can see what you're shooting on the screen. And, they bank on their electronic AF being so excellent (all that DR in the sensor!) that it can handle the job. Now, I admit, I kind of assumed that there was some menu option to give you the Canon situation where the screen toggles back and forth between light and dark, but I guess not. I also never found such a thing (or something that keeps the aperture always wide open until the moment you're recording), but I blamed it on myself, rather than the camera. Either way, both feel infinitely inferior to an optical viewfinder in that situation.

And, yes, yes, I know, anyone who actually takes photographs in poor lighting situations or with strobes or flashes or whatever, will scream a laundry list of reasons why this whole scheme of not opening up the aperture to focus sounds like a terrible idea. I'm just not sure how else you'd do it and not have it look ridiculous on the screens. Anyways, in the current scenario, even if the AF system and sensor are super duper amazing, I cannot be convinced that AF can't do a better job with more light than with less light.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 26, 2017)

Mancubus said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > There's nothing Canon can put into a 5DSR2 to make it competitive with the D850 or A7R3 without sabotaging at least the 5D4, the 7D2 and likely 7D3, as well as some Cinema options...just to name a few.
> ...



OSOK is making a fair point depending on your perspective. If you believe the premise that _Canon is ultimately competing with itself in this market space_, one might argue that not upsetting the apple cart with a D850-level super camera -- let's say a 5DSR2 with an on-chip ADC 50 MP x 9 fps rig -- makes sense. Such a camera would indeed give photographers no reason to buy a 5D4 other than by reducing its price, which Canon very carefully manages over the lifecycle of the product. I don't think that's likely to happen as Canon see the $3-4k nongripped FF workhorses as being split between the detail crowd and the overall crowd.

Again, the presumption that a spec sheet sells a camera simply isn't being borne out in the market. People trust Canon quality, Canon color, the EF portfolio, etc. and that seems to be winning the day. I'll be the first to tell you that they lack the horsepower of these other rigs, but the market doesn't really seem to care. And until that happens, don't expect Canon to blow up the business plans of 2-3 major midcycle product lines by putting out a supercar just 'because our spec sheets look flat'. They will do what they always do: stick to the plan.

- A


----------



## Ryananthony (Oct 26, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Mancubus said:
> 
> 
> > OSOK said:
> ...



With that said, ive ran into some professional photographers who just buy the latest 5D series camera, which ever and when ever they need a new camera. Ive spoken to two recently that didn't even know the 6D line camera existed. When the 6Dii was mentioned, they just assumed it was rebel style crop sensor camera. They have their lenses, they know their system works and delivers what they need. What everyone else is doing is completely irrelevant.


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Oct 26, 2017)

Wow, can't wait to get this new Sony for professional use, what with their awesomely innumerable selection of lenses and unbelievably responsive aftersales support and rad & righteous ergonomics. Now I can troll the DPR forums hard together with the other spec monkeys who never actually shoot their cameras anymore.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 26, 2017)

Talys said:


> woodman411 said:
> 
> 
> > Mikehit said:
> ...



Thank you Talys (and Woodman just above). If I think how performance of AF on Canon drops off above f5.6, and the Sony does its AF while stopped down I guess it is not surprising to see comments on reduced AF accuracy at f7.1 and narrower.


----------



## Aglet (Oct 26, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > Sales to new, first time buyers of pro DSLR maybe. They are all going Sony. But the majority of the market is already invested in a system. That's what Canon has been riding on.
> ...



Seems a bit like choosing a car for the tire selection.


----------



## Aglet (Oct 26, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Jello is appropriate at suburban block parties and on hospital lunch trays...but not in images of fast-moving subjects.



Unless global-electronic, ALL shutters make jello. Just a matter of how much.

Anyone know the sensor scan speed of this thing yet?

Some new sensors can scan pretty darn quick tho not sure if they're quite up there with fast mechanical FP at 1/250s


----------



## Jopa (Oct 26, 2017)

Aglet said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > OSOK said:
> ...



Excellent comparison, the only problem it's completely wrong  Lenses is what give you an image, a unique lens gives you a unique image. Any digital sensor or film can capture it. If you think lenses are not relevant, I'm not sure what kind of photography are you doing (if any)?


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 26, 2017)

I need Sony being the best it can be, so that Canon lowers the 5DIV price lower ... which ... most probably will just not happen. We need to buy in two months. Hey, Canon, please do something


----------



## dolina (Oct 26, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> I need Sony being the best it can be, so that Canon lowers the 5DIV price lower ... which ... most probably will just not happen. We need to buy in two months. Hey, Canon, please do something


They wont lower it because they know it's expensive for people to switch system.

If only those lens adapters had native performance then this wouldnt be an issue.

I always cheer for the other side so my side improves.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 26, 2017)

Aglet said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Jello is appropriate at suburban block parties and on hospital lunch trays...but not in images of fast-moving subjects.
> ...



Well, I don't get distorted images of fast-moving subjects at 12 fps on my 1D X, but oh-so-innovative Sony warns of jello.


----------



## candc (Oct 26, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > woodman411 said:
> ...



There is a menu setting to select whether the camera focuses wide open or stopped down. "live view setting effect" on or off.


----------



## canon1dxman (Oct 26, 2017)

By the time you have read all the posts on this thread, the Sony A77R IV will probably be announced....


----------



## Jopa (Oct 26, 2017)

candc said:


> There is a menu setting to select whether the camera focuses wide open or stopped down. "live view setting effect" on or off.



As far as I remember this setting only affects what you see - either normalized brightness or full exposure simulation + post effects. The first one is nice when you're shooting in studio with strobes, so you can see at least what you're shooting; the second one is good outdoors - like a "preview" mode. The camera always focuses stopped down. It's not necessary bad - you won't get any focus shift related problems.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 26, 2017)

canon1dxman said:


> By the time you have read all the posts on this thread, the Sony A77R IV will probably be announced....



No need to read, just write, it's fun! ;D


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Oct 26, 2017)

> Seems a bit like choosing a car for the tire selection.



Of course, the fans of the brand that has only 2 tire types to choose from would be expected to say that.  But then again, many car buyers choose a model because it has the highest horsepower at a certain RPM point that 99% of the time they would never get to reach in typical usage.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 26, 2017)

Jopa said:


> The camera always focuses stopped down. It's not necessary bad - you won't get any focus shift related problems.



How do you figure that? Focus shift, with lenses that exhibit that problem, occurs when a different aperture is used for focus than for image capture. On a dSLR, it occurs when focus is performed wide open and the image is captured stopped down, and that results in back-focus. But if focus is achieved with the lens stopped down, and the image is captured wide open, focus shift will still occur...the only difference is that it will result in front-focus instead. 

The problem is that no autofocus system is perfect. If you focus using the shallowest DoF achievable (lens wide open), stopping down will serve to mask any focus errors; but, if you focus stops down then shoot with a shallower DoF, any focus errors will be exacerbated.


----------



## BeenThere (Oct 26, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > The camera always focuses stopped down. It's not necessary bad - you won't get any focus shift related problems.
> ...


Is this a hypothetical, or do you know of AF systems that work this way? (AF focuses stopped down, then opens for image capture)


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 26, 2017)

AFAIK, Sony MILCs focus with aperture set to the exact value required for the shot. it does not open up or stops down past what the F number is set in camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 26, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



That was hypothetical, based on Jopa's statement, "The camera always focuses stopped down." If the camera always focuses at the selected aperture for the shot, that does indeed eliminate the problem of focus shift. 

However, in that case if shooting stopped down in low ambient light, there would likely not be sufficient light for the camera to achieve focus. The use case of 'stopped down in low ambient light' describes a very common scenario in a studio setting, where one wants all the illumination for the shot to come from the strobes, so a low ISO and a narrow aperture (for me, typically ISO 100-200 and f/10-14) are used to kill the ambient light contribution. I have no problems shooting in that situation with my Canon gear, but if I bought an a7-series and needed to flip flood lights on/off or change aperture between every shot to achieve focus, or switch to continuous lighting, well...I'd be righteously pissed off.


----------



## sdsr (Oct 26, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Aglet said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're right, of course. But if, like me, you prefer manual focusing, there's almost no limit to the number of lenses you can attach to an a7xx; and thanks to the focus magnification and focus peaking available via the EVF, manual focusing is far easier than on dslrs. (Plus, they all get image stabilization.) With luck, the same will be true of the FF mirrorless camera(s) Canon eventually releases (assuming it will).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 26, 2017)

sdsr said:


> But if, like me, you prefer manual focusing, there's almost no limit to the number of lenses you can attach to an a7xx; and thanks to the focus magnification and focus peaking available via the EVF, manual focusing is far easier than on dslrs. (*Plus, they all get image stabilization*.) With luck, the same will be true of the FF mirrorless camera(s) Canon eventually releases (assuming it will).



I'm sure it would be, because 3rd parties would make adapters. But I'm not convinced we'll see in body image stabilization from Canon.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 26, 2017)

-pekr- said:


> I need Sony being the best it can be, so that Canon lowers the 5DIV price lower ... which ... most probably will just not happen. We need to buy in two months. Hey, Canon, please do something



Ask and ye shall receive:
http://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-store-restocks-popular-refurbished-lenses/

Effectively it's as good as new (my 35 f/2 IS Canon refurb was pristine), one year warranty, $2349, zero chance of a ripoff that you might get from eBay/craigs/etc.

That's the best (risk-free) deal you'll see for quite some time, I'd wager. #giddyup

- A


----------



## ethanz (Oct 26, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > I need Sony being the best it can be, so that Canon lowers the 5DIV price lower ... which ... most probably will just not happen. We need to buy in two months. Hey, Canon, please do something
> ...



That really is quite the deal.


----------



## ethanz (Oct 26, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > There's nothing Canon can put into a 5DSR2 to make it competitive with the D850 or A7R3 without sabotaging at least the 5D4, the 7D2 and likely 7D3, as well as some Cinema options...just to name a few.
> ...



But the 5DS2 would be at least $1,000 more than the 5D4, so I would think they could bump the specs in it and not necessarily threaten the 5D4. Different price points for different level of gear?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 26, 2017)

ethanz said:
 

> But the 5DS2 would be at least $1,000 more than the 5D4, so I would think they could bump the specs in it and not necessarily threaten the 5D4. Different price points for different level of gear?



This is the 'relative prestige of the 5-level' thing. Some think it's important, others less so. Aligning specs makes sense, but the timing of the product lines doesn't line up to do that. Others argue the 'feature-set envy' the 5DS camp gets at (say) an on-chip sensor or DPAF/touchscreen in the 5D4 may serves to drive people to buy both models -- who knows?

A clean slate approach of releasing a 5D5 / 5DS2 with the exact same core tech / same basic throughput other than the sensor and FPS would deliver 'parity' for the two brands:

50 MP x 7 fps for the 5DS2
36 MP x 10 fps for the 5D4 

...(or thereabouts, you can play around with an hypothetical throughput) should command the same price if everything else is kept the same.

Others would argue 'screw relative prestige, don't make me choose speed or detail _-- give me both!'_ and ask Canon to bend it's strategy to better align to the competition of:

Good: 6D2
Better: 5D4 
Best: 5DS2 (with high MP and at least the 5D4's fps count)

(Hint: many Canonites are saying this of late in light of Sony and Nikon offering such cake-and-eat-it-too high throughput products.)

We've beaten this up many times. There is no right answer -- just opinions.

- A


----------



## OSOK (Oct 26, 2017)

Different strategies. Canon separates features out to different bodies. Nikon and Sony have provided two, essentially "do all" bodies.

5D4 looks very weak and old in comparison.

Canon was looking good within the industry due to the presumption that you couldn't have your cake and eat it, until Nikon D850 and A7R3 proved otherwise.

42mp @ 10fps w/ 14+ stops of DR and low noise FF for $3,200. 

The folks in here can have their fun and bash them all they want, but in reality there is very little answer to this.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 26, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Different strategies. Canon separates features out to different bodies. Nikon and Sony have provided two, essentially "do all" bodies.
> 
> 5D4 looks very weak and old in comparison.
> 
> ...



Apparently you can't "do all" with the 5dm4? I'm wondering what exactly it can't do for you? I know it can't make a sandwich, so it must be a crappy camera, right?


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 26, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Canon was looking good within the industry due to the presumption that you couldn't have your cake and eat it, until Nikon D850 and A7R3 proved otherwise.



That actually changed with the Sony A7R and the Nikon D800 - and still Canon kept growing its market share. You are making the assumption that the things that look great on a spec sheet are important to the general public but time and again the consumer technology market has shown us that 'perfect' is rarely the driving force. 

CD won out over LP because of convenience and durability. But HDCD, Bluray music, DVD-A barely made a dent despite superiority. And the CD is itself being superceded by low-res digital downloads to the point that ipod plug in stations are the closest many get to a 'hifi'. 
VHS beat betamax despite technical inferiority, and DVD beat VHS because of convenience and durability not because of image quality.
Any camera now has reached the point that any change is incremental and in general the market just doesn't care. 

Question: if Canon cameras continue to be at the top of, or very close to, the top of the sales where does that leave your argument? Or will you simply blame 'people don't want to sell their Canon lenses' and brush it off with the same disdain that you claim Canon are showing to their customers?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 26, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Different strategies. Canon separates features out to different bodies. Nikon and Sony have provided two, essentially "do all" bodies.
> 
> 5D4 looks very weak and old in comparison.
> 
> ...



Sure there's an answer for this. Canon is in a _leading _marketing position and has built a terrific reputation of stuff working well. _They have to do less to maintain that position than their competitors do to claim that position._

Sony and Nikon are in a _following _market position and can do a lot of things to change that. One of those things is to follow the Canon model and be efficient and smart about improvements, core technology, improve quality/reliability/service, etc. and the other is to simply offer more per dollar to gain business. Sony and Nikon are choosing the latter. It looks awesome on paper, but one might imagine they are burning through cash to do this -- selling more for less tends to hurt your margins.

But please spare us all the entitlement to an answer from Canon for why they are offering less spec per dollar. They don't owe us anything. Just because Sony and Nikon have a balls out throughput cake-and-eat-it-too camera design approach (a) doesn't mean it will be financially successfully and (b) doesn't mean Canon has to follow suit.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 27, 2017)

OSOK said:


> 5D4 looks very weak and old in comparison.
> 
> Canon was looking good within the industry due to the presumption that you couldn't have your cake and eat it, until Nikon D850 and A7R3 proved otherwise.
> 
> ...



Canon is the ILC market leader and has been so for >14 years. Nikon and Sony are a distant second and third, and recently have been losing market share to Canon. 

The trolls in here can have their fun and bash Canon all they want, but in reality there is very little answer to this.


----------



## Talys (Oct 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > Different strategies. Canon separates features out to different bodies. Nikon and Sony have provided two, essentially "do all" bodies.
> ...



They are _really_ good at pricing stuff, and have a whole slew of pretty darn good alternatives below their top tier.

I have a few top-shelf Canon lenses, like 70-200/2.8L IS, 100-400LII, and a couple of L primes. Those are cheaper and/or better than Nikon/Sony alternatives, by the way. But, the truth is, as a non-professional photographer, I don't want to spend a fortune on every lens, and Canon just has much better mid-tier and consumer alternatives, and a whole spectrum of primes that are priced and that performs at what I want.

I have one friend who has a A7RII, and he buys the best lens that Sony has to offer in every category that he buys glass in, because, it seems, most of their cheaper lenses are really quite poor. His opinion is that there really aren't any cheap lenses that are optically excellent. The practical reality of that (he is also not a professional photographer) is that he barely owns any lenses (two... plus a kit lens he hates) and really has to think hard before he makes a purchase.

In contrast, I have a huge number of midrange lenses that I bought on a whim. A lot of them are very useful; for example, I still have a 10-18mm attached to an old Canon APSC body, which takes beautiful photos at that FL. It is an infinitely cheaper alternative to a 16-35/2.8, or even 16-35/4, and frankly, on tripod shots at f/5.6 or f/8, _I can't tell the difference_. It's not just me; check the Ken Rockwell review with side by side photos with the 16-35II. I still have my 100mm macro, which is very nearly as good than (and half the price of) my 100mm L, and I still put it to good use, setting it up on a second body so that I can take shots from 2 angles and 2 tripods without moving the cameras. But pick a focal range, and the Sonys are pretty much all significantly more expensive on the glass that enthusiasts (or pros) really want.

Also, there is a very healthy used lens market for Canon, plus excellent third-party lens options.

It doesn't in any way diminish feature set of the A7RIII or the D850 -- and I hope that Canon narrows the gap. But practically, the total investment "value" gap is still just huge for me (favoring Canon), because realistically, I will own a mix of top tier and mid-tier glass.


----------



## bhf3737 (Oct 27, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Different strategies. Canon separates features out to different bodies. Nikon and Sony have provided two, essentially "do all" bodies.
> 
> 5D4 looks very weak and old in comparison.
> 
> ...



Companies are to do business rather than entertaining us. A simple business rule, based on Babich (1992) study is that: 
If the market share of competing companies is evenly distributed (e.g. C, N and S each 33%) you have to be better than your competitors. 
If the market share of competing companies IS NOT evenly distributed (as currently it is the case between C, N and S), the company with the highest market share should do what it is already doing. And Canon is exactly doing that! That is the business "reality".


----------



## Talys (Oct 27, 2017)

bhf3737 said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > Different strategies. Canon separates features out to different bodies. Nikon and Sony have provided two, essentially "do all" bodies.
> ...



It is also worth mentioning that passionate enthusiasts care about things like AA filters and on-chip ADC and steps of dynamic range.

RETAILERS really don't care at all. I've been to a lot of camera stores, and they all try to stay very neutral, and are happy to sell you whatever you're inclined to want to buy. They are certainly not going to try to convince someone who is thinking of buying a 5DMk4 that there is an alternative with XYZ gizmo, because story might end in, "I get no commission at all". 

Shelf space also matters. Sony typically has a small amount of shelf space compared to Canon or Nikon. People tend to buy the brands that take up the largest amount of shelf space. It's also chicken and egg. Shelf space costs money, and you give more shelf space to the company that is selling more stuff.

Sony also has an uphill climb for grabbing new photographers. People think cameras when they think of Nikon, Canon, Pentax or Olympus; but when you mention Sony to the average person, they think playstations and expensive TVs. Now, those folks probably won't buy an A7RIII any more than a 5DIV, but they might get into photography, and because of this bias, they are less likely to buy a Sony as their first camera, which diminishes the chances of them buying a Sony ILC, and ultimately, a pro ILC.


----------



## stochasticmotions (Oct 27, 2017)

This sounds like it will be a nice update to the A7RII. It addresses most of the things that were just ok in that camera and if it turns out the autofocus is better then great, joystick, bigger battery and dual cards are the things I really wanted....I didn't expect the extra speed. A7RII with the new 100-400 I find works just as well as my 5DS and 100-400 II once you really start to understand the differences in the way each type of continuous autofocus wants to work (took me some time to get used to the sony after many years with the canon but now there are some conditions that the sony is better and some for canon but I don't tend to miss on birds in flight for either anymore in that focal range). I am more than happy with both cameras for image quality (and I don't expect any real difference in the new A7R raw files). I carry both of these cameras for pretty much all of my shoots these days with either a wide angle zoom on the sony and 100-400 on the canon or the 100-400 FE on the sony and the 500 (+teleconverters sometimes) on the canon.

There are differences with canon usually giving slightly redder tones and sony more green but I can usually adjust both to my liking pretty easily. 

I have no problem with the ergonomics of either camera even after long days out but everyone has their own preference (I used to have a 1DIV and found that really hard to hold for a long time, unlike most people it would seem).

One great thing about the latest a7RIII and Nikon D850 is that hopefully when they replace the 5DS(R) they might give us a few more frames per second and a bigger buffer ( I don't usually do long bursts but there are times when it would be a nice bonus)...there really isn't much else to complain about with the current 5DS, as you can probably tell with my current camera choices I like detail


----------



## that1guyy (Oct 27, 2017)

I wonder if those complaining about Sony's ergonomics have ever even shot using the A7 cameras? Or perhaps they have really fat hands? 

I admit that DSLR grips are nicer in the hands but I've owned a Sony A7II (and will definitely buy this new A7RIII) and the grips are totally fine and usable, nowhere near as bad as some people make them out.


----------



## dak723 (Oct 27, 2017)

that1guyy said:


> I wonder if those complaining about Sony's ergonomics have ever even shot using the A7 cameras?



Yes, shot with both the A7 and A7 II.



> Or perhaps they have really fat hands?



No, I have rather small, thin hands.



> I admit that DSLR grips are nicer in the hands but I've owned a Sony A7II (and will definitely buy this new A7RIII) and the grips are totally fine and usable, nowhere near as bad as some people make them out.



Well, each person is entitled to their opinion. I found that the Sony's were (by far) the least comfortable cameras to hold -especially compared to any Canon or Nikon or the Olympus E-M1. The EVF was also quite poor compared to the EVF on the Olympus, but I believe various reviews have mentioned Sony has improved their EVFs. Considering ergonomics should be the easiest part of the camera design, the fact that Sony continues to make no improvements in this area is rather mind-boggling.


----------



## -pekr- (Oct 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> -pekr- said:
> 
> 
> > I need Sony being the best it can be, so that Canon lowers the 5DIV price lower ... which ... most probably will just not happen. We need to buy in two months. Hey, Canon, please do something
> ...



Well, contacted Canon, but those deals are only in terms of US. You have to add a VAT there too, at least on my end, it displayed the price of 2799$ or something like that.

We are most probably going to get it via Panamoz, as we've got some friends living in UK, sending the camera here to CZ.


----------



## snoke (Oct 27, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ...
> The sensor in the a7RIII is the same as the sensor in the a7RII. Perhaps there will be measurable improvements in the RAW image quality, but claims of a full stop seem unlikely, at best.



Wait evidence then Sony liar. Not yet.

Update: photonstophotos say same. Sony liar.

Sony say RAW IQ better. RAW or JPEG? Many company say this. Reality: JPEG noise better.



> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > BurningPlatform said:
> ...



What shutter speed this need?

Please experiment. HDR and 0, -2, +2. Minimum give 83ms is?

Example. 83ms slowest is 1/100, make 0/-2/+2 be 1/400, 1/800, 1/100. Add DoF. ISO?

Back to problem.

Use HDR at 100m sprint? No. Runner fast, camera slow. Want 3 images at time of 1 image.

Water worst. Not matter if 83ms or 830ms. HDR hell.

For good HDR merge, no motion. Need HDR if light bad. Bad light, slow shutter. Photographer hell. Sony feature same problem but photographer can't pretend.


----------



## snoke (Oct 27, 2017)

rfdesigner said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > P.S. How are you supposing they are fitting 15 stops of DR into a 14 bit, at most, file?
> ...



Good bet. Need non-linear raw data.


----------



## snoke (Oct 27, 2017)

Talys said:


> ..
> Put a Canon onto LiveView One Shot, and crank the aperture to f/14 in a dim room, til almost everything is barely visible. Tap somewhere on the screen or hit the AF button, and the screen will suddenly light up for a second or so while it focuses -- that's the camera going to max aperture when it needs more light to electronically AF. Then it returns to being dark.



No you wrong. Canon lens wide open until exposure. Canon simulate exposure and artificial bright in live view. Want preview DoF? Push button on front camera. Maybe some camera not work same.


----------



## snoke (Oct 27, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > The camera always focuses stopped down. It's not necessary bad - you won't get any focus shift related problems.
> ...



Photographer with Canon use eye and live view zoom for focus verify and guess about expose. DoF button help sometime if light good.

Photographer with Sony use focus highlight. Canon photographer need ML to get this.

Focus highlight closest perfection but electronic only, not optical.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2017)

snoke said:


> rfdesigner said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



How does turning linear data into a curve help? There is no more space so something somewhere is crushed. Sure there are theoretical oversampling and averaging computations that haven’t been shown to be practical in this application that can give you more steps within a file. But so far we have been given linear data as linear data, so how are Sony getting, supposedly, well over 14 stops of DR into a 14 bit file? Red moved to 16 bit files to achieve the feat.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > rfdesigner said:
> ...



I'm not sure if that's the case with the A7r3, but all other Sony cameras starting with the A99 and up to the A9 shoot 14bit only in the single shot (no burst) mode. If you switch to the burst mode - the cameras stores 11bits only.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 27, 2017)

Sony A7S II: What to expect if you are taking pictures with a Sony camera near the surf and water splashed up from below and /or behind.


https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/10/about-getting-your-camera-wet-teardown-of-a-salty-sony-a7sii/


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 27, 2017)

Jopa said:


> I'm not sure if that's the case with the A7r3, but all other Sony cameras starting with the A99 and up to the A9 shoot 14bit only in the single shot (no burst) mode. If you switch to the burst mode - the cameras stores 11bits only.



That's incorrect, I believe:

A9 will capture bursted uncompressed 14-bit RAW shots, but your electronically shuttered capture drops from 20 fps to 12 fps. (See manual, page 80.) 5 fps mechanically shuttered performance I believe would still work as well, but that was not spoken to specifically in the manual.

A99-II will slow down if you go with uncompressed 14-bit RAW + Continuous Hi+ (aka 12 fps) mode. (See manual, page 47.) However, it doesn't slow down that much in the testing I've seen:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a99-ii/sony-a99-iiA6.HTM

They pegged somewhere in the 10.5-11.1 fps neighborhood.

Don't get me wrong, Sony is rife with burst 'terms and conditions' to constant AF vs. first exposure AF only, compressed fps vs. uncompressed fps, etc. but their latest round of camera appears have been hacking away at (some of) those terms and conditions.

- A


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not sure if that's the case with the A7r3, but all other Sony cameras starting with the A99 and up to the A9 shoot 14bit only in the single shot (no burst) mode. If you switch to the burst mode - the cameras stores 11bits only.
> ...



My bad. It's 12bit RAW. 11+7 - that's just their lossy RAW compression.
A7r2: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1379163
A9: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7266455439/sony-a9-real-world-iso-invariance-and-dynamic-range (but DPR say "12-bit in continuous drive comes at no cost", yeah, sure  )

It's really every single Sony camera, I'm not sure about APS-C, but really even my old A99 had this "quality drop".


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

The 12 vs 14 bit difference is actually quite visible: http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/sony-a7ii-12-bit-modes-effect-on-shadows/


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 27, 2017)

Jopa said:


> The 12 vs 14 bit difference is actually quite visible: http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/sony-a7ii-12-bit-modes-effect-on-shadows/



Re: 12 vs 14 differences, I completely agree.

I'm just saying the days of getting a Canon/Nikon-like full 14 bit RAW files at any burst settings is becoming more and more possible with these most recent Sony rigs. I never would use compressed formats, so I never really took their specs that seriously... _until this past year._ We now have rigs that can deliver the following numbers with 14 bit RAW files:

A99 II: 42 x 'slower than 12 fps' (manual) --> 42 x 11 (tested)
D850: 45 x 9 (manual) --> haven't seen testing yet
A7R3: 42 x 10 (advertised, no manual yet)

- A


----------



## PavelR (Oct 27, 2017)

Actually it is quite model specific - I do not see any significant difference: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr346_0=efcs_single&attr346_1=efcs_continuous&attr346_2=electronic_single&attr346_3=electronic_continuous&attr347_0=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_1=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_2=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_3=iso100%2B6ev&normalization=full&widget=519&x=0.289341062&y=0.6311134



Jopa said:


> The 12 vs 14 bit difference is actually quite visible: http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/sony-a7ii-12-bit-modes-effect-on-shadows/


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > The 12 vs 14 bit difference is actually quite visible: http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/sony-a7ii-12-bit-modes-effect-on-shadows/
> ...



Adam, are you sure the A7r3 won't fall back to 12bit @ 10fps?


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

PavelR said:


> Actually it is quite model specific - I do not see any significant difference: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr346_0=efcs_single&attr346_1=efcs_continuous&attr346_2=electronic_single&attr346_3=electronic_continuous&attr347_0=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_1=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_2=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_3=iso100%2B6ev&normalization=full&widget=519&x=0.289341062&y=0.6311134
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You probably mean those images all are noisy as h3ll  But the colors and noise pattern / grain look different. On Jim Kasson's example (A7-2) the noise is much more obvious on the 12bit RAWs.

I'm not sure how PhotonsToPhotos measure DR (i.e. what mode), but on their DxO-derived chart the A9 has less DR than the 1dx2.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 27, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Adam, are you sure the A7r3 won't fall back to 12bit @ 10fps?



The manual isn't out yet, but if the A99 II has 42 MP sensor, a mechanical shutter capable of 12 fps and the ability to actually move 42 x 11 14 bit RAW files' amount of data, I don't see how the A7R3 wouldn't be able to pull that number off. Neither the mechanical shutter nor the throughput would bottleneck at 42 x 10, right?

So yes, they might say 'speed may go down with 14 bit uncompressed RAW', but that would be design/cost decision more than if than any technical limitation on their part. So I'll place 42 x 10 as 'advertised' until I see a footnote in ads/announcements or an actual manual that qualifies that.

- A


----------



## PavelR (Oct 27, 2017)

I mean that 12 vs 14 bit does not show any significant difference on A9 camera. So the difference on A7II is model specific not general bitness difference!
(Any camera image pushed 6EV exhibit noise.)



Jopa said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > Actually it is quite model specific - I do not see any significant difference: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr346_0=efcs_single&attr346_1=efcs_continuous&attr346_2=electronic_single&attr346_3=electronic_continuous&attr347_0=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_1=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_2=iso100%2B6ev&attr347_3=iso100%2B6ev&normalization=full&widget=519&x=0.289341062&y=0.6311134
> ...


----------



## Takingshots (Oct 27, 2017)

Someone on the forum mentioned that Metabones adp. did not work too well with Canon lens vs Sigma. I am ready to switch over to Sony A7Riii but will probably have to wait until someone tested in the field using Canon L lens.


----------



## Famateur (Oct 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> OSOK said:
> 
> 
> > Different strategies. Canon separates features out to different bodies. Nikon and Sony have provided two, essentially "do all" bodies.
> ...



Bingo!

You know, these debates are feeling more and more like they're between people who understand business fundamentals and people who feel entitlement to the latest tech from every company. They feel that if a company doesn't give them all it has, all the time, it must not be _capable _of doing that (or it's greedily cheating its customers out of their money).

I, for one, am glad that Canon cares not only about building solid, reliable, capable cameras, it also is cares about maintaining a solid, reliable, capable business.

When competition gets stiff enough (read: Canon starts losing market share), I anticipate the company that pumps out patent after patent after patent will respond.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Adam, are you sure the A7r3 won't fall back to 12bit @ 10fps?
> ...



You're right, the A99 II is "full" 14bit, but you never know what kind of fine print to expect from Sony...


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

PavelR said:


> Any camera image pushed 6EV exhibit noise.



Any but not _Sony_ according to DPR!


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

Jopa said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



Actually, check this out... https://books.google.com/books?id=DUEkDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT42&lpg=PT42&dq=A99+II+12bit+mode&source=bl&ots=RebtG1I8Ht&sig=2CRlqbRSL1FU8hdmriNofXcMriU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwitiKq_t5HXAhUKziYKHWjvDpQQ6AEIOTAC#v=onepage&q=A99%20II%2012bit%20mode&f=false

I don't remember Sony actually ever acknowledge they use 12bit mode. So you probably won't find it in the official manual.


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 27, 2017)

Takingshots said:


> Someone on the forum mentioned that Metabones adp. did not work too well with Canon lens vs Sigma. I am ready to switch over to Sony A7Riii but will probably have to wait until someone tested in the field using Canon L lens.



I think that may have been me. 
One review I read tested the A9 with the Canon 100-400 and 500mm f4Lii - the Metabones adapter did not do particularly well even when maxed out with firmware updates, but the Metabones V did much better. Unfortunately I can't remember whose review it was. but I am still looking....


----------



## Mikehit (Oct 27, 2017)

Jopa said:


> I don't remember Sony actually ever acknowledge they use 12bit mode. So you probably won't find it in the official manual.



is there anything in the exif data that would tell you? Or is it one of those things you only find out by extensive technical measurements?


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > I don't remember Sony actually ever acknowledge they use 12bit mode. So you probably won't find it in the official manual.
> ...



Sorry Mike, I don't know for sure, but my guess is no, it won't be in EXIF. It's not even about encoding itself, but about how much valuable data is encoded. They still can encode 14bit without changing the algorithm, but only 12 out of 14 bits will contain color data.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 27, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Actually, check this out... https://books.google.com/books?id=DUEkDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT42&lpg=PT42&dq=A99+II+12bit+mode&source=bl&ots=RebtG1I8Ht&sig=2CRlqbRSL1FU8hdmriNofXcMriU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwitiKq_t5HXAhUKziYKHWjvDpQQ6AEIOTAC#v=onepage&q=A99%20II%2012bit%20mode&f=false
> 
> I don't remember Sony actually ever acknowledge they use 12bit mode. So you probably won't find it in the official manual.



Sony does not say 14 or 12, they just say compressed RAW and uncompressed RAW in the manual. I believe the files have been looked at after the fact in testing to show that they are indeed 14 and 12, respectively, but I don't have a link handy. (Paging anyone to assist?)

Jopa, you may be conflating _what the camera does by default_ (like your quote, attached, but not from Sony btw) with _what the camera will and will not ever allow_. From the manual, page 47: "The shooting speed during continuous shooting becomes slower when [ RAW File Type] is set to [Uncompressed] in [Continuous Shooting: Hi+] mode." 

So it's possible the camera switches from 14 to 12 bit when you crank up the drive mode, but the manual's verbiage above would imply you can switch it back to 14 bit -- otherwise they would have said 'Drive mode X leads to compressed output only' (which I believe was conditionally the case with the A7R II.) 

And the proof is in the testing. Again, from Imaging Resource: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a99-ii/sony-a99-iiA6.HTM --> they were clearly able to shoot uncompressed RAW at high speeds.

- A


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, check this out... https://books.google.com/books?id=DUEkDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT42&lpg=PT42&dq=A99+II+12bit+mode&source=bl&ots=RebtG1I8Ht&sig=2CRlqbRSL1FU8hdmriNofXcMriU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwitiKq_t5HXAhUKziYKHWjvDpQQ6AEIOTAC#v=onepage&q=A99%20II%2012bit%20mode&f=false
> ...



Adam, compression is a different beast. It's _11+7_, lossy: https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/sony-craw-arw2-posterization-detection
Sony actually admitted and "fixed" it by introducing the uncompressed RAW. But _how much_ information is being compressed - that's the question. It can be either 12 bit or 14.

Edit: uncompressed can be also 12 bit, just padded to 14 or even 16 (2 bytes). It won't have posterization issues due to lack of lossy compression, but will have less DR.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

^ everything is not so easy in the Sony world folks... ;D


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 27, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Adam, compression is a different beast. It's _11+7_, lossy: https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/sony-craw-arw2-posterization-detection
> Sony actually admitted and "fixed" it by introducing the uncompressed RAW. But _how much_ information is being compressed - that's the question. It can be either 12 bit or 14.
> 
> Edit: uncompressed can be also 12 bit, just padded to 14 or even 16 (2 bytes). It won't have posterization issues due to lack of lossy compression, but will have less DR.



A99 II claims uncompressed = 14 bit, but I don't see any statements to what their compressed is.

https://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-cameras/ilca-99m2/specifications
(search for 'bit')

I fully get Sony has historically saddled people with RAW < 14 bit, FPS + AF shenanigans vs. lens type vs. burst rate, etc. but it would appear that on the RAW front they got scorched on mandating the use of compressed RAW with the A7R2 to the point that they put out firmware changes and gave a proper 14 bit option to A99-II and A9 owners. I fully expect A7R3 to do the same.

- A


----------



## PavelR (Oct 27, 2017)

It can be found in RAW file - for example Raw Digger can show the information: Bits Per Sample



Jopa said:


> Mikehit said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 27, 2017)

PavelR said:


> It can be found in RAW file - for example Raw Digger can show the information: Bits Per Sample



That's the tool DPR used when Sony moved from 11+7 to 14 with the A7R2 firmware change.

- A


----------



## PavelR (Oct 27, 2017)

It is needed to test yourself, because AF, IS, AE works but everybody need to judge himself if it works good enough. Difference between native and adopted lenses is mainly in frame coverage of Eye AF and jiggling in AF-C AF-S is already darn good with MC-11 adapter - I've tested 200/2, 120-300/2.8, 35/1.4II on A9.



Takingshots said:


> Someone on the forum mentioned that Metabones adp. did not work too well with Canon lens vs Sigma. I am ready to switch over to Sony A7Riii but will probably have to wait until someone tested in the field using Canon L lens.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

​


PavelR said:


> It is needed to test yourself, because AF, IS, AE works but everybody need to judge himself if it works good enough. Difference between native and adopted lenses is mainly in frame coverage of Eye AF and jiggling in AF-C AF-S is already darn good with MC-11 adapter - I've tested 200/2, 120-300/2.8, 35/1.4II on A9.



How is it compared to the 1dx2?


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Adam, compression is a different beast. It's _11+7_, lossy: https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/sony-craw-arw2-posterization-detection
> ...



The only way how we can check it - someone needs to buy a camera and take the same scene in AF-C & AF-S, and then compare  I'm done with Sony, so it won't be me for sure.


----------



## PavelR (Oct 27, 2017)

I'm sorry, I do not have any 1dx2 to compare with. I was using 1ds3 and 1d4 before A9 and I can say that AF acquisition is immediate on all cameras, but A9 with e shutter without blackout and Eye tracking over almost whole frame is far better on A9 (using native lenses... I'm not afraid to regularly use 85 @ 1.4 & 70-200 @ 2.8 on moving subjects, which was not possible on Canon with 85/1.2 II and 70-200 II).


Jopa said:


> ​
> 
> 
> PavelR said:
> ...


----------



## Jopa (Oct 27, 2017)

PavelR said:


> I'm not afraid to regularly use 85 @ 1.4 & 70-200 @ 2.8 on moving subjects, which was not possible on Canon with 85/1.2 II and 70-200 II).



That sounds like a great improvement over the A7r2 (based on my experience - via the Metabones mk4 and Sigma MC-11). I wasn't able to shoot the same lenses as you accurately on anything moving, especially if the light was less than perfect. The Sigma 120-300 was a big fail for me even in a good light. But focusing on the static subjects was accurate with only a few exceptions. Hope to see this kind of accuracy one day from a Canon mirrorless!


----------



## PavelR (Oct 27, 2017)

I hope that next big win for Sony will be global electronic shutter without rolling, flash sync at any speed and flicker detection ;-)


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> I hope that next big win for Sony will be global electronic shutter without rolling, flash sync at any speed and flicker detection ;-)



Couldn't care less for Sony


----------



## PavelR (Oct 28, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Couldn't care less for Sony


You need to be quite patient... I was not... I was waiting 3 years to upgrade my 1ds3 to new camera with new functions [not only several enhancements] and month ago it was done ;-) I do not think that Canon want & can catch Sony in MILC functions. I think that next year first Canon MILC can only appeal current Canon users with lenses not available elsewhere and as second smaller camera for DSLR users which prefer OVF in its primary camera.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 28, 2017)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a7r-iii/sony-a7r-iiiA.HTM#comparison


> It also borrows the A9's impressive trick of a truly live viewfinder display, at least up to 8 frames/second



Oh look at that, the A7RIII can’t do Live View above 8fps.

You’re just as well off with an A6500. Pathetic.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 28, 2017)

“Mirrorless” is all “Smoke and Mirrors”
(Sorry, I couldn’t help myself)

At this rate it’s going to take another 5-10 years to actually get something comparable with high end SLR performance.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 28, 2017)

> And you can now access the menus while images are being written to the card.



This reminds me of an old WWII movie where a bunch of high rank POW’s spent weeks making an escape plan, only to be told that the guards were just being given bullets the day before the first attempt.

For years people have been theory crafting as though the A7 series was a serious threat, when this is actually Sony’s first product worth paying any attention to.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Couldn't care less for Sony
> ...



Fair enough Pavel. My experience is not that sad though  My "photo gear" path was 50D -> A99 -> A7r + A7 (later A7-2) -> A7r2 + 5DsR -> 5DsR + 1DX2.
Now I'm at the point when my GAS is mostly over, I'm completely satisfied with resolution of the 5DsR and speed of the 1DX2, except of one annoying thing that I've mentioned multiple times on this forum - a necessity to calibrate my lenses. A mirrorless would solve this issue once and forever. If not - no biggie, I'll just keep shooting what I have until maybe a next great high-res mirrorslapper will appear on the horizon (I don't mind a 5DsR with a better DR just because "why not"). OVF vs EVF - don't care. I really like my lens collection, and it matters to me. If I had a 5Dm2 and could keep my lenses I would be still happy. My current priories are: subject, composition, light, optics & filters, post-processing techniques, and a camera would be the last thing, but of course YMMV.

BTW when the A9 was announced I was interested and almost bought it (oh that GAS!). But since I definitely didn't want to buy Sony lenses over again - it will be a downgrade for me in terms of FPS (10 only with adapted lenses), and most likely the focus acquisition speed and AF-C accuracy would somewhat suffer. About a month ago I saw a great deal on the A9 - $3900 brand new, but I was so happy the GAS is gone, and simply walked away from it  The A7r3 is a great camera no doubt, but again, I don't think the 5DsR successor will be worse. The ol' good 5DsR is still kicking pretty well.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 28, 2017)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a7r-iii/sony-a7r-iiiA.HTM#comparison


> The camera does drop to 12-bit RAWs when shooting in continuous burst mode using the compressed RAW format or when Long Exposure NR is enabled.



Great, the A7RIII is now equivalent or inferior to the Canon 7D2 in every way if you’re actually shooting sports or wildlife in a focal length lmited scenario. (7D2 has more pixel density, higher burst with visual tracking, and the same Dynamic Range).


----------



## PavelR (Oct 28, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Fair enough Pavel. My experience is not that sad though  My "photo gear" path was 50D -> A99 -> A7r + A7 (later A7-2) -> A7r2 + 5DsR -> 5DsR + 1DX2.


My path was Panasonic FZ-10 -> Nikon D200 -> D2x -> 1D4 -> 1Ds3 -> A9
(1Ds3 -> A9 was after 3 years of waiting - there were also Pentax 645Z, Fuji GFX on a table, but AF on those bodies are not even remotely comparable to 1ds3.)

1dx2 does not offer any new significant feature compared to 1ds3. But A9 does:
* exposure view + zebra + histogram in VF (realtime)
* almost whole frame PDAF coverage
* Eye AF (tracking all over the frame I do not need to select correct AF point to get proper focus)
* blackout free e shutter
* really silent shooting
* VF photo review
* tilting display

All features 1dx2 does have too:
* mpx 21 vs 24
* AF speed
* High ISO performance
* AF point memory for each camera orientation
* 4K video
* DR
* whole day shooting battery (3x Sony vs 2x Canon) life

I can use all my Canon mount lenses in AF-S without any penalty.

I lost only weather sealing, scrolling speed in captured pictures and a bit of handling comfort (small buttons).

The most user friendly cameras are Nikons, but I'm not to buy any Nikon soon because they silently announced new lenses incompatible with all my that time owned bodies.


----------



## Perio (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Fair enough Pavel. My experience is not that sad though  My "photo gear" path was 50D -> A99 -> A7r + A7 (later A7-2) -> A7r2 + 5DsR -> 5DsR + 1DX2.
> ...



You've tested 1dxii and found that it's not a significant upgrade over 1dsiii??? Is it a joke?


----------



## PavelR (Oct 28, 2017)

Perio said:


> You've tested 1dxii and found that it's not a significant upgrade over 1dsiii??? Is it a joke?



I've read reviews and spoke with two first person users of 1dx2 and none significant new feature was added. (I do not consider flicker detection as significant, because I do not have any problem using A9 on any natural / artificial light = I do not need it.)

Name some to "overpower" my list of advantages I can get by upgrading 1ds3 -> A9 over 1ds3 -> 1dx2.


----------



## Viggo (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> Perio said:
> 
> 
> > You've tested 1dxii and found that it's not a significant upgrade over 1dsiii??? Is it a joke?
> ...



Wait, what?

The 1dx2 is significant leap from the 1dx, maybe in studio the difference is less, but take it outside and it blows the socks off the 1ds3.


----------



## PavelR (Oct 28, 2017)

Viggo said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > Perio said:
> ...



Name features, don't say only fanboy statements. (I have no studio, thus I use it outside.)


----------



## Perio (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > PavelR said:
> ...



ISO, AF speed/accuracy/sensitivity, FPS, 4k video, DR, improved battery, great rear screen, improved shutter just to name a few.


----------



## PavelR (Oct 28, 2017)

Perio said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...



Nothing applicable for the original request: Name some to "overpower" my list [on the bottom of the page 12] of advantages I can get by upgrading 1ds3 -> A9 over 1ds3 -> 1dx2. (As a new feature can be considered only 4K, because all others are only enhancements.)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> Nothing applicable for the original request: Name some to "overpower" my list [on the bottom of the page 12] of advantages I can get by upgrading 1ds3 -> A9 over 1ds3 -> 1dx2. (As a new feature can be considered only 4K, because all others are only enhancements.)



I find nothing 'overpowering' — or even moderately compelling — on your list of a9 features. However, the loss of handling comfort, particularly with the f/2.8 zooms that are my most commonly used lenses, would be a total deal breaker.


----------



## PavelR (Oct 28, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing applicable for the original request: Name some to "overpower" my list [on the bottom of the page 12] of advantages I can get by upgrading 1ds3 -> A9 over 1ds3 -> 1dx2. (As a new feature can be considered only 4K, because all others are only enhancements.)
> ...



It is ok that you prefer other features than me. I'm using regularly 70-200/2.8, sometimes 120-300 and I do not have any problem using it on any body... I've already downgraded handling comfort in stage d2x -> 1d4 and it is lesser difference on 1ds3 -> A9. BTW: I've found today that I can use A9 & 70-200 with gloves.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 28, 2017)

As a person who went from 1DS MkIII's to 1DX MkII's I can see Pavel's point to some extent, however people prioritize the features they need or don't need and it often doesn't make sense to others. 

When I upgraded, and to suggest the 1DS MkIII to 1DX MkII isn't a massive upgrade is being churlish, the A9 wasn't an option, but there is no doubt it offers some interesting differences for those that find some particular feature valuable, I'd really like the fully silent shutter, the much wider AF spread etc. But I am not a whistles and bells person and I value reliability and system compatibility more than most people might so, for me, the list of A9 features is not compelling enough to even take a serious look at the camera.

Tools of this calibre are all fully competent, which makes our ability to get 99.9999% of shots we envision more about our competence than the cameras. Very, very rarely is a shot possible with one model and not another, how we interact with the tools is far more important and in that regard we are all different.

I grew up out of a slide shooting background and to me the necessity for in viewfinder review is zero, I could easily live without rear screen review. My need for exposure simulation is also zero. I find 10x Live View much more reliable and accurate than focus peaking and the Canon implementation of Live View is superb. I have no need for zebras as I use 'blinkies' for a test shot and dial in my exposure from that, I actually prefer less information in the viewfinder rather than more so turn a lot of the viewfinder information off.

Having said all that, high end cameras are very mature products, they all take excellent images, how we prioritize the whistles and bells really isn't worth getting bent out of shape about.


----------



## snoke (Oct 28, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> How does turning linear data into a curve help? There is no more space so something somewhere is crushed. Sure there are theoretical oversampling and averaging computations that haven’t been shown to be practical in this application that can give you more steps within a file. But so far we have been given linear data as linear data, so how are Sony getting, supposedly, well over 14 stops of DR into a 14 bit file? Red moved to 16 bit files to achieve the feat.



Crush highlight, not matter. Human eye less sensitive to highlight change. More sensitive low change.

Remember: 14bit file, 0-16383, 50% values 8192-16383 for top stop. Who care about 8000 value for light grey to white?


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

Interesting conversation, Pavel. I'm glad you found your dream camera after all 

Since my "Sony path" ends with the A7r2, I can't really tell anything good or bad about the A9 first hand, same as you can also just rely on someone else opinion about the 1DX2. I think those 2 folks you spoke with didn't find significant improvements compared to the _1DX_, but not _1DS3_.

...which is also only partially true. The 1DX2 shoots impressive 4k DCI 60p video with exceptionally smooth and reliable auto focus (DPAF). I'm not a video guy, but when I saw it first time I was blown away, and now I don't have a choice - started shooting videos  Slightly expanded PDAF area, better DR, anti-flicker, touch screen, a couple of extra fps and even better AF due to AI Servo III+. The 1DX is an improvement compared to the 1DS3.

I was using Sony's Eye-AF since the A7r when it was working only in AF-S and no one seem to care about it. The A7r2 made it available in the AF-C mode and people started noticing it. It's probably evolved even more in the A9. You'll be surprised but Canon's face detection algorithm is not an iota of difference in accuracy. It just doesn't show the gimmicky square on the eye.

At the end of the day both are capable cameras using different technologies and different approaches. I really don't see any sense to switch systems, simply because I won't get any benefits for my photography. Buying the A9 just for giggles as a "back" for the Canon lenses is a downgrade IMO: fps and AF speed drop is imminent.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> It is ok that you prefer other features than me.



Yet, more than once, you asked others to list differences from 1DsIII to 1D X II that you would find overpowering. Interesting. 

I'm with PBD on this – bells and whistles don't impress me. I can achieve the exposure I want based on the VF meter and my experience, and having more stuff cluttering up the VF just gets in the way of composition. Mainly, I want a reliable, robust system that just works. Canon offers that, Sony isn't there yet.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > It is ok that you prefer other features than me.
> ...



I simply rely on the exposure meter too. Maybe I'm just dumb, but a histogram isn't telling me more than a simple meter. I just know if I shoot a landscape photo with a bunch of sky, I just want it to be between -1 and -2 EV


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 28, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > rfdesigner said:
> ...


Linear scaling would work, you just wouldn't have the bit boundaries line-up with the "stops" of DR.



> But so far we have been given linear data as linear data, so how are Sony getting, supposedly, well over 14 stops of DR into a 14 bit file?



Perhaps some EE with experience can chime in, but I don't understand how the number of quantization levels matters for how the contained information is interpreted. It seems common for people to assume that 1-bit corresponding to 1 "stop' of DR is natural, but I don't see it that way at all. 

A good way to see this is to compare the centigrade and Fahrenheit temperature scales: from the freezing point to the boiling point of water is 100 quantization levels in centigrade, but it's 180 quantization levels in Fahrenheit. We could invent a new temperature scale, call it the sowknee, that has 64 quantization levels between freezing and boiling. Now you need 8 bits to express that range in Fahrenheit, 7 bits for centigrade, and 6 for the sowknee scale. All represent the same "dynamic range," but express different gap sizes between integral temperature values, with Fahrenheit having the finest gradation, and sowknee the least.

In direct answer to the question, they're doing it by increasing the risk of banding, especially in the darker areas. (unless they have some magical mathematical compression algorithm)


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 28, 2017)

9VIII said:


> “Mirrorless” is all “Smoke and Mirrors”
> (Sorry, I couldn’t help myself)
> 
> At this rate it’s going to take another 5-10 years to actually get something comparable with high end SLR performance.



With today high end mirrorless, I found your comment quite lack of understanding. They both have their strength and weakness.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 28, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> I can achieve the exposure I want based on the VF meter and my experience, and having more stuff cluttering up the VF just gets in the way of composition



Do you play video games? Do you quickly become accustomed to the displays of each new game? Does that information impede your ability to see, navigate and act within the game? If your 1DX had available histogram you would quickly become accustomed to it and use it. Of course, you'd want to be able to assign a button to turn it on/off.

When I'm shooting events or action I don't have time for histograms, and often not even the meter. When I'm shooting on tripod, I definitely use the histogram.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 28, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > It is ok that you prefer other features than me.
> ...



I don't agree with Neuro this time. I found EVF very helpful for me to get better exposure, especially shooting in low light. Those bells and whistles are not just bells and whistles according to Canon users. Exp. Eye-AF is one of great features in that bells and whistles list. 

"cluttering up the VF", in Sony A7 to A9 you can select what you want to display in EVF and LCD. This is what I have on my EVF/LCD on my A9.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Do you play video games?



You'll be probably surprised but a bunch of people do not play video games.


----------



## PavelR (Oct 28, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > It is ok that you prefer other features than me.
> ...


privatebydesign summed it up nicely, but, Neuro, I have to say:
* you as some others still do not answer original question I posted here two times, so I will not repeat it nor wait for the answer...
* AF coverage & Eye AF is only way to compose in camera and focus on the correct eye shooting moving subjects (I needed to do lots of cropping on post with any used DSLR.)
* VF zebra is only way to not need to guess the correct exposure in frequent light changing situations
* true silent shutter is the only way to go with low volume music concerts and theater performances. Now I can also shoot just beside videographer using top of camera microphone.

BTW: My dream camera would be:
* mirrorless
* global e shutter with unlimited sync speed
* Nikon full size like D5 + Nikon flash system
* Sony sensor 36x36mm with optional aspect ratio crop
* Canon mount
And such camera will never exist so I as everybody else need to choose between current offers of current manufacturers and find best feasible features / price ratio.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> Eye-AF is one of great features in that bells and whistles list.



The Eye-AF is an shiny example of bells and whistles! Canon's face detection is as accurate with the only thing you can't switch the eyes - it's going to be the closest detected eye ball. But how many times in your life you needed to switch to the far eye?


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 28, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Do you play video games?
> ...



Not at all: I don't. I've just found it an effective illustration.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > PavelR said:
> ...



You may try to look in a different universe for this ^. Not gonna happen in ours


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 28, 2017)

Jopa said:


> PavelR said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Do you believe in string theory? Poof! New universe here and now! ;D


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > PavelR said:
> ...



LOL


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 28, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Eye-AF is one of great features in that bells and whistles list.
> ...



I love candid style, A9 eye-af tracking does wonderful job even when my subject is looking away from camera.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 28, 2017)

Allow the camera to track subject eye with eye-af while I'm compose the shot @ f1.4 is priceless.


----------



## Talys (Oct 28, 2017)

PavelR said:


> * VF zebra is only way to not need to guess the correct exposure in frequent light changing situations



With 15 steps of DR, if you can't avoid blowing out your highlights without VF zebras, you've got more problems than camera brand. Or, maybe, it's just that EVFs are super annoying to use in situations where the light changes frequently/quickly.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 28, 2017)

snoke said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > How does turning linear data into a curve help? There is no more space so something somewhere is crushed. Sure there are theoretical oversampling and averaging computations that haven’t been shown to be practical in this application that can give you more steps within a file. But so far we have been given linear data as linear data, so how are Sony getting, supposedly, well over 14 stops of DR into a 14 bit file? Red moved to 16 bit files to achieve the feat.
> ...



That's why a gamma curve is applied to the linear data in the rendering process. Nobody, and there are a lot of smart people working on it, has come up with a way to save more stops of DR than bit depth in the file. Like I said, companies that do actually push the boundaries of 12 and 14 stops of DR have all gone to 16 bit files, Red, Hasselblad etc. 

So how are Sony putting more than 14 stops of DR into 14 bit files, and what is being lost in the process?


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Great pictures Dylan! Very cute little boy 
But really, any DPAF-enabled Canon camera can track faces (and prioritizing the eyes) the same way, you just won't see squares around the eyes.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 28, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Re-posting raptor3x's link from another thread: http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Sony%20ILCE-7RM2,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3, it's actually 11.39. Their marketing department thinks it's very close to 15, so why not?


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 28, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > “Mirrorless” is all “Smoke and Mirrors”
> ...



The point is mirrorless is marketed using false metrics.
Even the A9 can’t shoot 14 bit above 12 fps, the 1DX2 has superior dynamic range at maximum burst, not to mention the myriad of other bizarre complications that no Canon camera has _ever_ had to deal with as far as I can tell (why can’t the A9 access the menu while writing to the card? These are some of the most immature photographic devices ever made).
The A7RIII is basically useless for subject tracking when shooting 10 fps, and it also has worse pixel density than a crop body and is reduced to 12 bit files. Yet it’s advertised with 15 stops of DR and 10fps subject tracking. LIES!
Regardless of whether those features work on their own limited terms, people will compare it with a 7D2 and think Sony has the better camera at peak performance when that is absolutely false.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 28, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > I can achieve the exposure I want based on the VF meter and my experience, and having more stuff cluttering up the VF just gets in the way of composition
> ...



My M6 has an available live histogram. I don't use it.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 28, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


Have you tried it?


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 28, 2017)

https://www.change.org/p/sony-remove-the-star-eater-on-sony-a7-a7s-r-mk-i-ii-and-a9-cameras

Oh my goodness this just keeps getting better!
I’m practically rolling on the ground laughing.

Sony can’t shoot Astro, at all. Their long exposure noise reduction erases the stars.

It’s a miracle Sony hasn’t been laughed out of the industry.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 28, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



I have, I hate it, far too distracting and takes too much real estate.


----------



## candc (Oct 29, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



I found the live histogram to be very useful for me to be able to better judge proper exposure compensation. I think it's a useful learning tool. I don't rely on it much anymore but it helped me so I think it a nice feature to have available.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 29, 2017)

candc said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



And that neatly leads back into the point I made earlier, we all value different features/bells and whistles more or less than each other. To me as a feature live histogram has no value, to others it might be the deciding factor in buying a camera. 

But criticizing each other because you are in need, or not, of a particular feature is pointless and now all top flight cameras are within a spitting distance of each other in any metric it just makes so little sense.

I've used lens adapters, I hate them, I love the lens selection Canon give me, others will happily use their Canon lenses via adapters on any number of cameras. To me that makes absolutely no sense, to them it is the reason they got whatever camera it is they have. I am not 'right' for anybody but me, and even then I am wrong sometimes  and the person who is happy with adapted lenses for them is not 'wrong'.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 29, 2017)

9VIII said:


> https://www.change.org/p/sony-remove-the-star-eater-on-sony-a7-a7s-r-mk-i-ii-and-a9-cameras
> 
> Oh my goodness this just keeps getting better!
> I’m practically rolling on the ground laughing.
> ...



Oh wow. Low noise at all costs!


----------



## candc (Oct 29, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Truenuf, all the debate over video capability is grand example of that. 

P.s. one of the main reasons I got the a7rii was to use my old fd lenses. Turns out most of the ones I had weren't that great so I had to get better fd lenses!


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 29, 2017)

Sony have all the best features. It's a disgrace the 6DII doesn't have a star eater option. It's 2017 for crying out loud. Get with it Canon.


9VIII said:


> https://www.change.org/p/sony-remove-the-star-eater-on-sony-a7-a7s-r-mk-i-ii-and-a9-cameras
> 
> Oh my goodness this just keeps getting better!
> I’m practically rolling on the ground laughing.
> ...


----------



## Talys (Oct 29, 2017)

Live histogram is like viewfinder zebra - by chasing the perfect exposure, you give up composition. Oh, no -- I'm going to blow out that strip of white! White's fixed, BOOM, shot's gone.

Exposure is not very complicated, _and you learn by making mistakes_. Get out, shoot, learn to use those dials, and sooner, rather than later, you'll have well-exposed photos, and be comfortable enough with your gear to know when AE will need correction. Or, how many stops you can get out of your flash/bounced flash/whatever. If you rely on viewfinder tech, you never learn to expose photos correctly -- or how far your gear will let you fix things in post.



Hector1970 said:


> Sony have all the best features. It's a disgrace the 6DII doesn't have a star eater option. It's 2017 for crying out loud. Get with it Canon.



Star Eater sounds awesome. Next, there should be Bird Eater and Baby Eater! And for sports shooters, Ball Eater.

I can't believe there are 6000+ on the petition. It is pretty hilarious.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 29, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Orangutan said:
> ...



You seem awfully insistent about this, so let me be clear: I have tried it, on multiple occasions. I don't like it. I don't want it. I don't need it. I can reliably achieve the exposures I want without it. I don't use it. My 1D X can display one on the rear LCD in live view. I have tried it. I don't like it. I don't want it. I don't need it. I can reliably achieve the exposures I want without it. I don't use it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 29, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



So what are you saying? You’d like to give the feature a try but your Canons don’t support the feature?


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 29, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



How do you mean? I asked one simple follow-up. That hardly counts as "awfully insistent."



>



Oh, now I get it: you found a new (quasi) humorous image, and you were itching to use it. What a waste of Brando's acting skills, I think he needs a new meme-manager.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 29, 2017)

Talys said:


> Live histogram is like viewfinder zebra - by chasing the perfect exposure, you give up composition. Oh, no -- I'm going to blow out that strip of white! White's fixed, BOOM, shot's gone.
> 
> Exposure is not very complicated, _and you learn by making mistakes_.


It depends on what you're shooting. On tripod, shooting a stream in a forest in dappled light -- for that a histogram is great. There are situations where there is no time for histogram or zebras, that's true. Do you also disparage the use of a dedicated spot-meter for studio work?


----------



## snoke (Oct 29, 2017)

Talys said:


> Live histogram is like viewfinder zebra - by chasing the perfect exposure, you give up composition. Oh, no -- I'm going to blow out that strip of white! White's fixed, BOOM, shot's gone.



Which you take most photo? Av? Tv? M? P? Bulb? C1? C2? C3? Ca?


New canonrumor meme: Live Histogram in EVF bad.
Why bad?
Sony feature. No Canon have it.

Old canonrumor meme: good DR bad.
Why bad?
Canon camera have bad DR. Then Canon fix it. Meme less problem now.

Who make memes? People take not many photo.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 29, 2017)

snoke said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Live histogram is like viewfinder zebra - by chasing the perfect exposure, you give up composition. Oh, no -- I'm going to blow out that strip of white! White's fixed, BOOM, shot's gone.
> ...



I hate that crap.

Nobody here has ever said “good DR bad” or anything close to it. What people have said is how much difference does the difference make most of the time to most users in most situations? And the answer to that is that for most people most of the time the difference in one two or three stops makes no difference at all.

Nobody has said inviewfinder histograms are bad, just that as a feature they are not something universally desired. I don’t want one, I find less viewfinder information an advantage, but that’s me, if my camera has one i’ll turn it off, if I don’t have the option to turn it off I probably won’t buy the camera. What is unreasonable about that?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 29, 2017)

snoke said:


> New canonrumor meme: Live Histogram in EVF bad.
> Why bad?
> Sony feature. No Canon have it.



Yeah, that must be it. It couldn't possibly be that someone might simply have no use or desire for the feature. It couldn't possibly be that someone might feel that way even after trying the feature. 

: 




snoke said:


> good DR bad.



Said no one, ever. 

Well, that's not true...CR trolls have certainly misrepresented the position of other members in just that way. I assumed everyone else was intelligent enough to see through such a puerile ploy, but evidently not.


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 29, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...


+1


----------



## Talys (Oct 29, 2017)

Orangutan said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Live histogram is like viewfinder zebra - by chasing the perfect exposure, you give up composition. Oh, no -- I'm going to blow out that strip of white! White's fixed, BOOM, shot's gone.
> ...



I'm not disparaging auto exposure or the tools to help you get a better exposure. What I'm saying is that when you take a few dappled light photos and mess them up (possibly on the viewfinder, but more likely at post, when they won't work out the way you thought they would), you learn pretty quickly what you did wrong. 

Then, next time, you know to turn down (or up) the exposure 2/3 stop or whatever when it's a similar situation, and neato, you have a better photo. As you gain experience, those adjustments become automatic. I don't need a histogram or zebras to tell me that when I'm photographing a bird or a building that has a in important white area of detail that I need to underexpose and that it doesn't hurt to turn the dial a notch down further and take another shot just to be safe. 

I think the histogram is very useful (and educational) in post, but in the moment, _for me_, in the viewfinder is a distraction, and with any subject where time is a factor, you can lose the moment by trying to fix the exposure. Among other issues I have with a VF histogram, it just eats up a ton of space.

I own a sekonic, but frankly, I went most of my life without one. If the lighting isn't complicated, I often don't pull it out now, because I know what kind of exposures I need at all the power levels that I like to dial in with my favorite strobe configurations. I'm going to take hours of shots with a lighting configuration, I'll look at the histogram -- but I'll also open the RAW on a laptop to ensure that I like what I see, possibly make adjustments, and also ensure that there aren't any other weird problems like moires.

The other thing is that it's possible to over-rely on histograms and light meters. It's entire possible that both suggest one thing, but when I look at my photos, it just looks better slightly more or less exposed (or, I would make that adjustment in post anyhow). Again, a bit of experience tells me the type of subjects that I like to vary from what the numbers theoretically say is ideal, because _most accurate_ isn't always the same as _most appealing_.




snoke said:


> New canonrumor meme: Live Histogram in EVF bad.
> Why bad?
> Sony feature. No Canon have it.



No, features are not bad, when I don't like them, as long as I can turn it off. There are LOTS of Canon features I also don't use. 

However, I'm perfectly within my rights to say that I prefer an uncluttered viewfinder and to go with the auto exposure shot, perhaps corrected by what my gut tells me.

And nobody said that more DR is bad. However, it might be _unnecessary_, it should not be a limiting factor to amazing photography when compared with various pro cameras with a little less DR, and it might not outweigh other factors. But all things being equal, yes, sure, I'd love whatever extra DR is available.


----------



## snoke (Oct 29, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Nobody has said inviewfinder histograms are bad, just that as a feature they are not something universally desired. I don’t want one, I find less viewfinder information an advantage, but that’s me, if my camera has one i’ll turn it off, if I don’t have the option to turn it off I probably won’t buy the camera. What is unreasonable about that?



When man make car, what people want? Faster horses.

Everyone agree, ETTR for good quality, yes?

Can't see right in OVF. ETTR difficult with OVF.

Histogram in EVF make ETTR better.

But not everyone want ETTR. ETTR only good if time for photoshop.


----------



## snoke (Oct 29, 2017)

Talys said:


> I'm not disparaging auto exposure or the tools to help you get a better exposure. What I'm saying is that when you take a few dappled light photos and mess them up (possibly on the viewfinder, but more likely at post, when they won't work out the way you thought they would), you learn pretty quickly what you did wrong.



Digital film free. Learn AEB.


----------



## Talys (Oct 29, 2017)

snoke said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not disparaging auto exposure or the tools to help you get a better exposure. What I'm saying is that when you take a few dappled light photos and mess them up (possibly on the viewfinder, but more likely at post, when they won't work out the way you thought they would), you learn pretty quickly what you did wrong.
> ...



Or not, because I don't want to have 1,800 photos to go through after a couple of hours of birding, instead of 600. I'd rather just take the extra shot the 5 times that I think I might need it.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 29, 2017)

snoke said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > Live histogram is like viewfinder zebra - by chasing the perfect exposure, you give up composition. Oh, no -- I'm going to blow out that strip of white! White's fixed, BOOM, shot's gone.
> ...



I can barely understand what are you trying to say. Is that some kind of new lolcat dialect?

Just in case here's my question translated to this dialect:
"I cant understand what you say? yes? no? Who make lolcat talk? Lolcats do."


----------



## candc (Oct 29, 2017)

Talys said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



the vf histogram on sony cameras is pretty small in the bottom corner. i don't really like a cluttered viewfinder either. i generally don't use levels, grids and turn off excess info. with an evf: wysiwyg so the histogram can be somewhat redundant. i think an option to have a live vf histogram would be even more useful on a dslr where you don't have exposure preview in the viewfinder to begin with.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 29, 2017)

As privatebydesign and Neuro mentioned, they both preferred not to have too much info on their VF and I respect their decision. Most pro(s) are likely already know the proper ways to get better exp. in any lighting condition. Happened to me quite often with my 1dx = I was shooting school events outdoor/sunny( -1ish under exp.), then events moved into old gym. I didn't re-adjust the exp. due to things happened too quickly. All my shots were -1ish under exp. Can I blame my 1dx for this = no. Is there technology that can help me to prevent this unintentional exp. from happening again? = yes.

For me, I use EVF as a gate keeper. It's almost impossible not to adjust the exp. when my eyes see extreme highly/shadow through EVF.

Have a great sunday everyone.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 29, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



Thanks Jopa. 
Visited your sites. Adorable models. Awesome candid shots 

I'm looking forward to see what Canon has to offer in FF mirrorless. I'm not fanboy in any brands. Prior to Sony gear, I was Canon shooter. My last Canon body was 1dx. I do miss my 200f2 and 400f2.8 IS II when I see Viggo's shots ;D


----------



## Orangutan (Oct 29, 2017)

I think we're saying nearly the same thing in different ways. I agree that you can't use live histogram for action, and that you may not need to for many landscapes. However, I want it to be an option on any body I might buy.



> you learn pretty quickly what you did wrong.... Then, next time, you know to turn down (or up) the exposure 2/3 stop or whatever when it's a similar situation


If there's a shot I want right now, I'm not all that interested in the painful lesson.



> I don't need a histogram or zebras to tell me that when I'm photographing a bird or a building that has a in important white area of detail that I need to underexpose and that it doesn't hurt to turn the dial a notch down further and take another shot just to be safe.


Agreed, I do not use live histograms for these kinds of shots. With a building I'll typically chimp the histogram of a sample shot (or two, or three) to get the exposure I want. For birds, it's been a long learning curve.



> and with any subject where time is a factor, you can lose the moment by trying to fix the exposure.



No disagreement there, but what about the subjects where time is not a factor? Or when working at the limits of the sensor's capabilities?



> Among other issues I have with a VF histogram, it just eats up a ton of space.


That's a design/UI issue, not a blanket argument against the principle.



> I own a sekonic...If the lighting isn't complicated, I often don't pull it out now, because I know what kind of exposures I need at all the power levels


That's fine if it works for you. I'll bet you've been happy to have that Sekonic a few times. That's how I feel about histogram: even if I don't use it often, I want it readily available.



> The other thing is that it's possible to over-rely on histograms and light meters... most accurate isn't always the same as most appealing.


Here I will dispute your premise: this is a personal issue. A photographer who can't use their final images to adjust their technique has problems that will not be solved by the absence of meters and histograms.


----------



## Talys (Oct 29, 2017)

@Orangutan - Well, like I said, I certainly don't give a camera a minus because it has a feature I don't use. If VF histograms or zebras help with shots like the one that you took above and that's the way you like to shoot - of course, have at it - I'm happy you have the tool! 

For me, I guess shooting film cameras for a couple of decades made exposure second nature, because I didn't have a choice then but to learn to get it right back then. I'm not saying that we should live in the past and deprive ourselves of tools that we have today, but it's not like those skills go away, either, and I find extra clutter -- especially in the viewfinder -- distracting, and of no real benefit to my finished product. It was also not really that painful to learn, and rather satisfying to see the improvement.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 29, 2017)

Jopa said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



Judging by the consistency of the writing style I’m betting “Snoke” doesn’t speak/write English at all and posts through a translator.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 30, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Thank you Dylan. I'm not a brand fanboy neither, but I'm probably an optics fanboy in general  I was a Sony shooter but eventually had to move to Canon because I've got quite a few Canon lenses which weren't available for Sony. It started simply from MF Zeiss glass for my old A7r. Later when I got the Sigma 120-300S and a few big whites - I realized my Sony camera (it as the A7r2 at that moment) can't efficiently AF them. I quit using it. It was collecting dust for a few month, and I ended up selling it. I don't have the 400/2.8 II, but the 200/2, 300/2.8 II and 600/4 II are 3 reasons I'm not changing camera brands in the near future  They work great on the 1DX2 but paired with the 5DsR they produce a mind blowing amount of details.

Same as you I'm _very_ looking forward to see a Canon mirrorless one day. I hope they will keep the EF mount though


----------



## Jopa (Oct 30, 2017)

9VIII said:


> Judging by the consistency of the writing style I’m betting “Snoke” doesn’t speak/write English at all and posts through a translator.



He's trolling pretty consistently too


----------



## Quirkz (Oct 30, 2017)

Jopa said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Judging by the consistency of the writing style I’m betting “Snoke” doesn’t speak/write English at all and posts through a translator.
> ...



I sometimes wonder if he doesn't mean to, but the translation makes it sound like he is.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 30, 2017)

Quirkz said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...



Well, that's the next step then http://speaklolcat.com/


----------



## Talys (Oct 30, 2017)

@Jopa - that's really nice -- Aggie has beautiful eyes, and you captured them well


----------



## OSOK (Oct 30, 2017)

While the 10 fps performance of the A7R3 might be misleading advertising or have to read the small print - It does uncompressed, full quality, no distortion images at 8 fps. Which still beats Canon offerings.


That is still 1fps better than D850 without battery grip, and 1 fps better than the 5D4 and 3 fps better than the 5DS line.


Canon painted themselves into a corner. How can the 5DSR Mark II possibly be improved to compete with the Sony and Nikon offerings without murdering the 5D4 in the process?

It stands to reason that the 5DSR2 will have many of the same things as the 5D4, such as higher DR, touch screen, and possible DPAF. If it doesn't at least have higher DR - there won't be much point to it at all.

If it goes up to 6 fps, it's a joke of an improvement. If it goes to 7 fps - why bother with a 5D4? If higher, then the 5D4 is completely pointless.

They are also boxed into the AF. Any better AF challenges the 1D series. They can't go backwards to a weaker system. So it will be some kind of unverifably improved 61pt system rehash like the 5D4.


What will they do? As Canon is Canon, they won't update anything for a long time. So long, that by the time a 5DS line is ready according to the Canon 3-5 year cycle, they could do one of two things --

Merge the lines. Instead of offering a separate 5D5 and 5DSR2, just offer a speedy 5D5R or whatever it would be called. 50mp, 8-9 fps, all the bells and whistles except AF, because can't outdo the 1D you know....unless that updates first as is typically scheduled.

Stay the course - and instead make the 5DSR2 an even higher MP camera, 60, 75 or 100mp. Use the massive MP count to justify the weaker ISO and slow FPS. Really push it even more against the medium format world, where 5 fps is a race car. In fairness, the 5DS was marketed to compete in that realm, not against other FF DSLR geared for lowlight, speed and general use. S stands for Studio I've heard.

Then, sometime in 2020 - 5D5 with 8-9 fps and better AF only after the 1DX3 gets something better to keep it on top.

We'll see how this plays out. Canon decided to separate camera traits into different lines. Nikon/Sony used this as a chance to give all-purpose type camera offerings. Canon did well to give a general purpose 5D4 and a high res studio rig in the 5DSR -- BUT....they left out two potential things...a low light specialty camera, and more importantly, a high speed Full Frame that is NOT a flagship. So the offering of specialist camera strategy sounded great at first, until Canon simply left out speed. All they did was give us a mediocre general purpose, and a bare-bones studio camera.


Sony system is immature, still. However, each generation is making very big leaps and each leap is making their system that much more practical to use. AF was always a point of weakness. Well, they have caught up. Won't say better. There's some give and take. But fair to say caught up. If this trajectory continues, they will surpass in AF in all areas by the next generation.

They win on sensor, no issue there.

They are weak on pro features -- ergonomics, settings, layout, lighting control...sure some will argue that, but the Canon is a better machine for getting volume work done.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 30, 2017)

OSOK said:


> Canon painted themselves into a corner. How can the 5DSR Mark II possibly be improved to compete with the Sony and Nikon offerings without murdering the 5D4 in the process?



(Almost?) everything in this world has a price. Just lower the 5dm4 price or increase the 5dsr2 price - problem solved. Easy enough?


----------



## Jopa (Oct 30, 2017)

Talys said:


> @Jopa - that's really nice -- Aggie has beautiful eyes, and you captured them well



Thank you Talys! Maybe that's not the best example because of using a relatively high ISO, but resolution is still there!


----------



## snoke (Oct 31, 2017)

Talys said:


> @Orangutan - Well, like I said, I certainly don't give a camera a minus because it has a feature I don't use. If VF histograms or zebras help with shots like the one that you took above and that's the way you like to shoot - of course, have at it - I'm happy you have the tool!
> 
> For me, I guess shooting film cameras for a couple of decades made exposure second nature, because I didn't have a choice then but to learn to get it right back then. I'm not saying that we should live in the past and deprive ourselves of tools that we have today, but it's not like those skills go away, either, and I find extra clutter -- especially in the viewfinder -- distracting, and of no real benefit to my finished product. It was also not really that painful to learn, and rather satisfying to see the improvement.



Sorry I not understand you. Now I understand what you say.


----------



## dlee13 (Nov 4, 2017)

Considering that it's the same sensor as the A7RII, is it the firmware that allows for more dynamic range?


----------



## SecureGSM (Nov 4, 2017)

no, no more dynamic range. the rest is a Sony Marketing Department trickery, wizardry, black magic whatever

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3






dlee13 said:


> Considering that it's the same sensor as the A7RII, is it the firmware that allows for more dynamic range?


----------



## bwud (Nov 5, 2017)

dlee13 said:


> Considering that it's the same sensor as the A7RII, is it the firmware that allows for more dynamic range?



There's probably marginally more DR due to downstream electronics (beyond the sensor) and maybe the front-of-sensor-optics. In and of itself, DR is no reason to buy an rIII; the rII is good enough and cheaper. 

As an rII user, it was the rest of the updates I found compelling. Joystick. Battery. PC sync for flash. Buffer. All those things are minimal, but taken together it's enough to earn my money. Congratulations to sony for earning $7k when they could have earned $3.5k two years ago. DR could have taken a hit and I'd still have bought one.


----------



## bwud (Nov 5, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> For me, I use EVF as a gate keeper. It's almost impossible not to adjust the exp. when my eyes see extreme highly/shadow through EVF.
> 
> Have a great sunday everyone.



I like it sometimes. Switching between exposure preview and whatever it decides to show in non-exposure preview (seriously I have no idea other than some random combo of settings the light meter thinks is natural) is one thing I hope to be able to either map to or set with the C-modes. I'm down to about 3 things I have to access the menus for. Fewer is better.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 5, 2017)

bwud said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > For me, I use EVF as a gate keeper. It's almost impossible not to adjust the exp. when my eyes see extreme highly/shadow through EVF.
> ...



Hope everything goes well bwud, haven't chat with you for awhile.

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle" than me buying into another FF DSLR system. I'm looking forward to see more FF mirroless systems from big players. Until then, A9 is pretty much has everything I need and want from mirrorless. My simple wish for upcoming a7s III to have similar specs, Eye-AF, fps and AF points as a7r III. If yes....will pre-order it to pair up with my A9.

Have a geat Sunday


----------



## bwud (Nov 5, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> bwud said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



You too Dylan!

The a9 is nice, but I’m accustomed to the rII files, so having the same sensor on top of satisfying most of my wishlist (still want lossless compression and bulb mode that doesn’t drop to 12+7 mode), it was a no brainer.


----------



## snoke (Nov 5, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> no, no more dynamic range. the rest is a Sony Marketing Department trickery, wizardry, black magic whatever
> 
> http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3



Yes 15 stop exist in Sony imagination. Weather sealing in same place.


----------



## candc (Nov 5, 2017)

this is an in depth look at the a7riii dr posted by dpr. 

https://www.dpreview.com/news/4302149407/sony-a7r-iii-dynamic-range-improved-nearly-matches-chart-topping-nikon-d850/1

l


----------



## SecureGSM (Nov 5, 2017)

> ... To summarize it in a number at base ISO: 13.6 EV at the pixel, or for a 42.4MP file. Or 14.8 EV if you like to compare to DXO numbers (and only generate 8MP images from your 42.4MP camera) ...



Heresy is not an error of the understanding but an error of the will;


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 5, 2017)

The DR (my dick is bigger than yours) discussion is a dead horse, much to Rishi's dismay. He might write in earnest tones about how important it is but when you look at simple facts, like the actual numbers, the D850, the A7RIII and the older 5D MkIV are all within 0.8 of a stop of DR. The 5D MkIV and A7RIII are 0.5 stops of difference at maximum DR.

Is that really something to get out shape over?

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Nikon%20D850,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3

When the 5D MkIII was trailing the competition by nearly three stops there was a point to be made, now, not so much........

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Nikon%20D810,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 5, 2017)

[quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]
To summarize it in a number at base ISO: 13.6 EV at the pixel, or for a 42.4MP file. 
[/quote]
[quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]
As for Sony's marketing, it sounds like the claim of 15 EV is believable, but only technically if you consider how your images look when shrunk to 8MP files. To be fair, there's some benefit to comparing dynamic range figures after resizing camera outputs to 8MP, since it's a common basis for comparison that doesn't penalize cameras for having higher resolution (and therefore smaller pixels).
[/quote]

Translation: "I want to believe it because I like Sony so much. But I'm not biased. Hey, can someone lend me a handkerchief to wipe this brown stuff off my nose?"


----------



## that1guyy (Nov 6, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> [quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]
> To summarize it in a number at base ISO: 13.6 EV at the pixel, or for a 42.4MP file.


[quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]
As for Sony's marketing, it sounds like the claim of 15 EV is believable, but only technically if you consider how your images look when shrunk to 8MP files. To be fair, there's some benefit to comparing dynamic range figures after resizing camera outputs to 8MP, since it's a common basis for comparison that doesn't penalize cameras for having higher resolution (and therefore smaller pixels).
[/quote]

Translation: "I want to believe it because I like Sony so much. But I'm not biased. Hey, can someone lend me a handkerchief to wipe this brown stuff off my nose?"
[/quote]

Just curious why you keep commenting on this thread, only to make disparaging remarks about Sony and its users, when you yourself don't like or use their cameras?

Bit pathetic.


----------



## SecureGSM (Nov 6, 2017)

there is a mega-bunch of Sony trolls coming around this place to leave stinky, disparaging remarks about Canon system and it's users when themselves don't like or use Canon cameras.
Neuro is in his own rights in doing what he is doing. If you do not like Canon gear or do not feel like you are being in company of like minded individuals, then please do yourself and us a favour and leave to Sony centric resource. And please take those Sony trolls with you.



that1guyy said:


> Just curious why you keep commenting on this thread, only to make disparaging remarks about Sony and its users, when you yourself don't like or use their cameras?
> 
> Bit pathetic.


----------



## Orangutan (Nov 6, 2017)

that1guyy said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > [quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]
> ...



Translation: "I want to believe it because I like Sony so much. But I'm not biased. Hey, can someone lend me a handkerchief to wipe this brown stuff off my nose?"
[/quote]

Just curious why you keep commenting on this thread, only to make disparaging remarks about Sony and its users, when you yourself don't like or use their cameras?

Bit pathetic.
[/quote]

Can you provide examples? I haven't seen anyone disparage the brand (generally) or its users; they've merely pointed out certain features of the hardware and service that didn't meet their expectations. In the one case, Neuroanatomist has pointed out that one DPR reviewer has...er...adjusted his values based on which brand he reviews.


----------



## Orangutan (Nov 6, 2017)

SecureGSM said:


> there is a mega-bunch of Sony trolls coming around this place to leave stinky, disparaging remarks about Canon system and it's users when themselves don't like or use Canon cameras.
> Neuro is in his own rights in doing what he is doing. If you do not like Canon gear or do not feel like you are being in company of like minded individuals, then please do yourself and us a favour and leave to Sony centric resource. And please take those Sony trolls with you.
> 
> 
> ...



I have no trouble with people pointing out legitimate advantages of other brands, so long as it's done in a cordial manner. There are times that the characteristics of Sony sensors offer a real advantage, and it's OK to discuss that. It's wrong, unproductive and trollish to claim that a single characteristic poisons the brand.


----------



## SecureGSM (Nov 6, 2017)

Cordial Maner - is The key word. 
There ar bunch of Sony trolls that ar just rude and unwashed trolls roaming around the forum. 
I recall one yesterday was pointing out that apparently owning a Canon system is akin to heaving a small 10cm penis. Just how cordial is that. Look.. I and many others are here to learn and share experience. These trolling individuals (or bots) kill the spirit of this forum. Nice and simple: we here because we like Canon. It is perfectly fine that some people prefer to use an alternative Systems. No problems at all. I have a massive problem though with individuals that have no idea about what they are talking about and being annoying as hell insisting that I have to jump ship as I am an idiot by using Canon and so on and so forth. Nor do I care about them leaving Canon system. 
I wish them well and do not disturb, please. I busy mastering my Canon system. 

*Neuro, thank you for kicking trolling a$$holes around this place. *


----------



## snoke (Nov 6, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> The DR (my dick is bigger than yours) discussion is a dead horse, much to Rishi's dismay. He might write in earnest tones about how important it is but when you look at simple facts, like the actual numbers, the D850, the A7RIII and the older 5D MkIV are all within 0.8 of a stop of DR. The 5D MkIV and A7RIII are 0.5 stops of difference at maximum DR.
> 
> Is that really something to get out shape over?
> 
> When the 5D MkIII was trailing the competition by nearly three stops there was a point to be made, now, not so much........



Good summary DR discussion. Only "wow" now Nikon D850 @ISO 50.

Next DPR special topic? Bet: shutter sound.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2017)

snoke said:


> Next DPR special topic? Bet: shutter sound.



Do you mean how silent it can be, or do you mean how aesthetically pleasing is the electronically generated artificial shutter noise?


----------



## OSOK (Nov 6, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> The DR (my dick is bigger than yours) discussion is a dead horse, much to Rishi's dismay. He might write in earnest tones about how important it is but when you look at simple facts, like the actual numbers, the D850, the A7RIII and the older 5D MkIV are all within 0.8 of a stop of DR. The 5D MkIV and A7RIII are 0.5 stops of difference at maximum DR.
> 
> Is that really something to get out shape over?
> 
> ...




The 5D4 does have the banding issue. 

Although, in my testing I was able to reproduce it - it was under insanely stupid levels of under exposure.

Literally, +4 or +5 stops increase and/or combined with +100 shadow increase (Lightroom).

The weakest underexposure I could do before this would occur required adjustments of +3 stops and ~80-100+ on shadows. 

Anything exposed brighter than that, which still was for the most part - an almost completely dark image with some bright things to the left - did not exhibit this issue.

Anyway, my point is -- the +5 shadow and exposure lifting crowd scoffs at the 5D4's DR. Not only is it not as a good as Sony/Nikon, but it has issues with extreme adjustments causing banding not seen in the Sony/Nikon. This is Canon's first generation of on-chip ADC and high DR sensors...so they might be working out the bugs.

Personally, I think images like that, even lifted very well because of a great sensor - are still garbage and such "photography" isn't photography. We're talking in the realm of +5 stop HDR. I know I know...Sony can give you an HDR image in a moving scene where you can't do bracketing with Canon by lifting +5. Ok, they got that one. Enjoy it. 

By moving subject, I will assume human beings in an a super high DR scene -- I will use strobes or flash. In the end, it will just look better anyway.

As I said before, these Sony people are like a new generation of photographers that significantly dispense with the use of artificial lighting even in extreme situations. They rely on sliders in post. They are very much more dependent on post processing and while I have nothing to back this up, it is my experience that on average, their images have more processing done to them. To their credit, in a world where most people are satisfied with cell phone picture quality - they can get away with it.

Too bad they don't realize there's no free lunch. There's no substitute in post for a large octabox powered with a strobe and the very high-end, beautiful portraiture look you get. No shadow lifting and tweaking in any program can recreate that.


Let's not forget that the DR issue was the main topic for years because that was the ONLY area they could beat up on Canon about. Now that Canon has caught up in that area for all practical purposes - they are now shifting to offering better speed and buffer in midrange bodies. And also in number of AF points (and bells and whistles)....


----------



## ecqns (Nov 6, 2017)

OSOK said:


> As I said before, these Sony people are like a new generation of photographers that significantly dispense with the use of artificial lighting even in extreme situations. They rely on sliders in post. They are very much more dependent on post processing and while I have nothing to back this up, it is my experience that on average, their images have more processing done to them. To their credit, in a world where most people are satisfied with cell phone picture quality - they can get away with it.
> 
> Too bad they don't realize there's no free lunch. There's no substitute in post for a large octabox powered with a strobe and the very high-end, beautiful portraiture look you get. No shadow lifting and tweaking in any program can recreate that.



There are many relevant applications for wide DR other than portraiture - that's probably the last place one would need a few stops of latitude. For my architecture work using the Sony a7R and then a7R2 has been an invaluable addition to my professional toolbox. Not something just to talk about online. Yes you can say bracket to get the DR you need with a Canon camera (say the 5Dr - need the pixels) but what if there are elements in an image you need? Light is a certain way, people are just where you need them, a certain expression? Bracketing isn't always the best solution.

Actually my last Canon cameras were the 5DMk2 and 6D, the banding was terrible when I needed to dig into the shadows. I wouldn't say the Sonys are perfect - not even close, but the DR, real live view and the biggest surprise was the tilt screen which I use all of the time. I also raw convert with Capture One so much better than any color from Lightroom. 

So I think your Canon brand defending are a little off base.


----------



## bwud (Nov 6, 2017)

OSOK said:


> As I said before, these Sony people are like a new generation of photographers that significantly dispense with the use of artificial lighting even in extreme situations. They rely on sliders in post. They are very much more dependent on post processing and while I have nothing to back this up, it is my experience that on average, their images have more processing done to them. To their credit, in a world where most people are satisfied with cell phone picture quality - they can get away with it.
> 
> Too bad they don't realize there's no free lunch. There's no substitute in post for a large octabox powered with a strobe and the very high-end, beautiful portraiture look you get. No shadow lifting and tweaking in any program can recreate that.



Your unsubstantiated guesses and peculiar broad brushing are almost certainly accurate. That is why it’s weird that so many people, myself included, are ecstatic that they finally added something which should have been there two generations ago: the sync port.


----------



## Mikehit (Nov 6, 2017)

ecqns said:


> So I think your Canon brand defending are a little off base.



IMO the tedious thing is not those who really need that additional functionality that Sony bring to the game. There really are people (like yourself) who find it both helpful and useful for their photography. The PITAs are the Sony trolls who come on the site simply to say 'Canon is crap because Sony has better DR'. But seriously, how many people need to push 5 stops - and by 'need' I mean purposefully other than recovering a screw-up?
I think there is respect here for people like yourself who do find a use for such functionality but a lot are simply spec sheet warriors who seem so insecure in their own choice the have to do down someone else's gear.

Or are they infested with the social media mentality where people feel the need to be offended on someone else's behalf? Having said that, there have even been Canon users on this forum who have said 'I don't use video but Canon omitting 4k from the 5D4 was a huge mistake'. If you don't use video WTF does it matter?


----------



## ecqns (Nov 6, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> [
> IMO the tedious thing is not those who really need that additional functionality that Sony bring to the game. There really are people (like yourself) who find it both helpful and useful for their photography. The PITAs are the Sony trolls who come on the site simply to say 'Canon is crap because Sony has better DR'. But seriously, how many people need to push 5 stops - and by 'need' I mean purposefully other than recovering a screw-up?



I would say that Canon is (a bit) crap for DR compared to Sony. So much that I switched and haven't looked back. Introduced a few others too. The Sony sensor/Canon TSE combo is quite popular in the pro architecture segment. I could care less about spec trolls - but people saying a stop or two (or useable 4 or 5!) of DR doesn't matter in real life situations have no idea what they are talking about. Accidents do happen in real life photography and not having to bracket to get good shadows and highlights is a revelation. I think some Canon shooters should give Sony a try - its nice to have a camera company that actually kind of listens to users and updates products in a timely manner. I would say Sony is designed by marketers and engineers while Fuji (who I would shoot exclusively if I didn't do architecture) is designed by people with photography experience. But after only a few years Sony is getting better. I just wish that they could match whatever low ISO magic Nikon is doing with the same sensor, I'd love to have a real ISO 64.


----------



## Mikehit (Nov 6, 2017)

The mere tone of your critique typifies the language that irritates so many on here. Sony suits you so fail to see the benefits of any part of what Canon does well. I totally get why you switched to Sony and why it suits you better than Canon but your whole post screams 'me! me! me!....only what I want is important'. 



ecqns said:


> I would say that Canon is (a bit) crap the use of the word 'crap' typifies the level of discussoin many knockers resort to. To me, using the word 'crap' suggests something far inferior so to use such an insulting word for 'a bit' inferior is bordering on puerile for DR compared to Sony. So much that I switched and haven't looked back. Introduced a few others too. The Sony sensor/Canon TSE combo is quite popular in the pro architecture segment. I could care less about spec trolls - but people saying a stop or two (or useable 4 or 5!) of DR doesn't matter in real life situations who has said that? I have read plenty of people saying some find it useful, and in fact most I have read said they would love the added DR of Sony _added to_ the things Canon does better than Sony. have no idea what they are talking about. Accidents do happen in real life photography and not having to bracket to get good shadows and highlights is a revelation. I think some Canon shooters should give Sony a try - its nice to have a camera company that actually kind of listens to users and updates products in a timely manner Canon does listen to its customers - and what Canon hear is that DR is not _the most important thing _ for _most_ of its customers. This idea that feedback on DR is the only feedback worth listening is argualy the most frustrating elemint of these discussions. For professionals how about after sales service, durability, weatherproofing....things Sony traditoinally suck at. I would say Sony is designed by marketers and engineers while Fuji (who I would shoot exclusively if I didn't do architecture) is designed by people with photography experienceand what is your view of who Canon is designed by? I note you make no assumptions on that. But after only a few years Sony is getting better. trueI just wish that they could match whatever low ISO magic Nikon is doing with the same sensor yeah, how pathetic of Sony. Crap aren't they., I'd love to have a real ISO 64.



You are clearly happy with the Sony over Canon and there is no real reason for you to switch back - fair enough, but I wonder what your thoughts are now that Canon in the 5DIV and 1Dx2 have pretty much caught up on the DR front. And it will get closer: Sony will improve their (frankly quite appalling) interface and Canon will close in on the DR.


----------



## ecqns (Nov 6, 2017)

Mikehit said:


> You are clearly happy with the Sony over Canon and there is no real reason for you to switch back - fair enough, but I wonder what your thoughts are now that Canon in the 5DIV and 1Dx2 have pretty much caught up on the DR front. And it will get closer: Sony will improve their (frankly quite appalling) interface and Canon will close in on the DR.



Isn't the whole point of everyone here is how they want camera companies to do what they want for their needs?

I can say from real world experience (as in I've actually used them, other people's cameras) that the 5DMk4 and 1Dx2 do not come close to the Sony DR - and for me that is the most important feature of a camera (and that it can use the TSE lenses). I wouldn't use a Sony if I was doing adventure or fashion photography but for how I work its great.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2017)

ecqns said:


> I would say that Canon is (a bit) crap for DR compared to Sony. So much that I switched and haven't looked back. Introduced a few others too. *The Sony sensor/Canon TSE combo is quite popular in the pro architecture segment.* I could care less about spec trolls - but people saying a stop or two (or useable 4 or 5!) of DR doesn't matter in real life situations have no idea what they are talking about. Accidents do happen in real life photography and not having to bracket to get good shadows and highlights is a revelation. I think some Canon shooters should give Sony a try - *its nice to have a camera company that actually kind of listens to users* and updates products in a timely manner. I would say Sony is designed by marketers and engineers while Fuji (who I would shoot exclusively if I didn't do architecture) is designed by people with photography experience. But after only a few years Sony is getting better. I just wish that they could match whatever low ISO magic Nikon is doing with the same sensor, I'd love to have a real ISO 64.



You do realize that tripod-based T/S work conveniently drives around two crippling limitations of the A7 platform, right? Your hands probably don't hurt with a heavy lens attached if you don't need to use that woeful grip as often as a general handheld shooter would. And the AF can't let you down if you are using MF glass, amirite? This entire paragraph reminded me of the first folks who jumped to the A7 I platform and raved about how awesome _astro_ was with it. :

Further, as far as listening to users goes, Sony is far less of a patient ear to the market and much more a rampaging bull that is sticking to its gut instincts. The #1 thing on the A7 III platform to-do list was to offer a grip (a) chunky enough to hold GM lenses all day and (b) not be so close to the mount as to create a finger trap. They did neither of those things. 

I have a healthy respect for what Sony is doing in the new product development space, but they continue to lay an egg on some critical considerations.

- A


----------



## ecqns (Nov 6, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> You do realize that tripod-based T/S work conveniently drives around two crippling limitations of the A7 platform, right? Your hands probably don't hurt with a heavy lens attached if you don't need to use that woeful grip as often as a general handheld shooter would.



As I said - if I didn't shoot architecture and pixel size and DR didn't matter to my needs, I would just shoot Fuji.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2017)

ecqns said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > You do realize that tripod-based T/S work conveniently drives around two crippling limitations of the A7 platform, right? Your hands probably don't hurt with a heavy lens attached if you don't need to use that woeful grip as often as a general handheld shooter would.
> ...



Sure, but your message's "I think some Canon shooters should give Sony a try" is informed from a really narrow and specific user need. I happen to agree with you in the broad strokes for architecture/product/landscape/astro -- if you don't shoot in a hurry, don't track moving things, don't need AF and plan to leave the camera on a tripod, sure, it becomes much more about the sensor (and if you can adapt your glass) than anything else.

But for the -- what, 90% of the rest of us? -- AF, ergonomics, handling, interface, etc. matter a great deal!

I don't mean to be dismissive of your perspective, but Sony needs a *lot* more than a slick sensor to tick the 'I should try this' box for me. Holding the A7R2 with a decently chunky FF lens on it in B&H last year for all of _five seconds_ told me that the 'II' platform was DOA for me. Just from that. So they may be listening to _your_ needs, but surely not mine, and until they do they won't get a second look from me.

- A


----------



## bhf3737 (Nov 6, 2017)

ecqns said:


> I would say that Canon is (a bit) crap for DR compared to Sony. So much that I switched and haven't looked back. Introduced a few others too. The Sony sensor/Canon TSE combo is quite popular in the pro architecture segment. I could care less about spec trolls - but people saying a stop or two (or useable 4 or 5!) of DR doesn't matter in real life situations have no idea what they are talking about. Accidents do happen in real life photography and not having to bracket to get good shadows and highlights is a revelation. I think some Canon shooters should give Sony a try - its nice to have a camera company that actually kind of listens to users and updates products in a timely manner. *I would say Sony is designed by marketers and engineers* while Fuji (who I would shoot exclusively if I didn't do architecture) is designed by people with photography experience. But after only a few years Sony is getting better. I just wish that they could match whatever low ISO magic Nikon is doing with the same sensor, I'd love to have a real ISO 64.



With all respect for Sony and all other camera manufacturing companies, I should disagree that Sony is designed by marketers and engineers. The closer phrase describing it is that "It has rather poor marketing and engineering practices." At the core of engineering practice is being realistic with the spec; applying standard engineering practices and most importantly, developing reliable and dependable products. Their engineering practice lags by far the products they offer. Ergonomics and maintenance service are a few examples. So far, we have seen a series of interesting proof-of-concept cameras rather than solid products. That is good for some enthusiasts but I guess many are waiting to see whether Sony's engineering practice will catch up eventually. Some may be more eager than the others to see this happen.


----------



## snoke (Nov 7, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> snoke said:
> 
> 
> > Next DPR special topic? Bet: shutter sound.
> ...



PdB. Perceptive dB.

Sound of shutter.

Measured distance 200mm at rock concert front row.


----------



## ecqns (Nov 8, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Do you mind to post some of your architectural shots so we all can see what we are missing?



of course - send me a PM and I'll send you my website.


----------



## ecqns (Nov 9, 2017)

Jopa said:


> Just post it here. I use to shoot Sony since 2012 (A99), my last Sony camera was the A7r2. Sold it because it was crap even compared to the 5DsR. So I'm quite positive that I'm not missing anything  But a lot of folks on this forum that never shot Sony may be still in doubt, that's why it makes sense to make your link public. Thanks!



I can't see how its crap - my clients don't think so.
But I think I could shoot with just about anything and get results - I don't identify myself with a camera brand. I just get better results with a Sony than a Canon because I have a lot more DR lattitude.
5Dsr - Last thing I'd want is 50mpix of a Canon file.
I'm happy to share my work with anyone that asks but I'm not going to publicly post it.


----------



## SecureGSM (Nov 9, 2017)

Can you please stop spreading this Sony DR latitude advantage misinformation, please? look at the graph and note how much of that DR advantage is really left. 0.5EV??

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2

for your knowledge, Canon 5D IV Dual Pixel RAW files contain an additional 1 full stop of DR in subframe B (easily recoverable). this makes Canon 5D IV RAW files a winner in this DR pissing competition.


*misinformation*
ˌmɪsɪnfəˈmeɪʃ(ə)n
noun
_false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive._

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misinformation





ecqns said:


> .. I just get better results with a Sony than a Canon because I have a lot more DR latitude...


----------



## chrysoberyl (Nov 9, 2017)

Yes, I'd like to see your work.

What has your service experience been with Sony?



Jopa said:


> Do you mind to post some of your architectural shots so we all can see what we are missing?


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 9, 2017)

Jopa said:


> ecqns said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



I've seen ecqns's site and it is a great example of commercial work with many tear sheets and a strong client list. 

I also don't post my website links here and I get virtually none of my work through it, mine comes almost exclusively via word of mouth.

As for whether the clients would notice, I'm not sure that is the point, besides I find it often is not the end result that is dramatically different it is the processing time it takes to get there, if a camera body saves you literally hours per job due to less processing time it would be a foolish commercial shooter that chose not to go that route.


----------



## ecqns (Nov 9, 2017)

Jopa said:


> "if a camera body saves you literally hours per job due to less processing time it would be a foolish commercial shooter that chose not to go that route" - I would love to know how shooting a Sony camera saves processing time?



I feel like we are going in circles. 
There is a lot more shadow and lower tones detail in a Sony file when pushed. Push it 2-3 stops if necessary and its very clean. I use CaptureOne and it makes a very nice 16bit tiff.
Not so with any Canon camera I had and I started with a 20D (after using EOS3 and other Canon film cameras).
Pushing the 6D, 5DMk2, or 1Dx and noise comes quickly, blocked shadows and cross hatch banding.
With interiors or architecture sometimes spaces aren't lit that much or that well so I live in the shadows in post so to speak. I use supplemental lighting at times but its not always feasible or aesthetically called for. If I shot outside daylight all of the time or was always using strobe, DR wouldn't be a big deal.
This is my work, not talking about cameras online. So yes the Sony files saves me a lot of time in post so it was an easy choice. I also use the tilt screen on every shoot, I wouldn't want to give that up. Focusing right off the sensor is great too.

I feel the most important part of pro photography is who you know - not your talent or gear. The most successful names in my field don't always put out the best work in my opinion but they know the right people. That could be the case in most other fields as well. I am competing by being technically precise with immaculate post production.


----------



## Viggo (Nov 26, 2017)

ecqns said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > "if a camera body saves you literally hours per job due to less processing time it would be a foolish commercial shooter that chose not to go that route" - I would love to know how shooting a Sony camera saves processing time?
> ...



Yesh, compare the brand new Sony to a 5d2 and 1dx which have the old sensor tech. Compare it to the 1dx2 and 5d4 and your argument isn’t valid anymore


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 26, 2017)

Viggo said:


> ecqns said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



Now that is true, but the A7R MkII had that advantage when we only had the options of the 5D MkII/III, 6D/MkII, and 1DX. Make no mistake, for some users that was an overwhelming advantage that truthfully did save a lot of time, personally I sat out all Canon upgrades from the 1Ds MkIII until the 1DX MkII principally because of it.


----------



## Viggo (Nov 26, 2017)

privatebydesign said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > ecqns said:
> ...



Oh I agree. But now it’s no point comparing and bringing up again that Canon sensors USED to be behind on DR.


----------



## Lyle Krannichfeld (Nov 29, 2017)

I kind of skimmed this thread and have to say I'm really not all that surprised by the animosity from the Canon crowd. Even just a year ago I would have been right there with you, sneering at the Sony fans. However, I really wish folks would take a genuine and unbiased look again. They are innovating at an amazing rate.

I've been shooting Canon since the first digital Rebel (and also have a New F1) and am very close to switching...and I've always said I'd NEVER switch. I've been an extremely loyal Canon shooter for quite a while. Platinum CPS etc.

The a7r3 is 42 mp, 10fps, with excellent af and something I didn't see mentioned (which is likely to really upset folks), has significantly sharper lenses in testing over L lenses almost across the board. Focus peaking, tilting screen, they fixed the battery life, and still 1.1 stops better DR than the 5d4. 

Someone tell me that if they listed the a7r3 specs and performance as the new 5d5 you wouldn't be absolutely frothing to get your hands on it saying it's the greatest camera ever. There is some serious hate for Sony and I think its based more on peoples dislike for Sony FANS versus the cameras themselves. Perhaps a little thinking they are 'gimmicky' and fiddly and I think that a little too, though the menus have improved a lot and honestly a lot of that tech is really useful. 

FOR ME PERSONALLY, coming from the 5ds R it's a significant upgrade. I shoot landscapes, underwater, wildlife etc professionally and in my situations, it will be a great camera. For instance, I shoot a lot of huge waves from the water. The fact that it shoots twice the fps and has more than 3 times the buffer is a big win there. And nobody will complain about picking up more than 2 stops DR for the switch. 

Are they perfect? No. Are they for everybody? No...though at this point I'd say unless you need the extreme big white telephotos, the Sony's are a very compelling idea. 

If you're up for it, do some reading. Compare the comparable lenses on DXOMark. Watch some of the reviews. Be open minded. Pretend it says Canon on it if it helps.

They've come a really long way in a short period of time.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 29, 2017)

Lyle Krannichfeld said:


> Someone tell me that if they listed the a7r3 specs and performance as the new 5d5 you wouldn't be absolutely frothing to get your hands on it saying it's the greatest camera ever. There is some serious hate for Sony and I think its based more on peoples dislike for Sony FANS versus the cameras themselves. Perhaps a little thinking they are 'gimmicky' and fiddly and I think that a little too, though the menus have improved a lot and honestly a lot of that tech is really useful.



We _would_ be frothing at the mouth, of course. Those are great specs. But that hypothetical 5D5 camera would come with an OVF and Canon knowhow, quality, service, ergonomics, and the EF portfolio to go with that droolworthy spec sheet.

Screw the fans, I don't care about them. *I just hate the read that a higher spec'd body will deliver you a better photography experience.* Nowhere on that A7R3 spec list is that you will enjoy the ergonomic poleaxing of a dainty grip ill-suited for heavy glass and far too close to the mount to leave room for your fingers. Nowhere on that spec list says that you need to buy plutonium-priced focus by wire glass to get back the first party AF glass you used to use on your CaNikon. Nowhere on that list does it say how much smaller the list of native options and third party ecosystem are. Nowhere on that list is a bulletproof reputation of durability and survivorship in the field.

Yes, Sony has come a long way. But for all the spec sheets in the world, they still have a long way to go, IMHO.

- A


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 29, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Lyle Krannichfeld said:
> 
> 
> > Someone tell me that if they listed the a7r3 specs and performance as the new 5d5 you wouldn't be absolutely frothing to get your hands on it saying it's the greatest camera ever. There is some serious hate for Sony and I think its based more on peoples dislike for Sony FANS versus the cameras themselves. Perhaps a little thinking they are 'gimmicky' and fiddly and I think that a little too, though the menus have improved a lot and honestly a lot of that tech is really useful.
> ...



With current specs sheet on a7r III + *this* logo, I'm sure everything is perfect ;D


----------



## chrysoberyl (Nov 29, 2017)

Lyle Krannichfeld said:


> I kind of skimmed this thread and have to say I'm really not all that surprised by the animosity from the Canon crowd. Even just a year ago I would have been right there with you, sneering at the Sony fans. However, I really wish folks would take a genuine and unbiased look again. They are innovating at an amazing rate.
> 
> I've been shooting Canon since the first digital Rebel (and also have a New F1) and am very close to switching...and I've always said I'd NEVER switch. I've been an extremely loyal Canon shooter for quite a while. Platinum CPS etc.
> 
> ...



Wow, why so acerbic and defensive? Personally, I am giving Sony a hard look.

But add more info; how do you find Sony service?


----------



## chrysoberyl (Nov 29, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Nowhere on that spec list says that you need to buy plutonium-priced focus by wire glass to get back the first party AF glass you used to use on your CaNikon.



What?! All good Sony lens options are focus by wire? I guess I'm the Luddite; I do not want focus by wire!


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 29, 2017)

chrysoberyl said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Nowhere on that spec list says that you need to buy plutonium-priced focus by wire glass to get back the first party AF glass you used to use on your CaNikon.
> ...



Their best glass (the GM line) is all FBW. Can't speak for the lower priced options or third party AF lenses.

Keep in mind our EF 85 f/1.2L II USM is also FBW, so I woudn't associate FBW with poor optics or anything (those GM lenses are certainly sharp). But I prefer FTM mechanical focusing, and if the sales of the new 85 f/1.4L IS are any indication, others may feel the same way (though IS + sharpness + sealing + pure AF speed likely have a lot more to do with it).

- A


----------



## Mikehit (Nov 29, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Screw the fans, I don't care about them. *I just hate the read that a higher spec'd body will deliver you a better photography experience.* Nowhere on that A7R3 spec list is that you will enjoy the ergonomic poleaxing of a dainty grip ill-suited for heavy glass and far too close to the mount to leave room for your fingers. Nowhere on that spec list says that you need to buy plutonium-priced focus by wire glass to get back the first party AF glass you used to use on your CaNikon. Nowhere on that list does it say how much smaller the list of native options and third party ecosystem are. Nowhere on that list is a bulletproof reputation of durability and survivorship in the field.



I have read more than one review saying how the Sony is a great tool but sucked the fun out of photography. 

This interview with Rob Galbraith gives a very balanced view of the Sony system but more widely about mirrorless sector in general - and ergonomics (including the size of the camera itself), post-sales support and lenses are mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwYoFDyQxsU


----------



## dak723 (Nov 30, 2017)

Lyle Krannichfeld said:


> I kind of skimmed this thread and have to say I'm really not all that surprised by the animosity from the Canon crowd. Even just a year ago I would have been right there with you, sneering at the Sony fans. However, I really wish folks would take a genuine and unbiased look again. They are innovating at an amazing rate.
> 
> I've been shooting Canon since the first digital Rebel (and also have a New F1) and am very close to switching...and I've always said I'd NEVER switch. I've been an extremely loyal Canon shooter for quite a while. Platinum CPS etc.
> 
> ...



I can only speak for myself, but I have no company loyalty whatsoever. I own both Canon and Olympus cameras and bought a Sony A7 and then an A7 II a few years back to replace my Canon 6D. I was looking forward to getting this great camera with the far better sensor that I had been reading about. And that is part of the problem, reading about the specs, reading the review sites which are heavily weighted towards discussing the innovations, rather than discussing camera basics that don't change much over the years and aren't nearly as interesting.

It is of course possible that Sony has made improvements with their 3rd generation of FF mirrorless, but having tried and returned both of the previous 2 generations, they would have had to make great improvements for me to even consider another Sony FF. Why? I cannot afford expensive lenses, so I would have to go with the kit lenses that Sony offers (which are not that cheap either, I might add). Due to the short flange distance (presumably) my results with those lenses was very bad. Anything away from the camera center was quite blurry. Various reviews of these lenses confirmed my experience. Other reasons that I didn't like my Sonys: The first one I bought was underexposing by at least 1 1/2 stops, the second, by about one stop. The EVF was quite a bit darker than real life and much worse than the EVF on my Olympus E-M1. The ergonomics are awful and it is very uncomfortable to hold the camera. And while the last is a very personal judgement, the color is far less pleasing than Canon color is. So, while the specs and the innovations are certainly going to attract an audience, the camera basics - color, good affordable lenses, exposure metering, comfort, good viewfinder - are all sub-par.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Nov 30, 2017)

Viggo said:


> ecqns said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...




Similarly people judge Sony by its previous ills (service, interface, responsiveness, lack of lenses). 

This is probably the most tiresome subject on canonrumors, especially without the comic stylings of dilbert. 

I had an A7R. It was truly awful. I have an A7R2. It feels like it gets in the way a bit but is otherwise good. On paper Sony addressed almost everything about A7R2 which bothers me, but I’m not a buyer (the combo of my 1Dx and A7R2 satisfies my needs).


----------



## Isaacheus (Nov 30, 2017)

Has anyone ordered and received a Sony a7r3 and been able to compare it with the 5dmk4 or 5dsr?

I've had mine for about a week but the adapter only arrived a day or so ago so haven't been able to do anything more than play with it in the backyard, cats and insects so far. 

Coming from a 6d (which I'll tell until it completely dies) and an often borrowed 5dmk3, it's a huge improvement, but I'm quite aware that they're also very different price points/levels so would be interested how others are finding it.

Downsides so far are mostly user error, adjusting to differing af modes etc. And the battery life, not as strong as the 6d when you leave it on constantly, but plenty for a good shooting session overall


----------

