At Cp+ Canon is Pokes Fun on Nikon and (indirectly) Sony because their new Canon 5ds has more Pixels than the D800 series and Sony A7r. Well, I refuse to make any comments on this 🙂
P.S.: Canon even showed a new 120MP sensor prototype (Mirrorlessrumors).
found via CanonWatch.
336 Responses
“this ISO’nt correct” (Sony A7S, laughing a lot)
That was a damn good joke! 🙂
[grabs the popcorn]
obviously the small cup is nikon, not sony… Canon doesn’t care about sony
Are you kidding? Canon is terrified of Sony. They’ve said it themselves in interviews several times since the Sony acquisition of Minolta in 2006.
come on … since about 3 years i got a mobile phone that has 40 MP, it’s nice, but pixels just don’t mean that much. one also has to consider that pixel count comparison is rather squared than linear. to double the pixel of a side you need 4 times as many pixels. if you really have that, it makes a big difference. so from 10 MP to 40MP is a great step. but even from 10 to 20 is not that big a difference. and from 36 to 50, that is just 17% more pixel per side, you will hardly notice. there are other things important, like dynamic range and high iso performance
Nikon and Sony should come out with something that compares DR against Canon lol. “I can see!” then “I can’t see!” Lol
Sony should come out with an A7SII with a global shutter.
Sony/Nikon should copy them, but make the large Canon 50,6 mugs with stupid thick walls, so they could contain less than the smaller 36,0. (referring to DR if anyone didn’t get it)
make any comments on ….Sure we will, ad least Canon has something out there at CP+ show, Sony has nothing !!!!
LOL, indeed nothing, not even a cup !!
Pretty funny 🙂
I think its dumb. Canon sells a lot of Full Frame camera’s that are less than 36MP. If they think 36MP is small, what are they saying about the 22MP 5D3 and 1Dx?
Cmon dude.
They are having some fun for the moment.
And wtf have the other cameras to do with this joke?
Don’t be a grinch. 🙂
and don’t forget that new Canon sensor are made by who???…. SONY!!!!!
No, it’s not. It’s designed and manufactured by Canon. Not every rumor is true.
Really? Any source for the manufacturing part? Thanks.
Yes Chuck Westfall and Canon ststed that it’s a canon manufactored sensor. Yes Canon know how to make image sensors but just not as good ones as sony.
Why are you surprised? Canon have made their own sensors for ages.
Because obviously moar pixels means moar quality… oh jeez…
People were pretty jazzed on the A7R and the D810…
Actually really stupid marketing move on Canons part. Talk about what you have not your competitors. This will backfire on them. I left canon years ago and I don’t care what they come out with there not getting my money again. I’ll wait for Sonys 50mpx sensor. Should not be too long now.
As a working Pro I care about the industry at large
I can only answer with laughter.
Not. MOAR MP MOAR BETTER.
Like i said on CanonWatch :
Better a small 36 Mpixels mug than a big 50 Mpixels with a crack on the bottom 😉
Shall we make some up with a large mug for Sony sensor dynamic range and a tea cup for Canon?
was the answer of 1LifeSoLiveIt • on CanonWatch
http://www.canonwatch.com/canon-big-nikon-small-canon-eos-5ds-marketing-campaign-suggests/#disqus_thread
Above 100 votes, Andreaa is paying the coffee ?
Haha, I think someone at Canon has a sense of humour! The question is, do Nikon/Sony fans have a sense of humour?
Oh well, people commenting here have already proven that they don’t see the humour in this. I think it’s hilarious, because I don’t see any need to defend any camera brand against anyone.
Of course we do! And it was posted by Admin, who is constantly under fire for his poking fun at Canon/Nikon. So guess who lacks the sense of humour!
That’s the only way Canon can compete with Sony and Nikon lol.
Now we know who pays all the trolls. The rhetoric is the same!
Oh where is the cup of that NEW Canon 7D II 20MP sensor ? or 70D ? 6D ?
need a microscope to see them in the pic :/
Oh dear! This is not going to end very well for them, is it?
Yes it is.
Sony needs to display a large pitcher of “Sony” tea next to a small “Canon” tea cup.
Next to it something like: A7s pixel size vs Canon pixel size.
Or “I am large (930g), you are small (465g)”
Or maybe “I am large ($3,699.00), you are small ($2,099.99)”
But all good fun.
Canon lenses are lighter and typically higher quality (when comparing the same manufacturing year) and also cheaper. There’s more to a photography set up than just the camera
And you can easily use Canon lens on Sony A7x. 🙂
Only if you dont need to autofocus very fast.
but at least u can :p…
it’s not because Canon ones are very good it means they dont need to use other manufacturers lenses
You have old lenses ? Just buy more or less expensive adapters and you can use it on E-mount camera. Isn’t it exciting or you will always prefer mind condition lenses?
The good fun went down the drain.
Just what I was thinking. It all goes to show that some people don’t read to the end of a comment.
I had fun writing and reading my comment
Sony are getting there. See how light the 70-200mmF/4 FE lens is. Put
it on the A6000 and together they weight about the same as a 2Lb bag of
sugar. It even focuses and shoots faster than the new Canon 7D. PS. And costs a lot less.
Sony aren’t getting close. They don’t have 10% of the lenses canon has. It doesn’t focus as well as the 70-200 f4 for the canon. There’s also a non is version that sells very cheap (less than half the price of the sony and with a sharper image and better colours)
Why do people think that there is only one type of photography(sport)…
Forever 🙂
If canon had higher dynamic range, sony fanboys would laugh and say canon has too many mega pixels. If canon had less megapixels, sony fanboys would laugh and say they need more. The only thing you can really trust as a statistic is what the average professional uses.
I think sony cameras are niche cameras
“only thing you can really trust as a statistic is what the average professional uses”
BS. That doesn’t even deserve a counter-argument.
I understand it might sound like argumentum ad populum but if people are to be subjective, then I would say that when you look at the average sporting event, wedding or even a photographer in rough terrain, canon cameras are more popular because they appeal to the people more.
If we are to look at the objective, then obviously my argument doesn’t apply but if we are to look at the objective, it is clear to see that canon cameras are a wiser choice:
superior weather sealing
larger range of lenses
superior range of flashes
superior battery life
superior auto focus
superior manual focus options (6d with split prism is quicker to focus than an EVF)
superior viewfinder when light metering is done using a separate tool
superior GPS options
superior network options (wifi and ethernet instead of just wifi)
superior compression algorithms
more balanced bodies for full frame-lenses
superior white balance
more accurate colours (when using colour checkers to check values)
superior redundancy options
superior raw options (raw, meidum raw, etc)
Of course to some people they don’t care about superior white balance or superior battery life. This is where the subjective comes in and this is why I believe it’s not necessarily argumentum ad populum to say the only statistic you can really trust is what the average professional uses.
Sony cameras have a superior dynamic range at 100iso but I have always found that this is only noticeable if you are pulling sliders too much. If you’re doing that, you likely don’t know how to use a flash.
If of course you’re a landscape photographer, you should be using medium format anyway
I’m left wondering if all you say is true why Canon didn’t put that on their mugs instead?
I just find the idea that someone might choose Canon over their competitors for simply the number of pixels a bit odd, I’d be amazed if its in anyone’s top five reasons to choose a particular camera.
The reason is because sony fanboys have been going crazy about megapixels for ages
“I just find the idea that someone might choose Canon over their competitors for simply the number of pixels a bit odd”
Obviously they won’t (well some might but very, very few).
With better support for broncolor and profoto flashes (there’s not even a flash sync port in the sony a7 cameras lol), better native support for flashes (600ex-rt is radio), better lens support (cheap and expensive options are available) and better battery life, make the canon cameras a more logical choice for the average photographer. For the professional, it’s easier to get cheap insurance with canon cameras
Keep trying, eventually you’ll start making sense. But not today.
That’s the biggest line of BS ever posted, and you’re an idiot.
In both your analogies, Canon doesnt have high DR. Its hypothetical
I’m going to take a wild guess and assume the point went over your head
Bob
Bobbob
Bob?
Bobbobbob
Bob!
spoken by Canon Sheep.
Admin, stop dreaming, they’re just making fun of Nikon. They don’t even consider Sony their competition.
Thats why Canon lost a good % of their user base to a7r and a7s.
Considering canon has sold way more 5d cameras, it’s amusing to see more sony cameras secondhand are up for sale on ebay
369 results for canon 5d
382 results for sony a7
The A7 has a direct successor out now, the A7II, the Canon 5D mkIII doesn’t.
5d, 5d mk 2, 5d mk 3. sorry what were you saying? I searched for 5d not 5d 3 you moron
Sigh. This site is badly in need of moderation.
A search on eBay UK yields 94 results for “canon 5d mark III” and 133 results for “sony a7”.
You seemed to be suggesting that a lot of A7 owners were selling their A7s as they didn’t like them. I was suggesting an alternative, that they were selling in order to upgrade to the latest A7II.
As for the people selling their 5D mkIIIs what are they upgrading to? The 5Ds isn’t out for four months 🙂
We can’t know why people are selling. They might be like me and buy two cameras. One as a backup. Now the replacement is coming, perhaps they’re selling their back up. It’s all conjecture.
What is fact is that canon have sold 100 times the amount of sony a7’s yet more sony’s are up for sale in the “used” category.
“A search on eBay UK yields 94 results for “canon 5d mark III” and 133 results for “sony a7″.”
Apparently you aren’t even capable of searching properly
n.b. I was only counting actual camera bodies for sale, not lenses/accessories with “sony a7” in the description that show up in the search.
30%+ cameras for sale
10,000%+ less cameras sold new
funny; you try to prove my point further
You’d have to actually have a point first 😉
“We can’t know why people are selling … It’s all conjecture” -Bob
“Considering canon has sold way more 5d cameras, it’s amusing to see more sony cameras secondhand are up for sale on ebay”
Nice contextomy though
Thanks.
Anyway both numbers are too small to really mean anything (I don’t think Sony have to worry that 94 people are selling their A7 in the UK when they sold far more units than they projected) but if that amuses you then I guess that’s your prerogative.
Yes, canon sold a lot of $hitty cameras. That is true.
There are more Canon users than Sony. Such comparison only makes sense in percentage.
Not all of the items listed on ebay are used. Perhaps you should search again. Select USED on the right, if you want to see used items.
There are 57
results for sony a7
There are 302
results for Canon 5D
The new Canon af system for both slt amd mirrorless …using an external af sensor…will make mirrorless ff Canon fully compatable with Canon DSLR lenses when they announce it around late 2015.
By 2017 Canon expects to lead the mirrorless camera market.
We will see. That will give it an immediate huge advantage over Sony E-mount… an immediate availability of a massive selection of glass. No need for SLT adapters.
On the other hand, we need to wait and see whether the AF system is really ready for primetime. Supposedly, the new M3 has a much improved AF system, but let’s see how it works with EF lenses. They claim it is “almost” as fast as their dual pixel AF system, but their dual pixel AF system is still slower than regular dSLR phase detection.
If Canon or Nikon really come out with APS-C and full frame mirrorless systems that are TRULY compatible with their existing lenses, truly giving FAST AF… Then they can actually grab market share very very quickly. But those are big IFs.
But most of that user base are using Canon lenses, not Sony.
Sorta. Mostly switched over by this point.
Could you please share a link with the % of Canon shooters switched to A7/A7r?
Sony puts itself in the mudd and as a result of not showing anything ( new) on CP+, Sony is not even in the manufacturers list on that site
He is just a 12 year old boy who cannot understand these things and just wanna join the crowd.
apparantely they are pointing at Nikon as their only competitors that”s why the mug says I AM SMALL
The irony is the idiots here would believe anything he posts and start thei childish comments
And yet, here you are…
I know. But the point here is that they are really having the guts to make that kind of advertising 🙂
The Canon text should be out of focus to make it real!
Bigger doesn’t mean better. Better than bigger
Morons. Nikon has had the 36 megapixel lead since February 2012, that’s 3 full years of beating Canon at resolution.
The 50 megapixel Canon is scheduled for a June/July release. That gives Nikon and Sony 4 more months to come up with a competitor.
Let’s not go there… Nikon hasnt always lead
What would Nikon do without Sony??
Clearly the photography industry has become a mugs game! lol Si
small p3nis complex?
No, p3nis complex was for the big lenses issue in previous post.
Now we are talking about mug ( a container) so it’s rather more about corones and who have the biggest ones 😉
http://www.canonwatch.com/canon-shows-off-120mp-sensor-9-5-fps-cp-global-shutter/
Gee..120mp aps h prototype
I have been talking about this sensor ever since it was first anounced in 2010. And every time I have been swamped by sar trolls for even mentioning it.
I wonder what they have to say now?
People will say that new computers are needed, even though cheap graphics cards can shift 4500+ gigaflops, ram disks (that people are too stupid to use?) can shift 6000MByte/sec, SSDs can shift 500MByte/second, 6TB drives x2 are 400 gbp, and photoshop can run on one thread of a modern 12 thread cpu. But we need super fast computers!! I don’t think people realise how basic an image processing task is for modern computers
Did you play Assassin’s creed Unity in Top High Quality ( to prevent from pixellisation or aliasing) or use 3D software like E-on Vue d’esprit?
Unless the software developpers make their software fully optimized, the final user and its computer will have to do the job itself :p
E-On software is only starting to think about GPGPU or Open CL power calculating to render faster than just with CPU and Graphic pro cards, when with a NVIDIA or AMD graphic card u could have over 5 Tflops in double precision against a few hundreds Gflops for CPU
Typical ram disks wont go that fast. Maybe 2000 tops for sequential.
False
Wrong
You are misinformed
http://imgur.com/314WT91
Have a nice day
Got results?
Why? That wasn’t the point of my argument at all; try to comprehended the point of my argument in its entirety rather than go down the straw man fallacy route. Here’s the results for some low quality DDR3 memory
http://imgur.com/314WT91
10,000MByte/sec+
If you can obtain an i7 920 (year 2009), you’ll be able to get 6000MByte/sec. Modern computers are considerably faster.
With current generation DDR4, speeds are even faster. At this point the point of my argument has been totally overlooked by you.
The cost for an entire computer capable of working with 100 mega pixel files is literally only the cost of one decent lens
On computer field we never talk about MB/s for a CPU.
MB/s is Data transfer, but for CPU we talk about Flops ( FLoating-point Operations Per Second)
“People will say that new computers are needed, even though cheap graphics cards can shift 4500+ gigaflops, ram disks (that people are too stupid to use?) can shift 6000MByte/sec, SSDs can shift 500MByte/second, 6TB drives x2 are 400 gbp, and photoshop can run on one thread of a modern 12 thread cpu”
Re-read what I wrote, please
You could build a very good one btwn 700 to 1000 dollars. I still have the i7 920
Even DDR2 can do 2000.
Typical as in not in theory and found commonly.
The words you speak don’t really matter when my new iMac 5k fully maxed hangs for 3-7 seconds in c1. Ps is a bit better.
Your screen’s resolution does not matter. 120MP is 120MP. Same amount of data has to be processed every time you make something in PS (preview has to be bigger to match your screen, so it might not be as responsive, but overall time for rendering should be similar).
Yeah. Thing is that responsiveness really adds up. While 36 was a bit exciting, this time around, the jump up is the least interesting thing about it.
I’m actually kinda happy with 24MP. I think you only need 50 or more for wall sized ads you see on the street. Those are typical medium format jobs so I’m not sure what Canon is trying to achieve with these crazy high-res sensors to be honest. Steal market share from medium format cameras? Good luck with that. PROs will probably like the DR and colors coming from those small, ancient tech pixels.
Jobe, build a custom PC.
Adobe has now partnered with Microsoft for enhanced software UX for Windows devices like Surface Pro 3, and I find there software runs much better on Windows 8.1 than Mac OSX Yosemite when you have the right system for it.
I dumped Mac after my Photoshop kept crashing on my $6,000 Mac Pro setup. My custom-built PC cost me $2800 all-in including 3 SSDs, 3 3-TB Seagate Barracuda Drives, 32 GB RAM and NVidia Quadro K4000 professional graphics card.
The same thing I said before…that you are a sad moron.
In 3 months we will know the answer to your question.
Heads up to Canon for the 50mp design. But any word up for who provides the production facilities?
Canon builds the 53mp sensor themselves, in house.
That has been officially stated multiple times and is no longer a rumor.
Of course we all know what will happen in a few weeks with a nicer, smaller mug:
It is going to be 46MP with crazy dynamic range. The reason canon users are switching to Nikon d810 is because of the great dynamic range. We will see this glorious sensor on the A7RII first
PRIDE COMES BEFORE A FALL.
funny thing…Titanic was bigger as well ..they both seem to be heading to the same glacier 😛
Iceberg, not glacier.
Might need a glacier to sink Canon though…
In this case the ice would keep the noise low
.
50MP and the sensor renders images flat as a pancake with no 3D feel. Lifeless images with low dynamic range. http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/images/5ds/sample-images/canon-5ds-sample-image-full.jpg There is no depth perception in this image!
Ken rockwell? Seriously?
It’s a sample image that came up from a google image search. I know Ken Rockwell is a douch get over yourself….
It’s “douche”
I am sure you use that word frequently.
Actually i don’t… i do shower though
Good that is important to shower. Make sure your washing your butt too.
Don’t now about 3D feel or flatness, but it is muddy as hell when you look at it full size.
It says “processed in Perfectly Clear” and that probably explains it. Should not be taken as an example of what the 5Ds can do.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/5ds.htm#sampleimages
I’d rather go to dpreview’s samples. Much more neutral.
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/canon-eos-5d-review-samples
That image was taken from Canon’s own site, and for some reason Ken Rockwell ran it through ‘Perfectly Clear’ software. Here’s the original, which to me looks much better (though jpeg-smudgy.)
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dsr/
DR is one thing, but resolution it has, this sensor baby. Canon will sell bodies like crazy.
Wonder who provides the sensor factory, thought. .
Every camera maker takes their turn in the spotlight. This time around, Canon gets to be the belle of the ball. Sony literally introduced nothing new. Nikon didn’t do very much — a bunch of point and shoot cameras, and a specialty niche version of the D810.
General Sony fans have no reason to be jealous — By my count, 7 new cameras in the last 18 months or so. Still the only real line of full frame mirrorless. And while there may be some delays, they are meaningfully growing the FE lens lineup.
On the other hand, any long-term A-mount user, has a bit of reason to be upset. Other than upgrading from SSM1 to SSM2 in a few lenses, there have been no new lenses in 2 years. Only 1 camera body in the last 18 months, with none other in the immediate horizon. I fully expect the next proclaimed “Alpha flagship” will be E-mount . And I’m not sure even Sony knows whether they will ever release a real A99ii or A88.
A99 was released end 2012 after the 2 competitors, 5ds will ship from June. A99 is recently in super deal in France so I expect new A-mount to come November for announcement with shipping from January 2016 in the worst case. 3 years after makes sense. About lenses we had the stellar 50 Sony planar 1.4 since August 2013, 70-400 II, 70-200 II. 70-300, 16-35 and 24-70 Mark II are announced. I also expect 85 and 135 to be upgraded with ssm nearly future as 135 can be found also in super deal at 1200 instead of 1700. I think everything is perfectly normal and in schedule. Except for impatience and looks at others brands from customers 😉
Those “II” lenses are nothing more than a simple change being implemented across the line of all SSM lenses. They aren’t “new” lenses. (If Honda sticks new hubcaps on the Accord, it doesn’t become a new car). As I said, no new lenses in 2 years.
Yes, IF the A99 comes by the end of the year, I wouldn’t consider it late. That’s IF it comes by then.
But let us look at the forest as well as the trees.
The A99 was announced in September of 2012. To me, that was the climax of the SLT and A-mount line. It is painfully obvious that plans changed in 2013. Because since 2012, in those 2 1/2 years: We have seen 4 cameras discontinued (The A37, A57, A65, A77) and only 2 new models introduced (A58 and A77ii).
What has Canon EOS mount done since September 2012?
Canon 6D
70D
7Dii
T5i, T6i, T6s, T5.
5Ds, 5Dr
So in the same time frame that A-mount has 2 announced cameras, Canon has 9 announced cameras.
What about Nikon?
D810, D810a
D610
D750
Df
D4s
D7100
D5300
D5500
D3300
So 9 cameras for Canon, 10 cameras for Nikon, and 2 for A-mount. Even Pentax, which doesn’t even have full frame (though they will soon) has done 4 or 5 models since September 2012.
So to say that the A-mount has been “business as usual” is quite disingenuous. It clearly is not business as usual. It is barely hanging on.
So more = better? Meh. Sony is well in competition. A-mount has all the right lenses and tools with competitive pricing and quality. A99 is 5d3’s equal and all the other cameras can be taken from e-mount that equal well with other brands’ enthusiast models. A77II is right on par with 7D2 and I believe a99II will be right on par if not better than 5D4.
What sony needs is clever marketing. The tools are there already.
Having options is better than not having options. Having upgrades is better than not having upgrades.
I am a huge fan of the A99, but only a Sony fanboy would claim that it is the equal of the 5D3 — The 5D3 has vastly superior noise performance, and a vastly superior AF system (having shot with both).
Does it have all the right lenses and tools at competitive pricing? Depends on which lenses you want.
My ideal full frame kit is:
A 24-105ish/F4 lens, for under $1000, as my walk around. (Nothing like it in Sony). A super high quality 70-200/4 for portraits and events, for under $1500 (doesn’t exist in Sony), a sharp ultrawide zoom for under $1000 (the sole option for Sony is the $2k Zeiss), and a fast prime for under $250. (None for full frame Sony). I can get all 4 of those options for Canon or Nikon — I can’t get any of the 4 for Sony A-mount.
Sony has all the right lenses for some shooters, but not for everyone. And unfortunately, they have halted expansion of A-mount lenses.
And the A99 and A77ii are both great cameras, but let’s not kid ourselves into thinking that there is no full frame camera better than the A99 or that there isn’t room for more options.
I have to disagree on noise performance. The quality of the noise is different, a99 loses by that 1/3 stop, but wins in the quality of the noise, which is very important when you go above 6400. Lenses? 24-105 sigma is there, right? 70-200/4? Why not 2.8? Oh yeah, and beercan, which is good enough for justabout anything and costs nothing compared to 70-200/4L IS. Doesn’t look as cool though.
UWA zoom? Well canon’s aren’t cheap new either and nikon’s 14-24 is still not beaten. Zeiss can be had for 1,5k used, I’m not complaining. Canikon wins in the used market, that can be said. Fast prime? Minolta 50/1.7 cheap enough for about 50bucks?
There is enough. Not the newest, coolest stuff that has value as status symbols and no 200-400L equivalent, but enough to get the job done. A99 locks focus more persistently right than 5d3 too, I’ve shot both. Canon is faster, but misses more.
Look at the DXO graphs.. the difference is far more than a 1/3rd of a stop at the high end. It’s actually over a full stop, comparing a camera like the D750 versus the A99. I’ve shot with both, it is a night and day difference.
No, there is no 24-105 for A-mount… Though initially announced for A-mount, Sigma never released it. (A few months ago, I got an email from Sigma in answer to my inquiry stating that they are not currently planning on releasing it for A-mount.. there seems to be confusion about whether it is ever coming). Why not a 70-200/2.8? Because it is twice the weight and twice the price. When shooting a day long event, handheld, I greatly prefer the weight savings of a 70-200/4. UWA zoom? Again, options… Nikon has a very very good 18-35 for about $750. Canon has a very nice 17-40 for $840. You can’t say that Sony is fully competitive in lens choices and prices, when such options are totally non-existent in the Sony ecosystem. Fast prime? So you desperately listed a USED 30-year-old lens (which also happens to be incredibly soft, non-digital coatings, etc). You can’t say that Sony has “all the right lenses” and then have to point to 30-year-old eBay options. By definition, if you have to resort to eBay, it means Sony does NOT have all the options.
And no, the A99 does not lock focus more persistently than the A99. I was shooting some baseball side-by-side, me with the A99, side by side with a 5Diii. The 5Diii was getting a much higher keeper rate on tracking. I got some very nice shots with the A99 but it’s AF points are much too narrowly clustered. Thus, whenever my subject ran off center, I lost focus. While the 5Diii was able to keep tracking and keep coverage.
This isn’t bashing the A99 — It’s a great camera. But it’s ludicrous to sit here pretending it is perfect and without any need for an upgrade.
1) I don’t give a rats ass about dxo. What I do know, I see people making a living with worse lenses than Minolta offerings. Canons cheaper L lenses are just as well old, by the way. 17-40L isn’t without problems either. I owned one with 1Dx.
Then you can tell me the difference that makes a point between beercan and 70-200 f4L IS: http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2012/03/24/minolta-70-210mm-f4-versus-canon-70-200mm-f4-l-is/
Yeah, nothing really.
That niftyfifty ain’t too special either. The pricetag don’t come without compromises. I also don’t btw desperately list anything, I list real options that exist and can be bought in a heartbeat. And that can be used for paid work if you know what you’re doing.
Thirdly, I haven’t said a half that you claim I have. It’s not perfect but pro’s and con’s even so that it’s just as useful as a TOOL than 5d3. Not least because of IBIS.
I don’t need to look at DXO graphs because I’ve used both in real world situations professionally.
DPreview found the same to be true and it’s why Canon 5D Mark III scored 82% whereas Sony A99 scored 84%, and remember, Dpreview tends to favor Canon.
DPreview Canon 5D Mark III Review conclusion:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii/29
Dpreview Sony A99 Review conclusion:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-slt-a99/22
Well to close this thing I had insight into the 3 brands for enough time and here is what I say from experience (not any review) :
af as fast for Canon Sony, slower Nikon. Bad locks or not at all on non contrasty scenes , less sensitive, or wrong positive locks with Sony (out of focus wide open primes). But in good light almost instant and quite consistently sharp. However for some unknown reasons a99 gives me better exposure and better af during concerts..
the af is also not very accurate out of center with lens suffering from field curvature such as 50. For that I use face recognition.
I find indeed slt has 1 stop less in Iso. Nikon’s processed Raws are best by far.
also the a99 has more sensor heat at high Iso, with magenta corners.
Bionz processor is by faaaar the slowest shit too. there is a little lag in everything with this camera. Canon are champ forever with that. There is some shutter lag too when pressing the button, which Canon fixed from mk2 to mk3. Nikon always sharp and responsive clicks.
Canon colors output is still the most pleasing about skintones. Even tho might not be the most accurate.
But with qualities of Zeiss primes and steady shot I only can remain loyal even with those quirks. A99 is a first, a laboratory in my opinion. Anybody trying my Sony is blowned by the simplicity and qualities of that camera. Anyway, every brand catches up the others all the time. Be loyal to your lenses and you won’t regret to wait for the next body (hum maybe Canon being exception ) . As for the number of camera released it should give you a hint about the market:
Nikon d610 and d810 only correct flaws from precedent generations plagued with Bad series. D750 arrives with flaws too. As for lower end cameras both canikon are just made to advertise. In truth , and despite all those new models, financial results are consistently falling especially for Nikon. It means what it means, brands make (made ) huge profit on low end cameras which are not selling anymore that well.
People hobbyists investing into photography only buy good quality now, and that’s a turn Sony understood. Fe mount is the obvious result. for all the rest mobile phones just do enought. Coolpix and oxidation are dead. Sony rx100 series are exceptions in the way that they are far superior to mobile phones and seem designed as pocket pro camera (price included). As for A mount they will slow down but certainly not abandon it as the flagships in every brands works as formula 1 or rally: just win competition, awards, with great features and impressive stuffs. Not to make big profit, but to advertise the research and dev leadership. In one word, fame. Canon are not the best but they won the marketing war long time ago by sponsoring a shitload of reporters which were seen by all every where. We are weak against advertising.
I’m quite confident into the future of a mount, but better not being used of a new release every year like fe mount-customer-conscious-target.
I also have to disagree on performance at high ISO and auto focus, but only when working with Sony SSM lenses in which AF-D is supported. The A99 focus is dead on accurate but you have to learn how to use it. It’s not designed for spot/recompose, like we shot on our Canons. You should have it set to to AF-D / Wide with Object Tracking set to the half Shutter Press.
On the high ISO performance, even DPreview found the A99 out performed the 5D Mark III, and don’t get me started on Dynamic Range.
AF-D mode unfortunately is a bust, it was far less accurate than AF-C mode.
I don’t exactly find Dpreview to be an objective way to compare — Reviewed at different times by different writers, who may therefore have applied different scoring.
But hey.. if that’s what you want to go by….
First off, in the review of the A99, they write: “Small coverage area of AF array compared to its peers” and they further note, “AF tracking lags behind its Canon and Nikon peers.”
So based on your chosen standard, they noted inferior AF in the A99.
In terms of noise performance, I would encourage you to look at the most recent updated studio scene comparison:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_slta99&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=nikon_d750&attr13_3=sony_a7_ii&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=25600&attr16_1=25600&attr16_2=25600&attr16_3=25600&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0.9574097713821514&y=-0.5120560020741509
Look at the RAW files at 25600…. I compared the A99, the 5Diii, the D750, and the A7ii… You will note it’s not very close, the A99 being clearly the worst of the four. The D750 being clearly the best of the 4 at 25600, with the 5Diii and A7ii falling in between.
If you do want to be more objective and look at DXOMark scores,
You see that the A99 lags a full stop behind the 5Diii and the D750 in dynamic range and in Signal-Noise ratio at high ISO. You need to dive into the graphs to truly understand and appreciate the differences. Also look at true measured ISO, and not just what appears on the dial. At a real ISO of 14800, the A99 has a SNR of only 16.1. The D750 and 5Diii still produce a SNR of over 22 at that ISO.. a huge difference. At that ISO, the A99 has a dynamic range of only 6 EVs, the D750 and D5iii are still over 7 EVs.
In further context, if you used 10 EVs as the benchmark for a good level of dynamic range, the D750 drops below that threshold around a real ISO 3200. The 5Diii drop below at a real ISO of 2500. The A99 drops below at a real ISO of about 1500. So more than 1 stop worse than the D750, and about 2/3rds of a stop worse than the 5Diii.
Again, I’m not bashing the A99 which is a great camera. But to pretend there is no room for improvement is simply ridiculous. In core areas like ISO performance and AF, it lags behind the competition.
I never said there wasn’t room for improvement, I only said I’ve gotten superior my results compared to 5D Mark III, and that AF-D using SSM lenses on A99 is more accurate. I never said the tracking was better either.
My biggest gripe with A99 is how compressed the AF array is in the center area, but anytime I focus in that area, I never miss. I suspect with the next version, if they combine this tech with that in the A77II, and A6000, they’ll have quite an AF system. I completely disagree with your assessment of AF-D being inferior to AF-C because AF-D uses the most points.
My second gripe is that you have to go to 10 MP for 10 FPS, when the A77/A77II are 8 FPS at full res with full control and 12 FPS in a Program AE mode.
As far as noise goes, I never look at image samples for assessments and can only base that of real world use, but all A99 samples are out of focus slightly.
Furthermore, for dynamic range, it appears they’re comparing the A99 12-bit RAW files for those numbers which does knock off a couple stops.
I only quoted Dpreview as you quoted DxO like it’s the BIBLE or something, and because I found it interesting that Dpreview rated A99 higher than 5D Mark III, considering their general favoritism towards Canon.
Again, however, I’m not surprised after working with them both.
I don’t really have anything else to say here. I don’t care what you shoot with.
Yeah but most of those Canon and Nikons are amateur bodies. Sony has made it clear that they’re no longer releasing amateur A-mount bodies, but only as E-mount. If you count only the pro bodies, they’re about equal on the scheduling front.
A fan boy rationalization… Please show me the official statement by Sony that they are not releasing any more “amateur” bodies. And I assure you, the A77ii is an amateur body, a very nice amateur body, but still amateur.
I’m glad I don’t have to resort to name-calling to prove a point.
You can pick my words apart all you want, but the proof is in the pudding. It is very unlikely we will ever see another body in A-mount at a lower spec from A77II. It doesn’t make any sense in this market.
Nikon and Canon are still putting out bottom end SLRs because they don’t have a solid mirrorless presence yet — simple as that.
Well that doesn’t make sense since they have a lot of amateur lenses in a-mount. I simply think that Sony used the calculator and found out they loose money if they have a bunch of models like they did in 2009 where they produced the following cameras. 230, 330, 380, 500, 550, 700, 850, 900. Thats 8 different cameras which is totally stupid when you don’t have a large market share and want to make money.
Sure it makes sense. The most popular “camera” in the world right now is an iPhone. The market changed and Sony is adapting.
Also, your comparison on lens updates is incorrect. Sony developed a new SSM motor that is up to 4-times faster at tracking. Also, the type of glass and coatings is changing to better resolve ultra high resolution sensors. I have the 70-200 F2.8 G SSM II and it’s a huge upgrade from version 1. I will be buying the 300mm F2.8 G SSM II, and the 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM II this year as well.
You’re right. It’s not business as usual. Sony dumped the low amateur side of A-mount for E-mount and that is blatantly obvious.
I was actually a little surprised with the A77II because I thought they might dump the APS-C side of A-mount, but they kept APS-C A-mount as a low cost sports/wildlife option, and I’m glad they did.
Again, the A-mount glass updates are not merely cosmetic as you suggest, but gearing them towards sports photography because of the new SSM motor and AF circuitry, AR coatings to further eliminate ghosting and improve micro contrast / resolution, and weather sealing.
If the updated lenses, the A77II, and recent interviews with Sony imaging are any indication at all, future A-mount cameras will be optimized for speed/sports, and this makes sense considering portraits and landscapes can be handled quite well with E-mount.
Who is this Bob, who have started to troll here at SAR recently? He seems to be extremely belligerent, intolerant and dismissive of other people’s opinions.
There’s about ten bobs
There is only one bob.
May the real Bob please stand up lol
I am a canon 50mpix sensor. I am usable only for landscapes and studio. I can go up to ISO 6400, but I would not advice you to go over 1600…
furthermore, you have to buy complete new line of lenses to feed me, forget your old stuff…
This is war. We’ll wait for jaw dropping response of Sony.
Maybe this is Canon’s form of small penis compensation?
You know I should ban you for using the word. Cna you make it xxx? 🙂
Some Japanese compare their penis sizes with other Japanese? Sounds crazy to me…:)
Just let them have their share of fun. It will probably be for a short period…
Canon has the highest resolution sensor at this point in time, but I bet the 36 megapixel Sony sensor in the D810 & A7r will render a more robust image by virtue of the three more stops of dynamic range and deeper color depth. A month or two from now this will be a long lost memory with the release of Sony’s new 50 megapixel sensor. The cups will go back on the shelf alongside the 5DS.
Well, the 50 mp camera is no where to be bought today. 36 mp yes, plenty. But cudos to Canon for being back in the game big time.
125-127 millions pixels on a FF sensor ( curved in theory) would be the last innovation to get closer to yound adult human eye… Is Canon trying to reach that Graal and brag out a bit more?
This same exact analogy can be used by Sony against Canon in making the A7s the large mug and the 5Dm3 the small mug in boasting how much more light the pixels are collecting on each sensor
Here… this is how you properly poke fun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJBq0z2Vmu4
🙂
That’s actually Bob, the canon fanboy.
I speak Spanish…and I actually laughed at the subtitles.
That was the best video I have seen this week… Still have tears in my eyes from the laughter…
If you shoot video, this really hits close to home, right? 🙂
LOL.
LOL i forwared to CanonWatch to make them LOL too 😀
As a a7s user, I prefer my coffee as an espresso.
And you’re cup would glow in the dark…
I do not and I do not want to know any more about Canon, but Sony has also less true bits into its own cRAW colors: for sure less than Nikon, Leica (uncompressed 14bits)……. less bits compared to Canon, too? ohhhh! no RAW, no party!
Nikon and Leica both have been caught cooking raw files. In fact everyone else except Canon have been caught out for cooking raw files.
And they cook them too, like the paella master below.
Evidence?
Canon has always been popular for astrophotography because they don’t cook their raws.
ah! ok! so Canon too has true “uncooked” raw color bits. I didn’t know but I now know and I am once more disappointed of sony cRaws….
From here:
http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/
5.2 Black substraction
Even if encoded using 14bits, the “real black” may not be recorded as
RGB = ( 0, 0, 0) and the white as ( 16384, 16384, 16384 ),
because of the sensor physical characteristics (2^14 == 16384). For
example for the 5D Mark II, the black level is ( 1023, 1023, 1023 )
and the white level ( 15600, 15600, 15600 ).
Below is an extract of emails exchanges between Doug Kerr and Dave
Coffin about how black level is computed for Canon CR2 pictures:
From: dcoffin@cybercom.net
Hi Doug,
The best measurement of the black level is the frame
of masked pixels bordering the image at left and right.
Older versions of dcraw averaged them into a single black
value, while the latest code calculates four black values
according to their positions in the 2×2 Bayer array.
[…]
There is no one right way. Look for statistical
patterns in the masked pixels, shoot a few dark frames,
and decide which noise model fits them best.
Dave Coffin 8/17/2010
—
I ignore the first two columns of masked pixels on
either side of the image, because they sometimes have a
bright stripe.
The assumed filter pattern for the masked pixels is
the same as for image pixels. In fact, there are no
filters here, but a few Canon images have an even column/
odd column skew in the black level, and a 2×2 black block
surpresses this nicely.
Dave Coffin 8/18/2010
Black not being 0 and white not being full white is actually a sign of things not being cooked. Anyone can normalise the data.
Hi! Can you please clarify? May be I’m wrong, available to correct myself: I use a7r and that’s the trouble and I red that Leica has 14bit uncompressed option since m9/me CCD, Nikon the same. I’ve analized with dcraw DNG, NEF and ARW and they have different color depths values. Could you help me better understanding? … cooking raw … I mean that all camera makers have to arrange some compromise to have the best with ths system camera-lenses-sensors, sharpness of corners included, wide angles color fring included, worste with astigmatism due to short flange distance of mirrorless etc… etc……
M9 raws have been found cooked… compressed/uncompressed is something else and is done later. Even dxomark has found the m9 raws manipulated.
The last factors you mentioned don’t have anything to do with why raw files are cooked. Lens corrections are generally left untouched in the raw data. The said cooking usually involves noise reduction strategies and artificially boosted DR. How do you think Nikon used the same sensor in the D3 and D3s with such a big difference in performance? 🙂
There’s also mandatory raw modifications that are done such as to remove sensor “stitching” artifacts, etc. but they need to be done anyway unlike NR and DR boosts.
Very clear. Thank you so much. Imho, I’m not so sure that some of the issues I mentioned haven’t to do with raw cooking. NR DR artifacts, let me add magenta shift, aberration coundn’t be cooked into raws before raw ?
If a manufacturer’s own raw conversion software allows for lens corrections to be toggled, then it’s safe to assume they’re not cooked in to the raw data. Colour shift compensation is a possibility because you never see it as an option but can be verified by attaching the lens without electronic contacts and then comparing.
Canon recently stated thst all thier new series of lenses introdiced since 2010 have been build in anticipation of todays higher mp cameras…I wonder if that means they are 50mp ready or 120mp ready?
Can they do 375 lines/mm at f/3.3 or below? Then yes… they can do 120MPs. Maths is your friend Barry.
I figure about 200lpmm resolution and f4 should do it..with f5.6 being usable but not perfect.
And of course even a lens that does not perform to that level will still look better with higher res sensor
If we go to a layered foveon like sensor then the lens can resolve higher resolution because the pixels are bigger .
200lp/mm is 400 lines/mm… a small central region maybe but not more. Forget landscapes.
Yes layered would help.
I am talking ovral res, not line hght/ mm.
Is this site Canon rumors now all of a sudden?
It’s not a rumor… more of a taunt at a Sony designed sensor.
haha very funny canon good good job haha
But this is at least 3 days old news.
You could have posted this on the day but no…amazon and BH links are most of what matters.
so Canon see everyone as mugs? – nice
And the biggest mugs are those that buy Cannon… 😉
He, he, Canon’s problem is that their own customers are not laughing!
Especially after their latest announcements, the only thing I’m hearing form Canon shooters is “That’s it, I’m switching to Nikon, or I’m switching to Sony”.
No… you’re making that up.
I left Canon bodies for Sony and the 5DS bodies are making me reconsider.
Because everyone needs 50mp, therefore your reconsideration is a point for all of us to pay attention to. That’s why freedom of expression exists…so we can all learn from you, and everyone who makes the switch to this or that because of X Y Z thing that works for them…so maybe it works for me too.
And how does your logic not apply to the original post? One word: prejudice.
Not at all, on DPReview, the comments after the announcement of the 5DS were overwhelmingly negative, and many Canon shooters saying they are tired of waiting and might look elsewhere. I was surprised, as this 5DS is only an option for these who need high resolution, I am sure Canon continue working on Mark IV.
People were mainly disappointed by the low ISO range and Canon mention that the dynamic range is similar to 3 year old 5D Mark III.
Look it up its a thread with more than 2k comments.
Dpreview is a site by incompetent whineys for incompetent whineys. They’re the same people who insisted that pro cameras should be compared by jpegs in the default settings and did so for years.
Sites like that are full of soccer moms and dads who like to sit at home and whine everytime something compelling comes because it puts them at the risk of meeting their requirements.
I can assure you that soccer moms and dads don’t hang out on camera gear sites. The whiney commenters at DPR are to a large extent the same whiney commenters you find on rumor sites like this one, in other words, enthusiasts and gearheads with GAS.
Every Canon announcement or review at DPR receive the same kind of comments. It’s very fashionable to bash Canon these days, it seems.
The low ISO range is because the 5DS cameras are meant for studio and landscape work, which typically don’t require high ISO (because of controlled lighting and/or use of a tripod). Any professionals who do high resolution work know exactly what they are getting and what the limitations of their gear is.
These aren’t sports/action cameras, neither are they meant for general use; they are specialized tools. It should also be clear to anyone, that they don’t replace the 5D3, but sit alongside it in Canon’s line-up.
They are for Landscape yes which is why the dynamic range must hurt…
Actually, lot of people are disappointed after seeing the Sample pics…
Sample pics are almost always disappointing. Can’t remember the last time a manufacturer put out samples that showed the full quality potential.
not all i think, fujifilm really shows some good sample pictures.
Thanks for supporting my argument 🙂
Canon should have made the larger cup grey to represent the clipped highlights… Due to the lower dynamic range… 😀
Ha, ha, good one 🙂
Probably should’ve added some noise as well to illustrate the poor ISO performance.
Canon is trailing behind at low ISOs, not high ISO.
Oh, yes, you’re right, the 5DS is capped at ISO 6400, expandable to 12800, so it dosen’t even have high ISOs for todays standards.
It’s a studio and landscape camera, not a sports/action camera or a general purpose camera. I didn’t know that the ISO requirements had changed that much when shooting with a tripod or under controlled lighting.
The main drawback of Canon’s current sensor tech is DR at low ISO settings. They aren’t behind at high ISOs, as you can see by looking at DxO’s graphs. The reason it’s capped at ISO 6400 in the 5DS is because you don’t need higher ISO’s for the kind of work the camera is intended for.
Now, that lower DR at low ISOs might be a problem for some landscape shooters, but won’t affect studio shooters at all.
You are quite wrong. Nobody “caps” useful high ISO: 5DS’s high ISO is simply bad and cannot be good with such high Mpx number and smallish photosites (comparing to A7S for example). And even in studio you still need a high dynamic range in some cases, especially for dramatic shots.
In any case, you don’t need high ISO for the intended use cases, so does it really matter why higher ISOs aren’t available in the camera?
Sure, studio work may sometimes require high DR, but nothing that a Canon sensor can’t handle. People talk as if Canon cameras are practically useless, which just isn’t true. Just ask any number of professional Canon shooters, who get by just fine.
“it’s a studio and landscape camera, not a sports/action camera”
That’s what they said about D7100 and D8xx’s until people started taking pictures of BIF with them!!!
Well well we have a Russel Peters here… are you going to tell your joke in an accent?
new 120MP sensor? then… did I see the future back in 2010? I think I didn’t: http://www.canon.com/news/2010/aug24e.html
yes, they successfully developed and tested for aps-h. but I think who would need that back then.
The fanboy-ism in these comments makes no sense. There are few image samples, no comparisons and because of the DR comment people are already writing the 5ds/r off. Like the d800, this is a game changer and it’ll keep the high MP shooters in Canon’s camp rather than going for a D810 or A7r. Kudos to Canon for raising the bar, hopefully the A9/A99II will take it to another level.
The only reason we get better products is competition. Bashing progress by any company is just narrow minded and short sighted. If it doesn’t fill your needs, then don’t buy. But we wouldn’t have better AF, better video, more DR, more MP and so on without companies pushing the envelope like this.
You have a point. These cups are a childish joke. Interesting that there are over 150 comments because of this.
I hate the word kudos. It’s something my preschool teacher would’ve told me for tying my shoes on my own.
But the coffee inside the smaller cup tastes a lot (of stops) better.
My next camera will probably be a Sony A7II (or future fullframe E mount camera). I’m sick of my Canon EOS 550D and Canon’s inability to match Sony’s dynamic range at base ISO. They’ve been lagging behind for about 8 years now which is incredibly long.
Because your wonderful art depends a lot on DR LMAO
You must be the oracle since you seem to know exactly on what my “wonderful art” depends… I’ve seen banding in the darkest shadows of my 550D images without even touching the exposure in post (and yes the images were exposed correctly).
Canon needs to get off its lazy ass and do something about this problem. Since they are number 1 in camera sales they should be leading the pack, but instead they have been trailing behind for about 8 years…
I’ve been really wanting to get the A72. I got the A7, but when I bought it when it first came back, I really really hesisated to get it because the lack of in body stabilization. It was the one thing that made me contemplate, but now that its there, I really want to get it. BUT! Now i hear of all these rumors about the A9, I have to wait. I truly thing, once I upgrade to one of these, I probably won’t need to upgrade in awhile. I’ve been using the Minolta glasses, and I find the results really marvelous. The more I use it, the less I feel like I need these expensive zeiss lens. But if I could just stabilize it……………..
oh and I started off with the 550D also. The t2i. Going from T2i to A7 is a huge upgrade in every way. I was also using 5d3 for a year before I got the A7. The a7 image quality is actually better than 5d3, but I do miss the quick shooting and AF from 5d3. With A7 ive been getting sharper images, more color control, and been shooting with alot more angles to improve my composition. Also, shooting with flash, I can’t really take advantage of quick shooting anyways…
Why don’t you buy Canon 10d and then compare it to Sony A7r or Nikon D810? Some people are endlessly crazy and stupid.
Price doesn’t matter here since EVERY Canon camera ever made has poor dynamic range at base ISO (even if the Canon camera is newer than the other camera you are comparing it to). I could be comparing an A6000 to a 1Dx and come to the same conclusion.
If you go up the “Canon ladder”, you get better AF performance, better high ISO performance, better build quality, but definitely not better dynamic range at base ISO (they are all stuck around the 12EV mark).
The only one being stupid here is you, since you don’t seem to get it…
Where did I ever mention the price of the camera? You’re sick of the crop amateur camera released 5 years ago and compare it to pro FF cameras released last year? If you need DD at base ISO, look at MF. I’m sure then you’ll be able to implement your photo talent into great images.
Price is one of the factors that determines in which category a camera sits (along with sensor size, features etc). But again category, price and age don’t matter since Canon has been lagging behind for about 5-8 years regardless of these three factors. An old and cheap APS-C Nikon D5100 (which uses a Sony EXMOR sensor) beats a newer and more expensive fullframe Canon like e.g. the 6D when it comes to dynamic range at base ISO.
Your comment about MF is irrelevant and needless since it has a pricepoint that’s way above what a lot of photographers can/want to spend on photography gear.
It’s nothing less than a big shame that the biggest player in the market has been trailing behind for such a long period of time (regarding dynamic range at base ISO).
This biggest player in the market beats all other manufacturers in the newest lenses released within the past 1 year. That’s what is more important for a vast majority of people. Keep pushing your shadows at base ISO and look at 300% magnification.
That’s Canon’s biggest advantage, they have a lot of nice (and some niche) lenses (e.g. nobody else has a macro lens with a 5:1 magnification factor like the MP-E 65mm). However they are asking insane launch prices for their new lenses (just like they did with their 24, 28 and 35 IS prime lenses at launch).
Canon’s new 11-24mm will cost around 3.000 EUR. With such a high price they are almost in ZEISS Otus territory (price-wise), but I’m quite sure they can’t even get close to the optical performance of the ZEISS Otus lenses (and yes I know they are different focal lengths).
Also, if you don’t mind using manual focus (which is easy thanks to focus peaking and/or magnification in the EVF), the Sony E mount system actually has a bigger lens selection than Canon since any Canon/Nikon/ lens can be used on an E mount camera via an adapter.
It’s very clear to me that you’re a Canon fanboy. I wonder what you’re doing here then? Except for looking down on people who tried Canon and want to switch to another brand after their own experiences.
You have no right in telling people what they should value in a certain camera, in the end it’s their preference. If people using Canon cameras want a higher dynamic range at base ISO, then it’s their right to have this preference. You should not belittle them for having this preference, nor should you try to start a flamewar with useless and provoking sentences like “some people are endlessly crazy and stupid” or “keep pushing your shadows at base ISO and look at 300% magnification”.
Oh, and by the way, I don’t go past 100% magnification when I’m judging images. But thanks for your failing prejudice.
Why are you surprised Canon charges premium for newly designed lenses? Aren’t all manufacturers do the same? You want/need it now, pay premium, don’t need it – wait till the price drops. Or you buy Nikon d700/Sony a850 for the introductory price? And 11-24 is a unique lens, why wouldn’t Canon sell it for $3000? When I needed 200 2.0, I paid $6000 for it. Same is with Apple, BMW and everything else that you buy.
I’m not a fanboy. I’m just saying that for a vast majority of shooters lenses/service/excellent bodies/flash system are much more important that DR ONLY at low ISO! You need it, go for it! This may be a valid reason for some Canon shooters like you to switch, but 99% of us prefer to get maximum out of our equipment. And remember that high DR at low ISO is good for landscapes/architecture. What about ISO 400-800 and higher, is Sony still the best?? For those who shoot sport/action, Canon is unbeatable. For those who shoot portraits, we value Canon skintone colors and not those crappy skintones from Sony/Nikon sensors.
I’m here on Sony’s forum because I like photography and I don’t give a damn whether it’s a Sony/Canon/Pentax etc forum. I respect Sony as a company who develops fantastic equipment and pushes all other manufacturer’s forward. And I can tell you dozens of Sony’s advantages over other manufacturers, including Canon. But I don’t bash the company just because I use 5-year-old camera and keep whining that it’s bad as compared to new FF Sony’s cameras.
Good luck! I’m sure you choose the camera that fits your personal demands.
Asking a premium price for a new product isn’t something new, but there is a limit. I expect a price of 3.000 EUR for fast tele lenses, not for a slow F/4 wide angle zoom lens. Since Canon sells the most lenses in the world, they could have easily asked 2.000 EUR for it and still make a lot of profit. Since their 24, 28 and 35 IS primes they are becoming greedy.
Well, Sony is also the king regarding high ISO (both noise performance and dynamic range) if you can live with 12MP (i.e. the A7S). The only thing they lack a bit at the moment is FE lenses, but since the fullframe E mount system is rather new, that’s pretty logical. And they are introducing new lenses at quite a fast pace in my opinion.
For sports my preference would also go to Canon. An OVF is still better than an EVF in this regard. Same goes for birding. But Sony has made a lot of progress with their A6000. It can definitely stand its ground for sports photography, even if there are better solutions from Canon and Nikon (and this is especially true when you’re comparing prices).
The skintone issue is a non-issue for RAW shooters. With the right custom camera profile in Lightroom you can get exact (or at least near exact) results.
And again you’re clearly stating that you don’t get it with this sentence:
“But I don’t bash the company just because I use 5-year-old camera and keep whining that it’s bad as compared to new FF Sony’s cameras.”
Like I said before: age, price and category don’t matter since ALL Canon cameras ever produced (even newer ones than the A7 series like e.g. the 7DII) fail at dynamic range at base ISO compared to ANY Sony EXMOR based camera from the last 5-8 years. Even other companies which don’t use Sony EXMOR sensors are getting better results than Canon. Canon really is the worst pupil in the classroom in this regard.
What you should read instead to simplify it is:
“Oh, the guy owns/has tried every Canon camera ever made and still can’t live with the dynamic range at base ISO. So I guess it’s time for him to look at other companies since Canon can’t fulfill his needs.”
And yes, I’ve examined and tried other Canon bodies like e.g. the 5D3 and 6D. Same shit, different Canon body.
“I AM SMALL”
Thank you, they must be complementing the Sony A7R’s nice and compact body size.
No this phrase represent Nikon cameras only “I AM” but it had to be explained for idiots like you and you admin
Whether it’s Nikon or Sony body, they’re talking about Sony’s sensor anyway.
Canon does not think Sony as competitor as mirroless and DSLR are different league.
Perhaps they should. I and many others have sold all our Canon gear and made the switch to either Nikon or Sony. Best move I ever made.
blah blah blah megapixels. If you want to make fun of Sony’s tiny penis then point directly at 11+7 bit file depth.
Sony’s penis is 3 bit shorter lolz
I do agree. 11+7 is unacceptable for such equipments, even if it is a trouble to get evidence of this lack. It’s a standard of the market of this category of cameras and a standard for our workflow. We all want 14bit uncompressed lossless raw option from our mirrorless.
Sign this:
https://www.change.org/p/kazuo-hirai-enable-uncompressed-or-lossless-compression-raw-files-on-the-a7-cameras-and-future-f-e-mount-cameras
Yet still nobody has posted any images showing how detrimental 11+7 bit depth is.
DPR showed it clearly. And if you play around with Sony raw files yourself, you’ll notice that they can’t withstand as much processing without getting artifacts and posterization, compared to most other companies’ raw files. If you do very little processing in post, then you may not notice any difference at all, but for heavy retouching and manipulation of colour tones, Sony’s files aren’t optimal.
In a lab, maybe. None of my 30,000+ real-life A7r files feel suboptimal. And I come from a Nikon D800e stable.
Wrong! See here: http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140212_2-SonyA7-RawDigger-posterization.html
And broken sensor cover. And shutter shock. And broken image corners. And poor EVF. And bad autofocus. And slow burst. And poor responsiveness. And bad menus. And no lens lineup. And no radio flashes.
hopefully they ordered not to much, things chance very fast these days…
Canon should wright on one side of the cup: “I’m 50,6 Mpix” and on the other “I’m low on DR” and on the back, “I shot 720p video” resolution wise. LOL
haha, that’s what I thought too. They should write “I’m 50,6 Mpix” in washed out colors, dark grey on light gray 😉
It could also be the difference in price. Canon to expensive.
But Sony where is the APS-C sensor size RX10? Still waiting 🙂
Actually, what happened to that entire market? There was a surge of APSC fixed-lens compacts that came out at one time and caused a huge interest it seemed. I haven’t heard anything new in that category ever since. Personally I was interested in the Nikon Coolpix A
you can get an A on e-bay for as low as 450$ now.
Fuji X100T, Ricoh GR and Nikon Coolpix A are all current models, even though the latter two are getting a little old.
Leica X and X-E was recently released, and X Vario is still available.
Sigma has four models in the Quattro series.
Hooray!! finally Canon is making fun of someone else rather than being made fun of. I love Canon they are the best!!
They are making fun of their own users, who have the 1D-X and 5Diii.
Where are the links to buy those mugs?
“I still have inferior dynamic range.” Yes, I’m a troll whatever that means.
No, you are an imbecile.
Someone should simply make a mug that says “I innovate” and “I don’t”.
those samples of the 50MP camera look terrible – especially the edges
Just a number
Compare that to some billionaires that ow tons of money and never do anything intelligent with it. Here we assist to a “at any price” policy from Canon once more, and I bet that Sony never had issued a camera with 50 mpix with that crappy pictures and that low dynamic range. Packing pixels on a sensor is not a problem, problem is to manage them for the “good”.
No, but they do issue cameras with no option of getting uncompressed raw files. Now, before you tell me that it has no impact on real life images (as opposed to lab test shots), the same is true about Canon, for most photographers in most situations. Fantastic images are produced by Canon shooters all the time, and few of them experience any problems whatsoever with “crappy” image quality. In fact, many have attested to the fact that Canon’s raw files are more malleable in post-processing than most others, except for the fact that you can’t push the shadows by 5 EV (who does that, anyway?).
“I’m also late to the party”…
Nice work, Canon! Now go make glass that isn’t a muddled mess wide open. Chop chop.
that is only one of the problems since on the test shots in wide angle landscape, one can see clearly that actual lenses are not able to give shots that crispyness they need
Which Canon lenses are not sharp wide open, photo guru? Please share with us your great experience.
I’ll chime in. the 24mm f/1.4 is a joke. The 14mm f/2.8 isn’t much better. The 16-35mm f/.28 is horrific at best in the corners… Shall I go on? Canon lost my business when the sold me a junk 24mm for 2 grand and then sat around while others gave me what I needed/wanted like dynamic range and low-light abilities.
What about 17-40L, 17 or 24 tilt-shift, 16-35 f4? Let along Canon’s telephoto lenses, portrait lenses like 85 1.2, 135 2.0, 100 2.8 macro, 200 2.8, 200 2.0, 300 2.8???? Are you kidding me? Keep going on with what you don’t like about Canon. There are tons of other people who make the right purchase and enjoy their Canon gear!
Enjoy! Last night I shot Northern Lights at 51k ISO, overexposed 4 stops and still ended up with a great and almost noise free image. Try that with your Canon! 😉
Well, could you share these wonderful images with all of us?
Sure! https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10205023434238975&set=a.1164707871300.2026087.1035988618
Sure!
Looks good to me! Keep going )
Dynamic range is very nice. I don’t understand why some canon owners defend their brand for being stuck to low quality DR. There’s something not quite right if a nikon d3300 can get better landscape picture than a 5D3 ?
Really? Where did you get a 24/1.4 sharp wide open?
Where did you learn to read?
sigma art lens? nikon’s lens?
I guess you didn’t get the memo that Canon doesn’t make a decent 50mm. Both their f1.4 and f1.2 are soft wide open. They sharpen well once stopped down, but focusing can be challenging. I got rid of Canon in favor of Hasselblad for a while and then got A900s with Sony Zeiss glass, and now added A7r to the mix. I don’t shoot sports or events, so I don’t need fast AF.
I agree with you, but 50 f1.2 has never been design to deliver razor shapr images. It’s more for dreamy look images, portraits, etc. Obviously, lots of Zeiss glass (for Sony or Canon) are crazy sharp, but that doesn’t mean all Canon lenses are bad. They just don’t fit your shooting style.
You’re right. Their f1.2 glass is designed for portraits. I prefer glass that can serve multiple purposes. Their 24-70 II is decent.
https://photographylife.com/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-image-samples
full sized images here. The resolution is good, but the dynamic range and colors are a deception, flat, dead colors all over. There is nothing on those shots one could no see on a 36 mpix, I would even say that 36 mpix Sony sensor beats this in all fields, except image size.
Agreed totally! The first image is excellent. The rest, not so good. There is no medium format “pop” to these images at low res. 50Mpix + a great lens should provide stunning low-res views. These are dull. Lens ? Sensor ? Lighting ? Very strange. I’m sure other photographers will make the camera sing better.
Thanks for the link.
50MP of crap is still crap.
Canon should improve their image quality first.
How do you know these 50MPs are crap? Have you used the camera?
There are sample images on Canon’s website…
You’re commenting on the image quality by compressed JPEGs? Oh well…
Nothing wrong comparing JPEG.
Nothing wrong at all, if you shoot JPEG. But you can’t say anything meaningful about the sensor by comparing JPEGs.
Sure you can.
omg, compare whatever you want )))
AND improve their hardware making it hum… Oh yeah, more FCC compliant.
*this marvelous piece of art was made in my FCC compliant iPhone.
“less pixels”
_fewer_ pixels.
Regardless of what advantage Canon might have, bashing competitors is poor taste. This reminds me of Microsoft’s “scroogled” campaign (which Microsoft has backed off from).
Also, 36 MP is not ‘small’.
“I am small.” Followed by an A7 mug that reads, “I am smaller.”
Excatly. A bit of a double-edged sword that campaign, that. Small also (mostly) means small in size. Most people want small, few want more than 36Mpix. Pretty lame choice of wording from Canon.
Only CR members like Neuro may find this amusing LOL
So should Sony do a “I can see in the dark” vs “I’m blind as a bat” mugs for the A7S?
No.
Battle of the boat anchor DSLR’s
Not to say anything about the 50mp sensor, but I would prefer the A99 m2 with the same 24 mp, but A7s sensitivity. Also, a better AF and coverage, and IBIS at least as good as the current one. That would be a great camera. Maybe someone needs the 50mp, but I think most people are OK with 24.
I downgraded from d800 to a99 when I passed into Sony camp. Yes downgraded, but would do it again. CZ primes + steady shot is killer combo in IQ. Evf is my thing too. For all the rest there is very little to envy Sony. But I must say that a 36mpix sensor with steady shot could seduce me. I honnestly miss this resolution. A dreamy 24mp double layer sensor (blue top and green/red under) even more. I’m Sure the clarity /pixel would be enough to catch up the 36 sensor when enlarged.
How many people actually make a good use of all this great “power”? And: is it really needed?if so, by how many people? And again, those who say “I need it”, how could they go on with their photography until now? Too many questions…. 🙂
Great point…
Also, the megapixel race is due to the weakness of Bayer sensors. The 15 megapixel DP Merrills, with an APS-C sized sensor, have better image quality at lower ISO settings than a D810, because the sensor is 1:1. And, there are not many lenses that can resolve 50 megapixels centre to corner anyways.
If Sony were to make a 1:1 full frame sensor with 20 – 30 megapixels and no AA filter, it would likely be far better than any 50 megapixel bayer sensor at lower ISO settings, as Bayer sensors don’t resolve at their stated resolution, due to the deficiencies in interpolation (estimates).
That said, similar to what you said, the cameras out today are sufficient for most people’s uses. I use an X-Pro 1 and DP Merrills, and although the DP Merrills have superior image quality at base ISO, the X-Pro 1 is still a fantastic camera with very nice image quality.
“merrill better than 36mp D8xx”
Close, but not quite https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3VjyHQiqdE&t=603
It’s nice how merrill is able to pull that off, but a wider usable ISO range would be nice. Sigma is working on their cameras so maybe eventually they’ll find a way to make it more versatile.
so.50mpx and wins everthing
Ahahahaha CANON 😀
Sony release product far better tnan a canon for a 1/10 price. A7 S for example. canon semi-equivalent cost 10times more hahahaha CANON! ridculos!
and for example EOSM3 … CANON arrive at this recessed product (ugly video mode no headphone and mic jack) exactly 5 or more year later. Do you remember the old nex-5N ok is far and far better than new canon EOSM3 hahahaha
Check your facts, EOS M3 does have a mic jack, although you’re right about the missing headphone jack.
And how do you know that the NEX-5N is far better? At least wait until we have some proper reviews to go by.
Hmmm…perhaps a bit like having a mug that’s the size of a dustbin: it might hold a lot more coffee, but at least I can get mine to my lips!
And you have to keep buying lots of coffee…
And it takes forever to boil the water…
And most of your coffee is cold by the time you drink it…
And it takes an age to wash…
And you don’t have a cupboard to store it…
And you look like a bragging idiot with one…
So, not much use then! LOL
All this megapixel thing, with those stupid mugs and the meaningless 50Mp bragging, brings the competition of the professional photography industry down to the level of the P&S camera tech. Canon is playing the fool with this thing. After all, it is STILL a huge 50Mp BAYER sensor. So what’s so fantastic about it?
https://fstoppers.com/business/hilarious-video-pokes-fun-canon-dslr-video-revolution-58356
check the video above, how they make fun of Canon. Try not to laugh !
LOL funny video man 😀
This 5DS looks like it could be a great camera. Yet another success from Canon.
It won’t have:
Broken sensor cover. And shutter shock. And broken image corners. And poor EVF. And bad autofocus. And slow burst. And poor responsiveness. And bad menus. And no lens lineup. And no radio flashes.
What camera are you referring to with all those “broken” issues?
I may be smaller, but Canon makes you pee more
I can agree the new 5DS and 5DR are the new flagship cameras for their semi-pro DSLR line, but I’ve been looking at more specs and I am shocked at the poor feature set at an unacceptable price point!
We all understand that full frame sensors used to have maximum 8-12mpix at one time so to a certain degree, greater resolution has always welcome by both pros and enthusiasts like myself.
First, I feel 50mpix is only a modest bump in resolution on a full frame sensor. Cramming 24mpix on the Sony a6000 APS-C sensor is not the same as 24mpix on a full frame sensor. The same goes for cramming 50mpix on the new full frame Canon is simply not comparable a medium format Pentax, Phase One or Hasselblad at 40-50mpix.
Second, Canon doesn’t have lenses capable of resolving 50mpix. Only one of the Zeiss Otus lenses are the most capable and affordable options for performing this task.
Third, the high ISO performance on this camera according to the specs are seriously disappointing compared to the D800 or 800E and Sony A7s….PLUS the Sony and Nikon options are reasonably priced.
Fourth, according to what DP Review was told, these new cameras have the same 5Dmk3 eleven stops of dynamic range…less than the Sony a6000, or any Sony mirrorless full frame camera or any current Nikon full frame camera.
Fifth, the list of “no’s”: still no 4K, piss poor 1080p video options, no HDMI output port, no headphone jack, no focus peaking, no zebras, and no Dual-Pixel AF from the lower end Canon 70D.
Other than more megapixels for stills, what use is a one trick pony priced like it came from the King Of Dubai’s equestrian stable? I feel this camera will only make sense to existing Canon users that are locked into the Canon system via 4 to 6 L lenses. I will personally be saving my money and wait for the next Nikon or Sony 50 megapixel camera.
Just a question: what do you need 50MPixel for?
x2
Canon is utterly stupid and cannot even properly relay the image size difference in these mugs. The linear size of the image of 5DS is only by 18% bigger than D810. The height of the corresponding mug is by 45% bigger, and this is simply an outright lie and is not even close to +18%. There is a simple calculation:
Canon 5DS: 50.6MP, image size 8688×5792
Nikon D810: 36.3MP, image size 7360×4912
Image width difference: 8688 / 7360 = 118%
Image height difference: 5792 / 4912 = 118%
And the lie is even bigger because the mugs are 3D. The difference in 3D between 50.6 and 36.3 millions of cubical units is cube root of (50.6 / 36.3 = 1.39) is 1.11 or +11% ONLY.
And BTW, Nikon D810 effective pixels number is 36.3 and not 36.0 as written of the mug.
What a joke this Canon!
CORECTION
Please everyone look at the last image and ignore the first one, which is not right.
There is something wrong with Disqus: it should have attached the last image only.
Don’t worry, we don’t care. We pity you, at most.
You don’t have sense of humor do you?
You are taking this way too serious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke
I used Canons for years (1ds model). I not one of these people that sits firmly in a single camp and defends it. The Canon 1ds had a few really great features, it was well built, great battery life, and fast. I left Canon (to nikon) for two reasons: 1) 21 megapixels for the 1dsmark3 was not enough, and 2) the anti aliasing filter. The Canon shots were so soft compared to the D800. Now that they have fixed both of these things, I think Canon is back from the dead.
Good for Canon.
The small cup looks more ergonomically friendly than the big cup, and more practical to use day to day. Big cups are a special use product with a niche market.
Meanwhile in the Nikon – Sony sensor meeting:
https://imgflip.com/readImage?iid=922147
Don’t waste your breath on him, he doesn’t get it.
Yeah yeah.. they were the first to announce the 50mp.. but sony’s sensors are quick to follow. Most likely with same or better DR than current sony sensors, and ISO not too much worse or the same as 36mp models (6400/12800 good usable ISO, 51200 or 102800 max ISO)
All due to new sensor tech, and not “old stuff”