July 19, 2018, 12:24:40 AM

Author Topic: Been with Canon for 12 years - wait or jump ship?  (Read 70012 times)

chrysoberyl

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 865
  • 6D
Re: Been with Canon for 12 years - wait or jump ship?
« Reply #135 on: December 04, 2017, 10:02:10 AM »
I am not jumping ship.  I have considered an a7R III, but this thread and others on this forum (and the Sony forum) have convinced me the time is not right.  The time will be right when Sony or Canon comes out with a reasonably-priced 400 or 500mm f/5 or f/5.6.  Which will be first?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Been with Canon for 12 years - wait or jump ship?
« Reply #135 on: December 04, 2017, 10:02:10 AM »

smithcon

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 22
Re: Been with Canon for 12 years - wait or jump ship?
« Reply #136 on: December 04, 2017, 01:36:25 PM »
I ended up jumping ship; picked up my A7R III on Friday from BestBuy, piling up rewards points and using a 10% discount coupon I had, I was able to get it for about 2600 (thanks to some appliance purchases earlier in the year). 

I am having some trouble getting used to the different ergonomics, and am keeping my Canon bodies for the time being to keep my EF and EF-S lenses going when I need to use them action-fast AF, but the A7R III is definitely giving me some usability benefits.  Love the fact that all of my lenses, even my cheapo Rokinon 14mm 2.8 and EF-S 8mm fisheye, can now benefit from stabilization and focus peaking.

I only have one Sony native lens so far, a 24-70 2.8 (also bought with the 10% off), but it works a treat.  I did not have the Canon 24-70 2.8 (I had the Tamron 24-70 2.8 IS Mk 1) so that lens was my logical starting point.  Not in any hurry to replace my glass; I'll be able to use my Canon lenses on the Sony for anything but action, as they seem to focus pretty quickly and accurately, if a little slow.

Part of me still hopes Canon wakes up and creates an A7R III-competetive body soon, in which case my Sony will most likely be on used market, but as long Canon continues to dominate market share, I don't see them getting innovative in that way.         

stevelee

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 636
Re: Been with Canon for 12 years - wait or jump ship?
« Reply #137 on: December 04, 2017, 01:44:52 PM »
Innovative = copying another company?

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5510
Re: Been with Canon for 12 years - wait or jump ship?
« Reply #138 on: December 04, 2017, 01:50:15 PM »
Sorry I did not read all the pages...

I am wondering too if I need to go to the new A7riii.
Really temptated by the eye focus feature.

Here are the 2 problems stopping me :
1- metabones adaptator seems not to control all canon lenses. Seems to be worst with sigma (I have the 35mm ART, the 50mm ART the 135 f2 L , the 100mm 2.8 L and the 24-70 f4). And more, metabones seems NOT to handle eye focus...
2- the two times reviewers posted raw files of the Sony, Focus was more on lips than on eyes (but reviewers were proud to promote the Sony performance..)
I love fast apertures, and perhaps eye detection on the Sony can’t be so efficient at f1.4...

So my options are to take a 5d mark 4 , jump to Sony, or wait a mirrorless from Canon.

Some says that dslr will die. Not sure what he does mean for a 5d4 owner in fact (and not sure it will happen)...

Thank for your advices.

I disagree. Eye AF works best with fast primes, especially at f1.4. How do I know??? I use my a9 + FE50f1.4 everyday.

Have you try Sony Eye _AF?

eoren1

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
    • Wednesdays in Marblehead
Well, I jumped...
« Reply #139 on: December 17, 2017, 09:17:50 PM »
Thought I would circle back to this thread I started and let you know I decided to move to the Sony a7rIII and, with one in hand, can offer some thoughts.

I did a LOT of research and was fortunate to borrow an a7rII to try. With that done, I purchased the a7rIII, metabones V adapter and the Sony FE 85/1.8 from BHphoto.  They arrived Friday at 5pm and I threw them in the house before taking a flight out of town. Returned home Sunday at 1am, charged battery and crashed.  Today, I've been playing with menus and the camera.

Body:
For good and bad, it is smaller.  I put my hand strap on it which made it instantly more comfortable and will buy the RRS L plate which adds to the bottom.  The camera is quite comfortable to hold and handle in landscape/horizontal orientation.  I do find the finger placement a bit awkward in portrait/verticle but am quickly getting used to it.  Battery life has been solid. Body is very customizable which is great and a pleasant change from Canon's 5DmkIII that I had been using for about 4 years.
The body is lighter which doesn't seem important until I put the Canon 24-105 on via the Metabones adapter and went out for some test shots. Slung the camera over my neck/shoulder as I would the 5D and was pleasantly surprised at the lack of pressure over the clavicle area.  It felt much lighter and less of something I was aware of carrying.

Autofocus
I have to say, the biggest surprise to me is EyeAF.  I didn't know much about it before and started reading about as I researched the Sony.  Still, I didn't get how powerful it was. Simply put, the camera finds your subject's eye and nails focus Every Single Time.  That's good in and of itself but it also means that you no longer need to compose based on lining up a red square with your subject.  You are now free to compose your shot however you like and essentially ignore the person/focus while knowing their eye will be nailed.  Shot the kids tonight as we lit candles for Hanukkah and the results were awesome.

Lenses
The 85/1.8 is really nice and I will happily give up my Canon 100/2 for it.  All of my Canon lenses work with the Sony (which is really amazing).  Still haven't pushed any lenses to test autofocus speed as I'm trying to get used to the 85 for a better sense of native vs adapted lenses.  I can see myself dumping the Canon 17-40/4, 24-105/4 and 70-200/4 for the Sony 12-24/4, 24-105/4 and 100-400 though.

Software
The menu system is LONG and needlessly confusing at times but makes the camera ridiculously customizable.

Files
Processing in LR Classic 7.1.  The files actually look great on the Sony LCD screen and in LR before Adobe processes the preview files.  Not sure what Adobe is doing but the files are much flatter than the Canon ones.  They also have a ridiculous amount of leeway when it comes to pushing exposure and shadows.  I read this before but it's very different to actually work with the files and see how easy they are to work with without 'falling apart' like the Canon ones are prone to do.

It's only been a day of use but I really am pleased with the Sony.  This is their third iteration of the a7r series which feels like a mature product now (just like the Canon 5DmkIII did when I bought it).  Between the improved sensor, customizability and eyeAF, it really is a marked improvement over the Canon I had and the ones on offer now.

I realize this is a Canon forum and I may get pummeled for this but thought it worth circling back and reporting my experience so far.
Exploring the beauty of a seaside town - https://wednesdaysinmhd.com

ecqns

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 98
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #140 on: December 17, 2017, 09:50:31 PM »

Software
The menu system is LONG and needlessly confusing at times but makes the camera ridiculously customizable.

Files
Processing in LR Classic 7.1.  The files actually look great on the Sony LCD screen and in LR before Adobe processes the preview files.  Not sure what Adobe is doing but the files are much flatter than the Canon ones.  They also have a ridiculous amount of leeway when it comes to pushing exposure and shadows.  I read this before but it's very different to actually work with the files and see how easy they are to work with without 'falling apart' like the Canon ones are prone to do.


Long time Sony user here - and Canon DSLR since forever before that - do yourself a favor and use Capture One for Sony. I use Photoshop all day for retouching but their raw file conversions are absolutely terrible. Just as the DR you are finding to be night and day compared to Canon - the raw conversion is like that between Capture One and Adobe.

Yes the menus are different, but one you learn them and make any customizations you almost never spend much time in them again.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2017, 09:55:47 PM by ecqns »

Ryananthony

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 498
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #141 on: December 17, 2017, 09:51:26 PM »
Thought I would circle back to this thread I started and let you know I decided to move to the Sony a7rIII and, with one in hand, can offer some thoughts.

I did a LOT of research and was fortunate to borrow an a7rII to try. With that done, I purchased the a7rIII, metabones V adapter and the Sony FE 85/1.8 from BHphoto.  They arrived Friday at 5pm and I threw them in the house before taking a flight out of town. Returned home Sunday at 1am, charged battery and crashed.  Today, I've been playing with menus and the camera.

Body:
For good and bad, it is smaller.  I put my hand strap on it which made it instantly more comfortable and will buy the RRS L plate which adds to the bottom.  The camera is quite comfortable to hold and handle in landscape/horizontal orientation.  I do find the finger placement a bit awkward in portrait/verticle but am quickly getting used to it.  Battery life has been solid. Body is very customizable which is great and a pleasant change from Canon's 5DmkIII that I had been using for about 4 years.
The body is lighter which doesn't seem important until I put the Canon 24-105 on via the Metabones adapter and went out for some test shots. Slung the camera over my neck/shoulder as I would the 5D and was pleasantly surprised at the lack of pressure over the clavicle area.  It felt much lighter and less of something I was aware of carrying.

Autofocus
I have to say, the biggest surprise to me is EyeAF.  I didn't know much about it before and started reading about as I researched the Sony.  Still, I didn't get how powerful it was. Simply put, the camera finds your subject's eye and nails focus Every Single Time.  That's good in and of itself but it also means that you no longer need to compose based on lining up a red square with your subject.  You are now free to compose your shot however you like and essentially ignore the person/focus while knowing their eye will be nailed.  Shot the kids tonight as we lit candles for Hanukkah and the results were awesome.

Lenses
The 85/1.8 is really nice and I will happily give up my Canon 100/2 for it.  All of my Canon lenses work with the Sony (which is really amazing).  Still haven't pushed any lenses to test autofocus speed as I'm trying to get used to the 85 for a better sense of native vs adapted lenses.  I can see myself dumping the Canon 17-40/4, 24-105/4 and 70-200/4 for the Sony 12-24/4, 24-105/4 and 100-400 though.

Software
The menu system is LONG and needlessly confusing at times but makes the camera ridiculously customizable.

Files
Processing in LR Classic 7.1.  The files actually look great on the Sony LCD screen and in LR before Adobe processes the preview files.  Not sure what Adobe is doing but the files are much flatter than the Canon ones.  They also have a ridiculous amount of leeway when it comes to pushing exposure and shadows.  I read this before but it's very different to actually work with the files and see how easy they are to work with without 'falling apart' like the Canon ones are prone to do.

It's only been a day of use but I really am pleased with the Sony.  This is their third iteration of the a7r series which feels like a mature product now (just like the Canon 5DmkIII did when I bought it).  Between the improved sensor, customizability and eyeAF, it really is a marked improvement over the Canon I had and the ones on offer now.

I realize this is a Canon forum and I may get pummeled for this but thought it worth circling back and reporting my experience so far.

Thanks for the post. I've been interested in the a7r iii as well. I just watched a video recently of eye AF with canon lenses and the sigma adapter (I believe) and couldn't believe how quick and reliable it seemed to be, and it wasn't even well lit.

Although, I'm not referring to the a7r iii but instead the d810, which from my understanding have very similar dynamic range I was blown away. I was playing with the raw files from a friend who just purchased one, (switching from canon) and there was a shot that was very poorly exposed. Now, no one should realistically be screwing up a shot by 5 stops and the +100 shadows I pushed it in lighteroom, but it was so surprising how little noise and how usable the image was. I can't speak for the 5div, but I feel my 5d3/1dx wouldn't be able to compare with half the pushing i did to the d810 file. Although that isn't enough for me swap systems, it was a big surprise and I can understand why many seem to be making a big deal of the Dr of the Sony Nikon cameras.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #141 on: December 17, 2017, 09:51:26 PM »

Ryananthony

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 498
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #142 on: December 17, 2017, 09:54:40 PM »

Software
The menu system is LONG and needlessly confusing at times but makes the camera ridiculously customizable.

Files
Processing in LR Classic 7.1.  The files actually look great on the Sony LCD screen and in LR before Adobe processes the preview files.  Not sure what Adobe is doing but the files are much flatter than the Canon ones.  They also have a ridiculous amount of leeway when it comes to pushing exposure and shadows.  I read this before but it's very different to actually work with the files and see how easy they are to work with without 'falling apart' like the Canon ones are prone to do.


Yes the menus are different, but one you learn them and make any customizations you almost never spend much time in them again.

That has always been one concern I never understood about Sony. I so rarely go into the menu system of my cameras after setting them up. It sounds like the Sony may take a little bit longer and perhaps be a little more stressful or confusing, but after figuring it all out, there is little need to access more then your my menu.

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6930
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #143 on: December 18, 2017, 09:35:24 AM »

Software
The menu system is LONG and needlessly confusing at times but makes the camera ridiculously customizable.

Files
Processing in LR Classic 7.1.  The files actually look great on the Sony LCD screen and in LR before Adobe processes the preview files.  Not sure what Adobe is doing but the files are much flatter than the Canon ones.  They also have a ridiculous amount of leeway when it comes to pushing exposure and shadows.  I read this before but it's very different to actually work with the files and see how easy they are to work with without 'falling apart' like the Canon ones are prone to do.


Long time Sony user here - and Canon DSLR since forever before that - do yourself a favor and use Capture One for Sony. I use Photoshop all day for retouching but their raw file conversions are absolutely terrible. Just as the DR you are finding to be night and day compared to Canon - the raw conversion is like that between Capture One and Adobe.

Yes the menus are different, but one you learn them and make any customizations you almost never spend much time in them again.

Or take a few minutes to make custom presets in LR that match C1, it has been illustrated before that the difference between the two is not a capability difference but a factory preset difference. For instance C1 applies more sharpening at import compared to LR, but a simple move of the slider evens them out. Both programs are very capable, neither is dramatically 'better' at rendering RAW files and both have the ability to create custom import presets that negate any differences in factory rendering.

I have never liked Adobe presets for Canon cameras and have always made my own and consider them vastly superior, but I also accept that it is a personal preference and that pretty much any software can be adjusted to similar output. My personal presets include no import sharpening and always have custom color profiles included.

One thing I do like about LR is the ability to make import presets that are serial number and iso specific, I can shoot all day and night with my two 1DX MkII's and dump all the files in one folder, then on import LR will apply different presets to the file depending on what camera and iso that specific image was shot with and at, not of interest to many people but I don't know if it is an option available in C1.

For sure either program is more than capable and personal preference of workflow etc is a much bigger differentiator than any virtually imperceptible differences in RAW rendering when you actually look into their capabilities.
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

ecqns

  • EOS Rebel SL2
  • ***
  • Posts: 98
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #144 on: December 18, 2017, 09:47:08 AM »

Software
The menu system is LONG and needlessly confusing at times but makes the camera ridiculously customizable.

Files
Processing in LR Classic 7.1.  The files actually look great on the Sony LCD screen and in LR before Adobe processes the preview files.  Not sure what Adobe is doing but the files are much flatter than the Canon ones.  They also have a ridiculous amount of leeway when it comes to pushing exposure and shadows.  I read this before but it's very different to actually work with the files and see how easy they are to work with without 'falling apart' like the Canon ones are prone to do.


Long time Sony user here - and Canon DSLR since forever before that - do yourself a favor and use Capture One for Sony. I use Photoshop all day for retouching but their raw file conversions are absolutely terrible. Just as the DR you are finding to be night and day compared to Canon - the raw conversion is like that between Capture One and Adobe.

Yes the menus are different, but one you learn them and make any customizations you almost never spend much time in them again.

Or take a few minutes to make custom presets in LR that match C1, it has been illustrated before that the difference between the two is not a capability difference but a factory preset difference. For instance C1 applies more sharpening at import compared to LR, but a simple move of the slider evens them out. Both programs are very capable, neither is dramatically 'better' at rendering RAW files and both have the ability to create custom import presets that negate any differences in factory rendering.

I have never liked Adobe presets for Canon cameras and have always made my own and consider them vastly superior, but I also accept that it is a personal preference and that pretty much any software can be adjusted to similar output. My personal presets include no import sharpening and always have custom color profiles included.

One thing I do like about LR is the ability to make import presets that are serial number and iso specific, I can shoot all day and night with my two 1DX MkII's and dump all the files in one folder, then on import LR will apply different presets to the file depending on what camera and iso that specific image was shot with and at, not of interest to many people but I don't know if it is an option available in C1.

For sure either program is more than capable and personal preference of workflow etc is a much bigger differentiator than any virtually imperceptible differences in RAW rendering when you actually look into their capabilities.

I figured we'd get a LR defender. I am not talking about sharpening. Color rendition is totally different. It would take much more than simply slider play to get something similar. Unless you are a color scientist (which I am not and I doubt many others are either) it is very difficult to match color in that way. I've had to do it for retouching jobs and its quite difficult and thats using a single image, not trying to make a profie. As I said before and eoren1 posted above, seeing the differences with your own eyes is hard to believe until you try both camera systems or both raw converters. Please try it sometime.

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6930
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #145 on: December 18, 2017, 09:50:30 AM »
I can't speak for the 5div, but I feel my 5d3/1dx wouldn't be able to compare with half the pushing i did to the d810 file. Although that isn't enough for me swap systems, it was a big surprise and I can understand why many seem to be making a big deal of the Dr of the Sony Nikon cameras.

The 5D MkIV and 1DX MkII are noticeably better in this regard than their predecessors.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%201D%20X,Canon%20EOS%201D%20X%20Mark%20II,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV

Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6930
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #146 on: December 18, 2017, 09:57:15 AM »

I figured we'd get a LR defender. I am not talking about sharpening. Color rendition is totally different. It would take much more than simply slider play to get something similar. Unless you are a color scientist (which I am not and I doubt many others are either) it is very difficult to match color in that way. I've had to do it for retouching jobs and its quite difficult and thats using a single image, not trying to make a profie. As I said before and eoren1 posted above, seeing the differences with your own eyes is hard to believe until you try both camera systems or both raw converters. Please try it sometime.

It's not about defending anything, it is about pointing out the truth that there is, effectively, no difference in the rendering side of the programs when you equalize the different parameters. One is not 'better' than the other, they are both capable of essentially identical output from presets that involve no user input past making the initial preset.

It doesn't matter why anyone prefers one program over the other, it could be the UI, because their cousin uses it etc etc, but to try to make a claim that the core rendering capabilities of the two programs are dramatically different is demonstrably false.

Why would you think for a second I haven't used C1?
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5510
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #147 on: December 18, 2017, 10:33:39 AM »
Thought I would circle back to this thread I started and let you know I decided to move to the Sony a7rIII and, with one in hand, can offer some thoughts.

I did a LOT of research and was fortunate to borrow an a7rII to try. With that done, I purchased the a7rIII, metabones V adapter and the Sony FE 85/1.8 from BHphoto.  They arrived Friday at 5pm and I threw them in the house before taking a flight out of town. Returned home Sunday at 1am, charged battery and crashed.  Today, I've been playing with menus and the camera.

Body:
For good and bad, it is smaller.  I put my hand strap on it which made it instantly more comfortable and will buy the RRS L plate which adds to the bottom.  The camera is quite comfortable to hold and handle in landscape/horizontal orientation.  I do find the finger placement a bit awkward in portrait/verticle but am quickly getting used to it.  Battery life has been solid. Body is very customizable which is great and a pleasant change from Canon's 5DmkIII that I had been using for about 4 years.
The body is lighter which doesn't seem important until I put the Canon 24-105 on via the Metabones adapter and went out for some test shots. Slung the camera over my neck/shoulder as I would the 5D and was pleasantly surprised at the lack of pressure over the clavicle area.  It felt much lighter and less of something I was aware of carrying.

Autofocus
I have to say, the biggest surprise to me is EyeAF.  I didn't know much about it before and started reading about as I researched the Sony.  Still, I didn't get how powerful it was. Simply put, the camera finds your subject's eye and nails focus Every Single Time.  That's good in and of itself but it also means that you no longer need to compose based on lining up a red square with your subject.  You are now free to compose your shot however you like and essentially ignore the person/focus while knowing their eye will be nailed.  Shot the kids tonight as we lit candles for Hanukkah and the results were awesome.

Lenses
The 85/1.8 is really nice and I will happily give up my Canon 100/2 for it.  All of my Canon lenses work with the Sony (which is really amazing).  Still haven't pushed any lenses to test autofocus speed as I'm trying to get used to the 85 for a better sense of native vs adapted lenses.  I can see myself dumping the Canon 17-40/4, 24-105/4 and 70-200/4 for the Sony 12-24/4, 24-105/4 and 100-400 though.

Software
The menu system is LONG and needlessly confusing at times but makes the camera ridiculously customizable.

Files
Processing in LR Classic 7.1.  The files actually look great on the Sony LCD screen and in LR before Adobe processes the preview files.  Not sure what Adobe is doing but the files are much flatter than the Canon ones.  They also have a ridiculous amount of leeway when it comes to pushing exposure and shadows.  I read this before but it's very different to actually work with the files and see how easy they are to work with without 'falling apart' like the Canon ones are prone to do.

It's only been a day of use but I really am pleased with the Sony.  This is their third iteration of the a7r series which feels like a mature product now (just like the Canon 5DmkIII did when I bought it).  Between the improved sensor, customizability and eyeAF, it really is a marked improvement over the Canon I had and the ones on offer now.

I realize this is a Canon forum and I may get pummeled for this but thought it worth circling back and reporting my experience so far.

Congrats on your new toys.

Once you customize the playback and shooting menu, I doubt would go back to main menu. Stay with native lenses and here are the lenses I would highly recommend:

Small and light weight combo:
1. FE35 f2.8
2. FE55 f1.8
3. FE28 f2
4. FE85 f1.8


Events + low light:
1. 24-70 GM and 70-200 GM
2. FE35 f1.4 and FE85 GM


Have you try silent shooting yet?  ;)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #147 on: December 18, 2017, 10:33:39 AM »

Hector1970

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 804
    • Flickr
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #148 on: December 18, 2017, 10:47:56 AM »
I'd agreed with Privatebydesign on this. Lightroom and Capture One are a muchness when it come to converting raw images. I don't think even Capture One would claim to be superior with Sony images.

Thanks for the updates on the Sony Camera.
I have been tempted by an A9 with its high frame rate.
I think it encourages Canon to keep updating and will encourage them to go big into mirrorless.
I'm not sure the physical limit of a shutter in terms of FPS but Canon must be approaching it already.
I certainly don't mind hearing about Sony cameras.
They are interesting.
I'm quite happy with Canon but if the 7DIII isn't alot better than the 7DII I might look again at Sony or a 1DX model.



I figured we'd get a LR defender. I am not talking about sharpening. Color rendition is totally different. It would take much more than simply slider play to get something similar. Unless you are a color scientist (which I am not and I doubt many others are either) it is very difficult to match color in that way. I've had to do it for retouching jobs and its quite difficult and thats using a single image, not trying to make a profie. As I said before and eoren1 posted above, seeing the differences with your own eyes is hard to believe until you try both camera systems or both raw converters. Please try it sometime.

It's not about defending anything, it is about pointing out the truth that there is, effectively, no difference in the rendering side of the programs when you equalize the different parameters. One is not 'better' than the other, they are both capable of essentially identical output from presets that involve no user input past making the initial preset.

It doesn't matter why anyone prefers one program over the other, it could be the UI, because their cousin uses it etc etc, but to try to make a claim that the core rendering capabilities of the two programs are dramatically different is demonstrably false.

Why would you think for a second I haven't used C1?

Talys

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1701
  • Canon 6DII
Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #149 on: January 06, 2018, 06:10:11 PM »
With that done, I purchased the a7rIII, metabones V adapter and the Sony FE 85/1.8 from BHphoto. 

I'm curious: why did you select the metabones adapter?  The Sony champion that I spoke to during the preview suggested the Sigma adapter as being as good/better and cheaper.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Well, I jumped...
« Reply #149 on: January 06, 2018, 06:10:11 PM »