Close Menu

    Canon EOS R visual size comparison against the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6

    By Updated:16 Comments1 Min Read Canon EOS R
    canoneosrbodybig 728x462 - Canon EOS R visual size comparison against the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6

    ApoTelyt has updated their CAM-parator app with the Canon EOS R. We have pulled the images comparing the Canon EOS R to both the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6. The Sony looks to be the smallest of the bunch, with the Canon and Nikon being closer in size, but the Canon a slightly larger grip and overall thickness.

    Check out the comparisons below.

    canonrsonya7iii 728x966 - Canon EOS R visual size comparison against the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6
    Canon EOS R vs Sony A7 III // Click for larger
    canonrnikonz7 728x966 - Canon EOS R visual size comparison against the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6
    Canon EOS R vs Nikon Z6 // Click for larger
    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    16 comments

    2. Beeing a photographer...this camera seems to be the sweet spot.
      If af will be fast with adapter on ef mount this will be a great update for 6d 6d2 and 5d3
      Hope batery will last 1000 shoots and 2h of 4k recording. This will be very good. No complain here.
      And if the DR will be 14 stops...than...we have the best ecosystem.

      But the size...ohhh my...the size...it's perfect for using by pro's... Not to big... Not to small...the greep seems to be perfect.
      Sony A73 looks like a toy...and it is a toy...let's be honnest.
      Any pro photographer will find incomode and uncofortable to use a small size camera.
      For videographers...maybe..but for pro photographers...for shure not.
      I'v tested all camera sistem and the most confortable and easy to use was canon...eaven with a 12stops DR
      One hand camera handeling...this is how it should work any pro camera.
      The card door is very claver put it on the camera...look at the nikon...dthe big finger will stay on it...in time... Who knows... This could create problems...and damage the connection...
      Also...on Nikon...the exposure compensation button...can be accidentaly touch while shooting ( it is very close to the fire button)

      But again... If the ef lenses will af very fast on the new mount with adapter...this will be a winner.
      I sow some video with the z7 and adapted nikon g lens...and the af was a little bit laggy.
    4. Not that I expected anything else, but I am very impressed. It seems really well done in terms of ergonomics. Of the videos I've watched so far, it looks good in peoples hands and people are describing it as being a joy to use.

      Something to look forward too.
    5. Sony A7 looks like a toy even though they already put a bigger grip.
      I'm pretty sure Canon will also do better in the heat with the bigger housing.
      This is what a pro mirrorless should look like.
    6. Yes, for me, bigger is better - I have large clumsy Britisher hands! The battery life looks a bit sad (399), but it's chargeable over USB and I have a big power bank lying around looking for a problem to be a solution to!
    7. Yes, for me, bigger is better - I have large clumsy Britisher hands! The battery life looks a bit sad (399), but it's chargeable over USB and I have a big power bank lying around looking for a problem to be a solution to!

      I wouldn't feel bad at all there Mark. If you've got man hands, that dainty little Sony is a joke. I have zero interest in any of these smaller cameras (5D size or similar fits my hands well), but it appears Canon made far better ergonomic choices than Sony.
    8. I hadn't really thought about using a battery pack to pack in some additional charge. But man, what a great option to have. I'd still rather use my 5DMIV and wait for Gen2 of this camera. Hell, I'd probably recommend literally anybody looking to go full frame to stick with Mirrors for the time being. Not because the new ecosystem isn't canon's future, but because currently, it's just not a good deal and most of the glass you'd be using will likely be adapted EF glass anyway.
    10. Agree with those who say Canon (larger size) looks better for handling. My issue with mirrorless cameras as a whole is the lenses are too big for the body and everything is off balance. I am happy with my 5D4's and have no interest in this system, though I must say a 24-70 f2 is tempting.
    11. So, I just read the Canon white paper. This won’t be new for those who have read it, but I discovered something that was very interesting.

      We’re reading that Canon didn’t implement IBIS. It seems as though that may not be true, if I read the paper correctly. Canon seems to be solely relying on in-lens optical correction, with reading of the blur image on the sensor as supplemental data to be processed back to that optical corrector. That’s for still.

      But for video, they do talk about in body correction used along with the optical correction in the lens. Again, if I’m reading this correctly, and I may or be, there is additional compensation being provided by the sensor in video. In other words, some sort of IBIS.

      If true, this is something we’re not reading about, at least, not anything I’ve seen. Again, if true, this is significant. I suggested earlier, somewhere here, that as Apple is doing this in the iPhone, that is, combining both optical and IBIS for better overall correction, then if Canon added IBIS, they could too. So if I’m correct, that’s exactly what they are doing, but only for video.

      But if they’re doing this for video, they can do it for still as well, and possibly even for lenses that have no optical IS. It’s hinted at in the paper that possibly in video, lenses without IS will also use this system.

      If someone will read that portion of the paper, and come back here and either shoot what I said out, or confirm it, that would be great for all of us.
    12. So, I just read the Canon white paper. This won’t be new for those who have read it, but I discovered something that was very interesting.

      We’re reading that Canon didn’t implement IBIS. It seems as though that may not be true, if I read the paper correctly. Canon seems to be solely relying on in-lens optical correction, with reading of the blur image on the sensor as supplemental data to be processed back to that optical corrector. That’s for still.

      But for video, they do talk about in body correction used along with the optical correction in the lens. Again, if I’m reading this correctly, and I may or be, there is additional compensation being provided by the sensor in video. In other words, some sort of IBIS.

      If true, this is something we’re not reading about, at least, not anything I’ve seen. Again, if true, this is significant. I suggested earlier, somewhere here, that as Apple is doing this in the iPhone, that is, combining both optical and IBIS for better overall correction, then if Canon added IBIS, they could too. So if I’m correct, that’s exactly what they are doing, but only for video.

      But if they’re doing this for video, they can do it for still as well, and possibly even for lenses that have no optical IS. It’s hinted at in the paper that possibly in video, lenses without IS will also use this system.

      If someone will read that portion of the paper, and come back here and either shoot what I said out, or confirm it, that would be great for all of us.

      The stabilisation you refer to is probably not a shaking sensor that is commonly referred to as IBIS but is likely the system used for stabilising video where the image is slightly smaller than the sensor so when the camera 'shakes' a program can follow the image around the sensor ad give a shake-free image. I understand there are issues implementing this for stills.
    13. The stabilisation you refer to is probably not a shaking sensor that is commonly referred to as IBIS but is likely the system used for stabilising video where the image is slightly smaller than the sensor so when the camera 'shakes' a program can follow the image around the sensor ad give a shake-free image. I understand there are issues implementing this for stills.
      That’s one way of doing IBIS, the other is moving the sensor.
    15. The stabilisation you refer to is probably not a shaking sensor that is commonly referred to as IBIS but is likely the system used for stabilising video where the image is slightly smaller than the sensor so when the camera 'shakes' a program can follow the image around the sensor ad give a shake-free image. I understand there are issues implementing this for stills.
      Since the system that Canon uses stabilizes one image in comparison to another, it doesn't have any effect on blur in a single frame.
    16. Since the system that Canon uses stabilizes one image in comparison to another, it doesn't have any effect on blur in a single frame.
      But that’s a software attribute. With dual pixels, there could be a comparison between them in a single frame, if they wanted to try that.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment