Canon must hurry up on FF mirrorless, Sony's new A9 is killer

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I had a good laugh at this given how the Sony sensors had been the Holy Grail of low ISO DR, and how incredibly important to everyone this was. And if you didn't know how important this was to you then you were clearly in need of enlightenment, and of course there were quite a few Evangelists out there who were prepared to do that for you.

12 stops of low ISO DR for the a9, 13.5 stops for the 1D X II. I wonder why Rishi isn't comparing the a9 to it's "best-performing peers" (which is how he referred to the a7RII in the 1D X II testing)? :

I did, 6 days before your post in fact:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7266455439/sony-a9-real-world-iso-invariance-and-dynamic-range

Also, I see you've cleverly compared my pixel-level DR estimate of the a9 to the print normalized DR of the 1D X II. You wouldn't be trying to mislead your own friends here, would you?

The theoretical max pixel-level DR of a 12-bit ADC is 12.5 EV, which normalized to 8MP is 13.3 EV... which, incidentally, is precisely what DXO measured.

So that's actually 0.2 EV behind the 1D X II. Though in our review of the a9 we mentioned we preferred the look of the 1D X II's deep shadows b/c the a9 shows some pattern noise.

-Rishi

Ahh The lightning rod ;D I find it amusing to see arguments starting over arcane details when two products both do a supurb job, so much so, that the photographer's skill is by far the biggest factor.

 

[RGF]

Go buy one… I'm sure Canon will survive and has no need to hurry.

Agree. just because a single buyer is frustrated, it will not cause problem for Canon unless that buyer will buy 10,000s units (or more).

 

[rishi_sanyal]

I had a good laugh at this given how the Sony sensors had been the Holy Grail of low ISO DR, and how incredibly important to everyone this was. And if you didn't know how important this was to you then you were clearly in need of enlightenment, and of course there were quite a few Evangelists out there who were prepared to do that for you.

12 stops of low ISO DR for the a9, 13.5 stops for the 1D X II. I wonder why Rishi isn't comparing the a9 to it's "best-performing peers" (which is how he referred to the a7RII in the 1D X II testing)? :

I did, 6 days before your post in fact:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7266455439/sony-a9-real-world-iso-invariance-and-dynamic-range

Also, I see you've cleverly compared my pixel-level DR estimate of the a9 to the print normalized DR of the 1D X II. You wouldn't be trying to mislead your own friends here, would you?

The theoretical max pixel-level DR of a 12-bit ADC is 12.5 EV, which normalized to 8MP is 13.3 EV... which, incidentally, is precisely what DXO measured.

So that's actually 0.2 EV behind the 1D X II. Though in our review of the a9 we mentioned we preferred the look of the 1D X II's deep shadows b/c the a9 shows some pattern noise.

-Rishi

Ahh The lightning rod ;D I find it amusing to see arguments starting over arcane details when two products both do a supurb job, so much so, that the photographer's skill is by far the biggest factor.

I agree with you.

But what's not amusing to me is a user who is on a dedicated campaign via tens (hundreds?) of posts to prove that I am pro-Sony? pro-Nikon? oh-I-don't-know-but-def-anti-Canon. With poor/no/mis-extrapolated data.

For example, his accusation that I was working on a Nikon advertorial whilst writing the 5D IV first impressions. What? We have more Canon advertorial videos than any other brand. Our editorial team has no knowledge of who paid for what; we're just told: 'make a video on the 1D X II' or 'make a video on the D5'.

That's it.

I wrote the 5D IV first impressions b/c I've owned and professionally shot every single iteration of that series (over Nikon, yup). Whoa, I bet that blew some people's minds here.

And yet a whole thread was started here stating 'Rishi finally admits DPR is owned by Nikon' b/c of one video sponsored by Nikon, while we have more videos sponsored by Canon.

People promulgating ridiculous assertions that are untrue prompt me to respond. My apologies if that offends anyone.

Feel free to read our FAQ on sponsored content, and also consider that photography gear review outlets are dropping like flies, so the fact that we're looking to innovate in terms of our content strategy should be seen as an intense desire for us to survive so we can continue to provide quality content for you, our readers.

Heck, I'm trying to find hundreds of thousands of $$ to actually develop proper lens tests with Roger Cicala. But you think we're on an anti-Canon campaign?

The disconnect between what some people here on CR think and reality is so vast I often find it difficult not to chime in.

-Rishi

 

[Jopa]

Heck, I'm trying to find hundreds of thousands of $$ to actually develop proper lens tests with Roger Cicala.

Interesting... more details please

 

[rishi_sanyal]

Heck, I'm trying to find hundreds of thousands of $$ to actually develop proper lens tests with Roger Cicala.

Interesting... more details please

Thanks for the inquiry. We're trying to get lens reviews back off the ground but in a totally different manner: in a way that actually shows photographers the differences between lenses they may be considering to purchase for their body.

It's a very difficult problem, but one that Roger and I want to solve in a practical manner, using authoritative tests.

I can't say more right now because I don't wish to over promise. Roger is already doing the best lens testing in the world. Bar none. We want to find a way to make his data more widely available and combine it with our own measurements to corroborate, but also to visualize show the implications of his data.

It's a difficult problem but one that must be solved to help our audience and you. Take for example the fact that current flat field MTF data has little to no bearing on a lens that is used to shoot an off-center subject using an actual focus point there, off-center, because of field curvature.

No one addresses this and yet MTF test data on review sites are widely accepted. Why? They're only relevant for a brick wall.

I don't know about you but I don't shoot brick walls.

Lots of work to be done We are researching intensively. I wish I could spend more time just sharing our thoughts and what we're trying to do... Might keep humanize us a bit!

In the end we're here to try and serve the photographer better. We have a ways to go.

 

[Jopa]

Heck, I'm trying to find hundreds of thousands of $$ to actually develop proper lens tests with Roger Cicala.

Interesting... more details please

Thanks for the inquiry. We're trying to get lens reviews back off the ground but in a totally different manner: in a way that actually shows photographers the differences between lenses they may be considering to purchase for their body.

It's a very difficult problem, but one that Roger and I want to solve in a practical manner, using authoritative tests.

I can't say more right now because I don't wish to over promise. Roger is already doing the best lens testing in the world. Bar none. We want to find a way to make his data more widely available and combine it with our own measurements to corroborate, but also to visualize show the implications of his data.

It's a difficult problem but one that must be solved to help our audience and you. Take for example the fact that current flat field MTF data has little to no bearing on a lens that is used to shoot an off-center subject using an actual focus point there, off-center, because of field curvature.

No one addresses this and yet MTF test data on review sites are widely accepted. Why? They're only relevant for a brick wall.

I don't know about you but I don't shoot brick walls.

Lots of work to be done We are researching intensively. I wish I could spend more time just sharing our thoughts and what we're trying to do... Might keep humanize us a bit!

In the end we're here to try and serve the photographer better. We have a ways to go.

Thank you Rishi. Very looking forward to see this ^
I know Bryan / TDP is using Roger's charts for a while, but it seems like you guys want to bring this to a whole new level, hope it will work out well for you.

 

[Jack Douglas]

I think this desire to be relevant is commendable and I look forward to the outcome.

Rishi, I for one have never considered you "anti-canon". I did however perceive, as others did also, that there were subtle biases evident in the odd statement that you made.

Obviously, you did not agree and you stated that, which could have been the end of it. However, no one likes to see themselves as a victim of what they perceive as false statements and there is a tendency to engage when the opposite choice would likely be better.

The longer the engagement the more likely it is that either party will make some poorly thought out/emotional statement with bystanders only to accommodating to join the "fun". It's a waste of everyone's time and even the fun factor wears thin.

There is only one solution. Having summarized your position, refrain from further responses/rebuttals. Your talents are far to great to be wasting time on this topic.

Jack

 

[unfocused]

...But what's not amusing to me is a user who is on a dedicated campaign via tens (hundreds?) of posts to prove that I am pro-Sony? pro-Nikon? oh-I-don't-know-but-def-anti-Canon. With poor/no/mis-extrapolated data...

...People promulgating ridiculous assertions that are untrue prompt me to respond. My apologies if that offends anyone...

...The disconnect between what some people here on CR think and reality is so vast I often find it difficult not to chime in...

I agree. Personally, I have found the feud/vendetta against DPR that was largely started by one individual and taken up by others to be an embarrassment to this entire site.

My own oft-stated opinion has not changed and will not change. Review sites exist to offer readers the opinions of the reviewers. Absolute impartiality is neither possible nor desirable. The purpose of a review is to learn what a reviewer thinks of a product. Readers should then judge for themselves whether or not the reviewer's assessment is accurate or not. And, if it is relevant to their use.

In my case, I have found DPR's critiques of Canon products to be generally accurate and fair. Fawning reviews are worthless and the ridiculous parsing of the language of DPR reviews that occurs on this site (They described Canon this way! They Described Nikon this way! Therefore they hate Canon and love Nikon!!!) can be just plain silly.

 

[privatebydesign]

I find it embarrassing too. How anybody who purports to offer unbiased controlled and semi controlled testing can claim personal reasons as a legitimate excuse for hiding their data is scandalous and strikes to the very heart of their honesty openness and transparency.

 

[rishi_sanyal]

I find it embarrassing too. How anybody who purports to offer unbiased controlled and semi controlled testing can claim personal reasons as a legitimate excuse for hiding their data is scandalous and strikes to the very heart of their honesty openness and transparency.

Choosing not to respond to threats by acquiescing to them is not a 'personal reason'. It's a policy that avoids bullying.

I have personally made tens to hundreds of Raw files publicly available showing the same exact thing on DPReview.com, and the fact that you won't rest till you see this one file points to a personal vendetta on your part, not 'personal reasons' on mine.

I agree with others here though, particularly Jack, so I will respectfully bow out now.

 

[john kriegsmann]

Canon will never catch up to Sony in the mirrorless area. its too late for them, they got such a late start. I love Canon and have bought their cameras for over 20 years. They make great bodies, and super lenses. Their bodies have simple and intuitive controls. What they lack and have lacked for the past decade is cutting edge sensor technology.
I do not like Sony bodies, they are more computers than cameras with extremely deep and multi layered menus for even basic camera functions. What they do have is cutting edge sensors and good form factors for their lenses and mirrorless bodies. Fuji is another innovative camera company that has come from know where to lead the cropped sensor mirrorless market with innovative bodies and small, high quality lenses. Canon's M5- meh!

 

[dak723]

Canon will never catch up to Sony in the mirrorless area. its too late for them, they got such a late start. I love Canon and have bought their cameras for over 20 years. They make great bodies, and super lenses. Their bodies have simple and intuitive controls. What they lack and have lacked for the past decade is cutting edge sensor technology.
I do not like Sony bodies, they are more computers than cameras with extremely deep and multi layered menus for even basic camera functions. What they do have is cutting edge sensors and good form factors for their lenses and mirrorless bodies. Fuji is another innovative camera company that has come from know where to lead the cropped sensor mirrorless market with innovative bodies and small, high quality lenses. Canon's M5- meh!

Funny, I bought Sony mirrorless and thought it was the worst camera I ever bought. And then a couple years later I bought the Canon M5...and I love it! Small, light, the lenses are excellent and it takes great photos.

Sony may innovate, but all those bells and whistles don't mean much when their color is sub-par. Until Sony can produce beautiful color, their cameras will always be sub-par. And their lenses aren't anywhere near the quality of Canon either. But I guess all those "innovations" make up for that.

 

[Jack Douglas]

For me, if I don't like using something, like I get irritated by the way it works or lack of features, it spoils my fun factor. Since I'm not earning money with my camera, what is there if there if it isn't fun. Of course viewing a lovely shot with great IQ is also part of the fun.

No camera is perfect so it comes down to what is disappointing vs. what is irritating and annoying. When I read:

"I do not like Sony bodies, they are more computers than cameras with extremely deep and multi layered menus for even basic camera functions.",

that's enough for me, especially when virtually all higher quality cameras are producing very decent photos. Endless debate.

Jack

 

[Jopa]

Canon will never catch up to Sony in the mirrorless area. its too late for them, they got such a late start. I love Canon and have bought their cameras for over 20 years. They make great bodies, and super lenses. Their bodies have simple and intuitive controls. What they lack and have lacked for the past decade is cutting edge sensor technology.
I do not like Sony bodies, they are more computers than cameras with extremely deep and multi layered menus for even basic camera functions. What they do have is cutting edge sensors and good form factors for their lenses and mirrorless bodies. Fuji is another innovative camera company that has come from know where to lead the cropped sensor mirrorless market with innovative bodies and small, high quality lenses. Canon's M5- meh!

Nikon now offers the best sensors, take a look at DxO. And it's not even made by Sony. Time do jump ship from Sony to Nikon! If you jump ship every year or even sooner, you'll be chosen as a best customer of all camera manufactures