DPReview: Canon EOS R vs Nikon Z 6 vs Sony a7 III, which is best?

[YuengLinger]

DPR is not the only entity rating the EOS R as a "show" (third place, for those of you who don't frequent the track) in this race. Is any non-Canon sponsored review site claiming the Canon is the best of these three?

 

[LDS]

One's got to be pretty naive to believe that a Hawai trip would not have a positive incidence on the review. Of course, personal preferences and experiences also matter.

There's an increasing number of "influencers" on the internet which are paid (directly or with other means) to promote products. Companies have people fully dedicated to manage influencers and ensure they promote as required. It goes from influencers who makes million to those who get only free products to review them favourably (and maybe make some bucks reselling them if they don't need them). Because you can try to influence buyers at many different levels - from reviews to shopping sites comments.

It's something that goes beyond personal bias (anybody has some, more or less), they are hidden deliberate marketing techniques that can be very effective. It's not really something new, but as other "social engineering" techniques, they got a big boost from a channel like the internet. It's becoming a huge underground battle.

As far as I know, even this site could be one

In some jurisdiction may be mandatory to disclose it, but it's not difficult to find some ways around that. Frankly, I welcome news about products, but I learnt to read *any* review with a pinch of salt.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

In a nutshell:
1. Sony, maturing product line
2. Nikon, good first try
3. Canon, I guess we have to release something if Nikon does

The ranking reflects resources invested in developing them

 

[privatebydesign]

DPR is not the only entity rating the EOS R as a "show" (third place, for those of you who don't frequent the track) in this race. Is any non-Canon sponsored review site claiming the Canon is the best of these three?

Probably not, but when did you use a body in isolation? I always needed to use a lens with one and if you look at the body and lens system for a keen photographer the R wipes the floor with the other two. Who else makes a 50 f1.2, or a workhorse mid zoom at f2? Nobody. As a photographer I am far more interested in lenses than if ia body has ‘eye’ focus or ‘face’ focus.

If I were starting out today I’d be very excited by the thought of using a high quality 50mm f1.2 throughput my career and know I can seemlesly upload jpegs (with good natural colors) via my connected device to my social media feeds to let everyone see how good I am and how amazing my life is than either the Sony or the Nikon, having said that if I was that person I’d have succumbed to the peer pressure and already have a Sony...

 

[tmc784]

When I spend $3K more, I would like to buy made in Japan camera, I won't buy made in third world country camera.

 

[privatebydesign]

In a nutshell:
1. Sony, maturing product line
2. Nikon, good first try
3. Canon, I guess we have to release something if Nikon does

The ranking reflects resources invested in developing them

I doubt that, I expect Canon spent way more developing the new lens system than the other two combined, well we know they spent more than Sony because they spent zero on it as it’s a legacy holdover.

 

[aceflibble]

EDIT: In fact I'm going to copy & paste this portion right at the top here so people definitely see it:

I mean, Canon flew reviewers to Hawaii to review the EOS R. Yes, Hawaii. The same place y'all are complaining about Sony sending reviewers to. The exact same place. Well, there is one difference: the people Sony sent to Hawaii are not the same people who wrote this 3-way article, but the people who Canon sent to Hawaii are. Allison Johnson is who Sony took to Hawaii, and she did not write the article we're talking about here. Richard Butler is who Canon took to Hawaii, and he is one of the two people who wrote this article.
In fact, not only did Canon pay for Richard to go to Hawaii to see the EOS R, but they also got the whole DPReview video team over there, too. (It should be pointed out that for the a7III, Sony sent the DPR video team to... well, nowhere. They did their videos of that camera in Canada, where they live.)

Rest of original post continues below, with that section in context.

Ditto.
The features / specs or things they tend to comment on as major considerations are things that I couldn't care less about. The things that are important to me as a photographer...they skim over and give little consideration over. It's like a site written by technology fan boys.

Gee, it's almost as if different people have different tastes, preferences, and requirements, isn't it?

If someone is trying to do wildlife photography and they find the AF on the 100-400 isn't keeping up, you don't say "well it's perfectly okay for my studio product work, so you must be wrong" or "useless hack, I bet B&H paid you to say that so they can sell more 500mm f/4s instead". You don't tell a jazz musician to play something a little simpler because you like pop music and therefore jazz shouldn't be played and all jazz musicians are secretly working to push Gibson guitars.

Some people don't care about the innards of a camera body as long as they end up with the shots they want with minimal fuss. Other people don't care about all the little capacitors and transistors but they do want to know how far they can push the camera in the field. Another bunch of people want to open up every camera and inspect every single piece of wire with a microscope and measure everything in minute detail.
DPR happen to belong to the latter category. That does not make them wrong, or that they miss the point, or that you and your interests are any more righteous. It just means that they are one group of people writing for one type of audience and you happen to not be that audience.

If a camera site is going into more detail than you're interested in and picking apart things you don't care about, that's fine. There's room for both of you. Read a different site and ignore the sites which don't cover the things you want.

When European car companies were no longer allowed to let journalists "test" their luxury models on weekends, many reviews became out of a sudden less positive. Coincidence???
One's got to be pretty naive to believe that a Hawai trip would not have a positive incidence on the review. Of course, personal preferences and experiences also matter.

The critical aspects, which apparently everyone here has just chosen to turn a blind eye to, are:

1) Every company ships reviews off to swanky locations, special set-up test environments, gives them free demo units with fore immediate support than any regular customer would receive, etc. This is not exclusive to Sony. Canon do it, too. So do Nikon, Fuji, Olympus, you name it. It's so common, it's not even exclusive to luxury goods anymore. A friend of mine used to work for a video game website and she was flown out to Dubai to preview a video game which, at that point, wasn't even half complete. She ended up not even writing up the preview, but they still paid for her to fly back over a second time once the game was finished. And that's a common entertainment product which sold for about £45. Do you really think there is any company in the world which doesn't try to give previewers and reviewers the most impossibly perfect scenarios for adjudicating their premium products? If you can get a holiday to Dubai for a £45 game, you will get a holiday to look at a £2000 camera, too, and everything in-between.

I mean, Canon flew reviewers to Hawaii to review the EOS R. Yes, Hawaii. The same place y'all are complaining about Sony sending reviewers to. The exact same place. Well, there is one difference: the people Sony sent to Hawaii are not the same people who wrote this 3-way article, but the people who Canon sent to Hawaii are. Allison Johnson is who Sony took to Hawaii, and she did not write the article we're talking about here. Richard Butler is who Canon took to Hawaii, and he is one of the two people who wrote this article.
In fact, not only did Canon pay for Richard to go to Hawaii to see the EOS R, but they also got the whole DPReview video team over there, too. (It should be pointed out that for the a7III, Sony sent the DPR video team to... well, nowhere. They did their videos of that camera in Canada, where they live.)

So, you know. Y'all might want to actually pay attention to who has been sent where by who before you start throwing around aspersions. If anybody is going to accuse DPR of being sweetened up by Sony then you should also be saying they've been equally sweetened by Canon, if not more so.

2) There's a big difference between saying "these people accepted essentially a free holiday, so I don't trust that what they say is entirely impartial", and "this outlet has a brand bias". One is a harsh but not entirely unrealistic take; the other is straight-up libel. It may shock some people to learn this, but phrasing matters. There's a reason why even "opinion pieces" still have to be looked over by copy editors and have their wording chosen very carefully.
And before anybody repeats again the "oh it's just the internet, who cares/nothing will happen" schtick, bear in mind that this site itself can be held responsible for promoting libel if a company did wish to press the issue. In other words, regardless of whether an individual poster had legal action taken against them, this site could have action taken against it; you are putting CR itself in a dangerous position when someone makes these kinds of poorly-worded claims. And I'm sure the site owners will agree that they don't fancy taking those kinds of risks just so a few users can write "anti-Canon bias" on the forums.
So, again, choose words carefully is the point. It's okay to voice your distrust of an outlet, but it's a whole 'nother issue when you start using words like "bias".

Do try to remember that although accusing someone of hiding behind a forum name to make false claims when those claims are supported by documented evidence is not, in fact, illegal...it does make the accuser appear rather foolish.

Yes, even if you're not hiding behind a forum name and you really are Mr. Ace Flibble.

No, there's no documented evidence of anybody at DPR working under an edict to intentionally slant reviews and copy. There is documented evidence that staff at DPR have accepted some pretty nice weekends from multiple companies—every company, in fact—but acknowledging that is not the same as throwing around claims that writers have been bought. Again, see point #2 above. Phrasing matters.

It's also not "accusing" someone of using a penname on a forum when registering for the site makes that mandatory. That's simply an objective fact. Nor is simply reminding someone that their username does not protect them an accusation of anything, either, which is what was actually said.
And no, of course I'm not really Mr Ace Flibble, nor did I ever claim to be. I'm not a Mr, for a start.

 

[YuengLinger]

In a nutshell:
1. Sony, maturing product line
2. Nikon, good first try
3. Canon, I guess we have to release something if Nikon does

The ranking reflects resources invested in developing them

OR the heavily cropped 4k, and the weird Multi-function swipe-strip thingy, and the lack of a sensible AF-point selection control. It's a camera that shows Canon has big things ahead, and, because I'm invested currently in EF lenses, and I'm looking forward to the great RF lenses, I'm happy to wait for the RF body that works for me.

But to wail and moan about bias and whatever might drive somebody to choose another camera as a "winner" in this round is...I can't even think of a word that fits.

 

[Random Orbits]

DPR is not the only entity rating the EOS R as a "show" (third place, for those of you who don't frequent the track) in this race. Is any non-Canon sponsored review site claiming the Canon is the best of these three?

I don't think so. I think the bigger issue is "value." The R was initially priced higher than I think it should have been, and there are already discounts available on the R (via street price, etc.). That reflects more on Canon marketing strategy than anything else. They're trying to get the highest profit possible, so they drop the price over time. Remember when the 24-70 f/4 IS debuted around 1500? Or the 35 f/2 IS, 24 f/2.8 IS and 28 f/2.8 IS in the 600-800 range? With 6D2s going between 1000-1500 and 5D4s going around 2500, the R will follow a similar curve, but I think it will be faster because of the Z6/A7III pricing and because of the upcoming R bodies.

If the R were priced at 1800 or 1900, I don't think there would be as much angst, but I do think it's going to fall to those values quickly. The DPR video said that all three cameras are mature and will take great pictures. That is the baseline. But it doesn't tell a good story if the lowest gets a 95 and the highest a 98, so they stress the differences -- IBIS, 1 vs 2 card slots (although how many people write video to both cards at the same time), etc. I take video of the kids' plays, and I still choose to use 1080p even though I have the 5D4 and the R. The R is more efficient, but 4K can still take up to 120 Mbps or 15 MBps or 54 GB/hr. I'm not willing to go through 54 GB of hard drive space for a 1 hr video.

I got the R and the 24-105 kit at effectively 20% off (20% back in points to spend later). I thought that was an ok deal. But as privatebydesign stated the reason to get the R is the lenses. The 50 f/1.2 is fantastic (where is Viggo when you need him to swoon ). The focusing with EF fast primes is more accurate than my 5D4 off center. The R is positioned to kill off the 6D2, not the 5D4. I still prefer the 5D4, but the R is growing on me. I use the control ring for ISO, and the multifunction bar to lock/unlock drag AF. The wheels moves the AF point several points per press (pad is slower), but it's still too slow to move across the screen because the R has so many AF points. That is where the touch/drag helps.

 

[YuengLinger]

I don't think so. I think the bigger issue is "value." The R was initially priced higher than I think it should have been, and there are already discounts available on the R (via street price, etc.). That reflects more on Canon marketing strategy than anything else. They're trying to get the highest profit possible, so they drop the price over time. Remember when the 24-70 f/4 IS debuted around 1500? Or the 35 f/2 IS, 24 f/2.8 IS and 28 f/2.8 IS in the 600-800 range? With 6D2s going between 1000-1500 and 5D4s going around 2500, the R will follow a similar curve, but I think it will be faster because of the Z6/A7III pricing and because of the upcoming R bodies.

If the R were priced at 1800 or 1900, I don't think there would be as much angst, but I do think it's going to fall to those values quickly. The DPR video said that all three cameras are mature and will take great pictures. That is the baseline. But it doesn't tell a good story if the lowest gets a 95 and the highest a 98, so they stress the differences -- IBIS, 1 vs 2 card slots (although how many people write video to both cards at the same time), etc. I take video of the kids' plays, and I still choose to use 1080p even though I have the 5D4 and the R. The R is more efficient, but 4K can still take up to 120 Mbps or 15 MBps or 54 GB/hr. I'm not willing to go through 54 GB of hard drive space for a 1 hr video.

I got the R and the 24-105 kit at effectively 20% off (20% back in points to spend later). I thought that was an ok deal. But as privatebydesign stated the reason to get the R is the lenses. The 50 f/1.2 is fantastic (where is Viggo when you need him to swoon ). The focusing with EF fast primes is more accurate than my 5D4 off center. The R is positioned to kill off the 6D2, not the 5D4. I still prefer the 5D4, but the R is growing on me. I use the control ring for ISO, and the multifunction bar to lock/unlock drag AF. The wheels moves the AF point several points per press (pad is slower), but it's still too slow to move across the screen because the R has so many AF points. That is where the touch/drag helps.

Great response. Yes, and good photographer is going to take many excellent photos with any of these. I don't know how much a few hundred dollars in price affects reviews, but it is important to remember the class of camera Canon has released. It is NOT a follow up to a 5D IV, even if it shares the sensor tech.

Probably most people who, such as yourself, actually USE video functions are happy in the 1080p zone for practical reasons, though as more 4K TV's are sold, home-video will still be one of the few actual sources of native 4K content for a while.

And, as privatebydesign reminds us, not all photographers considering this level of camera are doing so without either owning lenses already or looking at the bigger picture of what lenses are available right now.

I am glad to hear you and others making good use of the touchscreen for AF-point selection; however, I hope Canon comes up with something separate from the display screen (but better than the 80D style selector the R seems to have).

 

[Uneternal]

As always, Dpreview favors Sony over everything. And Nikon gets the bonus second place for having a Sony sensor.
Deliberately hiding the fact, that EF lenses perform far better on an EOS R with native adapter than on a Sony with third party adapter at reduced burst rate and also reduced AF hit rate - especially in dim light. Which is deliberately misleading people into buying a Sony.

Also the fact they put Nikon second in landscape/wedding photography dismissing the 30 MP of the R and instead cheering for that 1 stop more DR (although it shows HEAVY banding) is just ridiculous.

 

[YuengLinger]

Is Canon the Rodney Dangerfield of camera brands? "I don't get no respect"

I don't think so. But posters here get aggravated every time Canon releases a product that isn't universally recognized as the best in the industry. Is there some vast Sony-wing conspiracy out there?

 

[crazyrunner33]

The R is more efficient, but 4K can still take up to 120 Mbps or 15 MBps or 54 GB/hr. I'm not willing to go through 54 GB of hard drive space for a 1 hr video.

In the future, H.265 will be your best friend. Archiving 4K footage in H.265 is the way to go. Even if you're still shooting 1080, it's nice to archive it in H.265 at around 3-5 mbps.

 

[privatebydesign]

In the future, H.265 will be your best friend. Archiving 4K footage in H.265 is the way to go. Even if you're still shooting 1080, it's nice to archive it in H.265 at around 3-5 mbps.

H.265 isn't the future, it is the next step forwards, it might last 5 years before something even more efficient will come out, and we'll need it if we start going to 6k and 8k because competition dictates cameras have to have it.

 

[The Fat Fish]

Instead of blaming DPReview for a "biased review", why not blame Canon for not making a better camera? It's 2018 and the specs are lagging. That's not to say the EOS R is a bad camera, it isn't. It's just not a good value camera considering the specifications and most expensive in it's class price tag.

- No IBIS, No full frame 4K, No new sensor, no dual card slots and so on.

 

[[email protected]]

Both the Sigma MC-11 and Metabones adapters would be more than capable of adapting Canon EF lenses to FE mount with full auto-focus at almost the same performance as on an EF body.

Not being aware of those would mean you're not very familiar with the Sony system.

It appears I'm aware of the adapters you are aware of (metabones and mc11, no?), but that DPR is either aware of some other adapter, or its statement was incorrect. Regarding the adapters you and I are aware of, here are the actual measured reviews I found most comprehensive.

Dustin Abbott:

"Even with the Metabones, which is the better focus experience with the Canons, I wouldn't feel that for critical shooting... .... that focus is quite there yet..."

The Camera Store (the guys DPR has since hired to do their video reviews)

"...autofocus with adapters in the video market has still not arrived, and you're largely still going to manual focus."
&
"...sometimes there is a little hesitation... There is a slight bit of jitteriness as you move backward and forward..."

The adapters are generally positively reviewed, but they are not at all considered equivalent experiences. Unless you know something different. This DPR review could be fixed with a small language change to be more subtle, and changing their colored table to indicate that under the Sony system, the Canon-mount lenses have some small limitations, much like they made a different color under the Nikon f-mount box, indicating some autofocus exceptions.

 

[snappy604]

Wide lens are alright but Tele lens results were not that good. there is more than AF. The EF/RF adaptor is a passive adaptive compared to Metabones. modern day lens has lens data and don't think metabones can convert all lens data and translate it to Sony protocol. you lose out on this plus every time Canon updates lens FW, who is going to rewrite and fix the FW. It's a messy solution. Sony pumped lots of money working with Metabones but now they have many G master lens to sell, do you think Sony long term plan is to keep supporting this helping Canon sell more lens.
One of these days, the Canon lens will stop working on a Sony and the user now has to decide to chose between lens maker or body maker.

again everyone's needs and experiences will be different, but the sigma 150-600 contemporary with a canon mount and the canon 70-200 2.8IS v1 both worked just fine and I consider both telephotos.. the buddy took some great hummingbird pics with the 600... so not sure I agree with your statement, but possibly some subtle differences I don't notice and you do

the other way to consider this.. sure Sony may stop supporting the direct writing of adapters in future, but by then you've either decided to get into the Sony ecosystem or the canon one.. this is a bridge in essence. Also while canon does produce great glass, if you're not at the very top end, the 3rd parties give great lenses for a much lower cost and support the major vendors (canon, sony, nikon)... the tamron 28-75 2.8 IS produced some gorgeous pics on my friend's new a73 in very low light.

Not anti-canon, just think we need to be open minded that sometimes others do produce good products and sometimes others like those other products and its not the end of the world.

 

[jmoya]

This is what canon deserves for not putting out anything that can compete with the existing market. I've only ever shot canon nor do I choose to shoot anything else. I just have lost faith in their camera making abilities since I bought the canon 5dIV. They should've earned their lesson ever since the canon 6d II failure. How is recycling old tech into a new body classify the camera as new? Their not being innovative? I love canon lenses and their color science but their handicapping their cameras lately has really been getting to me for years not. Till they get it together and come out with a camera worth spending on I'll stick to the 5dIV. It's a shame.

 

[dak723]

Instead of blaming DPReview for a "biased review", why not blame Canon for not making a better camera? It's 2018 and the specs are lagging. That's not to say the EOS R is a bad camera, it isn't. It's just not a good value camera considering the specifications and most expensive in it's class price tag.

- No IBIS, No full frame 4K, No new sensor, no dual card slots and so on.

Of course, the same could be said for any camera - as they all have their pros and cons. Why not blame Sony for not making a better camera?

- No articulating screen, no DPAF, poor ergonomics, sub-par color science, and so on. (And in Sony's case, they have now had 3 generations to get it right, why don't they?)

I think it is far more useful to get reviews from actual photographers - not sites like DPR. Steve Huff has had a couple articles about the Canon R - and he is a long time Sony user. He says:

"The EOS-R does indeed do a few things better than the Sony A7III and HERE THEY ARE: Body style and body size, controls and ergonomics, EVF, button placement and easy menus as well as ease of use between video and photo. I prefer the swivel out screen as well for video, no need for an external display when filming yourself and can change settings on the fly while in front of the camera, and again, the focus speed and color are fantastic. The AF is better on the Canon over Sony with photos and video. Dual Pixel is as good as it gets, and Canon offers a smooth, almost cinematic style to the auto focus. For video, it’s amazing. The EOS-R feels so good while using it, and the grip is just right. I also think the overall IQ is better, more pleasing and with more depth but I am picky."

Also, "Yes yes yes, the Sony A7III does many things very well and even offers better video specs. But one thing for me that I do not get with the Sony is the Canon color, and yes, it is a real thing. Just as Leica has their own color signature, Sony has theirs, Fuji has theirs, Canon has theirs and Nikon has a unique Nikon color. No matter what camera brand one buys, it will have that brands color signature and in reality one should choose their system based on their color preferences and lens selection."

Another photographer I trust is Ming Thein. He has a very informative website with lots of great information. His review is of the 2nd generation Sony, not the 3rd, but I'm not sure there is any reason to think things have changed. While every one has the same spec - sensor cleaning - that doesn't mean they all work the same or as well: "On sensor cleaning: I’ve already got stubborn dust spots on mine that cannot be dislodged with blower or shaker. It will have to be wet cleaned, but the sensor suspension mechanism is delicate and this makes me very nervous. Note: in four years of multiple Olympus bodies and over 100,000 images plus lens changes with no heed for ambient dust, I’ve never had to wet clean a sensor. Or even use a blower, for that matter."

From Steve Huff on IBIS. Again, having a spec does not mean they are all equal. "I have always found the 5 Axis inside the Sony A7 series to be lackluster. At least for video. I have loads of shaky Sony video with 5 Axis active. I used to think it was defective in my A7RII as I never saw any benefit when shooting video. When it was the same in the A7rIII I realized that in full frame cameras it just will not be like it is in Micro 4/3 cameras."

In other words, having a spec does not mean that it works well.

The best quote I have seen that sums up the Sony offerings (and I have tried the first 2 generations) comes from Ming Thein. After using the A7 II for many months, he wrote, ""It is not a camera, it’s an electronic gadget. After six months and eight thousand frames with it, I disliked it more and more."

I only have used these many examples and quotes because so many folks make these definitive statements that one camera is better than another, or that one camera has better specs than another. It seems fairly obvious that their is no definitive answer. it all depends on what specs you need and how well they work.

 

[neuroanatomist]

yes. That was in the past. Mirrorfree cameras can be made at lower cost and we should see *at least some* of that cost advantage reflected in prices. Sony and Nikon apparently both decided to do so (to an extent) with A7 III and Z6 pricing.

Where is your evidence supporting the claim that a mirrorless camera is cheaper to produce than an equivalent DSLR? Are you aware of the fact that unit production cost is only one component companies use to determine a market price, and generally not the most important one? (As an extreme example, a certain medication for cystic fibrosis is billed at $300K/year but costs about the same as aspirin to manufacture.) Incidentally, the Z6 costs the same as the D610 at launch, and the Z7 costs more than the D850 at launch. Doesn't exactly square with your logic. Oh, and to which comparable Sony DSLR are are you comparing the a7III?

Without knowing ... I am convinced ... Not very smart.

I agree, being convinced of something regarding which you know nothing is not very smart.

But then, I've come to suspect you are merely yet another incarnation of AvTvM, and in that case none of the above really comes as a surprise.