Industry News: Sony Introduces the High-resolution A7R IV with World’s First 61.0 MP Back-illuminated, Full-frame Image Sensor

snoke

EOS RP
Jul 20, 2017
282
24
Yep. I have done some real estate stuff and generally have to bracket anywhere from 3stops under to 3 stops over exposed to manage the difference. That would mean in order to make a bracketing situation manageable in one shot the sony would have to be 5 stops better DR than the canon. Not the case. A moon over water. No way a one or two stop difference can make that photo magically any different. Anyone who canot tale a decent landscape image on a canon is obviously a poor photographer. Evidenced by the fact that i have seen a bazillion amazing landscape images taken on all sorts of cameras. Even lowly entry level canon dslr's. These claims seem a bit ridiculous
Blending need no motion for perfection. Moon moves. Ocean moves. House not move. No wind, trees still. Then good for blend. Blend not always answer. Try blend Formula 1 car photo when racing: 300kph = 1cm at 1/8000. +2 EV, car move 4cm at 1/2000.
 
  • Like
Reactions: clicstudio

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,394
828
Blending need no motion for perfection. Moon moves. Ocean moves. House not move. No wind, trees still. Then good for blend. Blend not always answer.
Irrelevant to his point that clicstudio's post was nothing but hyperbole. Having said that, manual blends do not require there to be no motion. There simply has to be no motion which crosses a (feathered) boundary. I've done many manual blends involving the ocean.

Try blend Formula 1 car photo when racing: 300kph = 1cm at 1/8000. +2 EV, car move 4cm at 1/2000.
There is no situation where a Sony could capture a Formula 1 photo but a Canon...or even an older Canon...could not. You do not encounter extremely wide luminance ranges in those scenes. Formula 1 races were shot with original 1D's without blown highlights or blocked shadows for crying out loud.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aussie shooter
Aug 11, 2010
402
30
Miami Beach
www.clicstudio.com
Then you should have no problem posting side-by-side examples so we can all see the huge difference.
I dont need to convince you nor trying to convert you. I can see the the difference and it was clear to me. That's all. I had both cameras with comparable 24-70 F2.8 glass on both. Also I forgot to mention how much better the AF is. I was tired of out of focus photos... Mainly shooting full body portraits, the focus screen doesn't even reach the top of the frame to focus on a face. On the Sony it goes all the way up. When you or anyone else here has both cameras with comparable lenses for a few weeks to compare, then talk to me. Until then, u know what to do.
 
Aug 11, 2010
402
30
Miami Beach
www.clicstudio.com
Blending need no motion for perfection. Moon moves. Ocean moves. House not move. No wind, trees still. Then good for blend. Blend not always answer. Try blend Formula 1 car photo when racing: 300kph = 1cm at 1/8000. +2 EV, car move 4cm at 1/2000.
Yeap. Agreed. People don't realize that anything is possible with bracketing multiple exposures and multiple focus stacking and lightroom and photoshop only if the subject is stationary. Sony cameras alleviate the need for so much processing with just one raw file. That's what I like about it.
 

scyrene

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 4, 2013
2,504
392
UK
www.flickr.com
I dont need to convince you nor trying to convert you. I can see the the difference and it was clear to me. That's all. I had both cameras with comparable 24-70 F2.8 glass on both. Also I forgot to mention how much better the AF is. I was tired of out of focus photos... Mainly shooting full body portraits, the focus screen doesn't even reach the top of the frame to focus on a face. On the Sony it goes all the way up. When you or anyone else here has both cameras with comparable lenses for a few weeks to compare, then talk to me. Until then, u know what to do.
I think everyone should be glad if you're happy with the decisions you made. But as they say, 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' - to be blunt, your assertions are indeed, as others have said, hyperbolic, and not supported by independent lines of evidence as to the relative capabilities of Canon and Sony cameras in the situations you describe. As for saying nobody's criticism is valid until they have both cameras to hand, well that's just silly, especially as your claims are merely assertions. My conclusion is either you're trolling, or you're foolish (maybe both).
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,394
828
I dont need to convince you nor trying to convert you.
You posted obviously false claims and hyperbole and you got called out for it. There's nothing wrong with a fantastic claim so long as you can back it up. You can't.

When you or anyone else here has both cameras with comparable lenses for a few weeks to compare, then talk to me. Until then, u know what to do.
I have, so you can stop posturing and appealing to yourself as an expert now.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,609
2,069
Sony cameras alleviate the need for so much processing with just one raw file. That's what I like about it.
I guess there’s just no limit to what you can do with nearly a whole extra one stop of DR. The DRastic DiffeRences are DownRight DRamatic!
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtaylor

Aussie shooter

@brett.guy.photography
Dec 6, 2016
459
459
Blending need no motion for perfection. Moon moves. Ocean moves. House not move. No wind, trees still. Then good for blend. Blend not always answer. Try blend Formula 1 car photo when racing: 300kph = 1cm at 1/8000. +2 EV, car move 4cm at 1/2000.
I never mentioned blending for a moon over ocean image. I said the extra stop of dr on a sony will make no difference in that situation because the dr of the scene is way beyond any possible for a camera to capture. Even a sony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtaylor

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,394
828
I guess there’s just no limit to what you can do with nearly a whole extra one stop of DR. The DRastic DiffeRences are DownRight DRamatic!
I wanted to take a photo of a black hole and a star in the same frame. With Sony I got detail in both! It doesn't matter that light can't escape the black hole, because with Sony SuperDR I was able to push the shadows until they were as bright as the sun.

Canon. Is. Doomed!
 

Normalnorm

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 25, 2012
525
132
Take Real estate interior photos of an apartment with a window in mid day without bracketing or additional lights for example. Take good sunset photos. Take moonlight over the ocean photos. Beach portraits in the shade with just a little flash fill. I couldn't do it with Canon...
You most likely can't do it with Sony either. It certainly wouldn't in my tests.
If you can, please post samples for us.
I shoot mainly architecture in business and have seen a ton of architectural work by people who shoot all sorts of gear from Sony A6000 to Phase One IQ180. None of them can make a 6stop differential in window brightness work with acceptable results in one shot.
Expose for the window and drag up the interior (the important bit the client is paying for) and the dark tones fall to bits. Not how it's done.
Maybe it works for manky RE pics for someone who can't spend more than 40 minutes in a property. But then why not use a phone? They have HDR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aussie shooter