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

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,577
654
119
As a nature/landscape photographer, 15 stops of dynamic range really gets my attention!!
Why?, It’s marketing bull. Sony have claimed 15 stops of DR since the A7r, the MkII and MkIII had less than the MkI and none of them have close to 15 stops of usable DR.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
461
431
I dont think anyone could credibly believe that. Canon has had years upon years where all they showed- even with thier biggest lines- 5d, 7d- that they were content with making adequate cameras.

There hasn't been true excitement for a canon body arguably since the 1dx2, and that has a limited audience. The RP got so much attention for its cheapness, but has one of the most pathetic spec sheets of any modern full frame camera. And thier sensor tech....just...shameful. Lookat all the bad press it took for them to finally be looking into ibis.

Canon's own philosophy has now doomed them. They can't catch up to this. They wont.

I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development. The writing is on the wall, especially if they have no desire to make class leading products. at that end, whats the point?
If I were you, I'd replace my crystal bowl with a reliable one... :LOL:
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
3,970
285
I cannot see how an EVF camera even this still non-existent - for a few months - Sony can be suitable for birding since it has an EVF. Maybe for bird portraits but for flying that remains to be seen. I guess it would make a fine landscape camera with an adaptor for Canon lenses though...

EDIT: I admit though that Canon should introduce new models a little faster. 7DII and 5DsR are long overdue.
 

woodman411

EOS T7i
Aug 1, 2017
99
47
USA
I stand by my statement.
The development of cameras is different from developing technology.
Canon has some incredible sensors and technology but seem to have a problem incorporating it into consumer products. And by consumer I mean pros as well vs heavy industrial applications.
Everytime I hear Canon is behind in sensor: please show me a real world comparison (not lab numbers, not the pathetic dxo numbers), real shots, where the 5d4 sensor "ruined" a shot and the Sony "saved" it because of dynamic range. Please just show me one example. Just one. You probably can't. But don't feel bad. No one can. You know why? Because like Alik Griffin said, the internet is one big echo chamber, people just regurgitating the same ol stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: peters

Yasko

EOS 80D
Jun 9, 2017
112
18
Nothing else attracts me more than Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L, and Canon RF 16-28mm F2 L.

Basically Canon RF F1.2 primes and F2 zooms are much more important, for pro level photography/equipment in my opinion, than anything else in mirrorless industry. Lenses are much more important than bodies. Canon R body is behind for sure and it will catch up. But if the lens mount has flaw, it is going to stay there for 30 years.

The only thing about Canon RF lenses that bothers me is the prices. Cheaper than Zeiss Otus, Leica M, I know. But still too much.
With today‘s high ISO Bodies a f/2 zoom is impressive but more a hassle to carry (and pay) than a need-to-have.
There are f/2.8 and f/4 lenses available with really good IQ. Of course a f/2 is „better“, but really necessary? I doubt that.
Looking forward to „you have no idea“ comments ;)
 
Aug 11, 2010
402
30
Miami Beach
www.clicstudio.com
As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.

sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.

i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/
I switched to an a7r iii from a 1Dx II last year and after 18 years of Canon "1" bodies. I could never go back. It's the best thing that ever happened to me. I can do.thjngs I never thought possible before and at half the price, half the weight and with 99% AF accuracy and lot more DR.
I don't do wild life but I have shot birds in flight just for fun and thos thing doesn't let go of the subject. Perfect AF every time. Rent one and try it for a few days. You willrnever go back. Just my opinion. Cheers!
 
  • Like
Reactions: rgeorge33 and Cryve

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,293
625
I dont think anyone could credibly believe that. Canon has had years upon years where all they showed- even with thier biggest lines- 5d, 7d- that they were content with making adequate cameras...I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development.
This is the kind of nonsense that results when every Canon innovation is ignored and every Sony innovation is hyped to the moon.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,293
625
Why?, It’s marketing bull. Sony have claimed 15 stops of DR since the A7r, the MkII and MkIII had less than the MkI and none of them have close to 15 stops of usable DR.
Eh...I may be forgetting a Sony PR, but I believe it's their fans who have been claiming 15 stops DR.

Every since the D800 came out fanboys have been acting as if ALL Sony sensors could deliver 15 stops (rounding up) of DR. This was never the case. The D8x0 series always stood out as the highest DR bodies, with a few other Nikon sensors delivering similar performance, all of them in the 14-15ev range. Most Sony sensors have been at or below the 5D4 (i.e. 13-14ev range). There are some notable exceptions where a Nikon or Sony sensor delivers 12s.

These same people tend to assume that ALL Canon sensors have the DR of a 5D3 with banding or a 6D2 with harsh shadow noise.

As I recall the mkII A7's did lose DR compared to the mkI's, and then the mkIII's actually got close to the D8x0 series. I don't feel like looking at DxO at the moment** to get exact numbers, but I think the mkIII's are on par with the D8x0 series, all of which are close to 15 (if you round up to a whole integer).

I've admittedly been a broken record regarding DR on this forum (and others) because...
  • Most people really have no idea how a DxO DR score translates into reality, i.e. what it actually means for image processing. DR is just pushed on sites like dpreview so they get GAS and "know" they need it.
  • Most images are not exposed/processed for maximum DR. Example: if you have a D850 and you're not using ETTR then you're not getting any more DR than a 5Dsr shooter who is using ETTR. If you're shooting JPEG you're not doing any better than cameras more than a decade old in RAW.
  • 1ev in the DxO score amounts to little more than a NR slider adjustment. 2ev means a real shadow detail difference that cannot be eliminated with post processing technique (NR), but only in images pushed to the max in terms of DR. 3ev and more starts to equate to actual difficulties with wide DR scenes that can only be shot in 1 frame.

** I really don't ever feel like looking at DxO, but their DR tests are internally consistent and reasonably close to reality. The rest of their tests are demonstrably trash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozturert

6degrees

RF 85mm F1.2
Sep 6, 2018
78
57
With today‘s high ISO Bodies a f/2 zoom is impressive but more a hassle to carry (and pay) than a need-to-have.
There are f/2.8 and f/4 lenses available with really good IQ. Of course a f/2 is „better“, but really necessary? I doubt that.
Looking forward to „you have no idea“ comments ;)
F4 or even F2.8 lenses can’t generate artistic bokeh effect. Period. They are only good if the purpose is to take snapshot with everything clear and no emphasized main focus in the photo. Those everything clear snapshot photos, taken by F4 or even F2.8 lenses, will not have popup effect which separating main focus/object from backgrounds, as those taken by F2, F1.4, or F1.2 pro lenses.

To make artistic photography, larger aperture lenses are the must.
 
Last edited:

unfocused

EOS 5D SR

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,293
625
Everytime I hear Canon is behind in sensor: please show me a real world comparison (not lab numbers, not the pathetic dxo numbers), real shots, where the 5d4 sensor "ruined" a shot and the Sony "saved" it because of dynamic range. Please just show me one example. Just one. You probably can't. But don't feel bad. No one can. You know why? Because like Alik Griffin said, the internet is one big echo chamber, people just regurgitating the same ol stuff.
You will never get that example. I have tried to get similar examples for years. Once the DR debate goes to "practical examples" I can typically end it with a shot I've repeatedly posted from an original Canon 7D.

I have never been forced to post shots from a higher DR Canon such as the 5Ds or a 5D4. No one has ever been able to challenge, with a real world example, a freaking 7D.

I've often been tempted to play devil's advocate because I know I could pull out the 7D and borrow a D800, go out at sunset, and illustrate the difference between them in a real world setting. I could probably find the difference against a 5D4 as well (but also illustrate how, in that case, it can be mitigated with NR). But the people who scream the loudest about how important DR is to every photograph they take have never, not even once, been able to challenge and force me to move to a higher DR camera than a freaking Canon 7D.

Most people are not shooting and processing for maximum DR. They're simply chasing DR as a spec.
 
  • Like
Reactions: woodman411

6degrees

RF 85mm F1.2
Sep 6, 2018
78
57
Those, who understand this issue, will appreciate what Canon RF F1.2 L lenses really mean. That is not what everyday-changed-body can replace. :). Yesterday they were cheering for a7riii, today a7riv, tomorrow a7rv. But lenses are the same. Canon RF F1.2 L are the future.
 
Last edited:

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
We, who understand this issue, will appreciate what Canon RF F1.2 L lenses really mean. That is not what everyday-changed-body can replace. :). Yesterday they were cheering for a7riii, today a7riv, tomorrow a7rv. But lenses are the same. Canon RF F1.2 L are the future.
I'm sorry but your response is incomprehensible. I understand that some people are in love with the overly romantic soft-focus effect that extremely wide aperture lenses provide. Wedding, portrait and commercial photographers who need to give the public what they want may utilize these lenses and there is nothing wrong with that.

The look can be fairly termed "artistic" but it hasn't been art since Paul Strand introduced straight photography to Alfred Stieglitz. I was simply trying to educate you. Of course, if you choose not to learn anything, that is your choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene
Feb 22, 2019
6
4
As a wildlife photographer i am kind of torn between canon and sony at the moment. On the one hand i really like canon so far and am pleased with the gear, but my needs arent getting adressed. i am longing for a native not 10k+ wildlife lens and for an up to date good high iso camera body with good reach (high mp) that can handle moving subjects.

sony seems really good regarding those requirements. 200-600 f6.3 + this 60mp beast with 10fps and supposedly a9 tracking is really all i want.

i dont know what to do. i really like canon but my needs arent getting adressed :/
Yes, I have to admit I've been looking at these. Currently I used a 7D mkII and 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS II as my main walk around set up, plus a number of other lenses and bodies. The 200-600mm f6.3 looks amazing. The internal zoom is the main feature, because in practise it's almost impossible to zoom in an out when something like a flying bird comes closer than expected. It seems sharp at 600mm, and there are other little features like the tabs either side of the lens for carrying it. This A7R IV gives 26.2mp in crop mode and it gives the buffer 3x the limit. With the high resolution EVF this is going to make an incredible portable wildlife set up.

I'd like to think Canon were going to match this because I'm very invested in the system, for instance I have 7 Canon fit macro lenses. However, there seems no good reason to think that Canon are going to introduce something competitive in the next few years. Like yourself 10k+ lenses are out of the question, not just on price, but on portability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Randywayne

AJ

EOS 7D MK II
Sep 11, 2010
614
21
Ok so the Sony has 9.8% more pixels in each dimension compared to the 5DS. To me this is more like Sony catching up to Canon.
 

dcm

Good or bad - it's not the gear.
Apr 18, 2013
723
49
OMG! Canon Rumors is trolling themselves with Sony announcements! Have they become paid shills for Sony? Ask 'Aussie Shooter'...only he knows for sure.

On a more serious note, where are the Canon engineers? What are they doing? Why is Canon not on the leading edge as they have been for decades? Giving the technological lead to a movie company...ROTCOL.
Actually, CR know its audience well and preemptively posted the article before someone else did, probably in the wrong category. What happens after that is a bit out of their control.

Looks nicely spec’d. Sony photo gear never really interested me, even though I have used their video and audio gear as long as I’ve used Canon photo gear. Early advice I got during film days was to choose my glass and don’t get hung up on bodies. Bodies change much more frequently than lenses. This still holds in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtaylor

PVCC

Arts & Engineering
Jul 5, 2019
48
13
Lensrentals are professional lens testers and publish their results on quality variation for all to see. Canon generally has very good quality control and often the best of the usual producers, especially their most recent lenses. Sony is often the worst. Read the latest blog of two days ago on 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/07/just-the-mtf-charts-70-200mm-f2-8-zooms/
This is what they write about the Sony: "Welcome to the MTF of the most tested lens in our history. Why did we test so many copies? Because Sony fanboys (and employees) were absolutely, positively, certain this lens was the best 70-200mm EVER. It’s not. It’s a decent lens with a LOT of sample variation."

If you want each lens to be individually tested and only the very best picked out, the price will be some ten times more, as lenstrentals has pointed out in the past, and reiterated two days ago with their comments on the Zeiss $21,000 Cinema 70-200mm T2.9 zoom."If you are expecting that extra $18,000 buys you higher resolution, well, nope. What it buys is consistency, lack of focus breathing, a true parfocal image, and accurate focusing scale."
Hi,

Since some people replied to my 5th point, I'd say:

I also own many L lenses, and had to return many times to get a multi-thousand dollars Lens working "as expected".

With that I mean: 2 copies (of different models) were AWFUL. Unacceptable blurred left or right area of the frame, no matter the aperture. In fact the appetite doesn't help much (if anything) when optical elements are misaligned...

If a company sells $2 - $3K (or even 10K) Lenses, any normal customer would expect it's working fine. I know some copies may do better, but not that way...

Just remember one IMPORTANT THING:
In USA you can Return a lens until you're satisfied with the copy you get. But is NOT always possible in other countries...

Several times, when explaining the problem, other people told me "but you can return it until the good copy". Well, unfortunately not. That's only in US, CA, Europe and some few other countries/regions.

So, for me, be Sony (with even more expensive optics), Canon or Nikon, they should increase the QC of lenses, which lot of times are 2, 3 or more times the cost of the camera itself in the Pro field.

In fact they do it. But it seems too low for so expensive Pro product.

Testing individually is done at certain level. But need to implement an industrial procedure, not by humans, to ensure better QC.

It's not so difficult at all. These companies are leaders in optics and can perfectly check the proper alignment in a automated array of production. "Engineering" speaking is not that difficult, nor so much more expensive.

The more expensive cost comes when they detect so many variants or worse, "bad copies", that require to go back if they want to KEEP A PRO STANDARD (as supposed..), at least for the "Best in class" line of lenses they sell.

It should be done for such expensive lenses. As well as they test the cameras.

Don't get me wrong, Nothing is "100% error free".
But sometimes they're out of the obvious & expected "normal" quality standards.

PS: I do know LensRentals. They know this problem very well, as Bryan at the-digital-picture does.

PPS: Sorry for my typos, from smartphone is not that easy ;)
 
Last edited:

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,228
2,235
Hi,

Since some people replied to my 5th point, I'd say:

I also own many L lenses, and had to return many times to get a multi-thousand dollars Lens working "as expected".

With that I mean: 2 copies (of different models) were AWFUL. Unacceptable blurred left or right area of the frame, no matter the aperture. In fact the appetite doesn't help much (if anything) when optical elements are misaligned...

If a company sells $2 - $3K (or even 10K) Lenses, any normal customer would expect it's working fine. I know some copies may do better, but not that way...

Just remember one IMPORTANT THING:
In USA you can Return a lens until you're satisfied with the copy you get. But is NOT always possible in other countries...

Several times, when explaining the problem, other people told me "but you can return it until the good copy". Well, unfortunately not. That's only in US, CA, Europe and some few other countries/regions.

So, for me, be Sony (with even more expensive optics), Canon or Nikon, they should increase the QC of lenses, which lot of times are 2, 3 or more times the cost of the camera itself in the Pro field.

In fact they do it. But it seems too low for so expensive Pro product.

Testing individually is done at certain level. But need to implement an industrial procedure, not by humans, to ensure better QC.

It's not so difficult at all. These companies are leaders in optics and can perfectly check the proper alignment in a automated array of production. "Engineering" speaking is not that difficult, nor so much more expensive.

The more expensive cost comes when they detect so many variants or worse, "bad copies", that require to go back if they want to KEEP A PRO STANDARD (as supposed..), at least for the "Best in class" line of lenses they sell.

It should be done for such expensive lenses. As well as they test the cameras.

Don't get me wrong, Nothing is "100% error free".
But sometimes they're out of the obvious & expected "normal" quality standards.

PS: I do know LensRentals. They know this problem very well, as Bryan at the-digital-picture does.

PPS: Sorry for my typos, from smartphone is not that easy ;)
You claim it is not so difficult at all to get the quality control and you know lensrentals. Here is their take on it, a good read that explains the problems: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/02/optical-quality-assurance/