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

[neuroanatomist]

Aint that the truth. And talk about out of focus images! At F4 my 600mm DOF is about 1 inch or less from 50 feet. I have to open it up to get the beak and tail in focus for a baby seagull!

Can’t be. Our resident artist expert-exrordinaire, @6degrees, positively assured us that, “F4 or even F2.8 lenses can’t generate artistic bokeh effect. Period.” Apparently our 600/4 lenses, “...are only good if the purpose is to take snapshot with everything clear and no emphasized main focus in the photo.”

Obviously, even a short focal length f/4 or f/2.8 lens can provide excellent subject isolation, if used properly for that purpose.

I wonder if @6degrees regrets making that comment? As has been stated, “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.’

 

[ozturert]

Then go get your F4 lenses. Save your money and it is good for you.

Can you show me some of your artistic photos with 50mm f1.8? Somehow you make art automatically with wide aperture lenses but f4 lenses are hopeless... No way anyone can make art with f4 lenses.

 

[Random Orbits]

Wait...what? Canon is "lagging" in their bodies but it "has been too many years since the last release" that you use or would buy. So, if you haven't bought or used a new Canon body for years on what authority are you claiming they are "lagging?"


I shoot with a 5DSR since it was first released. I also have an older 5D Mark III and a lot of Canon glass. I have been shooting with Canon for over 20 years and upgraded my bodies when I felt like there was enough progress to warrant the investment. I am also a CPS member and loyal Canon advocate on a number of forums.

The 5DSR is a great camera, but this new Sony beats it in almost every meaningful technical manner. There are always differences in ergonomics, weather sealing, user interface and service support that make me want to stay with Canon, but this is an incredibly compelling offering from Sony and I am just acknowledging that.

My point is not to whine and have someone talk me out of switching (I will make my own decision and live with the consequences) but to point out on a Canon rumors forum that posted a Sony release notice that Canon has lost focus on my needs (not anyone elses). Interesting that my original post received 10 likes and your critique quite a few less. Apparently there are other like minded people on this forum that might be feeling the same frustration.

What do you shoot with and how long have you been a Canon shooter? It is interesting that you are so willing to shout anyone down that raises anything slightly anti-Canon. We are not all sycophants to Canon on this forum. At least I don't think that is the price of entry to be a member. Some of us have the ability to independently think and evaluate.

Sony wins on senors. The 80D and 5D4 sensors closed most of the DR gap, but Sony went to BSI/stacked sensor technologies that gave it an advantage in video and frame rates. With Nikon and Fuji now using Sony sensors, Canon is the only major playing making its own. The G-series cameras use Sony sensors, and people still complain because they don't have DFAP (a Canon technology). For the short term, Canon is at a disadvantage, but I'd rather Canon do it this way than let Sony monopolize the ILC sensor market. Do you honestly think that Sony will allow other manufacturers to use chips better than their own before they launch them on their products?

Nikon: I want a new sensor.
Sony: You can have it two years after we put it in A7R Mark x.
Nikon cries as Sony passes it the 2nd ILC manufacturer because it doesn't have the technologies to compete on its own.

 

[RobbieHat]

Sony wins on senors. The 80D and 5D4 sensors closed most of the DR gap, but Sony went to BSI/stacked sensor technologies that gave it an advantage in video and frame rates. With Nikon and Fuji now using Sony sensors, Canon is the only major playing making its own. The G-series cameras use Sony sensors, and people still complain because they don't have DFAP (a Canon technology). For the short term, Canon is at a disadvantage, but I'd rather Canon do it this way than let Sony monopolize the ILC sensor market. Do you honestly think that Sony will allow other manufacturers to use chips better than their own before they launch them on their products?

Nikon: I want a new sensor.
Sony: You can have it two years after we put it in A7R Mark x.
Nikon cries as Sony passes it the 2nd ILC manufacturer because it doesn't have the technologies to compete on its own.

Agreed with the logic and it certainly puts a lot of pressure on Canon to up their sensor game. Not an easy task when you don't have the committed sales pipeline that Sony has. Wonder is partnering with other innovators in the space has been considered (Samsung, etc.)?

 

[M. D. Vaden of Oregon]

Agreed with the logic and it certainly puts a lot of pressure on Canon to up their sensor game. Not an easy task when you don't have the committed sales pipeline that Sony has. Wonder is partnering with other innovators in the space has been considered (Samsung, etc.)?

Seeing Canon gained market share last year while Sony declined, I'm sure they are not mesmerized with the same panic novel others may speculate from.

I think Canon bodies take some very good photos right now. And if they care to plug along at a slow steady pace, more power to them. Probably best Canon makes it's own sensors to avoid indirect manipulation.

 

[Otara]

No probs with the IQ of Canon, but I do want some of that fancy stuff the Sony A9 has, ie readout speed etc.

 

[Stereodude]

From your comments, I infer that you wouldn’t know a fact if it bit you on the ass. Could be a tough way to go through life.

Well, I guess it's a good thing facts don't bite people on the ass. That doubly applies for the your opinions that you try to present as "facts". Keep on making assumptions with your inferences though. They're entertaining to read.

 

[Kit.]

Sony wins on senors.

I'm not sure. Actually, 5D4 sensor is a 61 megapixel sensor, it just has pairs of pixels covered by the same microlens, which enables DPAF but lowers effective resolution.

 

[dtaylor]

Sony wins on senors.

Sony wins on specs sites like dpreview want you to focus on. Canon was first to 50mp and held the high resolution title until a couple days ago (4 years). We know their hi rez R will be >61mp. Canon has DPAF and great color science. And while I don't think this is a sensor issue per se, Sony can't get above 100 Mbps with video.

Sony is not the clear winner unless you're dpreview and you hold your hands to your eyes to make sure you only see one or two metrics.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Well, I guess it's a good thing facts don't bite people on the ass. That doubly applies for the your opinions that you try to present as "facts". Keep on making assumptions with your inferences though. They're entertaining to read.

Let’s look at my initial response, shall we?

The thing that many people, including yourself, apparently fail to grasp is that the views expressed on this forum really don’t represent the market as a whole.

The membership comprises a self-selected group of ~16,000 people interested in rumors about Canon. There were nearly 11,000,000 ILCs sold last year alone. Pick up any textbook on population sampling. <0.15% cannot be representative if that small a fraction is self-selected. Verdict: fact, not opinion.

That fact should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, because comments like yours have been made here for close to a decade, and over that decade the only thing that has happened to Canon’s market dominance is a slight increase.

Read back forum posts, the comments are there. Check market share data for the past decade, Canon has gained slightly. Verdict: fact, not opinion.

But hey, maybe that will change someday.

Clearly speculative, stated as such.

The only opinion I stated (which was phrased as ‘should be’ was that someone with a modicum of intelligence could grasp simple, verifiable facts. Facts which you’re calling opinions, suggesting you can’t grasp them.

This has provided a modicum of entertainment. Better luck next round.

 

[PVCC]

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/

Hey!

That's a great post indeed. I know some of the problems they tell.
I also know about optics tolerance manufacturing problems and their costs when trying to minimize them.

But besides that, Roger Cicala (at Lens Rentals) also agree that companies should improve Quality Control.

And also says "If your assembly line is churning out 5,000 lenses a week you will need a lot of benches. Any way you slice it, the equipment and the operators to run it are going to add something to the price of the lens. I think a company being really efficient could do it for an additional $20 per prime lens, $60 per zoom. (I couldn’t break even at that cost, but I’m assuming they have economies of scale that I don’t have.) "

Who is not willing to pay a bit more for better (Reasonable) quality assurance? At least I do.

As I said, and also Roger, we don't expect perfection, error-free, or that the lens resolution is exactly as the manufacturer's MTF...

But after many L (multi-thousand dollars) lenses, having terrible missalignement problem delivering blurred zones, I really want better QC and am willing to pay an extra for it to avoid the hassle of returning the copy many times. That's when I CAN, because if I'm not in US, CA or Europe, then I will have to keep the bad lens... and that means a multi-thousand dollars risk that I do not really like...

In fact I don't live in those countries, so I have to take huge precautions and spend a huge amount of time to ensure that I'll get something near to good-copy.

As I said, most people don't understand this huge problem if they live in above mentioned countries, because they can return until they get the good copy that meets their expectations... Go away from there and you'll remember me

 

[PVCC]

Have you had Canon test your body mount for an alignment issue?

Both the mount (relative to the film or sensor plane) and the lens have to be within a certain range of each other in terms of alignment. A lens can test just within acceptable range on one side of the range, and a body on the other, and the combination will show a problem. Yet the same lens on a different body can be fine, and the same body with a different lens can be fine.

Typically if the lens alone is out of spec then exchanging or repairing it solves the problem. It's when the body mount is also close to being out of spec that you can go through lens after lens or repair after repair and still see the issue.

I went through this due to a lens that developed an issue over time with the left side being blurry compared to the rest of the frame. Canon Irvine looked at it several times and said there was no problem. Finally a manager got involved, asked for both my DSLR and lens, and instructed a tech to adjust them both to be as close to perfect as possible. The lens was nearly out of spec, but so was the body mount, and it was the combo that created the problem.

I was annoyed that Canon's techs were putting my lens on a bench and saying "it's fine" when it was on the edge of not being fine. But to their credit they adjusted both at no additional charge over the first visit, and I might have run into the issue with another lens later had the body not also been adjusted.

This was a long time ago btw, Canon 10D days. I haven't had a problem with a Canon body or L lens since.

Hey!

Thanks for your detailed reply! Very interesting and to keep into account indeed!

Short answer: No. Because the "bad" (very bad indeed) lenses worked bad on different cameras (checked that), and the other (good) lenses have no problem on my cameras.

So the possibility of a mount-related issue was discarded. The problems were the lenses (some copies were blurry at left, others at right).

Thanks once again. Cheers!

 

[ivan11]

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'm waiting a little to see if Canon delivers... in the mean time i do wath i can with my gear.

 

[AlanF]

Hey!

That's a great post indeed. I know some of the problems they tell.
I also know about optics tolerance manufacturing problems and their costs when trying to minimize them.

But besides that, Roger Cicala (at Lens Rentals) also agree that companies should improve Quality Control.

And also says "If your assembly line is churning out 5,000 lenses a week you will need a lot of benches. Any way you slice it, the equipment and the operators to run it are going to add something to the price of the lens. I think a company being really efficient could do it for an additional $20 per prime lens, $60 per zoom. (I couldn’t break even at that cost, but I’m assuming they have economies of scale that I don’t have.) "

Who is not willing to pay a bit more for better (Reasonable) quality assurance? At least I do.

As I said, and also Roger, we don't expect perfection, error-free, or that the lens resolution is exactly as the manufacturer's MTF...

But after many L (multi-thousand dollars) lenses, having terrible missalignement problem delivering blurred zones, I really want better QC and am willing to pay an extra for it to avoid the hassle of returning the copy many times. That's when I CAN, because if I'm not in US, CA or Europe, then I will have to keep the bad lens... and that means a multi-thousand dollars risk that I do not really like...

In fact I don't live in those countries, so I have to take huge precautions and spend a huge amount of time to ensure that I'll get something near to good-copy.

As I said, most people don't understand this huge problem if they live in above mentioned countries, because they can return until they get the good copy that meets their expectations... Go away from there and you'll remember me

You are right that you should test every lens before buying. Fortunately, I am friendly with the local camera shop and they allow me to borrow and test before buying. Otherwise, I use the mail order laws that give you the right to return before 14 days. The only lens test that matters is the one you did yourself on your own lens. What I dispute is that Canon is terrible as they are among the better for quality control.

 

[neuroanatomist]

But after many L (multi-thousand dollars) lenses, having terrible missalignement problem delivering blurred zones, I really want better QC and am willing to pay an extra for it to avoid the hassle of returning the copy many times. That's when I CAN, because if I'm not in US, CA or Europe, then I will have to keep the bad lens... and that means a multi-thousand dollars risk that I do not really like...

Maybe you’re really unlucky, or maybe you’re ordering online and your UPS delivery person hates you?

Personally, I currently have 20 lenses including 10 L-series lenses ranging from 11mm to 600mm (plus two MkIII TCs not counted in the 20), and I’ve previously bought and subsequently sold another ~10 lenses, I think 6 were L-series (plus the two MkII TCs also not counted). Of all those lenses, I’ve had to exchange only one as a bad copy, and that one was the only 3rd party lens I’ve ever bought (a Rokinon/Samyang 14/2.8 for astro).

So from my perspective, Canon’s QC is excellent. Lest you think it’s a question of different standards or not knowing how to discern a poor copy, I’ll say that I evaluate lenses carefully and thoroughly. Among other things, I use an enhanced ISO 12233-type chart to evaluate new lenses (the same AI-QA77 chart that Bryan/TDP uses for his lens tests), along with Reikan FoCal. Along those lines, I wrote most of the EF-M lens reviews posted on TDP. Point being, when I say my lenses are performing well, it’s because I’ve tested them rigorously.

It’s unfortunate that you’ve had so many bad lenses and the hassle of exchanging them. I said maybe you’re really unlucky, but obviously it’s also possible that I’m just really lucky. Bryan has gotten bad copies of lenses...IIRC, he tested 4 copies of the 24-70/2.8 II whereas mine was great from the start, and after seeing my results with the EF-M 18-150, he ordered another copy and re-shot his ISO 12233 tests with much improved performance. I hope my experience is more typical than yours!

 

[drama]

Reread my post and take a deep breath.

I took several.

Time is not on their side and Sony are ramping up the pressure on me at least with this newest release.

Bye then!

What you said was that Canon has wasted a year. They have not. They've spent the year announcing and then releasing a ton of top of the line glass, because people like you would have bitched had the body come first and there were no lenses for it. If you'd like a Sony, go and buy one. My issue was only to do with the ludicrous level of threatening language you used, as if people from Canon read the comments here and might think "Oh no, RobbieHat is unhappy, quick chaps, let's release the megabeast!". Get over yourself. Better yet, go buy a Sony.

 

[caffetin]

I just saw the video of tony Northrup abou this camera.if this is true what I saw than this camera is not worth for the money.there is,on my opinion,no big difference with a7r3 which can blow me up.wasting time.as I sad and mean,sony is no camera company with tradition.they are just problem maker.i respect the competition but not the way of sony and Nikon as they put sony sensors.fuji,canon go ached,and am not planning to leave canon.
maybe 60mp is too much for dslr(according of images of tony video)and probably is better to go with less mp(40-50 like as 5ds)but with better improvement,performance ,and the rest is software.
good luck to sonikon users.
ENDE.

 

[AlanF]

I just saw the video of tony Northrup abou this camera.if this is true what I saw than this camera is not worth for the money.there is,on my opinion,no big difference with a7r3 which can blow me up.wasting time.as I sad and mean,sony is no camera company with tradition.they are just problem maker.i respect the competition but not the way of sony and Nikon as they put sony sensors.fuji,canon go ached,and am not planning to leave canon.
maybe 60mp is too much for dslr(according of images of tony video)and probably is better to go with less mp(40-50 like as 5ds)but with better improvement,performance ,and the rest is software.
good luck to sonikon users.
ENDE.

Unfortunately, I wasted my time watching two of his most recent reviews hoping he had improved - his ones on the Sony 600mm and and especially the 200-600mm were just nonsense, just wanting to get anything out to create a presence. I would not take seriously anything on his YouTubes or what he writes until backed up elsewhere. If you think 60mp is too much for DSLR (and the Sony A7RIV is not a DSLR - it is mirrorless) then you had better give up on Canon as well since they will be bringing out higher resolution 60+ sensors according to the rumours here.

 

[caffetin]

Unfortunately, I wasted my time watching two of his most recent reviews hoping he had improved - his ones on the Sony 600mm and and especially the 200-600mm were just nonsense, just wanting to get anything out to create a presence. I would not take seriously anything on his YouTubes or what he writes until backed up elsewhere. If you think 60mp is too much for DSLR (and the Sony A7RIV is not a DSLR - it is mirrorless) then you had better give up on Canon as well since they will be bringing out higher resolution 60+ sensors according to the rumours here.

sorry,my mistake about that.yes I meant mirrorless cameras.i don't take him seriously but the images he showed were the point.just watched them.no difference for me in regular size.croping them 300%,yes we can see some difference.
and according to that my thoughts were in way of mp.dslr or mirrorless not more then 40-50 mp(for more mp better to swich on medformat).
and yes,i am excited about canon new cameras(mirror and dslr)with more mp.maybe thay have some new formula which will deny me in my convictions about it.

 

[PVCC]

Maybe you’re really unlucky, or maybe you’re ordering online and your UPS delivery person hates you?

Personally, I currently have 20 lenses including 10 L-series lenses ranging from 11mm to 600mm (plus two MkIII TCs not counted in the 20), and I’ve previously bought and subsequently sold another ~10 lenses, I think 6 were L-series (plus the two MkII TCs also not counted). Of all those lenses, I’ve had to exchange only one as a bad copy, and that one was the only 3rd party lens I’ve ever bought (a Rokinon/Samyang 14/2.8 for astro).

So from my perspective, Canon’s QC is excellent. Lest you think it’s a question of different standards or not knowing how to discern a poor copy, I’ll say that I evaluate lenses carefully and thoroughly. Among other things, I use an enhanced ISO 12233-type chart to evaluate new lenses (the same AI-QA77 chart that Bryan/TDP uses for his lens tests), along with Reikan FoCal. Along those lines, I wrote most of the EF-M lens reviews posted on TDP. Point being, when I say my lenses are performing well, it’s because I’ve tested them rigorously.

It’s unfortunate that you’ve had so many bad lenses and the hassle of exchanging them. I said maybe you’re really unlucky, but obviously it’s also possible that I’m just really lucky. Bryan has gotten bad copies of lenses...IIRC, he tested 4 copies of the 24-70/2.8 II whereas mine was great from the start, and after seeing my results with the EF-M 18-150, he ordered another copy and re-shot his ISO 12233 tests with much improved performance. I hope my experience is more typical than yours!

Hey!

Yes, I know Bryan tested 3-4 24-70 2.8L II...

That's was, in fact, one of the problematic lenses...
I talked to him many times about the problem.

I think you're very lucky if you got a very good copy at once! Especially because that lens has noticeable variations in performance (I didn't know this matter when I purchased my 24-70 L mark 1, and I got a good one! Never thought the mark 2 would be so complicated...)

BTW, mine were purchased/exchanged at BH and sent via 2 days air delivery.

I honestly don't think the FedEx/UPS guy had anything to do with my bad luck.

But, well... the REALLY BIG problem is when you're in a country where stores don't offer you the option to exchange a bad copy. Stores don't even recognize as "bad" copy unless a big problem in AF, stuck ring o something similar.

US/CA customers usually think that "everyone" has that chance to return, but sadly it's very far from reality if you live in other regions...

Cheers!