Why I Switched from Sony to Canon by Armando Ferreira

3dit0r

EOS M50
Dec 4, 2017
46
6
This post made me laugh as I read it, since I’ve recently come to a similar conclusion. I moved away from Canon 5Dmkii to go ‘mirrorless’ a few years ago. Went to Sony initially, but hated the colours, even for stills shooting RAW (Yeah, you can almost get whatever colours you want RAW processing, well, you sort of can, but it’s actually extremely complex to try and replicate a particular colour science and Canon’s colour science is fantastic and probably took a lot of research over a long period). Also it takes a lot of time, when you could get that colour by just shooting Canon or whatever your favourite colour flavour is. And for video in the prosumer grade cameras the colours are more baked in so it’s more of an issue.

Then I switched to Fuji for stills, who also have great colour science, although different to Canon’s. But I didn’t have much video to produce so this was OK.

Now, gearing up for a short film, I took another look at the market and had several conversations with my DP, and came to a decision: I’m moving back to a 5Dmkiv for my daily use stills and ‘casual’ video cam. When I want to do serious filming, I’ll hire a C200/C300mkii, and I’ll already have nice glass from my stills cam. I came to realise that not all Canon’s choices are as mad as they seemed, including separating their DSLR video from their C-series.

Some of the logic of my choice is -

1. Above-mentioned colour science
2. Depth and quality of lens catalog (even including tilt/shift, L-series are mainly weather sealed, optical quality really is excellent usually, quiet fast AF)
3. Sensor crop and mjpeg don’t actually worry me for non-serious work. In fact I prefer S35 for film work and mjpeg apparently grades quite well
4. DPAF is unmatched and actually works to replace MF a lot of the time. This carries forward onto the C-series, making an investment in Canon AF lenses worthwhile and saving on, e.g., a dedicated remote FF and puller when working on a gimbal
5. Canon have always been reliable for me
6. These cameras have proven to be tough
7. C200 has RAW, built in ND and other ergonomic essentials for serious filmmaking when I do need it
8. Mature system of flash and other accessories
9. Huge compatibility (astrophotography equipment, RAW processors (unlike Fuji))

That said, there are some things I’ll miss from mirrorless -
- on sensor AF accuracy
- lack of sharpness robbing mirror movement/slap when shooting handheld
- smaller, lighter bodies
- WYSIWYG viewfinder sometimes, but not always

So I’m gambling Canon introduce a pro grade mirrorless/hybrid which will take EF lenses soon.

Just my 2p worth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jd7

IglooEater

EOS 6D MK II
Nov 15, 2014
904
0
horshack said:
privatebydesign said:
Very few people, a tiny percentage of the population, have internet service capable of delivering reliable 4K, because of that there is still very little 4K content available. Anybody can make 4K content, of varying qualities, but doing anything with it is still far from easy.
4K streaming requires 15-25 Mbps/sec.
I’m at 15 Mbps/sec and can’t reliably stream HD. If one can stream 4K at 25 it must be so compressed as to make the quality bonus somewhat of a moot point.

But to PBD “deliver” is very different from “stream”. I can’t stream full HD without glitches, but if I give it some buffer time it’s fine. In the case of 4K I’d just set the movie downloading before leaving for work in the morning. And yes, that makes 4K you tubers of no value to me. (Asides from not having a 4K display in the house.)
 

jedy

EOS T7i
Feb 14, 2014
84
15
stevelee said:
My dumb question for the day: If a professional is buying a camera to shoot video, why wouldn't he/she buy a video camera instead of a DSLR? Are there advantages to using that still camera for video that outweigh the advantages of a video camera?
Dedicated cine cameras are designed to create the quality output for big cinema screens and to follow strict guidelines from major TV networks. Quality at this level isn't really needed for the web and content mostly viewed on smaller screens. DSLR's a lot more compact, waaay less expensive - a few thousand $ vs tens of thousands of $. DSLR's, in the case of the 5DIV have autofocus and touch focus features that you wouldn't see on dedicated cine cameras. Also DSLR's are great at handling lowlight situations - cine cameras need a proper, professional lighting setup. Bear in mind, smaller film crews may not have the budget for lots of extra film equipment (carry cases for lighting equipment can be really expensive) and may also need to travel light, run and gun a good example, so the lowlight capabilities of a DSLR would be perfect. Also buying two or three cameras for a multi cam setup or as a backup is a lot more achievable with cost effective DSLR's.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,231
264
Davidson, NC
jedy said:
Dedicated cine cameras are designed to create the quality output for big cinema screens and to follow strict guidelines from major TV networks. Quality at this level isn't really needed for the web and content mostly viewed on smaller screens. . . .
Thanks. I have not looked at cine cameras, so I didn't know all that. I think of a DSLR as something I have anyway, and so the video is gravy. I had not thought of one in terms as first choice even for some pros, for the reasons you gave.
 

dak723

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
434
Mr Majestyk said:
The video is pointless, he's preaching to the wrong group. None of the Sony fanboys will give two hoots about what he says. He's the equivalent of the one climate denying scientist to them. Canon's entered a point where the media aren't even listening anymore, nothing they do is really good enough now. They had better hope their mirrorless camera is brilliant or the trash we get now against them will be nothing to compared to what will happen if it's another feature lite, ho hum offering.
Some folks don't mind a feature light offering. The fact that the "media" aren't listening anymore is only proof that the media (especially internet media) is basically ignorant and has totally different priorities compared to most consumers. I think most consumers would give Canon the edge over Sony when it comes to color, ergonomics, lenses, ease of use, reliability - you know, those boring attributes that are far more important than those sexy specs that Sony loves. It's no accident that I returned both Sony mirrorless cameras that I bought over the past few years and kept my Canon M5. If only Sony could make a mirrorless as good as the M5 - or even as good as my other mirrorless, An Olympus E-M1 - I might consider switching! But as long as all the aforementioned attributes are still subpar, Sony will have to wait.
 

masterpix

EOS 80D
Jun 29, 2016
121
83
Long time ago, in a debate between the Canon F1N and the Nikon F3 the two photographers were very convincing, each in their own gear. Than three years later, when they converted to AF.. they switched brands with similar convincing superlatives... The moral of the story is that you can find good and bad points in any brand or gear, Nikon has this, Sony has this, Canon has this. I think that today reviews about cameras is more in the "what we would like to see" performance rather than the "needed" performance. The makers are adding features, that most never use, not because those features are not good, it because that once you started to use the camera, you use it with your own preferences, which most times, are far less than what the camera offers. So the whole "debate" on "which is better" or "who is more innovative" is ridiculous, if the gear works for you, does it matter it does not have a feature you will rarely or never use?
 

rrcphoto

EOS 5D MK IV
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
jeffa4444 said:
As to Canon I'm a Canon fan but I do have frustrations such as when you mix shooting with the 5DS and the 6D MKII as I did yesterday different control layout and a d-pad rather than the joystick slow you down when fighting daylight & in a hurry I think all full frame cameras should have the same control layout the cost difference is really not an issue at that level (7D MKII and 6D MKII the latter is more expensive yet the 7D MKII has a joystick). I find that kind of hobbling irritating.
some of it (such as the second use on the top buttons) could be better on the 6D / 80D series, however, the rest is because of the articulating LCD hinge forces the layout differences in the back of the camera. it's not going to be the same because of that basic fact.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
2,058
329
Vancouver, BC
rrcphoto said:
jeffa4444 said:
As to Canon I'm a Canon fan but I do have frustrations such as when you mix shooting with the 5DS and the 6D MKII as I did yesterday different control layout and a d-pad rather than the joystick slow you down when fighting daylight & in a hurry I think all full frame cameras should have the same control layout the cost difference is really not an issue at that level (7D MKII and 6D MKII the latter is more expensive yet the 7D MKII has a joystick). I find that kind of hobbling irritating.
some of it (such as the second use on the top buttons) could be better on the 6D / 80D series, however, the rest is because of the articulating LCD hinge forces the layout differences in the back of the camera. it's not going to be the same because of that basic fact.
You can mitigate it somewhat by going all midrange prosumer (80D/6D) or going all high end (5D/7D) if you want to feel the consistency.

The articulating lens forces a certain re-arrangement, but also, the 80D/6D are meant to be a transition from xxxD Rebels, which they're quite similar to.
 

Bennymiata

EOS 6D MK II
dak723 said:
Mr Majestyk said:
The video is pointless, he's preaching to the wrong group. None of the Sony fanboys will give two hoots about what he says. He's the equivalent of the one climate denying scientist to them. Canon's entered a point where the media aren't even listening anymore, nothing they do is really good enough now. They had better hope their mirrorless camera is brilliant or the trash we get now against them will be nothing to compared to what will happen if it's another feature lite, ho hum offering.
Some folks don't mind a feature light offering. The fact that the "media" aren't listening anymore is only proof that the media (especially internet media) is basically ignorant and has totally different priorities compared to most consumers. I think most consumers would give Canon the edge over Sony when it comes to color, ergonomics, lenses, ease of use, reliability - you know, those boring attributes that are far more important than those sexy specs that Sony loves. It's no accident that I returned both Sony mirrorless cameras that I bought over the past few years and kept my Canon M5. If only Sony could make a mirrorless as good as the M5 - or even as good as my other mirrorless, An Olympus E-M1 - I might consider switching! But as long as all the aforementioned attributes are still subpar, Sony will have to wait.
I couldn't agree more. The M5 is such a fun camera to use and the photos and videos look great too - even compared to my 5d3.

I video weddings, bar-mitzvahs, product and instructional videos and all of my customers want the video on DVDs, as they always have problems with bluray (they never update their player's firmware) and my DVDs start playing almost instantly instead of waiting 10 minutes for a blu-ray disk to load.
I do also give them full HD on a usb key, but they prefer to use a DVD.
Maybe it's because they get a nice custom printed disk and a nice printed sleeve in the DVD box with my DVDs, which looks much more impressive than a usb key.
99% of people that are not photography nuts like us, could hardly tell the difference beyween SD and HD, and as long as the image is clear and colourful, they enjoy the content more than they would enjoy a boring video in full 4K.
 

Ian_of_glos

EOS RP
Jun 12, 2012
246
28
England
masterpix said:
Long time ago, in a debate between the Canon F1N and the Nikon F3 the two photographers were very convincing, each in their own gear. Than three years later, when they converted to AF.. they switched brands with similar convincing superlatives... The moral of the story is that you can find good and bad points in any brand or gear, Nikon has this, Sony has this, Canon has this. I think that today reviews about cameras is more in the "what we would like to see" performance rather than the "needed" performance. The makers are adding features, that most never use, not because those features are not good, it because that once you started to use the camera, you use it with your own preferences, which most times, are far less than what the camera offers. So the whole "debate" on "which is better" or "who is more innovative" is ridiculous, if the gear works for you, does it matter it does not have a feature you will rarely or never use?
Well said. I love using my 5D mark 4 and really I could not be happier with it, but there has been so much negative comment and half hearted praise (watch the Camera Store review for example) that I started to question my own judgement. Having tried many of the alternatives I always find myself coming back to my Canon 5D mark 4 because it is the right camera for me. Other people may prefer Sony, or Olympus or Fuji but that does not mean these are the right cameras for everyone. I am just grateful that we still have so much choice and we can each pick the camera that matches our own needs.
 

Maiaibing

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 7, 2014
1,054
2
Kabul
www.flickr.com
If I was new on the market I'd probably go with Nikon - for some of the reasons mentioned here++.

As for colors I've never understood people who say color is important to them - but do not color calibrate their gear. Making whatever brand you are using (shooting RAW) moot.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
2,058
329
Vancouver, BC
Maiaibing said:
If I was new on the market I'd probably go with Nikon - for some of the reasons mentioned here++.
I still wouldn't. There's a lot to love about the D850, but the lens selection still falls short, and that's a more important investment to me. 100-400II has become my favorite lens, to which there is just no Nikon equivalent. And, I'm very fond of a lot of other Canon lenses.

Plus, unlike Sony, there's no potential of me ever running Nikon and Canon at the same time -- since everything's backwards, with each other, lol.

Maiaibing said:
As for colors I've never understood people who say color is important to them - but do not color calibrate their gear. Making whatever brand you are using (shooting RAW) moot.
I set CWB and use a ColorChecker and color calibration mostly when I need color to be consistent with previous shoots. But that's usually product photography; with nearly everything else, I don't really care if the colors are accurate nearly as much as if the colors are pleasing.
 

3dit0r

EOS M50
Dec 4, 2017
46
6
Talys said:
Maiaibing said:
If I was new on the market I'd probably go with Nikon - for some of the reasons mentioned here++.
I still wouldn't. There's a lot to love about the D850, but the lens selection still falls short, and that's a more important investment to me. 100-400II has become my favorite lens, to which there is just no Nikon equivalent. And, I'm very fond of a lot of other Canon lenses.

Yeah, Nikon's wide zooms can't match Canon these days (which is a switch-around from when I owned a Nikon body over 10 years ago) and I believe even their standard zoom struggles a bit next to the latest Canon. Also, the D850 seems to have a lot of 'issues' which are becoming apparent, some of which may be solvable with QC or recalls, some of which may not...

Maiaibing said:
As for colors I've never understood people who say color is important to them - but do not color calibrate their gear. Making whatever brand you are using (shooting RAW) moot.
I set CWB and use a ColorChecker and color calibration mostly when I need color to be consistent with previous shoots. But that's usually product photography; with nearly everything else, I don't really care if the colors are accurate nearly as much as if the colors are pleasing.

This. For various reasons I'll not bore everyone with here, it's incredibly hard to replicate a particular manufacturer's colour science, even when shooting raw. I have a colorchecker passport and have found it often produces the least 'pleasing' profile out of the ones available to me in LR. I learned a while ago that this really is one area where you make a choice; if you like Canon colour science, buy a Canon, if you like Sony colour science, buy a Sony (and get an eye test ;D).
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,213
398
3dit0r said:
Also, the D850 seems to have a lot of 'issues' which are becoming apparent, some of which may be solvable with QC or recalls, some of which may not...
Really? The only thing I have read about is misaligned sensor and AF - both contentious
 

mkabi

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 21, 2013
509
2
39
Another debate about who needs 4K and relative sample size.

Here is my 2 cents.

Fact, people buying DSLRs period... is a small sample size to begin with compared to the general population.

Fact, people buying high-end DSLR is a smaller subset of the already small sample size...

Fact, people buying DSLRs for video is also a small subset of the already small sample size, but it intersects with those buying a high-end DSLR...

Now, the question is.... if you are buying a DSLR for video... chances are... you aren't some shmuck that saw a pro at an event carrying a DSLR for video/photographer and wanted to get the same equipment - thus goes to the local bestbuy and buys themselves a Rebel cam with a kit lens. Chances are that you were one of the few that saw the potential of the 5D mark 2 and the DSLR video revolution - and fully invested in the Canon system. So, given the competition's offerings in the video department, why not more than 1080p?

Its more of a want than need...

Its like the folks here that want exactly 36MP and more DR... do they need it? Nope.
Do they want it? Yep.
Can you survive without it? Yes and No.

Same thing with 4K.
 

Besisika

How can you stand out, if you do like evrybdy else
Mar 25, 2014
638
26
Montreal
mkabi said:
Another debate about who needs 4K and relative sample size.

Here is my 2 cents.

Fact, people buying DSLRs period... is a small sample size to begin with compared to the general population.

Fact, people buying high-end DSLR is a smaller subset of the already small sample size...

Fact, people buying DSLRs for video is also a small subset of the already small sample size, but it intersects with those buying a high-end DSLR...

Now, the question is.... if you are buying a DSLR for video... chances are... you aren't some shmuck that saw a pro at an event carrying a DSLR for video/photographer and wanted to get the same equipment - thus goes to the local bestbuy and buys themselves a Rebel cam with a kit lens. Chances are that you were one of the few that saw the potential of the 5D mark 2 and the DSLR video revolution - and fully invested in the Canon system. So, given the competition's offerings in the video department, why not more than 1080p?

Its more of a want than need...

Its like the folks here that want exactly 36MP and more DR... do they need it? Nope.
Do they want it? Yep.
Can you survive without it? Yes and No.

Same thing with 4K.
I respectfully disagree.
I am both photographer and videographer. Cannot afford primary and back up for both, cannot even carry both when needed at the same time - hence the need for DSLR.
Last three choir concerts, I used 1DX II for B-roll during getting ready. During concert I used 1DX II as main camera and 5D III as a secondary.
Believe it or not but I didn't use footage from the 5D (3 concerts in row now for the past month). They became just safety.

Many people talk about 4K without having in their life shot not even once in 4K. I have a DSLR so I have an opinion. It is like a taxi driver who has opinion about Formula one. Everybody is entitled to one, no doubt; but are these legitimate enough to be considered as a foundation on how to drive these cars?
 

mkabi

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 21, 2013
509
2
39
Besisika said:
I respectfully disagree.
I am both photographer and videographer. Cannot afford primary and back up for both, cannot even carry both when needed at the same time - hence the need for DSLR.
Last three choir concerts, I used 1DX II for B-roll during getting ready. During concert I used 1DX II as main camera and 5D III as a secondary.
Believe it or not but I didn't use footage from the 5D (3 concerts in row now for the past month). They became just safety.

Many people talk about 4K without having in their life shot not even once in 4K. I have a DSLR so I have an opinion. It is like a taxi driver who has opinion about Formula one. Everybody is entitled to one, no doubt; but are these legitimate enough to be considered as a foundation on how to drive these cars?
I don't know what you are talking about...
But which part do you disagree with? Because it sounds like you agree with some parts of what I said...
 

Besisika

How can you stand out, if you do like evrybdy else
Mar 25, 2014
638
26
Montreal
mkabi said:
I don't know what you are talking about...
But which part do you disagree with? Because it sounds like you agree with some parts of what I said...
"Its more of a want than need..."
If you want to stand out, why would you produce same result as everybody else? Or even worse, why would you want to stay behind.
1080P output from a 4K is the pro standard today. 1080P from a 5D III is a quality of yesteryear.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,213
398
Besisika said:
1080P output from a 4K is the pro standard today. 1080P from a 5D III is a quality of yesteryear.
Pure BS.
Most real pros shoot 1080p quite happily, use manual focus and produce top quality video for documentaries and films. Most people demanding after 4k DSLR/mirrorless are youtube vlogging wannabes.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
2,058
329
Vancouver, BC
Cool teardown of the A7RIII on Fred Miranda:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1520661

Interesting bit from the fella who took it apart: “There's actually no rubberized gaskets or anything like that. The edges where the camera comes together look standard. Any weatherproofing must be done with just very tight joints, and possibly hydrophobic coatings.”