@ecqns -
There is nothing wrong with preferring a Sony. I'm happy that you like your camera and that it works for you.
When you say
set,
post-production, and
workflow, that sure sounded like an artificial scene to me, where you control lighting and direction, whether it's for photography or video.
That said, I'm totally with rrcphoto, and while there were some great features on the A7R3, I was thoroughly unimpressed with the vaunted dynamic range. You couldn't crush overexposed whites even a tiny bit more, and the ability to lift shadows compared to any Canon full frame camera is, at best, dubious. More accurately, it was
different meaning that some colors and types of shadows recovered better, while others worse. I find the recovered shadows on Sony at even medium ISOs (up to 1000) to have unpleasing grain, and unpleasing color saturation, but this is simply my preference and opinion. I posted some eagle shots of Canon vs Sony in another thread to highlight what I mean.
But at the end of the day, every poorly exposed photo was still a poorly exposed photo.
ecqns said:
rrcphoto said:
so now you're changing the goalposts.
What do you mean? 40-50 mpix vs 30 is a big difference. Playing around with that chart shows that the 5Ds is almost 2 stops worst and the 5D4 is about one stop worst than the a7r3.
The biggest difference between 42 megapixels and 30 megapixels is somewhat bigger files. In practice, you are always much better served by using the right focal length or moving than you are to cropping more deeply.
I'm not saying that most of us don't prefer more megapixels to less. But very rarely does anyone ever finish with work anywhere near 30 megapixels.