CANON VS SONY A7III

[AlanF]

Sure, and butterflies flapping their wings in the Peking harbor cause Atlantic hurricanes.

Peking harbor?

Well, it's been Beijing for several decades now. But I'm old.

It's still Peking University as well as Peking Duck. But, as this is a Canadian site, it should be harbour.

 

[Ozarker]

Sure, and butterflies flapping their wings in the Peking harbor cause Atlantic hurricanes.

Peking harbor?

Well, it's been Beijing for several decades now. But I'm old.

It's still Peking University as well as Peking Duck. But, as this is a Canadian site, it should be harbour.

My God! The Canadians have internet? MAGA : : :

 

[Talys]

Sure, and butterflies flapping their wings in the Peking harbor cause Atlantic hurricanes.

Peking harbor?

Well, it's been Beijing for several decades now. But I'm old.

It's still Peking University as well as Peking Duck. But, as this is a Canadian site, it should be harbour.

My God! The Canadians have internet? MAGA : : :

I'm a Canadian, originally from that part of the world In Mandarin, Peking Duck sounds like "Beijing Yah"

For any who care, the name in Chinese never changed; the two characters forming the name of the city literally mean "Northern Capital" (as opposed to Nanjing = Southern Capital), and have been so for a very long time. Europeans called it that, because when the Spanish first went to China, they went through the south, where the local dialect enunciated it a little differently.

In other news, many of my American friends are jealous of our relatively cheap Internet... as we are often jealous of the better American cell phone plans

 

[Takingshots]

Sure, and butterflies flapping their wings in the Peking harbor cause Atlantic hurricanes.

Peking harbor?

Well, it's been Beijing for several decades now. But I'm old.

Several decades ..haha try 39 years ago... Probably having one too many peking ducks causing indigestion. Still in denial that Sony A7iii outranks Canon 6D mk ii specwise (still & video) with respect to price when 6D mk ii first launched.

 

[Loswr]

Probably having one too many peking ducks causing indigestion. Still in denial that Sony A7iii outranks Canon 6D mk ii specwise (still & video) with respect to price when 6D mk ii first launched.

Many Sony ILCs have 'outranked specwise' their Canon counterparts, yet the Canon counterparts still seem to outsell Sony. Maybe that's because spec sheets take lousy pictures. Sorry if that upsets your tummy.

 

[Takingshots]

Probably having one too many peking ducks causing indigestion. Still in denial that Sony A7iii outranks Canon 6D mk ii specwise (still & video) with respect to price when 6D mk ii first launched.

LOL - plz review articles while the camera is in the process field tested by people who have the camera... but then there r some of us what is good today is good enough (acceptable) with Canon innovation. Don't get me wrong. I love Canon camera but then competition is good. Canon 6d mk ii is marked down lower than its original 2k$.


Many Sony ILCs have 'outranked specwise' their Canon counterparts, yet the Canon counterparts still seem to outsell Sony. Maybe that's because spec sheets take lousy pictures. Sorry if that upsets your tummy.

 

[Loswr]

LOL - plz review articles while the camera is in the process field tested by people who have the camera... but then there r some of us what is good today is good enough (acceptable) with Canon innovation.

Read reviews? I guess some people like to let others tell them what is best...personally, I prefer to make my own decisions.

Next time, try responding to the issue raised – you claim Sony has better specs, but Canon FF ILCs outsell Sony FF ILCs, so more people are choosing Canon. Clearly, spec lists aren't everything, nor even the most important thing, for most people. Or maybe the specs you care about (i.e., the ones that Internet reviewers have told you are important) aren't actually all that important to most buyers.

Ps. Maybe you should read some Internet reviews on how to post on the internet, it seems you find it difficult to properly format your posts.

 

[jayphotoworks]

LOL - plz review articles while the camera is in the process field tested by people who have the camera... but then there r some of us what is good today is good enough (acceptable) with Canon innovation.

Read reviews? I guess some people like to let others tell them what is best...personally, I prefer to make my own decisions.

Next time, try responding to the issue raised – you claim Sony has better specs, but Canon FF ILCs outsell Sony FF ILCs, so more people are choosing Canon. Clearly, spec lists aren't everything, nor even the most important thing, for most people. Or maybe the specs you care about (i.e., the ones that Internet reviewers have told you are important) aren't actually all that important to most buyers.

Ps. Maybe you should read some Internet reviews on how to post on the internet, it seems you find it difficult to properly format your posts.

We rely on internet reviewers because they have spent time reviewing equipment in orders of magnitude more than most of us here combined across multiple manufacturers. I've gone from Canon to Nikon to Leica to Fuji to Olympus to Panasonic to Sony not to mention the various cinema systems I've used and I still haven't scratched the surface. Reviewers review the merits of the equipment and not brand recognition, perceived reliability, pro programs or market share. If those things are important, and buyers choose Canon because of that, that doesn't diminish the fact that the Sony A7III has outspecced the equivalent Canon offering today and has a more capable camera in the same price bracket. Disagreeing or using the market share hammer as an all-encompassing statement has no relevance in that discussion at all.

I try a lot of different systems to learn about the strengths and weaknesses of each. In fact, learning and re-learning different systems from DSLRs to mirrorless allows me to better use what mirrorless is strong at instead of shooting the same old way I would shoot a DSLR. I was originally a Canon fanboy many years ago, but over the years as I cross over into different brands, the less I really felt about which system was truly best as they all have their own corresponding compromises. As an overall system, Sony does a lot right, but it still doesn't quite have the immediacy of existing flagship DSLRs. It seems the people that have had the least amount of experience with competitive systems have the largest voices around here criticizing Sony. It reminds me of an article I read recently about the "Dunning-Kruger" effect. The less someone knows, the more they feel they know.... and that sums up a lot of the discussions around here.

But then again, this is the internet, and you cannot really say anything that doesn't trigger someone in some capacity anymore... I'm probably just as guilty of that...

 

[Talys]

It seems the people that have had the least amount of experience with competitive systems have the largest voices around here criticizing Sony. It reminds me of an article I read recently about the "Dunning-Kruger" effect. The less someone knows, the more they feel they know.... and that sums up a lot of the discussions around here.

Funny. I spent about a month shooting nothing but a Sony A7R3, taking more than 7,000 photos. I walked away having a far worse impression of Sony than I did going in, because so many of the "features" felt incomplete, and since Sony doesn't really do feature upgrades via firmware, the entire camera just feels like another unfinished beta camera that is an invitation to buy an A7R4.

I also never fell in love with EVF, though I must admit the current version in A9/A7R3 is much better than the previous ones. Still, the only thing I really miss from it is MF focus magnification.

Then again, perhaps I am simply not Sony's target market: I don't really like my camera bodies small, because most of my lenses are > 900g; I don't really have problems getting correct exposures, so EVF is simply less valuable in that way; I don't photograph events where face tracking or human tracking is very important; I don't care about video; top notch, on-camera and off-camera flash system is are very important to me; and the most challenging things that I shoot requires the fastest autofocus possible (birds in flight).

An annoyance that makes it impossible for the Sony to become my primary camera is that the ability to focus with just modelling lights is pretty crappy. I'm talking about reasonably bright ones, too, like out of a Godox AD600 Pro or an Elinchrom through some modifier. I'm not saying that it is unworkable; just that it's horribly slow compared to a DSLR, and in this scenario (in a studio), provides zero benefit over a DSLR.

 

[Mikehit]

We rely on internet reviewers because they have spent time reviewing equipment in orders of magnitude more than most of us here combined across multiple manufacturers.

I am rather more cynical about reviews. More and more are people who have a blog page that needs viewing numbers and they review articles not out of any particular brand hype but because that is what brings people to the site. And most of them have the camera for a very short period of time and as such their reviews are more about what the spec sheet says and trying out the functionality that the camera is introducing.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with that and I want to make that quite clear.

But one thing you cannot assess in that time is how does it feel to carry it round for days, how does it feel after shooting wedding for 5 hours or lugging around the streets of London. The ease of finger movements to change your favourite settings - this especially is where smaller size versus real estate comes in. And real-world thing like do the extra 1.5 stops of DR really matter in your normal workflow once the excitement settles down (sometimes it does, sometimes you have to bracket anyway).

Problem is it takes time to learn which reviewers are offering genuine real-world ergonomic reviews and which ones are weekend-with-a-camera to see how the latest gizmos impress you.

 

[Loswr]

We rely on internet reviewers because they have spent time reviewing equipment in orders of magnitude more than most of us here combined across multiple manufacturers.

As long as you understand and account for their biases.

...the fact that the Sony A7III has outspecced the equivalent Canon offering today and has a more capable camera in the same price bracket. Disagreeing or using the market share hammer as an all-encompassing statement has no relevance in that discussion at all.

Are you stating that a 'better spec list' equates to a more capable camera? And that disagreeing with that statement has no relevance? That's asinine.

Native lens selection is a huge part of a camera's capability. Does Sony outspec Canon? For vloggers, a fully articulated screen is very important...does the a7III outspec the 6DII?

Are you, like Takingshots, someone who lets Internet reviewers dictate to them which features/cameras are most important/best for them? Frankly, you seem either indecisive or unable to recognize that the search for 'the perfect camera' is futile...or you simply swallow the latest review proclaiming the superiority of the new —insert brand/model here— and jump at it.

The thing is, what's best for you isn't necessarily what's best for me, or for anyone else. There's no objective way to judge, because everyone's needs/wants differ. You can claim Sony outspecs Canon until you're blue in the face, but that's what really has no relevance here...'outspec' is a value judgement, and everyone's values are different, so there's no objective assessment. What can be objectively assessed is market share, which is a gauge of what collection of features incorporated into different brands/models best meet the needs of buyers in aggregate.

 

[dak723]

... that doesn't diminish the fact that the Sony A7III has outspecced the equivalent Canon offering today and has a more capable camera in the same price bracket. Disagreeing or using the market share hammer as an all-encompassing statement has no relevance in that discussion at all.

Here is where a lot of folks make, what I would consider, their mistake. They equate "more specs" with "more capable". This certainly might be so, but they are not equal. Yes, Sony has more items on the spec sheet, but if the items don't work well, or the camera basics aren't as good, then the camera may not be more capable at all. I have not tried the Sony A7 III, but did briefly own both the A7 and A7 II and they were far less capable in many areas than my Canon 6D. More specs, surely. More capable - not even close, in my opinion.

And while there may be some sites that do thorough, fair reviews, many sites are doing no more than repeating the same info off of other sites. Some review sites will be honest enough to tell you that they only had access to the camera for a few hours or a day at most. There are very few out there that I would consider worthwhile. Again, just my opinion.

 

[Talys]

At the end of the day, we all value different things.

Part of the dilemma for me when it comes to EVF cameras is that a lot of the things they are great at or valued for, like being smaller and easy to use for "generalist photography" end up being "make a memory photos" for me. In those cases, I tend to reach for my smartphone anyhow. I mean, for 99% of photos of my own family, image quality per se doesn't really matter, and anyways, it's happens in a moment when I neither carry an MILC or a DSLR, or even if I do have one with me, it is in a bag that takes much longer to whip out than to just snap something with a phone in my hand. I mean, hell, it takes more time for a Sony camera to boot up than it does for me to take a photo with a Samsung Galaxy.

And while there may be some sites that do thorough, fair reviews, many sites are doing no more than repeating the same info off of other sites.

This is a sad truth of many website and YouTube reviews -- not just for cameras, but, really, everything.

 

[jayphotoworks]

Are you stating that a 'better spec list' equates to a more capable camera? And that disagreeing with that statement has no relevance? That's asinine.

Native lens selection is a huge part of a camera's capability. Does Sony outspec Canon? For vloggers, a fully articulated screen is very important...does the a7III outspec the 6DII?

If you refer to the A7III review on Dpreview, you can see within the same type of tests, the A7III outperforms the 6DII on all fronts including autofocus tracking (even with the 6DII's DPAF). Then it goes on to be better at DR, AF coverage, burst shooting and oversampled 4K. If none of those items are important, than what is? Is it biased? Should I write a review and say, well the 6DII is better because it has an articulating screen, and Canon has more market share? The reader can make their own choices, but the A7III is better than the 6DII at those things that are kind of "important" for cameras right?

Are you, like Takingshots, someone who lets Internet reviewers dictate to them which features/cameras are most important/best for them? Frankly, you seem either indecisive or unable to recognize that the search for 'the perfect camera' is futile...or you simply swallow the latest review proclaiming the superiority of the new —insert brand/model here— and jump at it.

Yes, I realize the perfect camera does not exist, but trying and understanding how new tech can improve ways of doing things the "old" way doesn't mean I'm indecisive or in love with internet reviewers. How would someone even know what an A7III might bring to the table without trying it? You don't become a better doctor operating on the same patient with the same ailment time and time again. You gain that through experience in treating different patients with different ailments. Progress moves forwards whether you like it or not. There are some UX elements in modern Sony cameras that are better than Canon's own implementation, but I still see the comments about how Sony's are an ergonomic disaster. Those individuals probably haven't rented one or tried it out.

The thing is, what's best for you isn't necessarily what's best for me, or for anyone else. There's no objective way to judge, because everyone's needs/wants differ. You can claim Sony outspecs Canon until you're blue in the face, but that's what really has no relevance here...'outspec' is a value judgement, and everyone's values are different, so there's no objective assessment. What can be objectively assessed is market share, which is a gauge of what collection of features incorporated into different brands/models best meet the needs of buyers in aggregate.

Like I mentioned above, the specs and features that can be measured with uniformity against competitive brands shows that those features are better served with an A7III over a 6DII. Market share does not play into that here because we are comparing cameras and features that are comparable among other cameras. Canon might have decided that most buyers do not need those features or they might have a larger market share because its buyers do not want those features, but like I said, it doesn't diminish those features or the fact that it is more capable as tested.

 

[Loswr]

If you refer to the A7III review on Dpreview, you can see within the same type of tests, the A7III outperforms the 6DII on all fronts including autofocus tracking...

Oh, you mean DPReview, with all their 'orders of magnitude more experience'. DPReview, who when reviewing the 1D X II and performing their 'measurements with uniformity against competitive brands', in that case Nikon D5, concluded that the D5 has superior AF performance...despite the fact that they had configured the 1D X II in a way that Canon explicitly recommends against (Spot AF for moving subjects). The DPReview that in the same comparison complained that the 1D X II AF system failed to lock into the intended subject and instead locked onto the closest subject...which is exactly how Canon states it should perform, i.e. it was Canon's flaw that the camera performed as designed instead of how DPReview thought it should perform, and when the way they expected it to behave merely requires the appropriate AF setting to be changed, a setting of which they were at first unaware (even though it is a setting that has been on Canon cameras for many years).

That DPReview? I'm glad you find their tests reliable and credible. I don't.

Like I mentioned above, the specs and features that can be measured with uniformity against competitive brands shows that those features are better served with an A7III over a 6DII. Market share does not play into that here because we are comparing cameras and features that are comparable among other cameras. Canon might have decided that most buyers do not need those features or they might have a larger market share because its buyers do not want those features, but like I said, it doesn't diminish those features or the fact that it is more capable as tested.

Is the a7III more capable at GPS location tagging?

Features are great, but as I stated above, which features are critical and which are irrelevant is a personal value judgement. With characteristics that can be objectively specified or measured (e.g., frame rate, dynamic range) the a7III tops the 6DII on many (but not all). Those characteristics do not make the a7III a more capable camera (as you originally stated), and even in the specific areas where the a7III offers better performance, the differences may be completely irrelevant in practice (e.g., higher fps and a deeper buffer don't matter for typical studio photography).

 

[stevelee]

Feature lists don’t impress me per se. I keep the 610-page English manual for ny 6D2 on my iPad so I can look up things quickly. Sometimes I will flip to a random page to read about some unfamiliar feature. It seems like a third or more of them are not relevant to anything I want to do.

Sure there are things that I look for, so specifics in the list can be useful. But the length itself does not matter.

 

[Talys]

If you refer to the A7III review on Dpreview, you can see within the same type of tests, the A7III outperforms the 6DII on all fronts including autofocus tracking (even with the 6DII's DPAF). Then it goes on to be better at DR, AF coverage, burst shooting and oversampled 4K. If none of those items are important, than what is? Is it biased? Should I write a review and say, well the 6DII is better because it has an articulating screen, and Canon has more market share? The reader can make their own choices, but the A7III is better than the 6DII at those things that are kind of "important" for cameras right?

The A7M3 has much better autofocus TRACKING of certain subjects like human faces. There are some cool features like face registration and face preference, and of course, Eye AF is great for human subjects in well-lit conditions. But it is TERRIBLE in comparison to the 6DII in:

- Raw autofocus speed in good conditions
- Raw autofocus speed in dimly lit conditions
- Autofocus in very poor lighting where an AF illuminator is needed -- is excellent in 6DII and unusable in Sony
- Accuracy of spot selection in PDAF mode (the Sony is good for choosing the right point in accurate focus-magnified Autofocus in Contrast Detect mode, but then it's painfully slow)
- Continuous autofocus of a small subject by manually tracking it (such as a bird)
- Autofocus hunting in non-continuous AF modes
- Autofocus at smaller apertures (where the Sony uses crappy, stopped down autofocusing)

To me, every cool feature in the A7M3 is dwarfed by relatively poor autofocus. 20 steps of DR does nothing for me if my bird is blurry.

All things being equal (composition, quality of lenses, lighting, etc.), a camera needs 2 things to get a good picture: good focus, and good exposure. I can figure out the exposure part, by a combination of AE and experience. But I rely on the camera for good focus, and the Sony is not up to snuff when the conditions are challenging.

By the way: subject tracking is much better on the 6DII in DPAF (live view) mode than in PDAF. That said, as a stills photographer, this really isn't a feature that is very important, because usually, I need to keep the focus point on the subject anyways (otherwise, it will be poorly composed). For video, I get it.

Also, Sony has absolutely ridiculous AE ergonomics, where the camera can't link AE to the back button autofocus. So, if you press the back AF button, the camera won't provide AE. You must half-press the shutter to do that (or program it to another, separate button). Similarly, Sony has ridiculous shutter wheel ergonomics. You can't change the shutter speed/aperture when you your finger is on the AF. Often, I will back-button autofocus, and adjust my shutter speed with my index finger between shots. But on the Sony, you need to release AF in order to adjust exposure.

 

[stevelee]

Is this a good spot for me to admit my stupidity? I’ve been reading here about eye autofocus, and it sounded like a neat feature. Instead of choosing a focus point or tapping on the subject on the screen, you could just look at something in the viewfinder, and the camera would see what you are looking at and focus on that. I understood why people would want a camera that would do that.

Sadly, my further reading here suggests that is not what the feature does. I’m disillusioned.

 

[Takingshots]

We rely on internet reviewers because they have spent time reviewing equipment in orders of magnitude more than most of us here combined across multiple manufacturers.

As long as you understand and account for their biases.

...the fact that the Sony A7III has outspecced the equivalent Canon offering today and has a more capable camera in the same price bracket. Disagreeing or using the market share hammer as an all-encompassing statement has no relevance in that discussion at all.

Are you stating that a 'better spec list' equates to a more capable camera? And that disagreeing with that statement has no relevance? That's asinine.

Native lens selection is a huge part of a camera's capability. Does Sony outspec Canon? For vloggers, a fully articulated screen is very important...does the a7III outspec the 6DII?

Are you, like Takingshots, someone who lets Internet reviewers dictate to them which features/cameras are most important/best for them? Frankly, you seem either indecisive or unable to recognize that the search for 'the perfect camera' is futile...or you simply swallow the latest review proclaiming the superiority of the new —insert brand/model here— and jump at it.

The thing is, what's best for you isn't necessarily what's best for me, or for anyone else. There's no objective way to judge, because everyone's needs/wants differ. You can claim Sony outspecs Canon until you're blue in the face, but that's what really has no relevance here...'outspec' is a value judgement, and everyone's values are different, so there's no objective assessment. What can be objectively assessed is market share, which is a gauge of what collection of features incorporated into different brands/models best meet the needs of buyers in aggregate.

Wow - where did you get that assumption ? I do not let internet reviewer dictate to my decision to buy or not to buy. If they do have that power over me, I must be one Peking "lemming" deserved to be served on the table.
With the specs of A7iii camera, test or rent it to see one likes it and if you still like the workings of Canon colors and its functionality, stick with it. It is your money to decide where to park it. I think Jayphotoworks has a good point > " I realize the perfect camera does not exist, but trying and understanding how new tech can improve ways of doing things the "old" way doesn't mean I'm indecisive or in love with internet reviewers. How would someone even know what an A7III might bring to the table without trying it?

 

[Talys]

Is this a good spot for me to admit my stupidity? I’ve been reading here about eye autofocus, and it sounded like a neat feature. Instead of choosing a focus point or tapping on the subject on the screen, you could just look at something in the viewfinder, and the camera would see what you are looking at and focus on that. I understood why people would want a camera that would do that.

Sadly, my further reading here suggests that is not what the feature does. I’m disillusioned.

Ironically, on the Sony, you can't tap somewhere on the screen and have the camera autofocus on it. This action only sets the AF point Unless you're in video mode, when it does exactly that, because, having it do different things in photo and video mode makes tons of sense.