My new camera fund has reached $3000, barely enough for a used 1D4 or a new 5D3. Looking around, I can also get a Sony A7R with 36MP, ISO 25600 and a 24-70 f/4 FF lens. Or do I keep going and hope to get a lower priced or refurb 1DX for another $5000. I would like a camera for low light stage events.
How to spend $3000 now or keep saving?
- Thread starter tiger82
- Start date
Canon's sensors are embarrassing compared to Sony's. I can't think of one thing that is better if you get a Canon sensor. Why not get the A7R? I might sell my 5D3 to buy something like that. I guess focusing speed and fps are the main advantages of 5D3/1DX in this comparison. Maybe they focus better in the kind of events you mentioned.
Upvote
0
I´m no expert on the Sony, but for low light stage events ... I would be surprised if the AF on the Sony is anywhere near the 5DIII/1DX. And what happens to DR and all the rest of it in high ISO territory ...
I´m OK with people expressing their views in black and white, but to call the 5DIII/1DX sensors an embarrassment compared to Sony is to stretch the fact, especially in low light situations. If you add all the rest you need to make good images, I believe Sony is left in the dust.
I´m OK with people expressing their views in black and white, but to call the 5DIII/1DX sensors an embarrassment compared to Sony is to stretch the fact, especially in low light situations. If you add all the rest you need to make good images, I believe Sony is left in the dust.
Upvote
0
tiger82 said:
The part in bold in the quote above points to the 1Dx.
Low light performance of the 1Dx is better than the 5D3 or 1DIV.
Low light performance of the 6D apparently betters the 5D3, but gives up some AF performance parameters. There is a current thread on going from a 5D3 to a 6D here: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=18417.0
You can use an ISO 25600 file right out of a 1Dx. Can you do that with a Sony (serious question- I have no idea).
Upvote
0
The available glass selection? The AF system? All the DR and megapixels in the world don't mean a thing if the light is out of focus and distorted.Dick said:
Upvote
0
The optimum solution for "low light stage events" is the Leica M with the f0.95 noctilux - but you're only
$15,000 short if you plan to "keep saving". I'd suggest you buy now and enjoy the show - a 70D with the
85mm f1.2 will consume your camera fund and give you one hell of a low light solution. It's more about
the glass than the camera - and you can use the lens long after the camera body has bit it's technological
end.
$15,000 short if you plan to "keep saving". I'd suggest you buy now and enjoy the show - a 70D with the
85mm f1.2 will consume your camera fund and give you one hell of a low light solution. It's more about
the glass than the camera - and you can use the lens long after the camera body has bit it's technological
end.
Upvote
0
I'm a Canon guy with a 5DIII and a good investment in glass. I hate to say this but have you looked at the Nikon D800? Best sensor plus great glass. I love the Sony but the lenses are not there yet nor will they be for a long time. Can't go wrong with a Canon 5DIII though
Upvote
0
If you want the ultimate in low-light with high ISO & AF, 1DX, no question. This from a 5d3 shooter. The 5d3 is great, love it and wouldn't trade it, but every photo I've seen from the 1DX and what I know of it's AF/Metering system that's different from the 5d3 says it's even better. Especially with metering based on the AF selected, rather than just the standard modes that operate based off of the center of the VF. I'm so jealous of that.
If you just want to get shooting, and shoot a wide variety of subjects, the 5d3 is a great camera for that. No, not as good DR as a Sony sensor at low ISOs, but once you get up to the mid and high ISOs, it's as good or better. The AF system is outstanding as well, and the body handling & ergonomics are great. That said, if you think you can wait, the 1DX will be that much better for low light/concert photography.
If you just want to get shooting, and shoot a wide variety of subjects, the 5d3 is a great camera for that. No, not as good DR as a Sony sensor at low ISOs, but once you get up to the mid and high ISOs, it's as good or better. The AF system is outstanding as well, and the body handling & ergonomics are great. That said, if you think you can wait, the 1DX will be that much better for low light/concert photography.
Upvote
0
Drizzt321 said:
My thoughts exactly.
Most people bragging about Sony's DR and trashing Canon's, don't realize that it's only better at low ISO values, with the highest difference being at base ISO.
If you are going to shoot events at mid/high ISO settings;
5DIII with it's superb sensor & amazing AF, paired with pro grade Canon glass, is a far better choice than anything Sony can offer at the moment.
I would rather get a 5DIII and invest in a couple of fast primes for the price of a 1DX, eventhough it's THE best body money can buy for low light event/action photography.
Upvote
0
Dick said:
If the A7R uses the same sensor as the Nikon D600 or D610, then it is quite inferior to the 6D for low light exposures, between the ISO range of 1000 to 10,000 (at least at the pixel level at 100%). So is the 1DX, the D4, the D800, and every other camera on earth. Above this range, many of the others start to pull ahead...as well as below this range. But within this critical range, sorry but the 6D wins...for now.
Upvote
0
There are only 5 currently planned native lenses for the a7r with only 2 available now.
The native af speed is only on the native mount lenses. With an alpha mount adapter (to access sonys other lenses) the af is somewhat poorer.
With only 5 lens options I would not buy the a7r.
I would save further and buy a 5d3.
The native af speed is only on the native mount lenses. With an alpha mount adapter (to access sonys other lenses) the af is somewhat poorer.
With only 5 lens options I would not buy the a7r.
I would save further and buy a 5d3.
Upvote
0
