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

[neuroanatomist]

Way to have that early 80's Big 3 attitude.


Do you have any more baseless & rude insults you'd like to sling around in your blind, head in the sand, loyalty to Canon? You're on a roll with your "modicum of intelligence".


It seems like the 2nd part of your post invalidates the second. The first part assumes they're losing money which in the second part you admit you don't know.

Apparently you find facts personally offensive. I find that rather sad.

 

[Stereodude]

Apparently you find facts personally offensive. I find that rather sad.

I didn't realize you were a fact. I would have pegged you for something else, but thanks for letting me know.

 

[M. D. Vaden of Oregon]

Look at the new Sony review from Tony Northrup. Sony is playing hardball.

Or Sony is late to the game. Chelsea Northrup sounded high on something .. The A7R iv having no touchscreen means existing Sony users will do time travel backwards. Further, the screen is smaller with less dots than Nikon and Canon recent full frame mirrorless bodies released. The A7R iv has no S-RAW or M-RAW which should plague various users when they go to transfer and process files. I know this for a fact, because I shoot the 50 mp 5DS and often need M-RAW to keep file size within reason. It's worth $3500 .. but not a home run yet. Hardly anybody put it through the paces yet. It could do better or worse than expected. My thought .. they should have made it better and raised the price to $4000

Ok so the Sony has 9.8% more pixels in each dimension compared to the 5DS. To me this is more like Sony catching up to Canon.

That's a realistic way to express it. Then its still behind the 1DX mk ii for FPS (which barely matters in this case). As I wrote above, the RAW settings are lame in the A7R iv. It leaves good reason for a lot of Sony enthusiasts to keep A7R iii bodies, then wait.

 

[neuroanatomist]

But you go right ahead and keep believing that Canon is "severely falling behind". But if you really believed that, you wouldn't be here. You would have switched. And be posting on Sony forums, and sharing your pics and showing how much better the equipment made your photography, right?

Well, I’m not sure about that. I think there are some individuals who, upon finding that grass they thought would be greener has large brown patches and profligate weeds, come back here in some sort of attempt to convince themselves they made a good choice after all.

Or as me dear ol’ Irish Gran would have put it, they stepped into a bucket of sh!t and are looking for others to jump in with them.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I didn't realize you were a fact. I would have pegged you for something else, but thanks for letting me know.

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.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I’m being glib here as I’m on the train, but Neuro, you’re smarter than this. RIM is an extreme example, but unit sales are sometimes a lagging indicator—not a leading one.

So Canon has been lagging for 16 years and counting. Okidokeee.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development. The writing is on the wall, especially if they have no desire to make class leading products. at that end, whats the point?

YAPODFC.

Remember when mirrorless was going to kill the DSLR in 5 years? That was >8 years ago and DSLRs still comprise the majority of the ILC market.

Regardless, Canon doesn’t care if you give them 5 years or 5 minutes. If they can’t maintain market share over time, they’ll probably bail on the market...you know, the typical Sony move.

 

[neuroanatomist]

F4 or even F2.8 lenses can’t generate artistic bokeh effect. Period.

Perhaps not in your hands, but that’s got nothing to do with the lens.

 

[RayValdez360]

Canon said they would be the most aggressive camera company in terms of mirror-less development, but Sony certainly isn't taking a wait and see mode. Hopefully the new Canon RF models will be sooner than 2020

they are aggressively filing patents.

 

[tmc784]

So buying expensive high MP camera will make you take pictures like a Pro ?

 

[Architect1776]

Everytime I hear Canon is behind in sensor: please show me a real world comparison (not lab numbers, not the pathetic dxo numbers), real shots, where the 5d4 sensor "ruined" a shot and the Sony "saved" it because of dynamic range. Please just show me one example. Just one. You probably can't. But don't feel bad. No one can. You know why? Because like Alik Griffin said, the internet is one big echo chamber, people just regurgitating the same ol stuff.

I do NOT believe in DXO at all.
I have been shooting Canon since 1971.
I do not under expose my shots by 5 stops and then try to save them with falling back on DR.
I look at things like the animal eye AF and other features like IBIS which is huge to me as I wish to use my old FD, FL and R lenses on the new R mount cameras. Still not there.
It would be nice to have FF 4K though I would not use it much many would. Actually as I have said in the past 4K is outdated and Canon needs to go 8K FF with a global shutter for the video.
The a9 shoots faster than the 1DX MII, why?
High MP would be nice as Canon does make a 120 and 240 mp sensors, so why is this technology not put into a FF sensor?
So no it is not DXO or anything like that just the overall package.
Canon makes far superior lenses to all including Zeis and Leica.
Canon makes wonderful cameras that are easy to use but seem overall a generation or 2 behind in general.
I have defended Canon for years but it seems with each iteration they fall farther behind both Nikon and Sony feature for feature. Yes some are stupid but many would be very nice to have. I saw the new R as an opportunity to step up. Canon has with incredible lenses, let's hope the bodies will come that match the incredible lenses. I can accept the first gen to be behind but not the second gen to be behind at all.

 

[RobbieHat]

You work in landscape, astro and nature photography? Tell us your secrets, oh wise one!
Canon have hardly "thrown away" 2019. They've announced and released a ton of RF mount lenses in readiness for a new body, and we're only six months in. If you don't want to wait, Sony just announced a 60mpx 10fps camera for your nature/astro/landscape fast moving work. I guess you're the target market! Either way, I'm sure Canon will heed your demands and immediately release all their R&D for fear of you leaving.

Reread my post and take a deep breath. The RF lenses are only useful to me with a RF body that meets my needs. Current releases don’t. The RF system also significantly impacts my investment in EF lenses (I know you can adapt) and there are significant gaps in the RF current releases.

As I said, Canon have always had great glass but they are really lagging in their bodies and it has been too many years since the last release of bodies that I use or would buy. Time is not on their side and Sony are ramping up the pressure on me at least with this newest release. I would adapt some of my glass to Sony if I converted to them (11-24, Sigma 14 1.8) and would switch out to some of the longer lenses Sony are releasing as we speak.

 

[unfocused]

...they are really lagging in their bodies and it has been too many years since the last release of bodies that I use or would buy.

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?"

Time is not on their side and Sony are ramping up the pressure on me at least with this newest release. I would adapt some of my glass to Sony if I converted to them (11-24, Sigma 14 1.8) and would switch out to some of the longer lenses Sony are releasing as we speak.

No one is stopping you. If you prefer to switch to Sony, by all means, do so. But, just commenting on the forum to complain is pointless. "We'd like to talk you out of switching" said no one, ever on this forum.

 

[neuroanatomist]

"We'd like to talk you out of switching" said no one, ever on this forum.

True, but what has been said is, “Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.”

 

[dtaylor]

So buying expensive high MP camera will make you take pictures like a Pro ?

Only with the right batteries and lens caps.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

Eh...I may be forgetting a Sony PR, but I believe it's their fans who have been claiming 15 stops DR.

Every since the D800 came out fanboys have been acting as if ALL Sony sensors could deliver 15 stops (rounding up) of DR. This was never the case. The D8x0 series always stood out as the highest DR bodies, with a few other Nikon sensors delivering similar performance, all of them in the 14-15ev range. Most Sony sensors have been at or below the 5D4 (i.e. 13-14ev range). There are some notable exceptions where a Nikon or Sony sensor delivers 12s.

These same people tend to assume that ALL Canon sensors have the DR of a 5D3 with banding or a 6D2 with harsh shadow noise.

As I recall the mkII A7's did lose DR compared to the mkI's, and then the mkIII's actually got close to the D8x0 series. I don't feel like looking at DxO at the moment** to get exact numbers, but I think the mkIII's are on par with the D8x0 series, all of which are close to 15 (if you round up to a whole integer).

I've admittedly been a broken record regarding DR on this forum (and others) because...

• Most people really have no idea how a DxO DR score translates into reality, i.e. what it actually means for image processing. DR is just pushed on sites like dpreview so they get GAS and "know" they need it.
• Most images are not exposed/processed for maximum DR. Example: if you have a D850 and you're not using ETTR then you're not getting any more DR than a 5Dsr shooter who is using ETTR. If you're shooting JPEG you're not doing any better than cameras more than a decade old in RAW.
• 1ev in the DxO score amounts to little more than a NR slider adjustment. 2ev means a real shadow detail difference that cannot be eliminated with post processing technique (NR), but only in images pushed to the max in terms of DR. 3ev and more starts to equate to actual difficulties with wide DR scenes that can only be shot in 1 frame.

** I really don't ever feel like looking at DxO, but their DR tests are internally consistent and reasonably close to reality. The rest of their tests are demonstrably trash.

I agree that the DR of the 5D Mark IV is excellent. I've been using mine to duplicate 35 mm slides for the last few months and it's been performing much better than I expected. My slides are very dense and I've made many thousands of exposures that require very wide DR to capture. Some images have to be composited with HDR stacks but the 5D4 has been able to capture a great number of slides in a single image. My previous 5D's could never have handled many of those. The 5D4 also has a vastly improved ability to lift shadows relative to the other 5D's I've owned. I'm not sure the 5D4 sensor quite gets down to the noise floor that some of the best Sony sensor's achieve but it's certainly very good.

Had Canon put out that sensor a few years earlier we wouldn't have had to endure all the bitching and the negative perception of Canon sensors that still persists. But, as annoying as the Sony trolls are, it was Canon that resisted the need to upgrade their sensors when it was obvious to everyone that they were behind.

 

[neuroanatomist]

But, as annoying as the Sony trolls are, it was Canon that resisted the need to upgrade their sensors when it was obvious to everyone that they were behind.

Was it, though? Did more low ISO DR help Sony sell more cameras? Did Canon lose market share because they had less low ISO DR? The answers are no and no. So, either it wasn’t remotely ‘obvious to everyone’ or, if it was, the majority of camera buyers didn’t give a damn.

Just more evidence of the disconnect between forum folk and measurebators, and the camera-buying public out there in the real world.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

Was it, though? Did more low ISO DR help Sony sell more cameras? Did Canon lose market share because they had less low ISO DR? The answers are no and no. So, either it wasn’t remotely ‘obvious to everyone’ or, if it was, the majority of camera buyers didn’t give a damn.

Just more evidence of the disconnect between forum folk and measurebators, and the camera-buying public out there in the real world.

It's pretty obvious that you are only interested in enforcing your viewpoint on everyone else in this forum and couldn't care less what is going on in the "real world".

 

[maves]

People keep talking about Canon not listening to pro's, but pretty much all the pro's I know (and it's quite a few) are out taking amazing photographs, not sitting on forums. They use their spare cash on workshops and travel, things that actually WILL make you a better photographer. They upgrade when their gear dies. Their photographs are brilliant and they are booked out for months.

 

[sdz]

snip....

I give canon 5 years before they pull out of camera development. The writing is on the wall, especially if they have no desire to make class leading products. at that end, whats the point?

Canon sensor technology lags behind Sony's. This is one area in which Canon is lacking. Are there any other areas?

Crickets!

Canon may find it difficult to manufacture sensors that rival's Sony's. This need not be a matter of desire. The cause is economic. Canon currently lacks the competitive advantages Sony enjoys with its sensor business. One would need a true "all things being equal" clause to claim that Canon lacks the desire to produce class leading cameras. But, things are unequal. Canon is conservative. It is not complacent and incompetent.

Sensible persons would hope that Canon can improve the technology in its sensors and in the making of its sensors. There are few benefits for consumers when one company has a monopoly in a key component.

That said, I doubt Canon would abandon its camera development business. Why would it? What may happen is Canon may choose to use Sony sensors in its FF cameras. Why would it make this choice? A key reason: The costs of developing sensors could become so great and Sony's advantages so significant that competing with Sony in processor development would be uneconomic for Canon -- which is to say, unprofitable. If that point were to come, Canon would act irrationally if it attempted to compete with Sony. This situation is common. In the past, DEC, Motorola and HP abandoned computer processor development. It is not as though they failed to produce innovative products. They did. Rather, the economics of the situation favored Intel because Intel produced processors for a commodity product, personal computers. Intel had economies of scale the others lacked. It had the massive revenue stream needed to build fabs, to take risks, etc. Intel became the leading oligopoly provider of CPUs.

Sony, thanks to the expertise in and income from its cell phone businesses, now has a competitive advantage with respect to Canon, Nikon and other sensor chip makers. It remains to be seen whether Sony can translate this advantage into market share in full frame cameras. It could, but consumers find system switches costly. It also remains to be seen if Canon can improve its sensors to a degree needed to compete with Sony as an equal -- if only to preserve the expertise it has gained over the last half-century and to prevent Sony from becoming a monopoly provider of image sensors for FF and ASP-C cameras. Monopolies supress innovation.

Finally, Canon sensors continue to produce high-quality images in its cameras. We need to remind ourselves of this fact. Sony has not made Canon cameras obsolete. Camera sensors are a mature technology. The leader and the led are not so different that using Canon cameras is irrational. But, Sony is the leader. That's a fact.