Industry News: Sony officially announces the α9 II

[Graphic.Artifacts]

This subject also interests me. I assume you've also come across Jim Kasson's blog where he tests cameras' e-shutter readout speeds? Because of its e-shutter performance (and because it's less of an investment than an a9), I have contemplated getting an X-T3, though ideally, I would love to purchase a Canon system with an e-shutter speed fast enough for normal, non-action use without artifacts. Shooting stills on movie sets (where being silent is mandatory) without needing a blimp, that's the dream for me.

Yes. Some of the data I quoted came from Kasson's blog. I have an X-T3 but typically use the mechanical shutter for stills. When I have some time I'll do some e-shutter testing on my own. I'd always assumed I wouldn't be happy with the results but I think I'll find out for myself.

Video rolling shutter performance in the XT-3 is quite good. If you can live with the smaller sensor it's a great camera. Whenever I pick up the 1DX2 after using the Fuji for a few days I'm confronted again with how loud the mirror/shutter mechanism is. I won't miss that.

Edit: I know some folks around here aren't going to want to hear it but I find very little difference in IQ between the X-T3 and the 1DX Mark II. The colors and rendering are very different and the 1DX2 is still a little better at high ISO but they are fairly equivalent IMO. The 5D Mark IV still has a significant IQ advantage as you'd expect.

 

[SecureGSM]

Interesting. 1dx II Performs better than 5D IV at high ISO levels Over 5400 approx. 5D IV has a significant IQ advantage ? Very interesting. I am keen to understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Personally I am convinced that 1Dx II high iso performance is virtually untouchable. Seriously. I love my 5D IVs but 1dx II high iso files are great. Unless we are talking completely different products here. Let’s discuss.

 

[Viggo]

Interesting. 1dx II Performs better than 5D IV at high ISO levels Over 5400 approx. 5D IV has a significant IQ advantage ? Very interesting. I am keen to understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Personally I am convinced that 1Dx II high iso performance is virtually untouchable. Seriously. I love my 5D IVs but 1dx II high iso files are great. Unless we are talking completely different products here. Let’s discuss.

I feel that vs my R, I would rather have the 20 mp and high iso of the 1dx2 sensor, than the 30mp and high iso of the R.

 

[unfocused]

I shoot the 1Dx II, 5DIV and now the R side by side. I seldom go over 6400 but after processing thousands of images I can’t tell any difference.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

I think my first point was that I didn't feel that the full frame 1DX Mark II had a significant IQ advantage over the smaller sensor in the X-T3 for general purpose photography but that the larger frame sensor of the 1DX2 performed better at higher ISO's. The second point which I may have muddled is that the IQ of the 5d Mark IV is generally better than the X-T3 in most circumstances. I still like and use the X-T3 but you need to appreciate it's limitations if you currently use a full frame camera. I'd expect the same would be true if you were adding a Canon M but I don't own an M so I can't really say.

I was referring strictly to how the images present themselves when editing rather than the operation of the cameras. The three cameras are completely different animals as far as operation goes.

I guess what I'm saying is that modern APS-C sensors seem to be more or less equivalent to previous generation full frame sensors of equivalent or lesser pixels. I'd say the X-T3 is also equivalent to the previous gen. 5D's I've used. I wasn't really commenting on the 5D4 vs the 1DX2 but the 50% increase in pixels in the 5D4 would seem to offset any other advantage the 1DX2 might have as far as IQ goes.

I think the 1DX2 has superior low light AF relative to the 5D4 so I'd generally go with that in any situation that was going to require high ISO's. The 5D4 has a much better live view implementation so I'd typically go with that for low ISO max quality images. Generally speaking I don't really have a preference as they are both excellent so I'd typically chose one over the other based on something other than IQ. I don't own an R so I can't comment on that.

edit: Important point. The discussion was regarding electronic shutter which is why I referenced the X-T3. The only camera I own with a modern e-shutter. The M6 Mark II also looks promising for e-shutter. This is the Industry News section. I generally don't talk about other brands of cameras I might own on Canon Rumors. Not trying to start a brand vs brand thing.

 

[SecureGSM]

I shoot the 1Dx II, 5DIV and now the R side by side. I seldom go over 6400 but after processing thousands of images I can’t tell any difference.

Here is an interesting tool that may suggest that there is a tangible difference in noise characteristics at ISO 6400 for cameras that we discussed.

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

www.dpreview.com

 

[privatebydesign]

Here is an interesting tool that may suggest that there is a tangible difference in noise characteristics at ISO 6400 for cameras that we discussed.

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

www.dpreview.com

I think any differences seen at that level between the three Canon’s is down to rendering differences and is easily nullified by best processing rather than standard processing.

The numbers suggest there is essentially no difference between the three

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

www.photonstophotos.net

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

Yes. DPR's processing isn't really reflective of how my images look when processed. That being said, I'd be happy with any of those. It's interesting to see the magenta cast showing up in the 5D4/R sensor. I don't see that as a rule.

 

[Sharlin]

Here is an interesting tool that may suggest that there is a tangible difference in noise characteristics at ISO 6400 for cameras that we discussed.

Appears to be the resolution difference, mostly. Select the "Comp" option for an apples-to-apples comparison and the difference in noise quality all but disappears.