Is Sony going to beat Canon to the ‘Pro’ mirrorless camera punch?

Normalnorm

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2012
669
286
I roll my eyes when talk turns to "pro" cameras.
The idea that a "pro" camera MUST have an integrated grip, larger body etc. is really what a moneyed hobbyist "thinks" is "pro".

Amateurs also think pros largely inhabit sports and PJ photography genres where the benefits of a high frame rate, a deep buffer and long lived batteries make a difference. In the real world, the vast bulk of pro photography is done by people shooting subjects that can easily be done with an APS-C camera or even MFT. In addition, pros today are distinguished largely by their youth and poverty. They are not buying $6k bodies from anyone.
Make no mistake, these bodies are halo models for the amateur buyer and the nine other guys who need them for work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

mpb001

EOS 90D
Sep 10, 2016
128
114
I just cant imagine a Sony camera with good ergonomics. I guess it’s possible, but higher unlikely that it would be better than a Canon 1 series. Or any Canon for that matter.
 

jeffa4444

EOS 5D Mark IV
Feb 28, 2013
1,515
173
66
We rent Canon cameras to professionals mainly in the fashion and food sectors. As you can imagine we have the 1DX MKIII, the R5 & that dinosaur the 5D MKIV (plus the 5DSr). By far the camera most rented is the 5D MKIV followed by the 5DSr then the 1DX MKIII then the R5.

Good you defined "Pro" but any camera that earns a good return is "Pro".
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,719
1,589
We rent Canon cameras to professionals mainly in the fashion and food sectors. As you can imagine we have the 1DX MKIII, the R5 & that dinosaur the 5D MKIV (plus the 5DSr). By far the camera most rented is the 5D MKIV followed by the 5DSr then the 1DX MKIII then the R5.

Good you defined "Pro" but any camera that earns a good return is "Pro".
Realistically, it's a continuum with no clear-cut boundary. A lot of people who do this for a living use 5 series, and if you're talking about quality of work, more than "person makes a living doing this", then of course good pictures come off of lesser and lesser cameras.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,126
1,832
Ok

That is nice. Good for Sony. I can see the A9 with better battery life and CFExpress cards. The "no overheating" part cracks me up. Roger had it right, it is a box, if heat is generated in the box, it needs a way to get out of the box or the box will overheat. So, either Sony has a fancy way to minimize the rate at which the heat is generated or they have found a way to get the heat out of the camera. Or, that part of the rumor is BS.
You can make sealed heat exchangers. How do you think a nuclear reactor works?
 
  • Like
Reactions: docsmith

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,126
1,832
The bigger battery(10.8V/2750mAH) in the 'Pro' body has also been able to drive the AF of the lenses faster. If both Canon and Nikon stayed at 20MP in their recent 1 series bodies and the previous 'pro' Sony body was only 24MP, you have to wonder what changed in the 'Pro' oriented marketing to make the rumormill go big?
No more media giants buying cabinets full of gear for their hordes of staff photographers?

The typical buyers of these types of cameras are no longer corporate customers who buy them in bulk. They're mostly well heeled enthusiasts who may be freelance "semi-pros".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM and ERHP

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,126
1,832
According to Canon the R5/R6 are both professional and consumer cameras whereas the 1DX is only a professional camera.
It depends on what marketing region you're in. They call some camera's "pro" cameras in Europe that are not called "pro" cameras in North America, for instance.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,126
1,832
Once Canon announces their superteles in RF 400 f2.8 or RF 500 f2.8 and RF 600 f4, then we know the R1 is well on its way.

1DXM1: 18mp, 1080p@30, 12fps, dual cpu
1DXM2: 20mp, 4k@60, 14fps, dual cpu
1DXM3: 20mp, 5.5k@60, 16fps, single cpu

R1: 33mp(minimum for 8k), 8k@30, 18fps, single cpu

That’s my 2 cents.
The first two RF supertelephotos will be the 300/2.8 and 500/4 that weren't updated when the 600/5.6 III and 400/2.8 III came out in 2018.

8K is 33MP in a 16:9 aspect ratio. Make a 3:2 sensor that is wide enough for 8K and you need 39MP for 8K UHD and 45MP for "8K DCI".
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
1,712
575
Davidson, NC
Around fifteen years ago, the most powerful Macs were liquid cooled. I don't think that lasted a long time. These days Macs with orders of magnitude faster processors have fans that don't come on very often.
 

Joules

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,118
1,255
Hamburg, Germany
Around fifteen years ago, the most powerful Macs were liquid cooled. I don't think that lasted a long time. These days Macs with orders of magnitude faster processors have fans that don't come on very often.
Apple runs their Intel chip exactly as hot as their allowed to get or throttles the performance down heavily in order to get away with minimal cooling systems though.

I'm not sure what your point is. But Apple is not really the greatest example for how to deal with heat in enclosed spaces.
 

Aussie shooter

www.facebook.com/BrettGuyPhotography/
Dec 6, 2016
837
1,050
I've ammended the post to explain 'pro', I thought that desigination was clear.
I would add that the 'pro' designation should also require that it is built like a brick s@#thouse(Aussie colloquialism). Any camera can obviously be used for professional work but the built tough factor is very important in my oppinion
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
I roll my eyes when talk turns to "pro" cameras.
I'd just like to raise a point here regarding the "pro" tag. When a camera is used to bring home the bacon, the treatment of that camera and the hard handling that it will get generally bear no relationship to a camera that is in amateur / hobbyist ownership. Therefore it may well have to be capable of withstanding that kind of use over a long period of time without failing. Also it has to be able to be compatible with the kind of systems that someone who is using that camera for all sorts of paid work might need or want. So in these cases I think a "pro" tag is justified

An example that comes to mind was the robustness of the AF on the 1 series. I had a pal who was a professional photographer and many years ago his 1 series and tripod was knocked over and the camera hit the tarmac full whack. The camera was fine, and also the AF continued to be accurate. I know a few people with 5D / II cameras who had knocked them or dropped them and the AF was thrown out substantially. That includes me with a 5D and that camera didn't have AFMA to enable a user recalibration.

The original 5D wasn't very "pro" when the mirrors fell out. There was little satisfaction in finding that you were the owner of the first FF mirrorless cameras in 2006 that everyone was yearning for when you were in the middle of a wedding. Fortunately it was simple enough to glue it back onto the mounting plate, because on those early 5D cameras that's just how it was, no other retaining devices at all.

I think from the Mark III Canon lifted the 5 series to "pro" camera status. The 5DIII even had a stainless steel bottom plate. Neat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zim

Normalnorm

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2012
669
286
I'd just like to raise a point here regarding the "pro" tag. When a camera is used to bring home the bacon, the treatment of that camera and the hard handling that it will get generally bear no relationship to a camera that is in amateur / hobbyist ownership. Therefore it may well have to be capable of withstanding that kind of use over a long period of time without failing. Also it has to be able to be compatible with the kind of systems that someone who is using that camera for all sorts of paid work might need or want. So in these cases I think a "pro" tag is justified

An example that comes to mind was the robustness of the AF on the 1 series. I had a pal who was a professional photographer and many years ago his 1 series and tripod was knocked over and the camera hit the tarmac full whack. The camera was fine, and also the AF continued to be accurate. I know a few people with 5D / II cameras who had knocked them or dropped them and the AF was thrown out substantially. That includes me with a 5D and that camera didn't have AFMA to enable a user recalibration.

The original 5D wasn't very "pro" when the mirrors fell out. There was little satisfaction in finding that you were the owner of the first FF mirrorless cameras in 2006 that everyone was yearning for when you were in the middle of a wedding. Fortunately it was simple enough to glue it back onto the mounting plate, because on those early 5D cameras that's just how it was, no other retaining devices at all.

I think from the Mark III Canon lifted the 5 series to "pro" camera status. The 5DIII even had a stainless steel bottom plate. Neat.
I would disagree. I have been a full time pro for over 30 years and have used a lot of different gear to do my work. The tool that gets the job done is the one we buy and keep. When I used large format I used Deardorff, Linhof and Toyo. All did the job. Some were more pleasurable to use than others. The shutters on the lenses were the weak point but for the most part worked well. In medium format I used Hasselblad, Pentax and Mamiya. Of the three, the Hasselblads were the most unreliable yet had the most stature. In 35 I used Nikon, Canon, Minolta and Pentax. Only the Nikons went to the shop. Considering that the vast bulk of pro work can be done, and is done with lenses ranging from 24-105 FL range almost any FF system is "pro". As for reliability, today's cameras are pocket computers and as such suffer from software and FW glitches as much as mechanical failure. That happens irrespective of the model. A solid magnesium body does not save you from that.
The conceit that pros work in some screaming hurricane or a war zone all the time is ridiculous. Most studios have less drama than a library. I have had countless interesting jobs over the years many very exciting ones but the durability of my gear was never challenged regardless of the task.
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
The conceit that pros work in some screaming hurricane or a war zone all the time is ridiculous. Most studios have less drama than a library.
When I said " When a camera is used to bring home the bacon, the treatment of that camera and the hard handling that it will get generally bear no relationship to a camera that is in amateur / hobbyist ownership" I hope that you're the only one who interpreted this as 'The conceit that pros work in some screaming hurricane or a war zone '.
A camera sat in a studio all its life is one extreme, a camera used in a war zone is the opposite extreme. I'd like to think that my argument was based upon something more reasonable.
 

Rocky

EOS R
Jul 30, 2010
968
61
I dig into the “pro camera” a little bit. That is what I have found: Nikon SP ( copied and improved Contax, out of production after WW II) is the first “pro camera” claim by the manufacturer. When Nikon F( first SLR from Nikon) came out, it inheritated the “pro” title. Both cameras are well built and have more features then their peer. After that every major Japanese SLR maker introduces a “pro” model to grab the market share.