Off Brand: Sony Announces the Full-frame a7R III
- Thread starter xps
- Start date
While the 10 fps performance of the A7R3 might be misleading advertising or have to read the small print - It does uncompressed, full quality, no distortion images at 8 fps. Which still beats Canon offerings.
That is still 1fps better than D850 without battery grip, and 1 fps better than the 5D4 and 3 fps better than the 5DS line.
Canon painted themselves into a corner. How can the 5DSR Mark II possibly be improved to compete with the Sony and Nikon offerings without murdering the 5D4 in the process?
It stands to reason that the 5DSR2 will have many of the same things as the 5D4, such as higher DR, touch screen, and possible DPAF. If it doesn't at least have higher DR - there won't be much point to it at all.
If it goes up to 6 fps, it's a joke of an improvement. If it goes to 7 fps - why bother with a 5D4? If higher, then the 5D4 is completely pointless.
They are also boxed into the AF. Any better AF challenges the 1D series. They can't go backwards to a weaker system. So it will be some kind of unverifably improved 61pt system rehash like the 5D4.
What will they do? As Canon is Canon, they won't update anything for a long time. So long, that by the time a 5DS line is ready according to the Canon 3-5 year cycle, they could do one of two things --
Merge the lines. Instead of offering a separate 5D5 and 5DSR2, just offer a speedy 5D5R or whatever it would be called. 50mp, 8-9 fps, all the bells and whistles except AF, because can't outdo the 1D you know....unless that updates first as is typically scheduled.
Stay the course - and instead make the 5DSR2 an even higher MP camera, 60, 75 or 100mp. Use the massive MP count to justify the weaker ISO and slow FPS. Really push it even more against the medium format world, where 5 fps is a race car. In fairness, the 5DS was marketed to compete in that realm, not against other FF DSLR geared for lowlight, speed and general use. S stands for Studio I've heard.
Then, sometime in 2020 - 5D5 with 8-9 fps and better AF only after the 1DX3 gets something better to keep it on top.
We'll see how this plays out. Canon decided to separate camera traits into different lines. Nikon/Sony used this as a chance to give all-purpose type camera offerings. Canon did well to give a general purpose 5D4 and a high res studio rig in the 5DSR -- BUT....they left out two potential things...a low light specialty camera, and more importantly, a high speed Full Frame that is NOT a flagship. So the offering of specialist camera strategy sounded great at first, until Canon simply left out speed. All they did was give us a mediocre general purpose, and a bare-bones studio camera.
Sony system is immature, still. However, each generation is making very big leaps and each leap is making their system that much more practical to use. AF was always a point of weakness. Well, they have caught up. Won't say better. There's some give and take. But fair to say caught up. If this trajectory continues, they will surpass in AF in all areas by the next generation.
They win on sensor, no issue there.
They are weak on pro features -- ergonomics, settings, layout, lighting control...sure some will argue that, but the Canon is a better machine for getting volume work done.
That is still 1fps better than D850 without battery grip, and 1 fps better than the 5D4 and 3 fps better than the 5DS line.
Canon painted themselves into a corner. How can the 5DSR Mark II possibly be improved to compete with the Sony and Nikon offerings without murdering the 5D4 in the process?
It stands to reason that the 5DSR2 will have many of the same things as the 5D4, such as higher DR, touch screen, and possible DPAF. If it doesn't at least have higher DR - there won't be much point to it at all.
If it goes up to 6 fps, it's a joke of an improvement. If it goes to 7 fps - why bother with a 5D4? If higher, then the 5D4 is completely pointless.
They are also boxed into the AF. Any better AF challenges the 1D series. They can't go backwards to a weaker system. So it will be some kind of unverifably improved 61pt system rehash like the 5D4.
What will they do? As Canon is Canon, they won't update anything for a long time. So long, that by the time a 5DS line is ready according to the Canon 3-5 year cycle, they could do one of two things --
Merge the lines. Instead of offering a separate 5D5 and 5DSR2, just offer a speedy 5D5R or whatever it would be called. 50mp, 8-9 fps, all the bells and whistles except AF, because can't outdo the 1D you know....unless that updates first as is typically scheduled.
Stay the course - and instead make the 5DSR2 an even higher MP camera, 60, 75 or 100mp. Use the massive MP count to justify the weaker ISO and slow FPS. Really push it even more against the medium format world, where 5 fps is a race car. In fairness, the 5DS was marketed to compete in that realm, not against other FF DSLR geared for lowlight, speed and general use. S stands for Studio I've heard.
Then, sometime in 2020 - 5D5 with 8-9 fps and better AF only after the 1DX3 gets something better to keep it on top.
We'll see how this plays out. Canon decided to separate camera traits into different lines. Nikon/Sony used this as a chance to give all-purpose type camera offerings. Canon did well to give a general purpose 5D4 and a high res studio rig in the 5DSR -- BUT....they left out two potential things...a low light specialty camera, and more importantly, a high speed Full Frame that is NOT a flagship. So the offering of specialist camera strategy sounded great at first, until Canon simply left out speed. All they did was give us a mediocre general purpose, and a bare-bones studio camera.
Sony system is immature, still. However, each generation is making very big leaps and each leap is making their system that much more practical to use. AF was always a point of weakness. Well, they have caught up. Won't say better. There's some give and take. But fair to say caught up. If this trajectory continues, they will surpass in AF in all areas by the next generation.
They win on sensor, no issue there.
They are weak on pro features -- ergonomics, settings, layout, lighting control...sure some will argue that, but the Canon is a better machine for getting volume work done.
Upvote
0
Talys said:@Orangutan - Well, like I said, I certainly don't give a camera a minus because it has a feature I don't use. If VF histograms or zebras help with shots like the one that you took above and that's the way you like to shoot - of course, have at it - I'm happy you have the tool!
For me, I guess shooting film cameras for a couple of decades made exposure second nature, because I didn't have a choice then but to learn to get it right back then. I'm not saying that we should live in the past and deprive ourselves of tools that we have today, but it's not like those skills go away, either, and I find extra clutter -- especially in the viewfinder -- distracting, and of no real benefit to my finished product. It was also not really that painful to learn, and rather satisfying to see the improvement.
Sorry I not understand you. Now I understand what you say.
Upvote
0
no, no more dynamic range. the rest is a Sony Marketing Department trickery, wizardry, black magic whatever
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3
dlee13 said:
Upvote
0
dlee13 said:
There's probably marginally more DR due to downstream electronics (beyond the sensor) and maybe the front-of-sensor-optics. In and of itself, DR is no reason to buy an rIII; the rII is good enough and cheaper.
As an rII user, it was the rest of the updates I found compelling. Joystick. Battery. PC sync for flash. Buffer. All those things are minimal, but taken together it's enough to earn my money. Congratulations to sony for earning $7k when they could have earned $3.5k two years ago. DR could have taken a hit and I'd still have bought one.
Upvote
0
Dylan777 said:
I like it sometimes. Switching between exposure preview and whatever it decides to show in non-exposure preview (seriously I have no idea other than some random combo of settings the light meter thinks is natural) is one thing I hope to be able to either map to or set with the C-modes. I'm down to about 3 things I have to access the menus for. Fewer is better.
Upvote
0
bwud said:
Hope everything goes well bwud, haven't chat with you for awhile.
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle" than me buying into another FF DSLR system. I'm looking forward to see more FF mirroless systems from big players. Until then, A9 is pretty much has everything I need and want from mirrorless. My simple wish for upcoming a7s III to have similar specs, Eye-AF, fps and AF points as a7r III. If yes....will pre-order it to pair up with my A9.
Have a geat Sunday
Upvote
0
Dylan777 said:bwud said:
Hope everything goes well bwud, haven't chat with you for awhile.
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle" than me buying into another FF DSLR system. I'm looking forward to see more FF mirroless systems from big players. Until then, A9 is pretty much has everything I need and want from mirrorless. My simple wish for upcoming a7s III to have similar specs, Eye-AF, fps and AF points as a7r III. If yes....will pre-order it to pair up with my A9.
Have a geat Sunday
You too Dylan!
The a9 is nice, but I’m accustomed to the rII files, so having the same sensor on top of satisfying most of my wishlist (still want lossless compression and bulb mode that doesn’t drop to 12+7 mode), it was a no brainer.
Upvote
0
this is an in depth look at the a7riii dr posted by dpr.
https://www.dpreview.com/news/4302149407/sony-a7r-iii-dynamic-range-improved-nearly-matches-chart-topping-nikon-d850/1
l
https://www.dpreview.com/news/4302149407/sony-a7r-iii-dynamic-range-improved-nearly-matches-chart-topping-nikon-d850/1
l
Upvote
0
The DR (my dick is bigger than yours) discussion is a dead horse, much to Rishi's dismay. He might write in earnest tones about how important it is but when you look at simple facts, like the actual numbers, the D850, the A7RIII and the older 5D MkIV are all within 0.8 of a stop of DR. The 5D MkIV and A7RIII are 0.5 stops of difference at maximum DR.
Is that really something to get out shape over?
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Nikon%20D850,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3
When the 5D MkIII was trailing the competition by nearly three stops there was a point to be made, now, not so much........
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Nikon%20D810,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2
Is that really something to get out shape over?
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Nikon%20D850,Sony%20ILCE-7RM3
When the 5D MkIII was trailing the competition by nearly three stops there was a point to be made, now, not so much........
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Nikon%20D810,Sony%20ILCE-7RM2
Attachments
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
[quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]
To summarize it in a number at base ISO: 13.6 EV at the pixel, or for a 42.4MP file.
[/quote]
[quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]
As for Sony's marketing, it sounds like the claim of 15 EV is believable, but only technically if you consider how your images look when shrunk to 8MP files. To be fair, there's some benefit to comparing dynamic range figures after resizing camera outputs to 8MP, since it's a common basis for comparison that doesn't penalize cameras for having higher resolution (and therefore smaller pixels).
[/quote]
Translation: "I want to believe it because I like Sony so much. But I'm not biased. Hey, can someone lend me a handkerchief to wipe this brown stuff off my nose?"
To summarize it in a number at base ISO: 13.6 EV at the pixel, or for a 42.4MP file.
[/quote]
[quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]
As for Sony's marketing, it sounds like the claim of 15 EV is believable, but only technically if you consider how your images look when shrunk to 8MP files. To be fair, there's some benefit to comparing dynamic range figures after resizing camera outputs to 8MP, since it's a common basis for comparison that doesn't penalize cameras for having higher resolution (and therefore smaller pixels).
[/quote]
Translation: "I want to believe it because I like Sony so much. But I'm not biased. Hey, can someone lend me a handkerchief to wipe this brown stuff off my nose?"
Upvote
0
[quote author='I am unbiased' Rishi]neuroanatomist said:
As for Sony's marketing, it sounds like the claim of 15 EV is believable, but only technically if you consider how your images look when shrunk to 8MP files. To be fair, there's some benefit to comparing dynamic range figures after resizing camera outputs to 8MP, since it's a common basis for comparison that doesn't penalize cameras for having higher resolution (and therefore smaller pixels).
[/quote]
Translation: "I want to believe it because I like Sony so much. But I'm not biased. Hey, can someone lend me a handkerchief to wipe this brown stuff off my nose?"
[/quote]
Just curious why you keep commenting on this thread, only to make disparaging remarks about Sony and its users, when you yourself don't like or use their cameras?
Bit pathetic.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
