The arrival of the Canon EOS R5 changed the landscape for those looking to by a high-end full frame hybrid camera, and changed even further after Sony’s release of the a1. How do you choose which one to buy?
Jared Polin has used both of these cameras in the real world and is well placed to give his thoughts on which one deserves your money. Notably, the a1 grabs Polin’s first tick for containing a backside illuminated CMOS sensor, something that the R5 lacks but will be appearing in the recently-announced EOS R3. While there’s no information on when this beast of a camera will be released, this news came as something of a surprise as no one was sure when Canon would be able to produce a BSI sensor, complicated slightly by the fact that it would have to include the manufacturer’s highly effective dual pixel autofocus system.
One thing I didn’t mention in this article exploring the implications of the R3 news is the quality of the EVF that we’re likely to see. The a1’s 9.44-million dots sets a high bar but there are still plenty of hardened sports shooters photographing under incredibly challenging conditions who are still not ready to ditch their OVF.
Which would be your choice? Let us know in the comments below.
I'm not in the market, but it's an easy choice for me...Canon. Sony ergonomics are a non starter for me. Subjective for sure, but it's a Sony deal breaker for me.
Definitely subjective, I consider Canon's ergonomics a deal breaker. I suspect I have just become familiar with Sonys systems. I'm not in the market either, and both cameras a larger than I am interested in.
Yep! If we all liked the same thing, there'd be one camera brand. Not good.
David, Keith, come on. This discussion you're having is far too civil. Where are the snide comments the snark, and the insults? 😁
Funny, Andy. :-) This isn't DP Review, you know. The cameras today all take really good shots. The only reason for bad pictures is operator error. So, making good images isn't a concern, but enjoying the process is. It just so happens that I don't care for Sony ergonomics which means that the shooting experience wouldn't be as enjoyable.
Yes, absolutely! Sometimes it's just refreshing to see constructive discussions down here. 😊
I was weened on Canon. I think Canon. It's not a better/worse argument for me. Canon just seems to have woken up and now I can stay with them with confidence.
If Sony drops the price on their high end lenses I am going with Sony. That is the last big hurdle of having to switch lenses.
Hopefully, Canon will follow suit if such a move forces Canon to act.
That's a dumb question for starters. If you have $40k Canon lenses, should you buy a Sony body? You would become a Darwin award nominee as a bonus!
Exactly. Neither of these camera are going to be beginners camera just to start out. I have over $30K in Sony lenses, and I have no need for new body - my A7R4 does everything I ever wanted. But if I decided to
become sports or BIF photographer Canon would be out picture altogether.
Yes, Canon folks are trying hard to lure you into buying their new lenses (except of the RF 600/4 and RF 400/2.8). But guess what - Sony is not far behind in this strategy. They are now making everything "GM". If someone purchased the 50/1.4 ZA or 35/1.4 ZA - those are no longer Sony high end. If you still want to own the top of the line stuff - please buy the GM versions since ZA doesn't cut it anymore :)
Not really “entirely different”. With an adapter most of the EF lenses perform better on the R5 compared to the 5dm4. Sometimes it’s not just better but much better. It’s very different experience if you put an A-mount lens on the LA-EA3 adapter. You can get more performance from the LA-EA4, but then you’re back to SLT and limited PDAF.
The new RF lenses are just really unique… like there’s no other 28-70/2 zoom, no 100mm 1.4x macro with adjustable SA, no 70-200/2.8 zoom that weights like a good prime, no 85/1.2 with DS coating. If you don’t care about this new fancy stuff - your EF lenses would keep working on the new mount with no issues, and no need to upgrade. There’s nothing wrong with the 70-200/2.8 III. It’s as sharp and fast as the Nikon or Sony peers.
Really? Even after you process the RAW file?
I think he shoots jpg.
Oh, that makes sense if you are used to Canon colors, Sony will look a bit flat...
When I use both Canon and Sony I need to tone down the Canon and bump up the Sony
Here's the problem, the A1 is priced too high (I'm a pro SONY User). Sony is allowing the person who has a camera and a couple of lenses (not all pro's have ton's of lenses) to more easily switch and try the Canon platform. One could sell there current SONY system and buy the Canon R5 and equivalent lenses for the price of the A1 (if they were considering shelling out $6500 for the A1). Canon users have no motivation to switch to SONY. In fact, a Canon user could buy the R5 and buy a SONY a7siii and lens adaptor if video recording time is a thing and still be close price wise to the A1. A pure sports shooter would would go 1DX, A9ii route.
None of both!
"How do you choose which one to buy?" Easy, what glass do you have? This isn't entry level photo gear. Now can we discuss the flood of Fstoppers "articles" that just link and re-hash someone else's YouTube content?