If you thought the megapixel war was over years ago then you might shocked by the latest cameras released by Nikon, Sony, and Canon. The D810, A7RII, and 5DsR are the biggest and baddest pieces of artillery on the front line, and today the team at Fstoppers is going to determine once and for all which camera is the best. With enough megapixels to challenge some of the most popular medium format cameras, these compact full frame cameras pack a lot more punch than you would think. Don't believe us? View the full high res images and take the poll yourself!
Preface
Before we get deep into our thoughts about all three of these cameras, let me make this clear that we are not here to bash or praise any one of these cameras without good cause. Yes, both Patrick and I shoot with Nikon but as most of you know we are the first ones to point out when something isn't up to speed, is disappointing, or flat out sucks. The truth be told, if you simply want to create photographs, all three of these cameras are absolutely amazing in image quality, and if your photos aren't great it probably isn't because of the camera but instead you probably don't know how to take a good photo with the gear you already have.
It is very clear that the most talked about camera of the three is the Sony A7RII which is creating a media buzz storm in the photo world. Sony has taken on a very different approach with their A series cameras and because they are the only mirrorless camera in this test, the Sony will have some extra challenges to overcome. Canon and Nikon have become the industry standard for high quality DSLR cameras and it would be foolish to think that any brand could just come in and take the crown away from them overnight. So while our review might seem harsh at times towards Sony, it is simply because they have a few major concerns to address before they can be viewed as an apples to apples contender with a professional DSLR. That being said, everyone at Fstoppers is extremely excited to see this new underdog take on the big boys. It is clear why Sony is gaining so much ground because they are implementing features and upgrades that professional photographers actually want while Nikon and Canon keep slowly releasing uninspiring cameras year in and year out.
With that preface, let's get on with the tests!
Ergonomics
Let's first start with how the actual camera feels in your hand. Everyone is already pretty familiar with the Nikon and Canon DSLR cameras (and even the Sony Alpha series) and how bulky and large they are next to smaller cameras. It seems that in most cases people typically believe smaller is better (except for the recent wave in smart phones lately). While it is true that smaller and lighter cameras are easier to travel with, they don't always feel great in your hands especially when you mount professional 2.8 lenses to them.
This is where in my opinion the Sony falls short. For a travel camera, yes the Sony is absolutely the camera I'd prefer hanging around my neck, but the A7RII isn't aimed at travel photography. It is being sold as a high resolution studio camera for professionals. By the time you add a professional telephoto lens, a battery grip to balance out the heavy lens, and strap on your Sony or Metabones lens adapter, this lightweight camera becomes VERY similar in weight and size to a full sized DSLR. As we address later in this review, you are going to need a lens adapter and a ton of extra batteries which completely takes the "small and lightweight" argument completely out of the equation for me.
To be perfectly fair here, Sony does win part of the ergonomics test by having the best ISO, Shutter, and Aperture button layout. As a professional photographer, these three settings are going to be adjusted more than any other setting besides maybe White Balance. Nikon and Canon both require you to push and hold an extra button to change ISO while Sony has wisely attached ISO to the right hand lower thumb wheel. This means you can easily and quickly change ISO, Aperture, and Shutter without taking your eye out of the viewfinder (EVF in this case) and make every change with one single hand. The Canon 5DS R is the next easiest with the ISO button on top of the right hand grip and the Nikon D810 is the worst by having a dedicated ISO button on the left side which requires your left hand to leave the lens to make this change.
Dynamic Range Test
Dynamic range represents how much data the camera can capture in both the highlights and the shadows. Typically digital cameras can capture between 11 - 15 stops of light without crushing data on either side of the histogram. For this test we decided to take some test photos of a high contrast image and see how much detail we could pull out of the shadows while keeping the blown highlights to a minimum. I'll be the first to admit this is not the sort of situation you will be shooting in often but it does offer a unique environment to really pull out the shadow and highlight recovery.
Our test results are pretty consistent to what other more sophisticated review sites have found. The Nikon D810 revealed just a little more detail in the shadows under the car than any of the other cameras, and the Canon 5DS R was the clear loser. The dynamic range on the Sony camera was between the Nikon and the Canon but the lens flair from the Sony 24-70 f/4 lens was so bad that the resulting image was actually worse than the Canon. I wish we would have been able to use the same Tamron 24-70 2.8 lens on all three of these cameras because it would have removed the lens as a variable but unfortunately the lens selection for the A7RII is pretty small even from third party manufacturers.
It's pretty amazing to see how far dynamic range has come in the last 10 years. Having the ability to recover bright highlights and open up deep shadows is a very valuable tool for any photographer, and we were shocked how much details was still there hiding in these grossly underexposed night photos. That being said, these cameras seem to be aimed at studio photographers who have more control over their lighting ratios than other casual shooters. In the studio I don't think any of these 3 cameras really gives a huge advantage over the others especially if your total scene contains less than 12 stops from shadow to highlight. If you are a landscape photographer, you will either go with the Nikon for the best dynamic range, the Canon for the most resolution, or maybe the Sony just to have a lighter camera while sacrificing both dynamic range and resolution just a little bit.
The ISO Test
One of the most exciting upgrades with each new camera is better performance in high ISO ranges. Both the Nikon D810 and the Canon 5DS R have maximum native ISOs of 12,800 while the Sony A7RII has one extra stop of native ISO at 25,600 (all three cameras have a few extra stops of software expandable ISO). For the sake of making our tests as fair as possible, we decided to only push the ISO to the max native ISO of the Canon and Nikon. Therefore, ISO 12,800 was used as the main high ISO mark for all three cameras.
Sony, Canon, Nikon High ISO Test
As you can see from the small jpegs above, all three of the cameras produced a pretty incredible image at these insanely high sensitivities with very little ambient light on the subject. After processing the RAW files through Lightroom, we had a very hard time distinguishing the 3 cameras from one another and ultimately decided that all three cameras tied when it came to the signal to noise ratio. We found this fairly shocking since there has been so much hype behind Sony's new Back-Illuminated CMOS sensor technology.
As stated in the video, we did push the Sony ISO even higher to see how it performed but honestly the noise was so bad that in our opinion it really shouldn't be considered an option for professional photographers. That being said, we find it hard to justify shooting anything above ISO 6,400 unless you are just trying to capture something in pure darkness. Most professional photography and video work is always done with some sort of supplemental lighting even in "low light" nighttime scenes. So while the excitement of having these new insanely high ISO options is pretty neat, ultimately it is still pretty much a novelty and produces unprofessional looking results.
Auto Focus Test
If there was one test I was really curious about it was the Auto Focus Test. So many people have told me that the one thing really holding them back from jumping onto the mirrorless bandwagon has been the slow auto focus compared to the traditional DSLR. When Patrick and I traveled to Photokina last year, we took a Sony A7s along with us to test out during our European journey. We were absolutely amazed at the extreme low light performance of that camera but the autofocus was so bad that we concluded that neither of us would feel comfortable shooting the A7s at a wedding reception (we had the same 24 -70 f4 lens with us too).
Times have changed in just a year or two though. While we were skeptical that any of the photos would be in focus for this test, the Sony A7RII performed as well as the Nikon and only slightly less than the Canon. To be fair to all of these cameras, our "Miley Cyrus" test was a beast of an autofocus test. All the lenses were shot at 70mm and the swing of our wrecking ball celebrity spanned a good 7 feet from apex to apex. As a whole, the entire group of cameras locked onto focus about 30% of the time with the Canon 5DSR just barely winning out.
If you were one of the photographers who warned us that AF performance on the mirrorless system would be a deal breaker, you need to give the A7RII a try (and the new A7sII as well). It is too early to tell if the increased performance of the A7RII is going to become the standard for Sony auto focusing but if this is the future then we are pleasantly surprised.
4k Video Test
For some reason photographers like to complain about the added video functionality being packaged into each new DSLR that hits the market. Video and photography is a converging market, and those professionals who want to remain successful in their craft are going to have to learn how to create content through both mediums. For this test we wanted to see which camera would give us the clearest and sharpest image straight out of the camera.
Obviously the Sony outperformed both the Nikon and Canon because it is the only camera that can shoot native ISO directly to the memory card. Prior versions of the A7 series cameras could also shoot 4K video but required an external recording device to process and capture the footage. As we found out from our tests, the main reason an external recording device is needed is because these larger megapixel sensors tend to overhead when processing 4K footage internally. The Sony A7RII locked up on us a few times while filming, and the only warning it displayed was a short "Internal Temp High, Allow it to Cool" error.
While I have to applaud Sony for pushing the envelope and giving us the high 4K footage we desire, this overheating issue is simply too risky for me to fully adopt this camera for my video work. Many online reviews have said that in order to mitigate this problem you need to shoot in cooler temperatures and also pull the LCD screen out to allow proper cooling of the camera. Our video test was done in about 70 degree weather (while raining on us) and the LCD screen was tilted away from the body of the camera. The failure happened about 30 minutes into recording which is an all too typical continuous record time for interviews, timelapses, and other extended scenes.
100% crops of 1080 footage (Sony 4k exported to 1080 first)
In terms of 1080 video quality, we found the Sony to win this category easily as well. The Sony does produce the highest quality since it can record at 50mbps in 1080p (100mbps in 4k), but the Nikon and Canon footage still looked pretty good with their lowly 23mbps and 30mbps data respectively. Many people get caught up on the resolution alone when it comes to video quality but the truth be told, the total bitrate is more important since it gives you more information to color grade the footage in post. The Sony also offers an sLog profile which gives you the dullest image with the most dynamic range possible but you do have to dig deep into their menu system to find it since it is not labeled anywhere. NOTE IN THE VIDEO: we accidentally wrote kbps instead of mbps but the overall results are still the same.
Slow Motion Test
Since we produce a lot of youtube videos, having extra features like being able to record in slow motion are really important. The results for this test were similar to the previous video test in that the Sony was the clear winner in overall image quality. I would say the Nikon did okay in this test but the lower 38mbps bitrate still doesn't compare to Sony's significantly higher 51mbps files. The clear loser here is Canon which is a bit shocking considering they have always been the leader in DSLR video. This flagship camera cannot even shoot 1080p at 60fps and all of their footage had to be upscaled 100% which caused a major decrease in image quality. One might argue that Canon has divided their photo and cinema cameras into two different offerings but when you see that Nikon and Sony are offering 1080p at 60fps in their lesser expensive cameras it doesn't really make sense.
One thing that these cameras are all lacking is the ability to shoot faster than 60 fps. The iPhone and many other cell phones can now shoot 120 fps at 1080p and even 240 fps at 720p. Obviously the quality from the iphone isn't going to be up to Hollywood's standards but it's still pretty amazing for web usage. As mentioned above, Sony has found a way to push 4k into their small camera body even with the overheating issue so maybe there is a similar barrier at the moment with large sensors and super fast frame rates. Even so, 120fps seems like a useful feature we would like to see in future full frame cameras even if it is only intended for short 5-15 second clips. Apparently the brand new Sony A7sII will shoot 120fps at 1080 which is exactly what we are asking for (let's just hope it doesn't over heat). Why none of these cameras shoots 120fps even at 720p is beyond me.
High Resolution Photo Test
Without a doubt, the most important test for all three of these cameras is how well they resolve detail in a real world studio photoshoot. Since the Nikon, Sony, and Canon cameras are 36mp, 42mp, and 50mp respectively, these cameras are clearly aimed at delivering the highest quality photographs ever produced by a DSLR style camera. This amount of clarity has never been available to the general public outside of having to buy a medium format camera, and in many ways these three DSLR cameras are directly competing with the larger sensor format.
For this test we wanted to give you the reader the chance to guess which file came from which camera. All three RAW files were shot at the same settings and then tweaked ever so slightly to get the same WB and shadow/highlight detail, and overall color. We then exported the files and resized the Canon and Sony down to 36mp to give Nikon a fair playing field. You can download all three ultra high resolution images below (click image to open full res file) and take the quiz. We will release the results in a few days.
Camera 1
Camera 1, f/11, 1/200th, ISO 100, 70mm
Camera 2
Camera 2, f/11, 1/200th, ISO 100, 70mm
Camera 3
Camera 3, f/11, 1/200th, ISO 100, 70mm
One final thought, although all three of these cameras have a massive amount of resolution, the difference between 36mp, 42mp, and 50mp is not as much as you might expect. Sure, every little bit of increased resolution lets you crop a little tighter and print massive images that you can walk right up to and examine in full detail. However, when you stack the three resolutions up next to each other you can see that all three of these files are pretty similar in size. The advantages are no doubt HUGE when compared to another flagship cameras like the Nikon D4s which is only 16mp, but the difference in resolution between 36mp and 50mp might not warrant you to upgrade and jump ship to another camera brand. In fact, some of you may be surprised by your findings in the above resolution test when you look at all the images scaled down to 36mp for comparison.
Comparison of different image sizes from these cameras
A few thoughts on what WASN'T covered in the video
Lenses
Everyone knows that Canon and Nikon have the widest selection of lenses for their cameras, and they should since they've been in the photo game longer than most of the other manufacturers. I'm sure some physics guru can explain why Sony HAD to change their lens mount from the A mount to the E mount but that decision could be the most costly decision the company has made. Not only does it limit Sony DSLR users from using the Sony lenses they already own, but it also makes it increasingly difficult for 3rd party lens makers like Tamron, Sigma, and Rokinon to offer their contributions to the Sony platform because they have to make 2 different mounts now. If mirrorless is the future, you would think it would be wise to make the jump from DSLRs as easy as possible. At the moment Sony does not have the two most flagship lenses available at all, the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8. For this reason alone, I would not consider the Sony system for most of the portrait work I do both inside and outside especially if you rely on zooms over primes.
But what about all those people who say "just add an adapter and you can use every lens ever made by anyone?" It is true that we have not tested all of the adapters made by Sony, Metabones, and others, but we were disappointed to find that our Metabones adapter did not allow the autofocus to pass through. Adapters are fine and many videographers and film makers have been using them for decades to get the specific lens look they want out of their cameras. The issue I have with adapters like the Sony LAEA 4 is that 1) it is another piece I have to keep up with in my bag, 2) it adds even more weight and lens torque to a system whose main selling point is that it is so much lighter, and 3) it decreases your image quality and AF in a not so negligible way. Sure, lens adapters are a solution but that solution seems more of a work around rather than the most professional option.
There is no doubt that Sony will release some killer lenses for the E mount in the next few years and they have a close relationship with Zeiss which creates the top rated lens of all time. For me though, I like to buy into a system with lots of options and I do not like jerry-rigging my camera to work with other brands' lenses. It is obvious that Sony is making a huge splash in the camera market which is great for us consumers but at the moment their lack of lenses shouldn't be overlooked for those lusting after the greatest and latest camera technology.
Battery Life
If there is one thing that really plagues the Sony camera it is the battery life. When we recently traveled around the world for Elia Locardi's Photographing the World tutorial, we took one Sony A7s with us to help capture super low light video. What we noticed with that camera was the battery would deplete right before our eyes. You literally could turn on the camera and watch the battery percentage drain down every minute. Unfortunately not much has changed with the new A7RII. The camera even ships with 2 batteries so it's pretty clear Sony acknowledges how bad their battery life is but I would suggest having at least 5 batteries with you at all time if you are going to shoot anything important like a wedding or a full day photoshoot. Don't forget to bring the charger too!
Many people who love the Sony love it because the camera is so small, the batteries are 1/3 smaller than the Nikon or Canon, and the whole thing weighs a few ounces less than a full DSLR. While all of that is true, the sad reality is you will more than make up that weight and size difference by having to carry more batteries around with you (plus the charger). Being the owner of almost every Nikon DSLR camera to have come out, I can confidently say that you can easily shoot a full wedding with only 2 charged batteries. When we produce Fstoppers videos, we do use more batteries than during a wedding but they still deplete at a respectable pace. Luckily there is a Sony Power Adapter that allows you to plug into AC power which is a crucial accessory if you decide to go this route.
Camera Flash Sync Speed
I really do not want this review to feel like a Sony bashing but we honestly did have so many little issues come up with this camera that need to be addressed. During our final studio High Resolution Test above, we found that although the Sony claims the camera can sync up to 1/250th of a second with studio strobes, it actually had a much lower sync speed. In the above test, we set all the camera shutters to 1/200th of a second and noticed the Sony had a lot of vignetting along the left side of the vertical frame. Since maximum sync speed is a huge feature for photographers using flash, we decided to leave the image in the test but we also did a separate test on the Sony just to see what was happening. Here are the results we found.
Sony does not play nice with 3rd party studio flash
As you can see, using our Profoto Air Remote and 2 Profoto D1 heads, the Sony A7RII could not sync beyond 1/125th of a second. That is about a full stop of lost flash sync compared to the Nikon which syncs at 1/250th and the Canon which syncs at 1/200th. According to Sony's website, the A7RII can sync up to 1/250 just like the Nikon but in the real world it is going to sync well below that shutter speed. In a future video we are going to test a few common speedlights and studio strobes to see what the actual flash sync is on the Sony but after reading a lot of reports online, it looks like the only system that will give you the full 1/250th of a second sync is the proprietary Sony flash system.
Conclusion
When I first got into photography I always had to have the latest and greatest technology. I thought it made my photography better. The truth is that technology is so good now that you could use almost any current camera to get amazing professional results. A few more megapixels or a stop of dynamic range isn't going to effect your pictures at all.
The Sony A7RII is a great camera. If you don't already have a lot of money invested in a camera system and 2.8 lenses aren't a necessity right now, the A7RII may be a fantastic choice. I just didn't feel like the Sony was able to outperform the DSLR competitors in an area other than 4k video recording. That leads me to conclude that the A7RII isn't actually better than the D810 or 5DSR, it's just a really great smaller option.
Mirrorless cameras are the future and eventually this type of camera will be better in every way than our current DSLRs, but we aren't there yet. You may be tempted to jump ship on Canon or Nikon and move to the "newer" technology that Sony is producing but I can't recommend that. Nikon and Canon will eventually create an even better camera and you'll feel like switching back. This happens every 4 or 5 years.
Take a deep breath and know that your DSLR isn't obsolete. It still takes amazing pictures and it will for quite some time.
![Shoot 960 FPS at a Consumer Price with the New Sony RX10 III [Review]](https://cdn.fstoppers.com/styles/small-16-9/s3/lead/2016/05/sony_rx10_iii_review_1.jpg)
Look, don't blame your ignorance on the system. There are tons of people more than willing to help you out. You were ambitious, and that's fine and all, but don't be too proud to approach experts who know a system, when you admit you are ignorant of it. You would have had a ton of help and avoided just about every (deserved) negative comment you have received.
Yes, it would be not scientific. Your test with three lenses instead of one lens is also not very scientific. But it does not have to be!
My point is, I would not buy a camera with a high resolution sensor only for fun. I would certainly not buy an A7RII if 24 MPix would be enough for my needs because I could (well to some degree, only for still images) get an A7II and save a lot of money. I also would not get a D810 if I could manage to use a D750 with less resolution.
Therefore I would compare the systems (not only the camera bodys) with the corresponding lenses which give very good image quality and see what the differences are. What is the benefit of saying, well these three cameras with these three same lenses have no difference in image quality if I would never be using the tested lens because I am interested in high resolution and therefore not using any zoom lens at all?
In the article you say that these cameras are contenders to medium format cameras. Well, I do not know of any photographer who uses medium format and is expected to deliver very sharp high resolution pictures who would use something like a "24-70 2.8 medium format equivalent lens" because he likes the zoom range and could not care less about sharpness and these awkward to use prime lenses.
Of course you would use a 24-70 2.8 for weddings but when exactly do you need 50 MPix pictures to be delivered to your bride and groom?
This is not the typical use case where pixel-level sharpness matters.
I really do not understand what you intend to tell me in the first paragraph about apertures, I'm sorry. I agree that in not perfect conditions I would use a small aperture number (and of course a fast lens) to get a reasonable exposure. I do not agree about getting a sharp prime lens and not stopping it down because of "well, it is a fast lens, stopping it down just seems silly". That is not the approach you will be using when you want these megapixel monsters to deliver really sharp pictures.
Also, I personally do not believe that with the exact same lens on these three different sensors there will be a big difference in sharpness, detail, whatever. The differences will be in the lenses people would actually buy for their use case and my point is that usually those pixel peepers who buy 50 MPix cameras would not get a 24-70 2.8 but sharp (not necessarily fast!) prime lenses.
Also, my suggestion to you to get a 55mm 1.8 Sony/Zeiss lens and try on the A7RII is not meant for another comparison or something. I just thought that it seems that you have the means to get lenses to try out so maybe you personally would be interested and possibly more satisfied with the Sony camera when paired with a lens which could deliver better resolution images to its sensor. Also the 90mm 2.8 macro is said to be very sharp.
Also for the Nikon and Canon there have to be lenses (and I am pretty sure you also own some) which make the sensors shine much more than any 24-70 zoom lens.
Did you get a bad copy of the Sony? It's a pretty solid performer. And I'd say even a mediocre Sony/Zeiss is going to perform better than (or at least the same as) a top-tier Tamron.
f/4 lenses straight up have a sharpness and chromatic aberration advantage out of the gate to their f/2.8 counterparts. And the Tamron straight up has really poor spherical aberration and crappy onion bokeh.
I honestly don't really buy into the whole "bad copy" argument. If you look at the final studio photos, they all look very very similar except for a little CA if you look hard. I think everything performed as expected. Plus at f11 most lenses should even out and perform pretty well across the board. The big advantages come when a lens is wide open.
Just curious for all the Sony 24-70 f/4 haters, what Sony lens SHOULD we have used instead of that one?
The FE 90/2.8 is my studio portrait and do everything tele lens. It's absolutely fantastic. It's probably only beaten by the Zeiss Otus lenses.
yeah but we can't use that same lens on the other two cameras, that's the problem.
If you want to rule out differences between lenses, I think there is no other way than adapting an SLR lens to the Sony for the sharpness comparison. There is no lens that has both native SLR and E-mount (other than the Samyang 14mm/2.8, which is probably not the best portrait lens).
Then again, I guess we will see no difference at all in this studio portrait. ;)
Yes, that is right. But where is the problem?
Someone who would buy the A7RII would get the Sony 90mm 2.8 for high resolution macro work.
Someone who buys the D810 would perhaps get the AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED for macro work.
And someone who buys the 5DsR would perhaps get the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM.
These are the real world usable options you have (well in this example for macro lenses and/or portrait tele lenses) when you are about to drop more than 3000 $ or € on a camera so this should be the contenders to compare. You can do the same with 50mm lenses or wide angle or whatever. If you test this and compare picture quality that would be of great benefit for anyone interested in the differences of these systems!
One of the Sigma Art lenses. You can get them native for canon and nikon, and can easily be adapted to the sony. That would work well in all tests except AF :)
I'm a pretty big Sony fanboy, but Lee is making a key point here. The big aperture zooms are essential in a system that aims to prioritize professional photographers, particularly those who shoot weddings. Sony doesn't have a reliable zoom yet, despite how great their prime offerings are. In fact, being constrained to f/4 zooms, Sony isn't there at all. Comparing a ZA 55 to the CaNikon 50s could be a fair comparison, but they're still very different and it would not be the point. Canon and Nikon have excellent zooms available for professional event photographers while Sony has *yet* to make any significant offering in that regard. Sony has many great lenses for FE, but none of them are the zooms that pros need.
I'm not sure the pros who use the 24-70 2.8 lenses (like you said, wedding photographers for example) are the same pros who would rely on these cameras to shoot pixel-level sharp pictures with resolutions like 50 MPix to be delivered to their clients.
If I was a wedding photographer I would not be pixel-peeping at all, I would not compare these cameras in terms of pixel-level sharpness and most probably would move on using the lower resolution (24 MPix...) cameras all manufacturers have and save a lot of money!
But if I were paid to shoot watches, cars, architecture, ... for example the last thing I would worry about would be if there is a 24-70 2.8 available for my camera. But those are the people to whom the high resolution actually matters.
Yep, he just wanted to put the D810 in the most favourable conditions. Otherwise it would have looked much worse than 5DSR in some tests and A7RII in others.
Thanks for posting!! Hilariously funny!
Do I win anything for getting 100% on the Quiz first try?
Yep, send me your address and I'll send you some mud covered bullets
Haha, I honestly still would not mind that dude's gun.
Just a question...Which Metabones you used and didn't work?Because according to Metabones website the EF to E mount should have worked fine!
http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB-EF-E-BT4
Liked the video the video a lot!!!! More like these please!!!!
Apparently we were sent the wrong one: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1079571-REG/metabones_mb_spnfg_e_b...
Nikon-F to E-mount?!?!?! snap....:-( The only lenses that play well with these adapters are the Canon (EF mount, not natives only) ones. B&H should have told you...
Redo the review immediately!!!!!! Kiddin...
Another interesting choice would be the natives 35mm f/1.4!!!! Not the same lenses I know but all same length.Sony makes an excellent one for the E-mount and with the new Canon 35 f/1.4 II and the good old Nikkor 35 f/1.4G they are (kind of) on par!
Another thing to consider is we wanted a variety of focal lengths for the video segments. If we had only a 50mm or 35mm all of the footage wouldn't have been shot as interestingly.
Thought so!! Anyways you did the best possible solution and the result is great!!!
OMG they looked the same to me but wow Nikon wins this. love it but i prefer canon for some reason, Great review :) !
It's cheating I know, but you gave the answer of the quiz away with your resolution comparison chart. The amount of softbox shown in the top right corner is the giveaway....before anyone says it, yes I am fun at parties.
Great video.
or maybe I intentionally mixed the images up in photoshop because I got confused which one was which? After all, there def was not a D4s camera to give that resulting image so you know that image is another one altogether too :)
what about the give away
We are patiently waiting for our sponsored partners to make the announcement.
F/2.8 lenses aren't a necessity? You can put just about any lens you want on the Sony with a simple mechanical adapter, including Nikon and Canon lenses. The slowest lens I use on the A7RII is an F/2.0.
If you shoot events or weddings you really need a 2.8 lens for bounce flash indoors. It also helps greatly for low light focusing to focus through 2.8. Of course you can use a prime but there are many situations like sports, weddings, events, etc where a simple zoom is the best option.
We had the adapter and the focus didn't work.
I'm not sure you read my post. A purely mechanical adapter doesn't give you autofocus, but I guarantee the manual focus still worked. A prime is always an option, especially with a camera as small as the A7RII. I'll take two bodies with different primes any day over a zoom. Again, 2.8 is one or two stops slower than most prime lenses.
Another stellar piece by F Stoppers. I love the independent work you guys put out and I appreciate the added humor as well. I currently have a 5DMK II and performs flawlessly, but I have been waiting for the MKIV to come out before I buy another body. I shoot real estate & portrait stills and a lot of video. I need at least 2K video in the next body I purchase. Even my drone and Go pro are at 4K. I was considering the Sony but attaching my 70-200L to that tiny body would feel so off balance and look ridiculous, not to mention the lens mount fiasco. I can't believe Canon has fallen so far behind with video performance. I mean they charge $3K for 720P at 60fps? terrible.
Canon clearly said the 5ds is not a video camera :)
Don't Hold your breath that Canon will even come out with a Canon 5DMIV and I pretty much guarantee you it won't have 4K and even if it did it would not be with any c-log, not even the new 1DxMII has C-log which completely defeats the purpose of shooting 4K. Unlike Sony, Canon limits and cripples their cameras so they do not compete with the next model a level up. That is why I am pretty tired of Canon and thinking about jumping ship here soon. My only concern is shooting tethered to CaptureOne with a 48 mp camera through micro usb 2.0 port. To me Sony need to put a USB 3.0 on their next camera. Great lens re already available for the Sony E mount already so that is no brainer and the batteries are small and light weight so that is also no problem for me.
awesome video. Patrick in the mud was pretty funny. And the turtle producer...ROFL
I'm puzzled by the comparison. I am a Canon shooter and know going in the ISO performance and video do not compare. They aren't supposed or intended to. The 5DS and 5DSr are baby medium format cameras. They are for all intensive purposes a specialized DSLR for what a DSLR has become. It is really only intended to excel at a picture not be an all around beast. The 810 is intended to be an all-around. The Sony also an all-around. The Canon is not. When the Mark III replacement comes out then we can have a true comparison. Canon appears to be taking a specialization strategy with the C100, C300, C500, Cine lenses and now the 5DS and 5DSr. More pure video and image spaces in the market, most definitely not competing in the all-around space or for the same dollars as the 810 and Sony.
Well the Canon appears to have lost both the dynamic range and the image quality test so there is that :/
You don't need dynamic range in a controlled setting, which is what this body is for. Canon openly admits it is not looking for dynamic range in this body. It did not "lose" in the resolution category either, you cropped the image which reduces resolution. Put a Zeiss Otis on both and then let's compare resolution, uncropped.
What canon camera should we have used?
The Mark III would still get destroyed but it's 4 years old. But that is the correct all around body in Canon's current line up. When it's replacement comes out that will also be the correct body for such a comparison. I get this is the newest body and that is why it was used but my only point is two of the body's are all-around cameras. For a camera that isn't intended to be an all-around it held up pretty well. Still not an entirely fair comparison but if Canon wants to tout it's resolution a Phase and the Pentax would be better what do you get for the money comparisons.
I agree, especially with the video aspect. I've read many reviews saying the 5ds is not even a good all arrounder and is basically a specialized still camera. I used the 5ds in medium RAW mode (28mp) on jobs that does not require higher MP and it performed flawless. In fact DR and AWB was much improved over the 5diii. If you require fast FPS, you would not even want to use a 5diii anyway.
woah! really bad CA with the tamron lens compared to the Sony
Half the people say it was unfair to the Sony and half say it was unfair to Nikon and canon.
"The truth is that technology is so good now that you could use almost any current camera to get amazing professional results."
oh...the turtle costume hahaha.
Just a thought.. It might be a factor that the Sony Zeiss lens get pretty terrible reviews?
I don't know, it just seems that using the same lens for all three cameras would have been more fair. Why not use a Sigma Art, and then use it on the Sony with the Canon to E-mount metabones adapter? It gives you autofocus, although not good enough for the AF test, but in that part the lenses doesn't really matter. But i guess it might in resolution?
And it may also play a part in the horrible dynamic range image from the sony?
I rather enjoyed this video, a little cheesy at times and I felt you poked fun at the little sony a bit much but I guess that was the point :)
I figured all three systems would be similar as most dslr's are pretty similar anyway with just a few different features or lens options, what matters most is the person using the cameras and how it feels to them... I for one not like the rear control dial on the canon's for example while others do :).
Just to toss a spanner in the works and one I know would have failed 99% of the test's here, I would love for you guys to get hold of a Sigma Quattro for some location (with strobes using the leaf shutter lens) and in the studio as they are pretty remarkable and will give you detail close to the cameras here but have a different look.
I was at the sigma Dp0 Launch event in the UK and they had two large prints, one with the dp2q and another with a d810... detail wise there where pretty much the same but the Sigma print had much more tones, shades of color which made the d810 shot look flat on close inspection :).
You guys are a HooT !
A crying baby turtle girl ? A Morgan Freeman impersonator ?
There hasn't been ONE video production come out of FStoppers that hasn't been balls white crazy good. The S. I. Shooters, Bergman on Bon Jovi, Hurley, The Wedding shooters..
You guys are a great collection of talent and I just really enjoy everything you've produced. You even had me feeling bad for the 'turtle girl'... Lee, Patrick & FStoppers just rock the pooh out of this whole site.
So glad you like it. We worked so along on this stupid video.
Hi, guys. I need some help in choosing between two of cameras/systems. Nikon D810 or Canon 5Ds. I have not any prefers to any of this systems. The both of cameras seems good and almost excellent. I am a portrait and still life photographer, and the main thing for me, which of them makes best truly colors in raw from camera, especially in skin tones.
I really don't think it matters
Lee, try swapping your 'extra' lens for an iron. ;)
Great video!!