The year 2018 will be known as the year Canon and Nikon introduced their first mirrorless full-frame camera. It was their first step into a world that has been dominated by Sony for years. The cameras of Canon and Nikon have been mocked and laughed at, but how do they compare in real life? I got a chance to find out.
When I was reviewing the Canon EOS R I was asked to make a comparison with the brand new Nikon Z 7 and the Sony a7R III also. Soon after that I held three wonderful cameras in my hand and got a few weeks to get familiar with them, and shoot a lot of photos. I used the EOS R already for some time and found out how it felt to shoot a wedding with it, and I got a chance to do a love shoot with both the Z 7 and the a7R III. I also used these cameras for night and astronomy photography, and of course landscapes, which is also one of my passions.
Three amazing cameras next to each other: the Canon EOS R, Sony a7R III, and Nikon Z 7.
First of all I like to point out that I think a camera is just a tool. It allows me to take the photo I want. It has to work flawlessly and I have to be able to trust it. It must be easy to operate and handle. What I don’t find that important is sensor resolution. Most of the times a resolution of 16 megapixels is more than enough for all sorts of photography. Although more pixels allows you to crop a bit, or to correct a tilted horizon without losing too much resolution, it is just nice to have. These three cameras have more than enough resolution.
Another thing that is not worth bothering is battery life. It does not really matter if you can shoot 100 or 200 photos more than the other camera. I shot more than 800 photos during the wedding with the EOS R and left with 29 percent battery life, while I took 100 shots only during a day of landscape photography with approximately the same juice left. The battery life of each of these cameras is good, as good as a mirrorless can be regarding the mandatory use of a digital screen. But I would always advise to have a spare on hand, or two, depending on your needs.
The result after a day of wedding photography. The battery of the EOS R has a remaining 19% after 767 photos. For comparison, the EOS 5D Mark IV had a remaining 38% after 869 photos.
As I already mentioned, I find handling of a camera the most important feature. If a camera doesn't handle well it can become a misery to use it. The only way this can be tested is in real life and not in a laboratory. My intention of this article is not to advise one or the other camera, but to tell how I experienced photographing with these beautiful tools. It might help to make a choice of your own if you are planning to buy one. But please keep in mind, what I find a drawback, someone else might find it to be an advantage. It all depends on your personal preferences and even the type of photography performed.
Whatever the pros and cons of these cameras are, I could take the photo I wanted or needed regardless of it being a Sony, Canon, or Nikon. They all get the job done and the quality of the images are good regardless which camera you use.
Size and Design
Due to the lack of a mirror and pentaprism, the mirrorless camera can be a lot smaller and thinner. That is what Sony has done. The a7R III is a really small camera, just like its predecessors. That has come with a price in that the body is so small that all buttons are close to each other. Nevertheless all the necessary buttons and wheels are there, just like that all-important joystick. Unfortunately, Sony did leave the top plate half empty and did not place that nice dial like on the a9. I do like the dedicated exposure compensation dial though, which I find one of the most important dials on any camera.
The Sony is very small and its ergonomics are not the best around. For me the camera doesn't feel convenient. A grip could improve this, but it will make the camera a lot larger and heavier.
The Canon EOS R is a much larger camera, but it’s still smaller than most DSLRs. The larger size gives more room for buttons and ergonomics, something the Sony does lack. Unfortunately, just like the Sony, the left side of the top plate is empty, except for a large power switch. The biggest innovation, if it can be called like that, is the introduction of the Touch Bar, which made a couple of big changes in button layout necessary. Thanks to that the placing of some buttons is not really convenient anymore.
For me the Canon is perfect in size and the grip feels very convenient. The ergonomics make it easy to shoot with one hand.
The Nikon Z 7 is also bigger than the Sony, but just like the EOS R it is still smaller than the average DSLR. Fortunately, Nikon has made the decision to keep the button layout close to all its DSLR cameras, and thus the handling of the camera is very familiar to anyone who is used to a Nikon camera. The modest size of the camera gives enough room for all its buttons, and there is even room for two custom buttons between the lens and the grip. The ergonomics of the Nikon is very good, almost on par with the Canon and in some cases even better when it comes to button layout.
The Nikon has a secure grip and feels very comfortable.
Although all these cameras differ in sizes, it is surprising they all have almost the same weight. The Sony is 657 grams, the Canon 660 grams, and the Nikon weighs 675 grams, all with memory card and battery included. But you should always be aware that these cameras need the best of lenses, which have the same weight and size as the lenses made for DSLR cameras. I think the weight of a camera body should not be an argument to choose a mirrorless full-frame camera for that part.
Handling and Operating
This part is in close connection with the button layout, camera size, and ergonomics. But the ease of use is also dependent of the size of your hands. Even the length of your fingers can influence how easily you can operate a camera.
My hands are average, I think. Not particularly small nor large. I find the Sony too small for my hands. The grip isn’t that comfortable and I need to replace my hand to use some buttons or the dial on the back of the camera, otherwise I get cramped fingers. The buttons don't have a very good relief and sometimes it is hard to find the right button using only touch. I cursed the many times I pressed the dial on the back without intention when rotating it, activating a function I did not want to. With gloves it is nearly impossible to feel any button and I sometimes had to remove my eye from the viewfinder to see if I had my thumb on the right button.
Due to the small body, I had difficulties reaching all of the buttons and dials. After a longer period of use my thumb got sore from reaching that dial on the back. I often needed to loosen my grip to reach one or two buttons.
I love using my Canon DSLRs, and I find the button layout overall very well thought through. Except for the EOS R. I really think it is all because of the Touch Bar. It made the good button layout that is the characteristic Canon layout impossible. Another real downside is the sensitivity of that Touch Bar. When holding the camera in the normal position you automatically place your thumb on the Touch Bar, and thus activating it without intent. It is also too difficult to operate accurately. I would rather have this Touch Bar removed and replaced by the AF-On button and a decent operating wheel like the modern Canon DSLRs have. But the EOS R is not all that bad. The buttons that are present have a good feel to it and can be found very easily, even while wearing gloves. Except for the AF-On button, but that is because of its unusable position on the camera body.
I noticed some issues due to the Touch Bar. Although most buttons can be reached quite easily, the AF-On button is now in a less obvious place. Also the thumb touches the Touch Bar way too easily, thus activating it unintentionally.
I find the Nikon the best concerning ergonomics and handling. The grip is large enough, well-formed, and the buttons have a good feel to it; You know when you have one under your thumb. The camera can be operated with gloves without problem and all the buttons are in the right place. But it is too bad Nikon has not placed a double function dial on the camera, like their DSLRs. Now drive modes have to be activated by a button and on screen. I do really like the two custom buttons next to the lens mount and I really enjoyed using and operating this camera. The only downsides are the quality of the ISO and exposure compensation buttons.
To my surprise I found the Nikon to be the best concerning dials, buttons, and the overal use. I really enjoyed using it. Simple as that.
The Menu
The menu structure has to be easy and well organized. You should find all functions quickly and it should be clear what it is for, without the need of scrutinizing the manual. I find the menu of Canon one of the best organized and most easy to use. It has menu tabs with multiple pages and you can switch between them very easily and quickly. There is a My Menu tab that can contain more than one page, and you can name every page to your liking.
I find the menu of the Canon the best available. It is well designed, logical, and quick to operate. It is possible to operate it completely with the touchscreen.
Nikon is less easy, with the need of scrolling through a lot of options before finding what you need. After some thought I think it is because of the vertical tab layout, which makes maneuvering through the menu less simple. But it also is a matter of getting used to. Nikon provides a My Menu where most used menu functions can be programed in. But if you place a lot of function in there, you end up scrolling again.
The menu of the Nikon requires a lot of scrolling through its options. The menu is not bad, but it is less quick to operate. Fortunately Nikon has implemented the use of touchscreen when operating the menu.
It is well known how cumbersome the menu of Sony is. You need to search a lot before finding the right menu option. Sony also has tabs but with way too many underlying pages that are not well grouped. It is difficult to scroll quickly between the different pages. Fortunately there is also a My Menu tab, but it is limited to only six options per page. You could program some of the menu functions into the quick menu, or assign one of the buttons to it, so you don’t have to use the menu that much.
The Sony menu is difficult to use. It takes ages to go through all the underlying pages of the different tabs. It is not well designed and cumbersome to use. The menu can not be used with the touchscreen, which is unfortunate.
The best way to learn the menu is to use it over and over again. That way you know where to find the most used options. And this way you learn to operate the camera. So no matter what camera you have, you will get used to the menu eventually. Some brands may take longer to learn, though.
The EVF and the LCD Screen
All three cameras have a screen that can be titled in some way or another. The Sony and Nikon can only be tilted up or down, and the Canon can move in all ways. I find the screen of the Nikon and Canon very crisp and bright. The screen of the Sony is opposite to that; it rather look dull.
This shows the limitations of the LCD screens. The Nikon and Sony can only tilt, the Canon can move in any direction.
The touchscreen functionality is very well implemented in the Nikon and Canon. You can use it not only for placing the AF point, but also to operate the menu. Everything can be activated by touchscreen. The Canon has a small advantage with the possibility of swiping the AF point while looking through the viewfinder. Both Nikon as Canon have a very responsive touchscreen that is a pleasure to use.
Strangely, the Sony has only a rudimentary touchscreen which renders it almost useless. You cannot use it for operating the menu, and the only practical use is swiping the AF point, fortunately also while looking through the viewfinder. But the touchscreen is not that responsive and the AF point was following my thumb with a significant lag.
A tilted screen is very convenient when working in landscape orientation. But when switching to portrait orientation you won't have much use of a tilted screen anymore.
I find the EVF of the Sony is the worst of all modern mirrorless cameras I have seen (and I have seen quite a lot). It is perfectly usable, but it is not like looking through an optical viewfinder. The Canon and Nikon are much better, and I find the Canon almost as good as the best I have seen, which can be found on the Leica SL.
Autofocus and Speed
I haven’t really looked into this and can only tell you what I experienced. I found these cameras to perform very well. The Canon has quick autofocus and doesn't need much light. The Sony has an amazing Eye AF and face recognition that almost always focuses spot on. The Nikon focuses quickly and accurately, but has some difficulties with tracking moving objects.
I would not recommend using any of these cameras for action photography, although you can use it occasionally of course. (Sony a7R III FE 70-200mm @ 200mm | ISO 500 | f/2.8 | 1/200 sec)
I find none of these cameras suitable for real action photography, no matter how many frames per second they can shoot. The Sony has a big disadvantage with action photography. Its buffer may be large, but it takes ages to write the images to its memory card. And be aware, when the Sony is writing, many menu functions cannot be used or adjusted. You have to wait until all those frames are out of the buffer and onto the memory card.
Use in Real Life and Dynamic Range
How I experienced the use in practice can be deducted from the things I already said. There is no clear winner is this. But then again, it is not a contest. All three of these cameras have their strengths and their weaknesses. I like the handling of the Nikon and I dislike the Sony. The Canon feels good in my hand but I don’t like the Touch Bar. The menu of the Sony is a disaster but it is usable when most used functions are programed into the quick menu. Still, the customization of the Nikon is similar to the Sony and the menu is much easier to use. Canon wins concerning the menu, and I love the feel of the buttons on the Nikon. The Canon also has the best screen and EVF, closely followed by the Nikon. Sony lost on quality of the LCD screen and EVF, but when it comes to autofocus, I think the Sony wins over both Nikon and Canon.
I did this comparison during wintertime and I needed to wear gloves regularly. Operating the Sony with gloves imposed a real challenge when finding and using buttons.
What about the results and the dynamic range? Well, I think all of these cameras perform very well and the photos are full of detail and full of rich colors. I shoot raw and don’t look at the JPEG produced by these cameras, so any color that could be related to one brand is non existing for me. You can get any color you like in post. Also the dynamic range is very good with each of these cameras. It is easy to lighten up an underexposed image with at least three stops. But when you are in search for the limit, the Sony clearly wins.
Three photos of the same scene with the three different cameras. These are the untouched raw files as seen in Lightroom.
The result of what is possible using extreme post-processing with the EOS R.
The result of what is possible using extreme post-processing with the Z 7. The only difference in settings is the color balance to match it as much as possible .
The result of what is possible using extreme post-processing with the a7R III. Again, the only difference in settings is the color balance to match it as much as possible with the other two.
When checking how the darkest part of the image looks like, you can see how much loss in quality there is. This is how the EOS R ended up.
This is how darkest part of the image made with the Z 7 looks like. You can see there is not much difference with the EOS R.
With the Sony the darkest part of the image after correction clearly shows the best result. It is a reasonably clean result.
These three images of a sunset show the limit of what I find possible. All of these extreme processed images are acceptable, but the Sony produces the best result. But even with the Sony the image shows a large degradation in quality. In these situation you would be better off with a gradient neutral density filter, or with a bracketing, or with both, as shown in the example below. But if you shoot under conditions that would not allow filters or bracketing, like during weddings, you can benefit from the possibilities these cameras have, with Sony as the one that goes the furthest in recovering shadows.
Even with the clean results that the Sony produces after an extreme correction of the darkest parts of the image, a much better result can be achieved when using bracketing. Also filters can help reducing the dynamic range thus preventing such an extreme correction. Left is HDR, right is without.
One last complaint and compliment. My complaint for Canon and Nikon is the lack of a double card slot. I did shoot a wedding with the EOS R, and all went well, but I felt not happy having no backup on the spot. I would like to compliment Sony on having two card slots.
What I Like and Don't Like
I am not going to mention all the likes and dislikes of these cameras. I'll limit myself to what I find to be the most important things. If you are in search of a mirrorless camera, perhaps my findings can help you make the best choice for you.
Canon EOS R
Like
- Ergonomics and size
- Tilted screen
- Very good and functional touchscreen
- Use swipe to move AF point while looking through the EVF
- A good menu structure
- Very good EVF
- Bright and clear LCD
Dislike
- Touch Bar
- AF-On button in the wrong position
- No joystick
- Not enough buttons on the camera body
- One card slot
- AF and light meter doesn't work at maximum frames per second
Landscape photography with the Canon EOS R (EF 70-200mm L @ 145mm | ISO 100 | f/11 | 13 sec with Lee 0.9 ND Landscape Polarizer)
Wedding photography with the Canon EOS R (EF 35mm L | ISO 250 | f/6.3 | 1/30 sec)
Sony a7R III
Like
- Very good Eye AF
- Large dynamic range
- Joystick
- Customizable
- In-body image stabilization
- Two card slots
Dislike
- Too small of size and ergonomics are not that good
- Buttons are too flimsy
- EVF is not that good
- Touchscreen is not that responsive
- Touchscreen is very rudimental and not really usable
- Menu structure is not good
- Writing from buffer to card takes ages
A winter landscape with the Sony a7R III (FE 70-200mm @ 118mm | ISO 125 | f/2.8 | 1/125 sec)
Twilight landscape with the Sony a7R III (FE 24-70mm @ 53mm | ISO 500 | f/8 | 1/125 sec)
Nikon Z 7
Like
- Ergonomics and size
- Enough buttons that have a good feel to it
- Joystick
- Very good touchscreen functionality
- EVF is good
- Bright and clear LCD
- In-body image stabilization
Dislike
- AF tracking not that good
- ISO and EV button are difficult to find without looking
- Cannot swipe AF point while using EVF
- One card slot
Sunset at the beach with the Nikon Z 7 (Z 24-70mm @ 49mm | ISO 400 | f/11 | 1/60 sec with KASE 0.6 medium GND filter)
Comet 46P/Wirtanen together with the Pleiades star cluster, shot with the Nikon Z 7 and the iOptron tracker (EF-S 70-200mm @ 150mm | ISO 6400 | f/2.8 | 33x 8 sec stacked)
Which of these cameras would you prefer and why? I'd love to see your answer in the comments below.
The screen of the Sony is rather look dull. Because is rubbish 0.9m dot technology from 2012.
And on top of that, it is surprising they did not implemented a real touch screen.
"First of all I like to point out that I think a camera is just a tool."
No it's not. It's a religion. A religion where we prophesied how much better our camera god is than yours, and how you're going to burn in camera hell for not using our camera god, and how we will hate each other and argue incessantly and have flame wars until we die...
Hahaha - perhaps you're right. The Roman Pantheon, with the Gods Canon, Nikon, and the lesser Gods Pentaxm Fujifilm and Panasonic. I don't know which part Sony plays...
lol
Sony is Pluto. lol
Sony's decision to put the front dial below the shutter button instead of around it is a head-scratcher. It reduces the space available and causes the pinky to dangle. In contrast, my pinky does not dangle off my Panasonic GX8 which has exactly the same shoulder height and the dial around the shutter button. Did anyone at Sony actually try holding the design prototype before they started production?
I wonder also. I find a lot of things on the Sony not well thought through. But that is just my 2 cents
I think it all comes down to a) preference, and b) #1 priority. I'm partial to Sony, since I like the smaller body (that was the promise of mirroless, after all), and it's a smaller package overall, esp when traveling. Video AF, eye tracking and IBIS are nice +ives, too.
I find the Sony is more of a all-rounder targeting the enthusiast market, too, not just (mostly) their own existing customers who may have started to look elsewhere for a hybrid camera.
You mention a smaller package. But don't you think it is only the camera body? When I reviewed Sony cameras they all came with big lenses, making the complete package not that much smaller - well... with the small camera body only a little bit.
Anyway... your comment shows exactly it is a matter of personal preferences.
Agree, that's why I put preference as the 1st thing. Complete package can be made very small with a light prime lens for walking around and traveling, like the 35mm FE. To me, it's the most flexible platform of the 3, and as someone that doesn't make money from photography, that makes it the most appealing.
Why did you bump the ISO on the Z7 to compare the DRs when bodies will have their peak DRs at lower ISOs? Also, the Z7 can go below 50 ISO for even higher DR, where the A7R can't. This should illustrate what I'm talking about :
https://www.dxomark.com/sony-a7r-iii-sensor-review-nikon-d850-meets-mirr...
(The Z7 and D850 share the same sensor/pixel density etc...)
It has been mentioned already. This mistake is probably because I forgot to turn off the auto ISO. But I don't think it will make a lot of difference.
It does for sure. In my own experience with the D810 for example, shooting at lower ISOs(64 and below) produces cleaner images under the same conditions/light for sure. Cheers
It's my understanding, going below base native ISO doesn't improve DR. If it did, the lower number would be the base ISO.
Sam, check the dxomark link above. Look for Dynamic Range(Landscape).
I don't see anything to indicate lowering ISO below base increases Dynamic Range. I saw "the newer sensor shows its advantage at the lower values, from ISO 50 to 3,200 — the most commonly-used settings" but that doesn't mean 50 is better than 100 on the Sony nor that <50 would be better on the Z7.
That dxomark is pure laboratory results. In real life things are much different. I am convinced you won't notice mucht difference in real live between any of these cameras.
Currently I use my Sony A7R III to photograph birds, my previous camera was a Nikon D810 and a Canon 7D Mark II. I consider this mirrorles superior in focus accuracy, speed and ISO than the previous ones. I've never had pictures as sharp as before.
Thanks for the post, I will try to try the Canon and Nikon.
I wonder why you choose the A7R III for your bird photography. Did you consider the A9 as well? Or was there a special reason to go for this camera?
Since 3 years ago I used Sony mirrorless for general photography and reflex for nature by construction. When Sony took the A9 I considered it but soon announced the R III with 43 mpx, when it comes to birds the mpx matter as it allows you to make crops without losing quality. Today I only use Sony mirrorless (A6xxx and A7R III) for all types of photography.
I understand. It is a good reason. Thank you for sharing.
Oh, c'mon, really?: "I haven’t really looked into this and can only tell you what I experienced. I found these cameras to perform very well. The Canon has quick autofocus and doesn't need much light. The Sony has an amazing Eye AF and face recognition that almost always focuses spot on. The Nikon focuses quickly and accurately, but has some difficulties with tracking moving objects."
That single point makes the Sony far superior to the other two! The whole autofocus system, that is. And if you're claiming a ”real life comparison" you should ”have really looked into it"
Also you bash the buffer transfer to card speed on the Sony, yet don't offer a real comparison with the others! How much time is "ages"? How does it compare to the others? Do they take half an "age", a quarter, an ice age? You don't even mention what kind of card you used? Was it in RAW? Compressed? JPEG? Which slot were you writing to? Ugh... Also, if none of these cameras are suitable for action photography, on what are you basing this opinion and against what are you comparing it? Meh, another biased and lazy ”real life article". You should learn from Tony Northrup's unbiased comparisons, just to mention one of the many good examples out there.
I really like your comment. It brought a smile on my face. I guess you are a real fan of Sony. I think you understand I am joking when I tell you I still am waiting for the buffer to clear ;)
:) No, not really a Sony "fan boy", but a fan of balanced reviews AND a fan of the best *current* camera, **whatever** their brand. So, I had real high hopes of a balanced review but kept waiting... much, much more than it took for the buffer to clear! :D Seriously, the autofocus on the Sony A7(R)III is just amazing and the reason I went mirrorless (and from Nikon to Sony!). You must understand my disappointment when you said you haven't really looked into it -in a "real life review, of all things!-, when really, at least in my case, it was the first thing that jumped to my face when I had the camera "in real life"! So, now that you know I'm not a "fan", how'bout you go into the details of my questions? (In all honesty I didn't see much difference between the buffer transfers of these cameras, and I'm not sure the Z7 should be compared to the A7RIII but the A9 although I admit it's a gray area given the "in-between"" prices.) I'm really curious about this, not that it will make me switch back to Nikon, for now, but still -maybe when Nikon's AF catches up to Sony, but I see that in a very, very distant future; I mean the current AF in the Sony camera is so good that it can make the difference between getting the ACTION shot or not! (Yeah, I kept at it, LOL!)
Surely a problem with the Canon is the use of CFast, a dead end technology. Both Nikon and Sony will be able to use CF Express in XQD slots.
The Canon uses normal UHS-II SD cards, not CFast
IMHO, by far the Sony A7RIII is the best overall camera for function, features and quality performance of the bunch. I was a Nikon and Canon pro user for 40 years, yes 40 and switched to Sony mirrorless back in January 2017 and have never looked back. I have tried the Z-Camera and the EOS R just to satisfy my curiosity but like my Sony's better in many ways. FYI I have owned Sony A7RII , A7III and A7RIII, and recently added the A9. Cheers
"The cameras of Canon and Nikon have been mocked and laughed at ..." You mean like Sony was (mostly by Canon and Nikon shooters) when they introduced the A7 & A7R in 2013? The Canon and Nikon offerings wouldn't even exist if it weren't for Sony's success. With respec to dynamic range btw, when I can I shoot my landscapes at ISO 50 on my A7RIII and the dynamic range is more than adequate. And noise is virtually non-existent.
Thank you for the review. However, your statement "so any color that could be related to one brand is non existing for me. You can get any color you like in post." The color
science of every camera is different. Very little time is given to that topic in most camera reviews. To me this is the most important aspect of a particular camera. The subtle hues I can get from Canon suit my style. The color from Sony is vibrant and amazing. Equal but different. In the day each film had a different color tone. It is the same with digital but to a lesser extent. Every one talks of exposure latitude. Important yes but what of your color latitude in post when grading. Each manufacture has a different raw codex that affects your post grading as well. For me its about the look, color foremost. Exposure latitude is something you can deal with much easier.
Hello. You can customise Canon EOS R's Touch Bar or even disable it. touch and drag screen is an amazing thing for selecting focus point too.
If you would disable it because it is not working the way you like, than it is a bad designed feature. Customization is limited, and it does not change the way you would use it.
When my hands get smaller .. my camera can get smaller !!
hahaha
Love your comment. :)
I apreciate fine details as well as many fixating on those things in the comment section but feel there is a much bigger picture to the current mirrorless wars.
Most comments here miss the mark for most serious photographers. Many Canon owners are shying away from buying another Canon camera because their chip design and specs are years behind and also refuse to jump over to a Superior spec'ed Sony due to unacceptable ergrononics. We are caught in a consumer's no man's land, not jumping ship (yet).
I personally own a first generation Canon 7D, a Canon M50, and Sony A6300. My reality is I was forced to buy a 3rd camera body, the 2.5 year old Sony, for its superior video capabilities even though I have a large investment in Canon glass. Did I want to buy Canon? Of course, problem is they don't offer the product I need.
The big questions I have, directed towards Canon and Sony are:
Canon:
Being the largest seller of camera gear, how could you simply allow Sony to surpass you technically? Incremental improvements doesnt maintain brand loyalty in a market with massive technical improvements.
I purchased my Sony A6300 this year and it is pathetic Canon lost my business. I simply had no Canon product to buy. Canon currently, including the R that is 3 times more expensive, cannot match the Sony Alpha series that is in a much cheaper price bracket in video capabilities. I am not splitting hairs about this, the Canon video specs are literally unaceptable and years behind the competition. In addition, 5 fps on stills on the R while my 2011 purchased 7D shoots 8 fps and my Sony A6300 shoots 11 fps that was released in Feb of 2016!
Sony:
You had years to study and copy the vastly superior ergrononics of Canon and Nikon and continue to release cameras that appear to have no consideration for the interactions of the user with the camera. The size and shape of the camera bodys reveal no feedback from camera users was asked upon or if so, taken into account when designing your cameras. What company invests massive amounts of money to design a product without conducting focus groups to get user feedback? It appears your cameras are designed by conputer geeks that are doing a great job reaching industry leading specifications but are clueless about the needs of actual photographers. I have never read one review that prefered your cameras ergrononics PERIOD! We are photographers, not conputer nerds. We use cameras in real time following real subjects.
Sony menus are disjointed and force the photographer to search for commands at the expense of losing time and shots in an active photoshoot. I shoot sports. You cannot tell particpants in a sporting event to stop so you can find a camera setting in an illogically placed menu.
In addition, your LCD does not rotate, no quick dual pixal touch screen focus to transition from one subject to another on videos. Did you even study the competetion or simply design your cameras in an isolated electrical engineering geek squad?
So basically it is not a matter of deciding which camera to buy next for me, it is refusing to buy anything until I truely see a product line that meets my sports photography and videography needs. Why invest more money in products that do not meet my needs?
With over $8000 invested in Canon glass, i simply refuse to dump it for Sony with its deal breaking ergronomics. Likewise, I refuse to buy a Canon R whose still fps are inferior to my first generation 7D and video capabilities are inferior to a 2.5 year old Sony I own that is 1/3 the price of the Canon R. Seriously, it is mentioned Canon is soon releasing new 400, 500, and 600mm lens using their new mount. Do they honestly think a person will invest $8,000-$12,000 in a telephoto lens and buy your Canon R with inferior still and video specs for sports photography? Maybe a few Canon devotees but not educated consumers.
A side note; I have used all the adaptors connecting my Canon L series telephoto lens to my Sony. The autofocus is completely useless, stays in search mode while my sports subjects actions are not captured. Essentially for video, I am forced to shoot Sony to get 120 fps slow motion in manual focus mode. It is 2019 and this is totally unaceptable.
Canon, time is running out. It isn't asking much for long term Canon user to expect you to match the competition's specs on a almost 3 year old camera 1/3 the cost of your inferior spec'ed R. In the electronic world, being 5 years behind in technology is like Ford releasing a slightly improved version of the model T in hopes consumers do not buy another brand car in 2019.
Sony, if you truely want to destroy Canon and Nikon, get a much greater number of their users to dump all their Canon and Nikon lens and fully invest in Sony, you must study their superior ergronomics and LCD screen design, and implement them in your cameras. I refuse to invest more money in your products until your ergronomics vastly improve.
What i would love in a mirrorless camera
A canon eos-r style of body (slightly smaller ok), evf, and lcd
with Nikon z7 weather sealing!
Sony bsi sensor at 36 MP
Canon or Nikon raw compression options
Sony lenses but at canon prices, and weather sealed
QA assurance on copy variation, including lenses designs that are resistant to copy variation when possible.
with a shared protocol available to third party lenses manufacturers, or at least licensed to them for a fee.
All of the manufacturers to upgrade their old tech processing chips to latest tech, such s 7/10/14 nm fabs.
Some thoughts -
While, of course the whole business model is not geared this way - i wonder if some of this is going to need to move to direct sales. The markups are very high. A $100 increase in manufacturing cost might be $500+ increase in camera cost, so a model that can absorb this as well as increased costs for lens QA would help, although no idea how it would be implemented.
I also think that within a few years,sony?, will bring non-bayer, fovean style (but not necessarily fovean tech) sensors to an acceptable level for use in the field, which will be one of the next camera higher end camera revolutions, along with AI assisted detail recovery and noise reduction.