Second body Canon 5d mark IV or Sony A7R iii? Opinions please

Hi all,

I'm currently shooting with a 1DX "Mark I" and want to purchase a second body.

I have a few good Canon L lenses, 16-35 f4 IS, 24-70 2.8 ii, 70-200 2.8 IS ii, 85 1.2 and 11-24 f4.

There is a lot of talking about what the competitors are bringing to the table currently and I've have been following this as well. I don't want to part my Canon lenses because I like them a lot and my 1DX still makes great pictures.

With the Sony A7R iii recently being introduced the specs do look very impressive compared to a 5d Mark IV. In camera IS and eye detection, pixel shift, DR etc. The Sony would be a very nice travel camera as well. I still have a metabone adapter and Zeiss 55m 1.8 lens at home and could pretty easily use my Canon lenses.

I do however feel that a Sony camera would work best with native lenses (at least that's how I felt on my A7R), so if I'd buy a A7r iii I'll likely buy a GM lens with it, and save for some others later.

The "problem" however is that I like the ergonomics and colors of my 1DX a lot. Yes a lot is written about RAW and able to process, but I struggled to get the output with my old A7R similar to my Canon (maybe I needed to put more effort in).

I wonder in the real world, are the differences really that big between the 2 camera's or would you barely see it. In reviews they do pixel peeping side by side pictures, checking high ISO's pics and which are slightly cleaner etc. Wonder if in reality one would notice these differences clearly. You would expect that a good composition and choosing the right light would make a bigger impact??

I'm curious to hear other people's opinion on whether they would go for the Sony A7r iii or 5d mark IV and why?

Many thanks for your reply.

You have a bunch of awesome Canon lens. While Sony A7RIII spec is impressive, I'd would go with Canon 5D IV. If you go with Sony, then you'll need lens adapter like Metabones speed booster. To me, I don't like to have adapter, but original lens, but it's me...

I've always steered clear of adapters. By their very nature even the very best are compromises. Also, I've read a many mixed reviews about Sony color, handling and menus. I read almost no negative material about the 5D IV; I certainly love mine.

I recently weighed the 5D4 vs 7R3 decision, although, it was to replace my primary pro body for stills, architecture, studio, landscapes, etc.

The 7R3 is a very capable camera. Sony also has a good selection of lenses at this point, including many excellent large f/2.8 zooms, large f1.4 primes and compact f/1.8 & 2 primes (like your Sony 55/1.8 lens). For me the adapter option isn’t appealing, so I would be looking to do a full kit replacement. Of course, the 7R3 costs a premium right now, and Sony glass is a bit more expensive, so it is a pretty big purchase. Once I considered Canon flashes and the ability to rent just about any high-end Canon lens I require for the Canon system, then the Sony quickly dropped out of contention.

I now have the 5D4 and it is one heck of a camera. While I have used the 5D4 in the past, I’ve just finished diving into the menu and setting options. The 5D4’s AF treads pretty close to the 1D series, more so than any other non-1D camera. It is way more camera and AF than I require, but for you it could be an excellent option. In fact, it could be competitive to your original 1DX when used with the vertical grip.

Have you considered selling your 1DX for a 5D4? B&H and Adorama currently offer the 5D4 with free Canon grip, printer, paper, battery and card for $2849 after rebate ($2949 w/ Canon Log)? That way you could make use of all your Canon glass, flashes and other gear. You would have a more compact option for travel, and then could add the vertical grip when required for action subjects. The 5D4 is also arguably Canon’s best overall performing sensor and would provide you with improved DR, noise and resolution compared to the original 1DX.

And another options worth considering: What about picking up a more affordable and still compact 6D for travel? The AF isn’t great, so that needs to be consider. For me, it has been more than good enough for my requirements. It could be a nice option if you want to give Canon and Sony another year to let things play out. As consumers we have so many excellent options, which in many cases also includes the gear we currently own.

Best wishes,
Chad

5DIV. First, native lenses work best with the camera for which they were designed. And secondly, and it's just me, I do not like Sony's ergonomics...a deal breaker out of the box.

David

Choosing the right light (exposure) always makes the biggest impact. Many folks pick a camera based on the "experts" reviews, then when they shoot with it, and choose the incorrect exposure, wonder why their pictures are so noisy and don't have the multiple stop DR the reviewers claim.

Both bodies produce similar results. guaranteed. You need to know your equipment to produce the best results.

I was just about to post a thread like this.

I'm a wedding and portrait shooter and I'm thinking of selling my 2nd 5DIV and getting a A7RIII with MC11 which now works for eyeAF on Canon glass. Also, the bigger battery and dual slots has made it a more compelling choice.

The caveats I see for pro use is I can't transfer my flashes/trigger over like I do now on the job. I'll need to take more time editing vs RAWs from the same camera to achieve consistency. And I'll need to develop UI memory for a 2nd camera whereas now there's no hesitation changing settings between cameras Holdfast'd on me. How often do Sony's crash? The Canons just work and always work... now that I've typed this out, I think it's a bad idea LOL

Slightly lighter system, improved sensor tech, more edge-to-edge focus points? The Sony isn't going to change more important factors like my composition, posing, lighting and editing skills. Maybe if their lenses didn't cost so much... still on the back burner, not sure, it have to be a complete changeover down the road if I liked it.

Kim van Heuven said:

Hi all,

I'm currently shooting with a 1DX "Mark I" and want to purchase a second body.

I have a few good Canon L lenses, 16-35 f4 IS, 24-70 2.8 ii, 70-200 2.8 IS ii, 85 1.2 and 11-24 f4.

There is a lot of talking about what the competitors are bringing to the table currently and I've have been following this as well. I don't want to part my Canon lenses because I like them a lot and my 1DX still makes great pictures.

With the Sony A7R iii recently being introduced the specs do look very impressive compared to a 5d Mark IV. In camera IS and eye detection, pixel shift, DR etc. The Sony would be a very nice travel camera as well. I still have a metabone adapter and Zeiss 55m 1.8 lens at home and could pretty easily use my Canon lenses.

I do however feel that a Sony camera would work best with native lenses (at least that's how I felt on my A7R), so if I'd buy a A7r iii I'll likely buy a GM lens with it, and save for some others later.

The "problem" however is that I like the ergonomics and colors of my 1DX a lot. Yes a lot is written about RAW and able to process, but I struggled to get the output with my old A7R similar to my Canon (maybe I needed to put more effort in).

I wonder in the real world, are the differences really that big between the 2 camera's or would you barely see it. In reviews they do pixel peeping side by side pictures, checking high ISO's pics and which are slightly cleaner etc. Wonder if in reality one would notice these differences clearly. You would expect that a good composition and choosing the right light would make a bigger impact??

I'm curious to hear other people's opinion on whether they would go for the Sony A7r iii or 5d mark IV and why?

Many thanks for your reply.

Click to expand...

I read hundreds of posts before deciding myself (concerning a7RII)

And I went for the Canon.

Not all lenses work very well with Metabones. I have a 135 f2 and AF becomes very bad in low light.

About MP, 30 MP makes now my iPad Pro 10.5 a bit slower than with the 20MP of the 6D. And SD card is filling more quickly. 42 MP is great but big files.

About DR, A7RII and 5D were very close, now the III is a bit better but 13,6 stops is a great thing. If you don’t need very extreme tweaks on the image it should be ok. (We have seen many good photos for decades with the 11,7 stops or less of the previous 5D)

The thing I wanted first was eye focus. But, well, I have looked at all my portraits and I did not miss a lot... and the face detection of the 5d is working good. At 1.4, not sure eye focus is so good (I have seen some raw of the Sony and it was not perfect. At 2.8 or 4 it is probably working good, as the face detection of the 5d).

Abour lenses, you can see that they are really more expensive and not better than canon. Big loss of money for me here if I want native lenses.

In conclusion I decided to go with the Canon to save a lot of money. The new technologies could be very temptative but I am not a rich man, I take months to afford something like lenses, and I sold all I could for the 5D, including my drone.

The Sony seduces by some features, but I will not be a better photographer with them, and will spend a lot of money. Battery life of 5D is 900 while Sony is 550 and I like the idea to look trough the viewfinder without having to start the camera (getting birds for instance).

A Sony would have been a kind of whim in fact. Poeple burry the camera very quick. D850 is 89% and the Sony 90%? Ok, I want a Sony...

hmmm, the 5D was 87%, it is a really nice camera. With all your native lenses, I think it is a good and obvious go, unless you are a very rich man.

(and I am really not sure I would like ergonomics and small size of the Sony. Weight and size gain is not a legend but with good lenses we have nearly the same)

Hi,

Thanks for your reply. Seeing that you own both the 5D Mark IV and 1DX Mark II.

Since you use both would you recommend me the 5D Mark IV as second body or should I go for the 1D Mark II?

Which one do you use more frequent? Suspect I might miss the "lack" of MP for landscape photography in the 1DX MKII, but somehow always find the 1 series having a special robust feel to it

Kim van Heuven said:

Hi,

Thanks for your reply. Seeing that you own both the 5D Mark IV and 1DX Mark II.

Since you use both would you recommend me the 5D Mark IV as second body or should I go for the 1D Mark II?

Which one do you use more frequent? Suspect I might miss the "lack" of MP for landscape photography in the 1DX MKII, but somehow always find the 1 series having a special robust feel to it

Click to expand...

More than two-thirds of my photography is sports/action/wildlife, so I shoot with the 1DxII most of the time. But for everything else I use the 5DIV. I experience really spectacular results with my 5dIV.

If you plan to get into video as well as stills, supposedly the 1Dx II is Canon's best video Non-cinema camera. I don't use video at all, so I can't comment from experience. But for stills, the 1Dx II has everything over the 5DIV, except resolution and, for the most part, form factor. I use a grip on my 5DIV, so form factor is the same for me.

30mp is really noticeable when editing, although the 20mp of the 1DxII is so clean and beautiful, sometimes I have to look at the exif data to know what body I used. Resolution isn't everything. The overall rendering (with the same lenses) between the bodies is just different. IDxII has better DR and overall image quality, but is it worth $2k+?

I would say if the original 1Dx is your main body for stills, keep shooting with that, and pick up the 5dIV as a second body for at least 2k less than the 1Dx mark II (the II goes for a little over 5k now). I'd save the money unless you need the frame rate in a second body. If you go with the 5DIV you will not regret it. I like the options I have between the two bodies. If I had a Idx and a IDx II, I'm sure the 1Dx would just gather dust. The 1DX/1DxII bodies are similar for stills, with the 1Dx II incrementally better, so why shoot at all with the lesser body? On the other hand, a 1Dx and a 5DIV....you will be using both bodies and enjoying your options much more at a much lower cost.

5DS/R is simply the perfect match for a DX-1. Use the DX-1 for speed and the 5DS/R for the best IQ Canon can deliver.

5DIV sits between the DX and DS/R-series. Not really fast, not really high MPIX. An excellent compromise for those who can only have one camera.

All the people you need to hear from have already abandoned ship and do not read the Canon forums anymore. You are only hearing from people who haven't used a Sony A7 or A9 camera and the advantages that the mirrorless technology brings. I still have a 5D4 but the 1Dx has gone and the 5DsR is on ebay currently. I have replaced them with an A9 and an A7R3.

I have a a7r3 on order will be here on the 6th, right now I plan on using it with my 5d4. Everything I have seen so far is its the best sony yet with canon glass some say just as good as native but it going to depend on the lens your using also. I will be using the sony as a travel, backup body and portraits, landscapes nothing that moves fast so im pretty sure my canon glass will be fine for now. If the sony performs as good as the 5d4 for weddings and events I may get rid of the 5d4 and pick up a a9 guess well see

Beside 5dIV , I have a a7rII using adapter for 24-70 f2.8ii. pretty good. Adapter does not work on 100-400mm

If I have to make a choice now, I would get an a7rIII, which resolved some most complained issues with the II. The image is amazing with Canon lens. And a bigger size file to crop from.

Georgeee said:

Beside 5dIV , I have a a7rII using adapter for 24-70 f2.8ii. pretty good. Adapter does not work on 100-400mm

Click to expand...

Which adapter? EF 100-400L IS II works with either MB4 or MC-11, OK for relative still subjects, not good in fast tracking however. I shot several months ago with this combo in a zoo here .

Georgeee said:

If I have to make a choice now, I would get an a7rIII, which resolved some most complained issues with the II. The image is amazing with Canon lens. And a bigger size file to crop from.

Click to expand...

Sure. I have many photos with Canon 24-70L II and 16-35L/4.0 IS that you can find in my Flickr.

To OP: if you want the best performance of Canon lenses, 5D IV is great choice. If you mainly shoot in landscape and traveling, then A7r II works fine with modern Canon lenses. 5D IV complements your 1Dx well.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums
http://pwphotography.zenfolio.com

Phil Shaw said:

All the people you need to hear from have already abandoned ship and do not read the Canon forums anymore. You are only hearing from people who haven't used a Sony A7 or A9 camera and the advantages that the mirrorless technology brings. I still have a 5D4 but the 1Dx has gone and the 5DsR is on ebay currently. I have replaced them with an A9 and an A7R3.

Click to expand...

If poeple ask for opinions in threads like this, it is because it is not black or white, it is grey.

I have seen poeple selling all their stuff to go to Sony, and few months later they came back to Canon. It exists. It is also a matter of taste in some ways.

I think you just confirmed what I was saying. Mirrorless is the future without doubt. Why stay with an older technology which cannot deliver what is out there now. I'm not an evangelist, just someone who like to use the best tools for the job.

I’ve been trying to decide the same thing for a month lol... it’s very hard. My best advice is choose depending on what images you shoot. For me, I mainly shoot portraits and the skin tone colors from the Canon sensors are more natural. I do know of some fashion photographers that shoot Sony but they highly manipulate their work, shoot a lot of black & white, or use flash. For some reason I found that if you shoot using strobes over natural light then the colors look much better.

Other than the skin colors, I’d say the only upside for Canon is great customer service. Very professional in this area & known for it around the Industry. The talk about lenses is irrelevant in terms of which company has more options, if you use high end glass. Also the prices are very similar, Canon a little cheaper but not by much.

So overall I’d say if you mainly shoot portraits and use natural light then Canon is best.. after that Sony is better. Lighter weight, eye af, video capabilities, 42MP, and continually pushing better technology, something Canon is lacking, gives Sony a huge advantage. If my main work wasn’t portraits I’d have a Sony in my hand right now. Even Nikon brought out the D850 which is a beautiful beast but same sensor as Sony and falls behind in same benefits I listed other than the 42MP, also truly more expensive glass but very good.

Well best of luck.

Phil Shaw said:

All the people you need to hear from have already abandoned ship and do not read the Canon forums anymore.

Click to expand...

Apparently not, since you’re replying.

Phil Shaw said:

You are only hearing from people who haven't used a Sony A7 or A9 camera and the advantages that the mirrorless technology brings.

Click to expand...

Again, apparently not. The OP is hearing from you.

Phil Shaw said:

I still have a 5D4 but the 1Dx has gone and the 5DsR is on ebay currently. I have replaced them with an A9 and an A7R3.

Click to expand...

Very helpful. I'm sure that your views have contributed to the high quality of informed knowledge in this forum.