-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
How Much Longer Will You Wait?
- Thread starter Batdude
- Start date
The a7cr/cii is a big problem for all of Sony's competitors imo as the compact lenses just keep coming. I'm not convinced the a7V will be as good as the R6iii actually but I don't really feel like combining the R5ii with another dslr shaped lower spec'd body, one is enough. I do quite like though having an a1ii and a7cr and I would have scraped by like you with Canon's lenses if they had something "real" like an R8 with a HR sensor and ibis. But while lenses like the new Sony 16 1.8, 300gr, the Tamron 25-200 2.8-5.6 550gr and now Viltrox 85 f2 evo 300gr just keep rolling off the production line why would I want to scrape by and wait for Canon's next rumor? I'd rather buy what's here and now than rumors, how long have we had Canon teasing the 200-500 f4, which became the 180-600 then 200-600 and now we are back to 300-600, which I think will come, but probably 4-5x the cost of Sony's 200-600!
you can see why Canon has locked it's system and it's not going to change, ever. Viltrox is really upping it's game, the 85 f2 evo, £270 and 300gr with aperture ring and the recent 50mm f2 air, 200gr and no aperture ring but <£200 are very competent lenses at incredible prices that work well as travel/hiking options with a competent all in one, eg Sigma 20-200 or new Tamron 25-200.
The A7C II / A7CR are great cameras on one side but they are very outdated at the same time as well.
Some people probably do not care, but this thing called mechanical shutter is or will soon be a relict of the past. While having great image quality and excellent AF and a desirable form factor, sensor readout times and e shutter viability is worst in business.
In the past years in 99% of shots I used e shutter exclusively. Z8, Z6 III, R5 II and with a DR hit R8 and R6 ii are totally fine as e shutter, silent cameras. Sony doesn't offer anything in that segment to their customers.
Last edited:
Agree - and it is just a matter of time when those cheap Chinese lenses get hosed with new bodies and new firmware updates - plus iPhone with AI is ruling going forward for the wide focals - it is not worth the uncertain future of cheap
thunder storm
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,656
- Solutions
- 7
- Reaction score
- 5,952
For 99% of my shots the read out speed of the A7C cameras would be just fine.
So you're either loosing DR or you're on 24Mp. Not great for traveling.
For a travel camera DR, IBIS, compactness and some croppability is way more important for me. The R6II is big, the R8 doesn't have IBIS. There are no compact telephoto primes over 50mm, and no truly affordable yet high performing prime options. 24Mp isn't great for cropping in cases a longer focal length is too big in your bag. Why is read out speed important? I even don't know the read out speed of my current cameras. I almost never use full electronic shutter. As long as there is a mechanical shutter it doesn't matter.
IBIS, DR, compactness and a high MP count do matter.
your mileage varies from mine
for my wildlife application I’m using eshutter 100% of the time for fps and reduce rolling shutter on my r8
i still do ceremonies / theater and the silent shutter is indispensable so I don’t get kicked out
and mostly I use eshutter for quick busts to capture the decisive moment at 20 and 40 fps, and even to avoid the blink of an eye
Im about 80% e-shutter
as I said, YMMV
That makes no sense MAC, e-shutter does not reduce rolling shutter, it exacerbates it. The r8 does not have a stacked sensor either, so you really are getting the worst of both, the reduced dr, ie 12bit burst and e-shutter. Not sure why an R8 would be the camera of choice for wildlife but it would be way down my list. In my use case I'M replacing an R5ii with A1ii, ie like for like. The a7cr is a completely different type of camera, a high resolution, compact walk around when fast moving birds isn't so important. But it can still track and shoot action, just not at 30fps!
Like I say, I do see the benefit of e-shutter, my main camera currently is R5ii, I also recently acquired an a1ii, like for like. If I need e-shutter, stacked is the way to go!
sure.and mostly I use eshutter for quick busts to capture the decisive moment at 20 and 40 fps, and even to avoid the blink of an eye
e-shutter is primarily of use like you say when you need to be silent or if you need high fps/pre-capture etc, for those occasions I'd choose a stacked sensor all day long.
But I’m talking. Eshutter vs eshutter on Sony vs canon compacts where one can’t afford the big dogsThat makes no sense MAC, e-shutter does not reduce rolling shutter, it exacerbates it. The r8 does not have a stacked sensor either, so you really are getting the worst of both, the reduced dr, ie 12bit burst and e-shutter. Not sure why an R8 would be the camera of choice for wildlife but it would be way down my list. In my use case I'M replacing an R5ii with A1ii, ie like for like. The a7cr is a completely different type of camera, a high resolution, compact walk around when fast moving birds isn't so important. But it can still track and shoot action, just not at 30fps!
Like I say, I do see the benefit of e-shutter, my main camera currently is R5ii, I also recently acquired an a1ii, like for like. If I need e-shutter, stacked is the way to go!
sure.and mostly I use eshutter for quick busts to capture the decisive moment at 20 and 40 fps, and even to avoid the blink of an eye
e-shutter is primarily of use like you say when you need to be silent or if you need high fps/pre-capture etc, for those occasions I'd choose a stacked sensor all day long.
OK, but it will be interesting to see how things work out when Canon increase the resolution? If the C50 is anything to go by then the R6iii and presumably the R8ii will face the same challenge that Sony did years back, ie increasing resolution on a non-stacked sensor = slower scan times. There's definitely room for more decent e-shutter options, stacked or otherwise from all the brands, next up R6iii and a7V, be interesting to see what they deliver, I'm not optimistic we are moving forward though with these releasesBut I’m talking. Eshutter vs eshutter on Sony vs canon compacts where one can’t afford the big dogsThat makes no sense MAC, e-shutter does not reduce rolling shutter, it exacerbates it. The r8 does not have a stacked sensor either, so you really are getting the worst of both, the reduced dr, ie 12bit burst and e-shutter. Not sure why an R8 would be the camera of choice for wildlife but it would be way down my list. In my use case I'M replacing an R5ii with A1ii, ie like for like. The a7cr is a completely different type of camera, a high resolution, compact walk around when fast moving birds isn't so important. But it can still track and shoot action, just not at 30fps!
Like I say, I do see the benefit of e-shutter, my main camera currently is R5ii, I also recently acquired an a1ii, like for like. If I need e-shutter, stacked is the way to go!
sure.and mostly I use eshutter for quick busts to capture the decisive moment at 20 and 40 fps, and even to avoid the blink of an eye
e-shutter is primarily of use like you say when you need to be silent or if you need high fps/pre-capture etc, for those occasions I'd choose a stacked sensor all day long.
That's highly contradictory. How can you know that the A7C is fine if you almost never use e shutter anyway.
The thing is, those old sensors are no real viable options for e shutter. I didn't use e shutter with the Zf or Z50 ii either. R8 / R6 ii is fast enough for some moving subjects, but even there you will get some wobbling when shooting bursts and fast objects like balls (wings, clubs, ..) will sometimes be distorted even more. R5 ii is better and mostly fine for even fast objects, I have rarely seen some distorted balls when shooting soccer and with the Z8 there where only a handful of shots where rolling shutter was somewhat visible. LED lighting is another topic though.
And of course I don't want to be that "clackclackclack" guy any more.
The DR hit on the R8 is btw not obvious if you do not have direct comparison. Was never an issue for me. Wouldn't use it for landscape though. I personally don't need IBIS either, but most people are convinced that they do, even if they can't explain why. IBIS has it's usefulness in niche scenarios but doesn't improve my action, event or people shots one bit. I even tone down those Nikons to sports IBIS (aka moderate) as they become less consistent with full IBIS + linked AF point in my (and others) experience.
Last edited:
thunder storm
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,656
- Solutions
- 7
- Reaction score
- 5,952
What's contradictory?
We have the Canon fallacy "if Canon shouldn't make it you shouldn't want it", and here's a Sony fallacy "if you don't use it you don't know if you need it".
Logic is this: I don't use it so I know I don't need it.
Again: Who needs e-shutter in a travel camera? And for those who do, how many "travel action shots" will get messed up due to slow read out speeds?
You're not talking travel use cases. Sony has dedicated travel camera options, Canon has not. Non travel purposes has nothing to do with it.The thing is, those old sensors are no real viable options for e shutter. I didn't use e shutter with the Zf or Z50 ii either. R8 / R6 ii is fast enough for some moving subjects, but even there you will get some wobbling when shooting bursts and fast objects like balls (wings, clubs, ..) will sometimes be distorted even more. R5 ii is better and mostly fine for even fast objects, I have rarely seen some distorted balls when shooting soccer and with the Z8 there where only a handful of shots where rolling shutter was somewhat visible. LED lighting is another topic though.
And of course I don't want to be that "clackclackclack" guy any more.
The DR hit on the R8 is btw not obvious if you do not have direct comparison. Was never an issue for me. Wouldn't use it for landscape though. I personally don't need IBIS either, but most people are convinced that they do, even if they can't explain why. IBIS has it's usefulness in niche scenarios but doesn't improve my action, event or people shots one bit. I even tone down those Nikons to sports IBIS (aka moderate) as they become less consistent with full IBIS + linked AF point in my (and others) experience.
Travel use case?!
All my cameras have been fine when being abroad. Maybe with exception of Z50 ii, really didn't like that 1/4000s shutter shed limit in bright light.
As I said before: IBIS is not an essential technology. If you want a compact option R8 will do that for you. You even get OIS in quite a lot of lenses if you insist on optimizing ISO in low light situations.
But yes, if you mainly shoot static subjects with natural light you can go silent with Sony as well. You should talk to some of your fellow Sony shooters though, there are quite a lot that would like additional e shutter options outside of static shots and A1/A9.
No need to glorify the absence thereof. And yes R8 ii with IBIS would be great as well. As is the Canons with IBIS are still the second most compact full frame travel options. Nikon and Panasonic bodies are larger/heavier. Even Z5 ii weighs more than R6 ii.
All my cameras have been fine when being abroad. Maybe with exception of Z50 ii, really didn't like that 1/4000s shutter shed limit in bright light.
As I said before: IBIS is not an essential technology. If you want a compact option R8 will do that for you. You even get OIS in quite a lot of lenses if you insist on optimizing ISO in low light situations.
But yes, if you mainly shoot static subjects with natural light you can go silent with Sony as well. You should talk to some of your fellow Sony shooters though, there are quite a lot that would like additional e shutter options outside of static shots and A1/A9.
No need to glorify the absence thereof. And yes R8 ii with IBIS would be great as well. As is the Canons with IBIS are still the second most compact full frame travel options. Nikon and Panasonic bodies are larger/heavier. Even Z5 ii weighs more than R6 ii.
Last edited:
Rock and Rollei
Senior Member
I can't imagine who doesn't. If I'm taking pictures inside a church, a mosque, a temple, a synagogue I'm using silent shutter out of respect, because I'm not a horrible person. Are you seriously saying you don't? Wow.
Sure read-out speed isn't that critical, but common human decency is.
You're not talking travel use cases. Sony has dedicated travel camera options, Canon has not. Non travel purposes has nothing to do with it.The thing is, those old sensors are no real viable options for e shutter. I didn't use e shutter with the Zf or Z50 ii either. R8 / R6 ii is fast enough for some moving subjects, but even there you will get some wobbling when shooting bursts and fast objects like balls (wings, clubs, ..) will sometimes be distorted even more. R5 ii is better and mostly fine for even fast objects, I have rarely seen some distorted balls when shooting soccer and with the Z8 there where only a handful of shots where rolling shutter was somewhat visible. LED lighting is another topic though.
And of course I don't want to be that "clackclackclack" guy any more.
The DR hit on the R8 is btw not obvious if you do not have direct comparison. Was never an issue for me. Wouldn't use it for landscape though. I personally don't need IBIS either, but most people are convinced that they do, even if they can't explain why. IBIS has it's usefulness in niche scenarios but doesn't improve my action, event or people shots one bit. I even tone down those Nikons to sports IBIS (aka moderate) as they become less consistent with full IBIS + linked AF point in my (and others) experience.
--
R5 & RV
EF & FE
thunder storm
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,656
- Solutions
- 7
- Reaction score
- 5,952
I used to do that with the M6II. The R5 and RV aren't that audible in the huge touristic churches like say the Basilica of Santa Croce in Florence. Making wide angle shots in small intimate churches is often a matter of waiting for the occasion you're the only one in that small church. In a way you're never alone of course, and God always knows there's a shutter curtain moving, but beside that it's hardly noticeable in most cases.
That said, I do use it, very rarely, there's always that 1%, however, for traveling these cases aren't about fast moving stuff. I don't need to use any A7C camera to know it would be sufficient for my travel use cases.
Well, it happened once another photographer started a conversation outside a church saying the electronic shutter of my R5 was so nice to have, while I was actually using EFCS.
You're not talking travel use cases. Sony has dedicated travel camera options, Canon has not. Non travel purposes has nothing to do with it.The thing is, those old sensors are no real viable options for e shutter. I didn't use e shutter with the Zf or Z50 ii either. R8 / R6 ii is fast enough for some moving subjects, but even there you will get some wobbling when shooting bursts and fast objects like balls (wings, clubs, ..) will sometimes be distorted even more. R5 ii is better and mostly fine for even fast objects, I have rarely seen some distorted balls when shooting soccer and with the Z8 there where only a handful of shots where rolling shutter was somewhat visible. LED lighting is another topic though.
And of course I don't want to be that "clackclackclack" guy any more.
The DR hit on the R8 is btw not obvious if you do not have direct comparison. Was never an issue for me. Wouldn't use it for landscape though. I personally don't need IBIS either, but most people are convinced that they do, even if they can't explain why. IBIS has it's usefulness in niche scenarios but doesn't improve my action, event or people shots one bit. I even tone down those Nikons to sports IBIS (aka moderate) as they become less consistent with full IBIS + linked AF point in my (and others) experience.
What’s wrong with the Canon RF 1.4 lenses? They are certainly more affordable than the 1.2 lenses. And the non-L primes are pretty good too, as well as being even less expensive. Sigma’s EF mount Art lenses work with an adapter. There are many non-AF third party RF mount lenses. Now, if Canon and Sigma could come to terms on FF I would take a look at whatever Sigma offered, I have four of Sigma’s RF-S lenses, but I don’t feel any inclination to switch platforms just to have more third party lenses. I don’t have all of the Canon lenses I want.
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
Yea Im gonna have to disagree with you here. Silent shutter is great for any kind of candid shooting. It's my default setting. I don't shoot action so I'm not bothered by rolling shutter or w/e.What's contradictory?
We have the Canon fallacy "if Canon shouldn't make it you shouldn't want it", and here's a Sony fallacy "if you don't use it you don't know if you need it".
Logic is this: I don't use it so I know I don't need it.
Again: Who needs e-shutter in a travel camera? And for those who do, how many "travel action shots" will get messed up due to slow read out speeds?
You're not talking travel use cases. Sony has dedicated travel camera options, Canon has not. Non travel purposes has nothing to do with it.The thing is, those old sensors are no real viable options for e shutter. I didn't use e shutter with the Zf or Z50 ii either. R8 / R6 ii is fast enough for some moving subjects, but even there you will get some wobbling when shooting bursts and fast objects like balls (wings, clubs, ..) will sometimes be distorted even more. R5 ii is better and mostly fine for even fast objects, I have rarely seen some distorted balls when shooting soccer and with the Z8 there where only a handful of shots where rolling shutter was somewhat visible. LED lighting is another topic though.
And of course I don't want to be that "clackclackclack" guy any more.
The DR hit on the R8 is btw not obvious if you do not have direct comparison. Was never an issue for me. Wouldn't use it for landscape though. I personally don't need IBIS either, but most people are convinced that they do, even if they can't explain why. IBIS has it's usefulness in niche scenarios but doesn't improve my action, event or people shots one bit. I even tone down those Nikons to sports IBIS (aka moderate) as they become less consistent with full IBIS + linked AF point in my (and others) experience.
Very good examples. Some time ago I was hired to take photos for an event and while folks were being interviewed I was told to stop taking photos because in mechanical shutter my XT1 was too loud, thank god I had the option so I switched it to E shutter.
As competition continues to increase heavily soon we will have both performance and quietness.
You're not talking travel use cases. Sony has dedicated travel camera options, Canon has not. Non travel purposes has nothing to do with it.The thing is, those old sensors are no real viable options for e shutter. I didn't use e shutter with the Zf or Z50 ii either. R8 / R6 ii is fast enough for some moving subjects, but even there you will get some wobbling when shooting bursts and fast objects like balls (wings, clubs, ..) will sometimes be distorted even more. R5 ii is better and mostly fine for even fast objects, I have rarely seen some distorted balls when shooting soccer and with the Z8 there where only a handful of shots where rolling shutter was somewhat visible. LED lighting is another topic though.
And of course I don't want to be that "clackclackclack" guy any more.
The DR hit on the R8 is btw not obvious if you do not have direct comparison. Was never an issue for me. Wouldn't use it for landscape though. I personally don't need IBIS either, but most people are convinced that they do, even if they can't explain why. IBIS has it's usefulness in niche scenarios but doesn't improve my action, event or people shots one bit. I even tone down those Nikons to sports IBIS (aka moderate) as they become less consistent with full IBIS + linked AF point in my (and others) experience.
--
R5 & RV
EF & FE
What will e-shutter options be with C50 sensor in R6iii?
I’ve been looking at reviews of this 24 1.8 lens and they say when you apply lens correction for that massive distortion it has, the image then gets cropped heavily. Why does it get cropped so much and is this a software thing that can be corrected later on, let’s say Lightroom, or is this a problem of the actual physical lens therefore I will always have to deal with that issue as long as I own that lens?The canon RF 24mm f/1.8 already exists. What do you complain about??? This costs around 500 USD if I’m not mistaken.But that’s not the “real question” I’m asking. My question is very simple, how long will this go on, not having the option of third party lenses at a more affordable cost. Heck, not necessarily third party lenses, but let’s include more affordable Canon lenses something like the 24 1.4 but more affordable, perhaps even a F2 version. I mean, is every single canon lens I want going to cost me $1600 +?
The Fujifilm 16mm 1.4 I had was one of THE best lenses I have ever used and it never let me down at every single event I did, and is less than $1k.
And that’s totally fine and I’m glad and I do see Canon has a lot more RF lenses and now I own one of the lenses I fell in love with some years ago the RF 70-200 F4, but again, that’s not the point here.
Again, more affordable third party options, again an example is a more affordable 24mm prime lens, even a F2 Canon version would be good enough for me for the type of low light photography I do.
Now, per other people’s responses maybe there is an EF version of a less expensive 24mm Canon lens to use with the AF adapter? I will continue doing more research but unfortunately I have to sleep now as I have to get up really early tomorrow so we’ll catch up.
Thank you everybody
Thanks
C50 is about 15ms in most video modes. Stills readout times are not yet know, they could be similar or potentially a little faster. We will have to wait and see.
If it is full 14bit (unlike R8, R6 II, which fall back to 12bit) with a similar speed of at least 15ms then it is fully useable outide of fast action. There you will see some deformed balls / bats / rotors / wings, but you will have a lot of keepers as well. It's a bit of statistical game. I would use e-shutter exclusively in that case and just throw away the outliers.
In short:
A) 15ms, 14bit (no dynamic range deficit) + higher sensor resoltion at the same time would be a win in my book.
B) Higher sensor res + 15ms readout + drop in DR (12bit) would be a bit disappointing, as this is too close to what we already have.
Z6 III has a very similar readout time with its "partially stacked" sensor at 14bit, but quite a bit of dynamic range drop at lower ISOs and only 24MP. So this sensor and R8/R6 II sensor have to be beaten. Sony is potentially doomed (;-)) if they use their old sensor again in the A7V.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum