Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
jonpais
jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout
6

I shared this with the Canon shooters, but these fellas shoot every conceivable type of video, from real estate, product photography, fitness, travel, corporate, weddings, interviews - you know, the kind of stuff we do to put food on the table when we're not shooting the next Netflix series. Parker Walbeck: "I wouldn't recommend the R5 as a viable professional video tool unless you only plan on needing it for 4K 24p and won't need 8K or 4K slow mo." "As for the a7s III, I think for the price, it's the best camera on the market and rivals the 1D X Mark III in most categories despite being half the price. So value is through the roof."

Two-thirds of their Full Time Filmmaker students couldn't tell which was which in a blind test.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS-1D X Sony a7S
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Currantos Senior Member • Posts: 1,256
Excellent
3

They covered all the points, no drama, highlighted different categories and explained everything in plain language. No hype.

GREAT video comparisons and helpful. Thanks for posting.

Pete_vB Regular Member • Posts: 184
Re: Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout
2

jonpais wrote:

Two-thirds of their Full Time Filmmaker students couldn't tell which was which in a blind test.

Good review and I think they do their best to be unbiased. I’m wondering about their conclusion re lens selection however, starting at 16:42 in the video.

“Canon has a wider lens selection, and having used Sony G-Master vs Canon RF and EF L-series we all like the Canon lenses better.” They go on to say that they have a big investment in canon glass towards the end.

I know I’m asking a biased audience but is that a widely held view? Is it specific to film-making? Put another way, specifically in the RF line in which focal lengths is the Canon considered superior?

A fast Sony prime lineup might be 24 1.4 GM, 35 Sigma 1.2, 50 1.4 Zeiss, 85 Sigma 1.4 DN, 135 1.8 GM, 400/ 600. In comparison I might put canon ahead at 50mm and possibly 85mm with their 1.2s, but I’d have thought Sony would be considered equal or likely ahead everywhere else? Or at least I wasn’t aware that adapted RF glass was equal to the E mount offerings at 24, 35 or 135mm.

With zooms I see a stronger argument with the 28-70 f2 and new 70-200 (both better than I believe Sony offers) but Sony counters with a wide selection, from high quality 100-400 and 200-600 offerings to the compact Tamron 70-180, sharp Sigma 24-70 2.8, etc. Sure Canon can adapt similar glass, but...

Bottom line do you guys agree Canon has a wider and better lens selection? For film making in particular perhaps? Or do you think that view’s perhaps dated?

 Pete_vB's gear list:Pete_vB's gear list
Sony a7R II Sony a9 Sony a7R IV Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar Sony 1.4x Teleconverter (2016) +9 more
verybiglebowski
verybiglebowski Veteran Member • Posts: 4,282
Re: Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout

Pete_vB wrote:

Good review and I think they do their best to be unbiased. I’m wondering about their conclusion re lens selection however, starting at 16:42 in the video.

“Canon has a wider lens selection, and having used Sony G-Master vs Canon RF and EF L-series we all like the Canon lenses better.” They go on to say that they have a big investment in canon glass towards the end.

I know I’m asking a biased audience but is that a widely held view? Is it specific to film-making? Put another way, specifically in the RF line in which focal lengths is the Canon considered superior?

A fast Sony prime lineup might be 24 1.4 GM, 35 Sigma 1.2, 50 1.4 Zeiss, 85 Sigma 1.4 DN, 135 1.8 GM, 400/ 600. In comparison I might put canon ahead at 50mm and possibly 85mm with their 1.2s, but I’d have thought Sony would be considered equal or likely ahead everywhere else? Or at least I wasn’t aware that adapted RF glass was equal to the E mount offerings at 24, 35 or 135mm.

With zooms I see a stronger argument with the 28-70 f2 and new 70-200 (both better than I believe Sony offers) but Sony counters with a wide selection, from high quality 100-400 and 200-600 offerings to the compact Tamron 70-180, sharp Sigma 24-70 2.8, etc. Sure Canon can adapt similar glass, but...

Bottom line do you guys agree Canon has a wider and better lens selection? For film making in particular perhaps? Or do you think that view’s perhaps dated?

Speaking of the lens selection solely, I don't think either platform has a problem. Since most of the professional video is done using manual focus, there are many more options via adapter behind the native line. For those who are using AF, both systems are offering plenty of good lenses.

It is important to take a different look at the lens "quality" when we speak about the video in general. Things like sharpness, field curvature, and some other aberrations are usually less important than weather sealing, rig compatibility, flaring, distortion, and color accuracy across the line.

In other words, apart from the direct compatibility between RF and E line, where Canon has few f/1.2 lenses and Sony - amazing Zeiss Loxia line (for the budget production) e-g- almost all other lenses are available for both systems.

For still photography, I don't see big disadvantages for any of the systems either. Sony has a great GM line of primes and zooms while Canon did an amazing job in bringing to the market so many great RF lenses in such a short period. Both lines will keep evolving also by the addition of the 3rd party lens makers. There will always be one model slightly better composed than its counterpart and vice versa, but the real-world differences in the IQ will be hardly meaningful.

Just my 2c

 verybiglebowski's gear list:verybiglebowski's gear list
Sony a7R Sony a7R II Sony a7R III Sony a7R IV Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4 +3 more
jonpais
OP jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
Re: Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout

Repeatedly bashing the a7s III in the Sony forums is a violation of the forum rules.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

cyberpi1 Regular Member • Posts: 405
Re: Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout
6

Did some calculations. BH prices.

Sony:

A7Siii - 614gr, 3500$

A7Riv - 665gr, 3200$

Tamron 70-180mm 2.8 - 810gr, 1200$

Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 - 835gr, 1100$

CanonR5 - 738gr 3900$

Canon RF 24-70mm 2.8 - 900gr 2200$

Canon RF 70-200mm 2.8 - 1070gr 2600$

Total Sony: 2924gr, 9000$
Total Canon: 2708gr, 8700$

Having two cameras is always better than having only one. For the same price and almost the same weight of R5 + 2 zooms you can have A7Siii+A7Riv and 2 zooms (and one is only 20mm shorter, but A7Riv has more mp to crop).

For me - there's no competition right now. Sony is an obvious choice.

 cyberpi1's gear list:cyberpi1's gear list
NEX-5T Pentax 645Z Sony a7R III Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake Pentax smc D FA 645 55mm F2.8 AL (IF) SDM AW +4 more
jonpais
OP jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
Re: Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout
1

cyberpi1 wrote:

Did some calculations. BH prices.

Sony:

A7Siii - 614gr, 3500$

A7Riv - 665gr, 3200$

Tamron 70-180mm 2.8 - 810gr, 1200$

Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 - 835gr, 1100$

CanonR5 - 738gr 3900$

Canon RF 24-70mm 2.8 - 900gr 2200$

Canon RF 70-200mm 2.8 - 1070gr 2600$

Total Sony: 2924gr, 9000$
Total Canon: 2708gr, 8700$

Having two cameras is always better than having only one. For the same price and almost the same weight of R5 + 2 zooms you can have A7Siii+A7Riv and 2 zooms (and one is only 20mm shorter, but A7Riv has more mp to crop).

For me - there's no competition right now. Sony is an obvious choice.

You read my mind. I just happened to do some calculations myself for Vietnam. The R5 goes anywhere from around $4,500 to $5,200 in Vietnam, while the a7s III looks like it will sell for the same amount as at B&H. Sony and Canon lenses can be found here for less than in the States, but Canon doesn't make lenses like the superb 20mm f/1.8 G ($907.000, purchased last week) or the 135mm f/1.8 (which I just bought new this afternoon, not grey market, for $1,620.00). And I plan on picking up the a7 IV whenever it's released as my second camera.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

kevindar
kevindar Veteran Member • Posts: 4,625
Nice review. clearly which is best is best on what you value most
1

I think they did a very nice job reviewing many aspects.  but your choice, in large part will depend on what you value.

Both did not like r5 b/c of over heating.  However the r5 had at 4k hq clearly the best image quality, and also the best stablizaiton if you are shooting hand held.  So, if the use of an external monitor solves the overheating issue of 4k uq,  for professional shoot it may be the best option for many.

At the same time, the sony had clearly the best high ISO performance.  so if your shooting darker venues with available light, its far and away the best option.  also it has teh best slow motion options again by far, which may be very important for your style of shooting.

Also they talk about cost of accessories, comparing a 70 dollar difference in cost of batteries, or a wireless microphone and giving points to that.  However, if you are say a wild life videographer, who wants AF, the cost and availability of  canon high end long glass, as well as 3rd party glass, makes a huge difference in cost of the rig.

A good review for sure, as it touched  up on many of the differences between cameras.  which is best for you depends on which of those categories you value most.

 kevindar's gear list:kevindar's gear list
Canon EF 85mm F1.2L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Sony a7R II Sony a6300 +25 more
Mr A7R4 Junior Member • Posts: 32
Are you going to buy one?
3

I asked the guys in my club that, and everyone said no. A7riv or iii would never think about it.

It ranks low for photography on the Sony list, probably last.

jonpais
OP jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
Re: Are you going to buy one?
1

Mr A7R4 wrote:

I asked the guys in my club that, and everyone said no. A7riv or iii would never think about it.

It ranks low for photography on the Sony list, probably last.

This thread is about the video functionality of the a7s III, not photography. I see you just posted in another thread putting down the a7s III. We get it already.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

Mr A7R4 Junior Member • Posts: 32
Are you going to buy one?

I’ll take that as a no to my question.

It’s a no for me too.  A7riv video is excellent and it is a better stills camera.

A9 has even better video than the A7riv and is one of these stills cameras.

jonpais
OP jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
Re: Are you going to buy one?

Mr A7R4 wrote:

I’ll take that as a no to my question.

It’s a no for me too. A7riv video is excellent and it is a better stills camera.

A9 has even better video than the A7riv and is one of these stills cameras.

The a9 shoots 8-bit 4:2:0, 100mbps, 4K 30p maximum, no 16-bit RAW, no S-log2, no Slog3, no 4K 120p, no HD 240p, no full HDMI out, no 13 stops dynamic range, it doesn't have the color science of the a7s III. If you'd like to PM me, that'd be okay rather than needlessly making this thread any longer than it needs to be.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

Barugon Veteran Member • Posts: 8,882
Re: Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout

jonpais wrote:

I shared this with the Canon shooters, but these fellas shoot every conceivable type of video, from real estate, product photography, fitness, travel, corporate, weddings, interviews - you know, the kind of stuff we do to put food on the table when we're not shooting the next Netflix series. Parker Walbeck: "I wouldn't recommend the R5 as a viable professional video tool unless you only plan on needing it for 4K 24p and won't need 8K or 4K slow mo." "As for the a7s III, I think for the price, it's the best camera on the market and rivals the 1D X Mark III in most categories despite being half the price. So value is through the roof."

Two-thirds of their Full Time Filmmaker students couldn't tell which was which in a blind test.

I don't see the Panaonic S1H or Sigma FP in there, so how can it be the "ultimate" video shootout?

jonpais
OP jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
The No.1 Selling a7s III

Looks like the uber-talented Mark Smith, who shoots with an a9, has already placed his order for the a7s III.

And many of YouTube’s most popular Sony shooters, like Peter Lindgren and Daniel Schiffer, who routinely shoot 1080 120p, will be picking up the a7s III.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

Mr A7R4 Junior Member • Posts: 32
No.1 Selling a7III
1

Are you buying an A7siii?

I have an A7riv. A much better camera. 5 times the resolution.

Crop 2x and it’s still better. The 200-600 is like a 400-1200mm lens with more resolution than the A7siii.

the A7iii will continue to be the most popular until the A7iv.

And the A9ii is best for sports and action. It’s double the A7siii resolution.

Sonys 3 best cameras, especially for stills: A7riv, A9ii, A7iii

The A7Riii should be in there too. So those are the 4 best Sony cameras for stills.

I can even edit my low light images with topaz AI then reduce them to 12MP and get more detail than the A7siii  could ever dream of.
did you know that if you crop an A7siii picture just a little, it won’t fill up a 4K screen? A 2x crop would only fill up a 3rd of the screen.
worst thing you could do is buy a 5k monitor and an A7siii.

jonpais
OP jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
Re: No.1 Selling a7s III
2

Mr A7R4 wrote:

Are you buying an A7siii?

I have an A7riv. A much better camera. 5 times the resolution.

Crop 2x and it’s still better. The 200-600 is like a 400-1200mm lens with more resolution than the A7siii.

the A7iii will continue to be the most popular until the A7iv.

And the A9ii is best for sports and action. It’s double the A7siii resolution.

Sonys 3 best cameras, especially for stills: A7riv, A9ii, A7iii

The A7Riii should be in there too. So those are the 4 best Sony cameras for stills.

I can even edit my low light images with topaz AI then reduce them to 12MP and get more detail than the A7siii could ever dream of.
did you know that if you crop an A7siii picture just a little, it won’t fill up a 4K screen? A 2x crop would only fill up a 3rd of the screen.
worst thing you could do is buy a 5k monitor and an A7siii.

It seems you are confused. This thread is about the video capabilities of the alpha seven s III, not about stills. The videos of Brandon Li , Armando Ferriera , Mediastorm and dozens of others look just fine on my 5K iMac, as will the thousands of others that will be uploaded to YouTube in the coming months. The $11,000 C300 Mark III has just 8.85 megapixels.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

SQLGuy Veteran Member • Posts: 9,489
Re: No.1 Selling a7III
3

Mr A7R4 wrote:

Are you buying an A7siii?

I have an A7riv. A much better camera. 5 times the resolution.

Actually, 2.3X the resolution.

Crop 2x and it’s still better. The 200-600 is like a 400-1200mm lens with more resolution than the A7siii.

How well does it do at ISO 16000, or 51000? Different speciality here. Sounds like it's not the kind of tool you need. Do you own a TIG welder? Do you need one? If you don't need one, does that mean that Gorilla Glue is better than a TIG welder?

the A7iii will continue to be the most popular until the A7iv.

Probably true.

And the A9ii is best for sports and action. It’s double the A7siii resolution.

No, it's 1.4X the A7SIII resolution. And, yes, it's best for sports. Not as good for low light, high DR, or video, though.

Sony's 3 best cameras, especially for stills: A7riv, A9ii, A7iii

And none of them as good as the A7SIII for video, low light, or high DR.

The A7Riii should be in there too. So those are the 4 best Sony cameras for stills.\

What's your point? This thread, and the related review, are not about stills.

I can even edit my low light images with topaz AI then reduce them to 12MP and get more detail than the A7siii could ever dream of.

I doubt it. Not in really low light.

did you know that if you crop an A7siii picture just a little, it won’t fill up a 4K screen? A 2x crop would only fill up a 3rd of the screen.
worst thing you could do is buy a 5k monitor and an A7siii.

-- hide signature --

A7R2 with SEL2470Z and a number of adapted lenses (Canon FD, Minolta AF, Canon EF, Leica, Nikon...); A7R converted to IR.

 SQLGuy's gear list:SQLGuy's gear list
Canon PowerShot G9 Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) Canon EOS-1D Canon EOS 5D Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro +24 more
jonpais
OP jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
Re: Are you going to buy one?
4

Mr A7R4 wrote:

I’ll take that as a no to my question.

It’s a no for me too. A7riv video is excellent and it is a better stills camera.

A9 has even better video than the A7riv and is one of these stills cameras.

You seem super knowledgeable. Do you have any videos you've shot that we can all learn from? Potato Jet, Armando Ferreira, Parker Walbeck and Philip Bloom are just influencers, right? It seems I've been stupidly following the advice of novices like Roger Deakins. Surely, you must have a website, YouTube channel or showreel? We're all eager to see them! I'll go first . Waiting impatiently for your reply.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

jonpais
OP jonpais Senior Member • Posts: 2,930
Re: Are you going to buy one?

8-bit unsightly purple banding in the sky.

-- hide signature --

an achievement unparalleled in human history
https://daejeonchronicles.com

kevindar
kevindar Veteran Member • Posts: 4,625
Re: Canon R5 vs Sony A7SIII vs 1dx Mark III - The Ultimate Video Shootout
2

cyberpi1 wrote:

Did some calculations. BH prices.

Sony:

A7Siii - 614gr, 3500$

A7Riv - 665gr, 3200$

Tamron 70-180mm 2.8 - 810gr, 1200$

Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 - 835gr, 1100$

CanonR5 - 738gr 3900$

Canon RF 24-70mm 2.8 - 900gr 2200$

Canon RF 70-200mm 2.8 - 1070gr 2600$

Total Sony: 2924gr, 9000$
Total Canon: 2708gr, 8700$

Having two cameras is always better than having only one. For the same price and almost the same weight of R5 + 2 zooms you can have A7Siii+A7Riv and 2 zooms (and one is only 20mm shorter, but A7Riv has more mp to crop).

For me - there's no competition right now. Sony is an obvious choice.

I think it becomes very tricky, once you try to compare equivalent lenses.  certainly the tamron 70-180 is not equivalent to canon rf 70-200.   You want to be fair about it, why dont you compare the sony 70-200 2.8 G and the the sony 24-70 2.8G?

You can also use the old canon EF mounts with adaptors like that excellent ef 24-70 2.8 or any of the 3rd party lenses.

 kevindar's gear list:kevindar's gear list
Canon EF 85mm F1.2L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Sony a7R II Sony a6300 +25 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads