Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
duncang Contributing Member • Posts: 516
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
2

pollup wrote:

Good choice, as good as the R5 is, the A1 is a superior camera in every way.

- R5 animal/bird subject detection and acquisition is faster than A1 in a number of situations

- no animal/bird eye af in video ?!

- IBIS better than A1

- A1 suffers more rolling shutter distortion in video mode

- R5 + 100-500 is sharper and has more contrast than A1+200-600

- R5 can record video with video settings simply by pressing record button

The 200-600 will let you take better photos than the 100-500 (I mean a higher percentage of great photos), but it's much larger and heavier. It's possible that Sony will release a "compact" 100-500 in the future. We will see.

travelinbri_74
travelinbri_74 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,519
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
2

duncang wrote:

pollup wrote:

Good choice, as good as the R5 is, the A1 is a superior camera in every way.

- R5 animal/bird subject detection and acquisition is faster than A1 in a number of situations

- no animal/bird eye af in video ?!

- IBIS better than A1

- A1 suffers more rolling shutter distortion in video mode

- R5 + 100-500 is sharper and has more contrast than A1+200-600

- R5 can record video with video settings simply by pressing record button

The 200-600 will let you take better photos than the 100-500 (I mean a higher percentage of great photos), but it's much larger and heavier. It's possible that Sony will release a "compact" 100-500 in the future. We will see.

Really? I hadn't read the R5 + 100-500 is sharper than the A1 + 200-600...

-- hide signature --
 travelinbri_74's gear list:travelinbri_74's gear list
Ricoh GR III Sony a7R III Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 Sony FE 24-105mm F4 Sony FE 20mm F1.8G +5 more
danny006 Senior Member • Posts: 1,413
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
5

duncang wrote:

- R5 + 100-500 is sharper and has more contrast than A1+200-600

The 200-600 is slightly sharper as you can see here . And with 1.4tc it is even sharper.

The Canon 100-500 is ridiculously expensive. Like that lens is something special but it isn't. And you lose 100mm and 1/3stop compared to the Sony.

 danny006's gear list:danny006's gear list
Sony a6400 Sony FE 200-600 F5.6-6.3 Sony 1.4x Teleconverter (2016) Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS
LarryRC Senior Member • Posts: 1,068
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500

danny006 wrote:

duncang wrote:

- R5 + 100-500 is sharper and has more contrast than A1+200-600

The 200-600 is slightly sharper as you can see here . And with 1.4tc it is even sharper.

The Canon 100-500 is ridiculously expensive. Like that lens is something special but it isn't. And you lose 100mm and 1/3stop compared to the Sony.

?

 LarryRC's gear list:LarryRC's gear list
Sony a7R IV Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 III Sony FE 12-24mm F4 Sony FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 Sony FE 600mm F4
duncang Contributing Member • Posts: 516
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500

danny006 wrote:

duncang wrote:

- R5 + 100-500 is sharper and has more contrast than A1+200-600

The 200-600 is slightly sharper as you can see here . And with 1.4tc it is even sharper.

If it looks sharper to you there that's great - it doesn't to me. In any event I was basing that comment on my experience of images taken in the field where some of the R5 combo images show more contrast/sharpness than the A1 combo ever seem to achieve.

Have not personally compared R5 images with the TC1.4 so can't comment, however I can't complain about the A1 combo.

Rather good back focus on that wing !?

The Canon 100-500 is ridiculously expensive. Like that lens is something special but it isn't. And you lose 100mm and 1/3stop compared to the Sony.

Agree - but I was just making the point that the A1 is not better in every way than the R5.

Personally either one will be fine for me - if Sony don't get around to fixing the lack of animal/bird af in video it will be "sayonara Sony" from me.

OP tevensen New Member • Posts: 17
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
3

I got my A1 some days ago and only done a few pics with it. And I am mighty impressed only after a few shots. I am not qualified to make any comments about the camera and how it performs, but compared to my old A9ii I belive the A1 is a superior camera by all means. There is a LOT to learn, and I am very happy I decided to stay Sony and keep the 200-600mm glass.

Djehuty Contributing Member • Posts: 516
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
2

duncang wrote:

danny006 wrote:

duncang wrote:

- R5 + 100-500 is sharper and has more contrast than A1+200-600

The 200-600 is slightly sharper as you can see here . And with 1.4tc it is even sharper.

If it looks sharper to you there that's great - it doesn't to me. In any event I was basing that comment on my experience of images taken in the field where some of the R5 combo images show more contrast/sharpness than the A1 combo ever seem to achieve.

Have not personally compared R5 images with the TC1.4 so can't comment, however I can't complain about the A1 combo.

Rather good back focus on that wing !?

The Canon 100-500 is ridiculously expensive. Like that lens is something special but it isn't. And you lose 100mm and 1/3stop compared to the Sony.

Agree - but I was just making the point that the A1 is not better in every way than the R5.

Personally either one will be fine for me - if Sony don't get around to fixing the lack of animal/bird af in video it will be "sayonara Sony" from me.

Then go with the R5 for video, we're not camera sales people.

duncang Contributing Member • Posts: 516
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
1

Djehuty wrote:

duncang wrote:

danny006 wrote:

duncang wrote:

- R5 + 100-500 is sharper and has more contrast than A1+200-600

The 200-600 is slightly sharper as you can see here . And with 1.4tc it is even sharper.

If it looks sharper to you there that's great - it doesn't to me. In any event I was basing that comment on my experience of images taken in the field where some of the R5 combo images show more contrast/sharpness than the A1 combo ever seem to achieve.

Have not personally compared R5 images with the TC1.4 so can't comment, however I can't complain about the A1 combo.

Rather good back focus on that wing !?

The Canon 100-500 is ridiculously expensive. Like that lens is something special but it isn't. And you lose 100mm and 1/3stop compared to the Sony.

Agree - but I was just making the point that the A1 is not better in every way than the R5.

Personally either one will be fine for me - if Sony don't get around to fixing the lack of animal/bird af in video it will be "sayonara Sony" from me.

Then go with the R5 for video, we're not camera sales people.

But on the other hand do I really want to give this up !?

Wicked sharp.

And this ONLY WITH SONY !

Or if I want to know how many head shakes per second a Welcome Swallow can do ONLY MY SONY can tell me...

Frame 1

Frame 2

Frame 3

OK then I guess it must be 30 shakes per second

See ya! :-).

And anyway who needs video when you can have so much fun with stills !!

daran
daran Contributing Member • Posts: 602
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500

duncang wrote:

Or if I want to know how many head shakes per second a Welcome Swallow can do ONLY MY SONY can tell me...

Frame 1

Frame 2

Frame 3

OK then I guess it must be 30 shakes per second

Could be 90...

 daran's gear list:daran's gear list
Sony a1 Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro Sony FE 200-600 F5.6-6.3 Sony FE 135mm F1.8 GM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +5 more
duncang Contributing Member • Posts: 516
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
2

daran wrote:

duncang wrote:

Or if I want to know how many head shakes per second a Welcome Swallow can do ONLY MY SONY can tell me...

Frame 1

Frame 2

Frame 3

OK then I guess it must be 30 shakes per second

Could be 90...

You're not watching the droplets closely enough 

(unknown member) Regular Member • Posts: 217
Excellent unbiased comparison video
1

You see a lot of bias on the topic. Tony Northrup got flamed by some when he said the R5 AF was better than the A1. But good number of reviewers now have said the same. Personally I shoot a lot of video, an there the AF gap really widens.  Sony left animal and bird focus off for video for some unknown reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5c8_7n0yI8

Jan goes does an excellent job here. I find it interesting the due to the focus breathing often there is much less of a difference between 500mm and 600mm, but the difference between 100mm and 200mm is large. IS on the combos also had a big gap between them.

Enjoy the video!

daran
daran Contributing Member • Posts: 602
Re: Excellent unbiased comparison video
2

MyDog Is Incharge wrote:

You see a lot of bias on the topic. Tony Northrup got flamed by some when he said the R5 AF was better than the A1. But good number of reviewers now have said the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5c8_7n0yI8

Jan goes does an excellent job here. I find it interesting the due to the focus breathing often there is much less of a difference between 500mm and 600mm, but the difference between 100mm and 200mm is large. IS on the combos also had a big gap between them.

He also rather obviously has much more experience with the Canon and none of his comparisons really regarded BIF.

 daran's gear list:daran's gear list
Sony a1 Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro Sony FE 200-600 F5.6-6.3 Sony FE 135mm F1.8 GM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +5 more
(unknown member) Regular Member • Posts: 217
Re: Excellent unbiased comparison video
1

daran wrote:

MyDog Is Incharge wrote:

You see a lot of bias on the topic. Tony Northrup got flamed by some when he said the R5 AF was better than the A1. But good number of reviewers now have said the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5c8_7n0yI8

Jan goes does an excellent job here. I find it interesting the due to the focus breathing often there is much less of a difference between 500mm and 600mm, but the difference between 100mm and 200mm is large. IS on the combos also had a big gap between them.

He also rather obviously has much more experience with the Canon and none of his comparisons really regarded BIF.

For my uses, the 2 big factors are, the slower acquisition time with the A1 and lack of eye AF during video for any bird or animal.   Video is important to me and any delay can mean a missed shot.

MILC man Senior Member • Posts: 4,756
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
1

duncang wrote:

- no animal/bird eye af in video ?!

the vast majority of camera owners do not need that functionality.

the much bigger problem is that the rf100-500 is not parfocal, which makes it a weak choice for shooting video, see the blurry crops here, and also the focus breathing at 500mm:

"While it can be an individual lens-specific attribute, the review lens does not exhibit parfocal-like behavior. Though it attempts to adjust the focus distance to be appropriate for the selected focal length, focusing at the long end and zooming to the wide end does not result in precise focus. If you adjust the focal length, re-establish focus as suggested by these 100% crops focused at 500mm."
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-100-500mm-F4.5-7.1-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx

the fe200-600 has better parfocal characteristics, which makes it better for shooting video, and for stills it's rated at 30fps af-c on the a1, while no none knows how canon lenses perform at 30fps.

"This lens(fe200-600) has focus breathing very nicely under control. Subjects in the frame go in and out of focus, but the framing remains quite consistent in appearance." Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS Lens Review (the-digital-picture.com)

Djehuty Contributing Member • Posts: 516
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500

MILC man wrote:

duncang wrote:

- no animal/bird eye af in video ?!

the vast majority of camera owners do not need that functionality.

the much bigger problem is that the rf100-500 is not parfocal, which makes it a weak choice for shooting video, see the blurry crops here, and also the focus breathing at 500mm:

"While it can be an individual lens-specific attribute, the review lens does not exhibit parfocal-like behavior. Though it attempts to adjust the focus distance to be appropriate for the selected focal length, focusing at the long end and zooming to the wide end does not result in precise focus. If you adjust the focal length, re-establish focus as suggested by these 100% crops focused at 500mm."
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-100-500mm-F4.5-7.1-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx

the fe200-600 has better parfocal characteristics, which makes it better for shooting video, and for stills it's rated at 30fps af-c on the a1, while no none knows how canon lenses perform at 30fps.

"This lens(fe200-600) has focus breathing very nicely under control. Subjects in the frame go in and out of focus, but the framing remains quite consistent in appearance." Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS Lens Review (the-digital-picture.com)

He said its for video, guess he wants BIF with DOF 8k short videos. Whatever that means.

daran
daran Contributing Member • Posts: 602
Re: Excellent unbiased comparison video

MyDog Is Incharge wrote:

daran wrote:

He also rather obviously has much more experience with the Canon and none of his comparisons really regarded BIF.

For my uses, the 2 big factors are, the slower acquisition time with the A1 and lack of eye AF during video for any bird or animal. Video is important to me and any delay can mean a missed shot.

Fair enough about the video. But what "slower acquisition time" are you talking about and in which application would that matter? For reference, recently I've been shooting swallows IF, so I am aware about actual limits of the A1. Which obviously vary a lot with my choice of glass.

 daran's gear list:daran's gear list
Sony a1 Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro Sony FE 200-600 F5.6-6.3 Sony FE 135mm F1.8 GM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +5 more
(unknown member) Regular Member • Posts: 217
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
3

MILC man wrote:

duncang wrote:

- no animal/bird eye af in video ?!

the vast majority of camera owners do not need that functionality.

Its my favorite feature. On the weekends we do dog coursing,

https://www.akc.org/sports/coursing/

Its great to have animal eye AF at 4K DCI 120FPS. Just one of the many uses.

Another thing not talked about much is how R5 eye AF works with many insects like butterflies.  I shoot those at 8K and 4K 120p too.

I realize people here will try to say negative things about these type of videos, but they are a blast to make and fun to watch.  And the whole point is to enjoy the camera you have.

duncang Contributing Member • Posts: 516
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
3

MILC man wrote:

duncang wrote:

- no animal/bird eye af in video ?!

the vast majority of camera owners do not need that functionality.

the much bigger problem is that the rf100-500 is not parfocal, which makes it a weak choice for shooting video, see the blurry crops here, and also the focus breathing at 500mm:

"While it can be an individual lens-specific attribute, the review lens does not exhibit parfocal-like behavior. Though it attempts to adjust the focus distance to be appropriate for the selected focal length, focusing at the long end and zooming to the wide end does not result in precise focus. If you adjust the focal length, re-establish focus as suggested by these 100% crops focused at 500mm."
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-100-500mm-F4.5-7.1-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx

the fe200-600 has better parfocal characteristics, which makes it better for shooting video, and for stills it's rated at 30fps af-c on the a1, while no none knows how canon lenses perform at 30fps.

"This lens(fe200-600) has focus breathing very nicely under control. Subjects in the frame go in and out of focus, but the framing remains quite consistent in appearance." Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS Lens Review (the-digital-picture.com)

So they make a $6k top of the line camera that does 8K video, they make 600f4 prime and 200-600 wildlife lens that apparently is better for video and leave the decent video stabilisation and animal af tracking functionality out.

MILC man Senior Member • Posts: 4,756
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
1

Djehuty wrote:

He said its for video, guess he wants BIF with DOF 8k short videos. Whatever that means.

i don't understand it either... 500mm is too short for bif, f/7.1 is too slow, it's not parfocal so there will be autofocus hunting with video, and oh btw why put it on an r5 that has serious overheating issues with video?

SafariBob
SafariBob Senior Member • Posts: 2,547
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500

thomeven wrote:

This is most likely asked before, but I have to decide within a few days which combo to go for.. The money is about equal, since the A1 is more expensive than Canon R5. Today I have the A9ii with the 200-600mm. I am going more into bird photography and both combinations is excellent for BIF, but they are also somewhat different.. I have been a long time Sony shooter, but also owned Canon gear some years ago.

Does anyone have some facts to consider helping med to decide.. I would probably be happy with both combos, and AF, eye AF and IQ is probably the most important for me. Something tells me to stay Sony, but I am not sure..

for bird/bif, there is no contest, the Sony combo is superior, for a landscape & wildlife hiker (me), it’s a tougher call, but given the 1 stop advantage of the Sony and the tamron 28200, I am still going to call it a slight Sony advantage. It’s a  pity Sony doesn’t have a more competitively priced 8k body.

 SafariBob's gear list:SafariBob's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony a7R II Sony a7R IV Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +3 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads