BTW, RD, have fun with your new 12MP Sony release! No IBIS, and you need to buy an external recorder and gimbal to get the most out of it...and it even uses a new type of memory card that you can't even buy yet! The fun of it all...

Rubber already said he has not interest. He's just trolling as usual.

He is upset that the 2 Canon's are getting rave reviews and the A7SIII looks like a 12mp dud.

Btw,. A few Sony guys say the animal eye AF videos and said they hope someday Sony has something that good.
And it was fun to see more reviews say Canon's have the best tracking during video. Maybe now during stills too! 😀

TRU it is funny that Sony is using a crippled version of that memory card. It has only 1/2 the speed of the one the R5 uses.

@Thoughts R Us

Yep. 10 days after 'launch' the only full-size images of the new 45MB sensor anywhere on the web are from Canon. And you've been linking them.

Every single thing about that stinks.

@Happy Dad

//Rubber already said he has not interest. He's just trolling as usual.//

Yeah, whatever. Criticised by an astroturfer who can barely write English.

Canon is vertically integrated, meaning they do everything themselves.

they obviously don’t do everything in-house, evfs are most likely Sonys their compact sensors are Sonys too.
there apsc and ff Sensors are imho in-house, but designed by is definitely a hint that’s not necessarily built by canon...

@Lookinto....
Oh I thought that Canon made the EVF for Sony.....?

Looking inside would reveal that most cameras including Canon have parts made by other manufacturers. Like Panasonic or Sony that make just about everything, including the main board or viewfinders.

If you look at DSLR teardowns you would see this.

Canon typically make their own sensors - particularly for higher end products. They will buy in sensors for certain more mass market (if that still exists) products. This is a Canon designed and manufactured sensor.

so, where do you read that the sensor is manufactured by Canon?

Wurlitzer?

The big picture...pardon the pun...is that it is a wonderful camera that takes wonderful images. Most anyone would be happy to own one.

Sometimes we get so spoiled that we forget that to most of the people out there, it is a tremendous luxury to own such a camera.

@Happy Dad:

Why are you comparing R6 to extremely high resolution cameras? If you compare it to α7iii, the difference would be much more pronounced. (Although MUCH smaller than with older Canon sensors.)

Moreover, the fixed noise is twice worse than for α7iii. It is still not going to be visible without post-processing, but it has only 0.5stop headway w.r.t. manipulation of contrast.
 https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PTC.htm

@Thoughts R Us

That is exactly the point. It takes wonderful images ....as do the other brands. Nothing stands out to switch and why would you in these days (especially as a professional)

@happy - I think something is making you extra happy. Who are you talking to?

@Happy Dad

//In case anyone is wondering, the R6 sensor (virtually the same as the 1Dx3) is equal to all the other top FF sensors these days.//

No, it isn't. The sensor in the R6 (assuming it has the same DR, resolution and noise profile as the 1DXIII's sensor) is the worst in it's class, below the A7III, z6 and S1.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos1dxiii&attr13_1=sony_a7iii&attr13_2=nikon_z6&attr13_3=panasonic_dcs1&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=100&attr126_3=1&normalization=full&widget=745&x=-0.6344298005794067&y=0.30092894307119566

@happy - Not sure what you're all giddy about. You need to examine the details a bit more. I don't know for sure it's the same sensor, but good chance it is. Better than? Equal to? In what area? Base? High ISO? What do you mean "only thing better"? You're comparing a 20Mp sensor to a 100Mp sensor? Those are broad statements that can't be supported.

Fact is, Canon have just only now been anywhere close, so catching up after all this time.

And when it's almost as good as a 45Mp sensor from Nikon, why is this a reason to get all giddy?

@Happy - You're such a baiter. Who were you before you became happy fairy daddy? This is all too familiar.

@Happy Dad: > “Ilxa, that not a reliable chart,”

A) I did not mention the chart at all. See the summary data on top.
B) All the charts on this site are based on the same data.
C) There is no “x” in my handle.

> “The R6 sensor readout speed is 6 times faster than the A7R4 and 4 times faster than the A73”.

BS. α7iii read the sensor in the compressed-raw mode in 1/28 sec. 1DxIII in 1/60 sec. (I suspect that your data for α7rIV is similarly flawed.)

And: who (but you!) called Bill a liar?!

@happy - quit pitting people against Bill. We know you’re a troll from way back who keeps getting respawned.

@Giddy Dad - you mistake me as someone who cares about brand wars or your so called facts. Nothing is more pathetic than tossing specs back and forth like tomatoes. Especially when you can't even read them and pick the (subjectively gathered) ones you want. Aren't you going to start whining about DXO anti-Canon bias?

I laugh at you and your fan baiting posts. It's just like a Canon fan to start crowing when a single sensor comes out that has decent specs. (And before we've actually confirmed it's the same sensor as another.)

Never mind that there is a whole industry to catch up with. Don't worry about that bud. I'll buy what I want while you remain glued to one brand. Where were you when they made the huge misstep with the first mirrorless? Did you wallow in your tears and cast a mea culpa into the forums?

Again, we all know you're an old troubler from way back. How about listing out all your banished names? That would be a more fun exercise.

@flappy - you know who you are. Tell us the truth about your troll history. It's funny how you keep coming back under different dumb names. Clearly you're not trying to hide.

And just so everyone out there knows - you LOVE to go to Sony articles and attack Sony. So who's the shill now? Did you really call someone else a fan boy? Funny how you crawl out of the woodwork just now. You can't be happy just admiring all the technology, you have to harass others about it. Pathetic.

Here you are:

An article about Sony - Sony fans comments = 100; Paranoid drama pursuers @Happy dad, @Thoughts R Us and @Sarman comments= 500

And for the record - my next full frame camera just might be a Canon...except that I'm not sure I want to associate with anything you push.

I'm not sure I trust P2P measurements. They give the 5DS and 5DMKiv almost identical ratings for low light ISO. I own both of these cameras and can say categorically that the difference between them in this regard is about 1 stop.

IMO, by far the most reliable guide to sensor performance is the dpr studio comparison scene, which shows up every aspect of performance, including noise and moire, both of which I consider more relevant than minor differences in resolution.

Photo 2 Photos is the more trusted and transparent site for comparing. Bill Claff posts here and explains his findings. They are peer reviewed by others too.
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%201D%20X%20Mark%20III,FujiFilm%20GFX%20100,FujiFilm%20GFX%20100(FF),Nikon%20D780,Sony%20ILCE-7RM4,Sony%20ILCE-7SM2

DxO is not transparent and even admits to arbitrary testing. They are the site trolls quote most. And probably the least reliable is the studio test scene. It is nice, but again mostly just food for trolls. You can cherry pick all day.

Happy Dad - I'd rather trust my own eyes than trust "measurements", whether they come from P2P, DxO or anyone else. I check all of these resources, but for me, a visual resource is better than a numerical one.

Sure test with different lenses with different t-stops, with different settings, and at different times.
The cherry pick the parts of the scene and ISO where you favorite camera looks best.

That's very common.

Happy dad - I don't suffer from "Brand Fanaticism Disorder", so "cherry picking" bits of the scene to make one camera look better than another would be a pointless exercise.

The whole object, for me, of using the studio comparison scene, is to see which camera/sensor offers the best performance in the areas that most concern me, which happen to be high ISO noise, and moire, both of which are particularly relevant for my own genres of photography (more relevant for me than DR or minor differences in resolution).

If others choose to cherry pick to bolster a sense of false superiority about their chosen brand, that's their issue, but don't assume we are all fanboyz.

dpr tries hard to carry out studio tests with a level playing field, and I'd rather trust this method than go down the measurebating pathway.

Even so, the comparisons in the studio scenes are not as accurate due to different lenses with different t-stops, etc.
Little things like a soft lens can hide noise, etc.

Happy Dad - I think dpr tries to minimise such potential inaccuracies by using the same lenses on different bodies. If I recall correctly, they generally use the Sigma 70mm via adaptors.

Justify it how you want. Actual measurements are always more accurate. Sorry.

Measurements are fine for people more interested in specs and techs. I'm more interested in photographs. If you prefer the numbers game, that's fine, and we'll both be happy with our choices.

"Little things like a soft lens can hide noise"
Absolutely...not ! The noise is created by the sensor and the lens is not on the sensor output path...So a soft lens cannot blur a noisy pixel...

“DR tells us shadow noise which says a lot about low light performance.”

No, it really doesn’t. It tells you how much range there is between saturation and the noise floor (read noise for engineering DR, usable shadows for PDR). That means that you can have higher DR just by having a higher saturation point, even though it does nothing for your shadows (unless the limiting factor for your exposure was not wanting to blow your highlights).

These are the relevant sources of noise in low light:
- read noise (usually decreases at high ISO settings)
- dark-signal non-uniformity
- dark current shot noise (mostly relevant for long exposure times, increases with temperature as well)
- photon shot noise (light itself is intrinsically noisy, with a standard deviation equal to the square root of the average photon count).

You can find the first two on PhotonsToPhotos.net, but *not* in the PDR chart.

Dark current shot noise is perhaps trickier to measure, but doesn’t matter much for exposures shorter than a few seconds or so.

Lastly, to know the impact of photon shot noise, you need to know the proportion of photons that release electrons in the sensor, i.e. quantum efficiency. You cannot measure that without knowing the absolute light level, which DxOMark knows but PhotonsToPhotos doesn’t.

@Happy Dad you wrote, “ And probably the least reliable is the studio test scene”. Can you provide any evidence for it? Otherwise it’s your opinion and not a fact. Can you point out which DXO sensor test was wrong? DXO is also been “peer-reviewed” and the measurements were similar.

Please stop with the cherry picking. If DXO said the Canon camera is great you would be quoting it like crazy.

Guys - fairy daddy is nothing more than a giddy baiter. Who do you think he was before he joined a couple of weeks ago? I think we’ve met this baiter before.

For people looking to make the switch to ff milc the Z6 or A7 III seems a much nicer option economical wise.

Z6 and a7iii have both been out for a while and are selling at good prices. The R6 isn't even in the stores yet.

Canon always launches its products at inflated prices, and they sell like hot cakes to early adopters. Then after milking that market they drop the price for everyone else. It's good business practice, and one of the reasons why Canon is so successful.

Like most things, if you are desperate to be first on the block with the latest gear, you pay a premium.

Otto k - Oh really!

To bad the RP doesn't attract people into a system. Just like the old (but still sold new) A7 or A7 II.

The Canon 24-105 RF STM is not being extraordinary, as the the "L" Version, and this way not being recommanded.

See respected YouTuber, Christopher Frost Review
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx9fDx77vgg

It is futherway being somewhat absurd, to pay >2700 EUR for a Canon R6 DSLM, but so little for a just average, cheapskate Zoom, which this 24-105 STM RF truly is. Nothing bad meant, but if one does spent >2500 EUR for a FF Body, one does want extraordinary, matching Lenses, not something average, or below average...because if so, there's virtually no need to upgrade to a whole new System, what the RF Mount truly is. . ;)

In fact: The EF 24-105 L vs 24-105 STM are much more close in IQ, than this 24-105 STM vs the 24-105 L RF Mount Lens. Into Contrast, the EF 24-105 STM is F5.6 @105mm, the RF F7.1. ;)

This RF 24-105 STM should being paired with the EOS RP, only. I'd prefer the X-T3/4 with the 18-55 anytime over a EOS RP/R6 with RF 24-105 STM. No offense. Peace.

Good Light.

Yes, there is a digital sameness to cameras now. It seems that the long-awaited goal of achieving electronic perfection has mostly arrived. Fortunately some recall and others now see this reality, so much so that even DPR must acknowledge it with its articles and forums for film.

Simple use vintage glass I can't stand modern lenses with bad bokeh and sterlie looks ;-D

Ha! Good point. Remember back in the day when Canon was using CMOS, Nikon CCD, JPEG engines were wildly different, and all sorts of other quirks. It is a good thing, but the anticipation of big steps forward is pretty much gone.

There is a photo shot at ISO6400 too. These are not for technical review. Those come later.

eos r and rp were a major let down in jpeg colors but looks like canon has finally resolved it with r5 and r6.

Don’t know what you are talking about the R and RP are praised for JPEG colors. I have the RP and it’s some of the best Canon color to date.

Are you saying ugly looking camera or pictures? If the latter what do you dislike so much as they look great to me.

What kind of things did you have in mind?

Different colours?
Change the grip so it doesn't get obscured by the hand?
Move all the controls onto the front where they can be seen (and make them shiny too)?

What specifically would make it appealing to carry?

@Zinch
I think he means the design of the R6 is ugly and not the photos.

I find the design of the EOS R series to be the best of all mirrorless cameras to really hold and use. For me it has the best overall grip and weight balance.

The controls on the R5/R6 will be very similar to the controls on the 5D series, which is fantastic. The joystick and the quick control dial are two major UI features that are very practical and welcome.

On the contrary, I think the R5 and R6 are very good-looking cameras. The R was something of an ugly duckling, but the new bodies bring back just enough of the famous Canon curves. And the ergonomics, of course, are exceptional. Retaining the touch and feel that Canon is known for is obviously a critical part of the equation to any pro who considers switching to mirrorless. A tool that feels foreign is a tool you don't want to use.

For me, the best MILCs in terms of both styling and ergonomics are the R5, R6 and the Panasonic S1 series.

And as Sharlin rightly points out, familiarity to Canon DSLRs is vital to many people, who do not want to relearn muscle memory and go through an adaptation phase. We want an easy transition and familiar controls. What we don't want is to miss important shots while we are learning an unfamiliar control system.

"Still resembles the DSLRs" - this is the best compliment one can make to a camera body! Nothing beats a DSLR in terms of comfort. And Canon, obviously, know that!
Do you really want it to be like the Sony's, or the Fuji's: an edgy artsy-fartsy glorified Lego piece, which doesn't even look appealing, let alone comfortable in the hand!

reminds me of people who prefer the overpriced Beats or Bose headphones over way less expensive and better sounding headphones, like Sennheiser or Beyerdynamic. Because they say Beats look cooler and because of Dr. Dre.