DPReview TV: Sony a7 III vs. Canon EOS R vs. Nikon Z6 2020 rematch!

No contest.

uh, I wasnt aware the 1Dx3 had so slow sensor readout. Hope they improve that so rolling shutter on R5 improves comparred to 1Dx3.

It will likely be slower because the resolution is likely double.

There are also some tracking AF-test videos, where the 1dxm3 is very good but not quite up to the A9II ... smaller is better!

Don't know how a discussion on entry level FF MILC led to a discussion on high end flagship sports/wildlife cameras...but hey...

There's no doubt that the stacked sensor in the a9/a9II is something really special and enables some really neat tricks. I describe the AF in the a9/a9II as being "magnetic" in that it almost cannot miss.

That being said, the 1DXIII comes close enough that for almost all real world situations, you will not notice a difference. The pro's who used the 1DXIII at the Super Bowl, for instance, were not complaining.

The 1DXIII also offers its own advantages: far superior video capabilities, far superior battery, far superior buffer, far superior build quality in that it's built like a tank.

And I will say that in the videos with AF test tracking, I did prefer the Canon colors again! That is important for sports shooters because at high profile events you are instantly uploading and those photos are going out to the world with no time for post processing.

I'll bet the A9II takes more beating and will last longer than the huge flapping mirror and jelly effect machine ... :-)

The fact that ethan is even comparing a mirroless camera with a DSLR is an amazing accomplishment period. Canon design this camera as a tank, weather proof and for people who are going to be in the wilderness for several days and need something they can rely on and not a device made in Thailand like the A9ii. Ever wonder why Sony's professional equipment is NEVER made in Thailand. I arrest my case.

@ Magnar - now that’s what I call baiting 😋

@Magnar: We all know that the 1DXIII will hold up better under severe environmental conditions than the a9II. The fact that one is a dslr and one a mirrorless has no impact.

Drop both cameras on the ground...which would you bet on to survive? Take the both in severe environments...rain forest with rain and humidity, desert with sand blowing, drop in mud a few times, maybe have bang up against a tree while climbing to a bluff, severe cold and snow...or how about just sports journalism...running down the sideline, having two cameras bang up against each other, maybe a fast and heavy player run into you.

There was a video Canon put out showing a pro using the 1DXIII photographing surfers...obviously exposing the camera to a lot of water, heat, etc...no problem.

Which would you bet on? Well, the pro's choose Canon overwhelmingly. There is a reason why so few pro's use the a9II in spite of its marvelous AF. They don't trust it to come through for them in tough situations.

The bait worked 👍

@sillen :)

You don’t miss shots “while the buffer is clearing.” You can miss shots if the buffer is full. When the camera has written 20 shots, you can take 20 more with the same performance as when the buffer is empty.

The issue is that with Sony cameras if you fire off a series of shots and then need to make a quick change in the menu, you cannot make any menu changes until the buffer has finished clearing and all images written to the card.

That can be very inconvenient in certain situations. and may result in some missed shots or shots.

For a properly setup camera menu operations are VERY rare. Most stuff is put on the quick-access function menu which is available while the buffer is clearing. The camera is so customizable that it’s rare that some function you would need isn’t available on a button you programmed or in one of those 12 fn menu spots.

This is the reality.

Thoughts R Us: Such long series that the buffer is filled, is cslled video, which both cameras can do well enough to cover some news events if jelly effect is not a concern. And yes, the A9II will outlast the 1DxIII, since it is almost solid state construction. Less mass = less internal damage after hard hits.

@Thoughts R Us

//far superior battery//

Actually the battery life of the 1DXIII is only better than the A9/II when shooting through the viewfinder.

When you use live view (which you need to get the 20fps and full AF coverage) the battery life is worse according to CIPA. 610 for the Canon compared to 650 for the Sony.

The Canon battery (EP19) is also more than double the weight of the Sony battery and can't be charged over USB.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-1-d-x-iii-review
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a9-full-review/13

Magnar: 1dxIII is so superior to a9 that it’s shocking to suggest otherwise. Canon can do 5.5k RAW video internal, 4k60, 10 bit, etc. Sony is stuck on 8 bit video which is like being able to shoot only jpeg.

RubberDials: guess what? Most users of 1dxIII prefer to use the OVF.

Magnar, you write " Less mass = less internal damage after hard hits."

So I guess by your estimation, a small car with a thin fiberglass shell is more durable than an M1 Abrams tank.

Come on, everyone knows the Sony bodies are flimsy. That's why pro's don't trust them.

Bait successful 😂😂😂😂 look at these guys trying to defend the camera thats $2000 more.

Jist wait til that R5 jelly machine comes out.

We don't have to defend a camera that is still consistently sold out and that will be used by far more working pro's than the Sony.

Sony doesn't have a true pro body in their lineup because they all lack the build quality.

Thoughts R Us: Close to solid state construction should be much more durable than a camera with a complex mirror box, an autofocus module that is so much off that every lens need to be calibrated, a coarse ground glass which goes dark early in the afternoon and that can be pushed out of alignment, and a heavy glass prism on top. Remove all this, replace the fragile mechanical shutter with electronic shutter, and then you can start talking about "durable" and "built like a tank" ... simply, skip the noisy mirror that obscures the view between each frame, and also replace that lack-of-high-tech jelly effect sensor. Then you get a modern professional cameras. :-)

@Thought R Us

Honestly you could give Donald Trump a run for his money. You seem to think if you believe something it becomes true.

//a small car with a thin fiberglass shell is more durable than an M1 Abrams tank.//

The A9II and the 1DXIII are both made from the SAME material - injection moulded magnesium alloy. Why are you talking about a fibreglass car and a tank?

The IDXIII also contains two mirrors and a separate focussing module that have to be in exact alignment. I'm sure the Canon is very difficult to damage if it gets knocked but it stands to reason that it is innately more fragile than the A9/II, which has no secondary viewing or focussing systems that have to be aligned.

//everyone knows the Sony bodies are flimsy. That's why pro's don't trust them.//

No, everyone doesn't know this - You just made it up. Where is this collective statement from pros that they don't trust Sony bodies?

Contd.

//a camera that is still consistently sold out and that will be used by far more working pro's than the Sony.//

I hate to break it to you but Canon has invested the 1DXIII with cinema video features for a reason. Pro sports cameras do not sell in large numbers. Canon has changed their mount and the 1DXIII is a harder sell than usual this time around. Why would any working pro put down £7K on a DSLR that offers him 2fps improvement over the MKII (already a very capable camera) when he knows that he is shortly going to have to upgrade to the RF system, at huge expense? More Mark IIIs will sell to film makers than sports shooters and Canon is well aware of this.

And the Mark II didn't outsell the A9 either. Take a look at the usage on DPR:
308 people own the Mark II and 62 people had it.

The A9 which has been on the market for a year less:
481 own it and 81 had it.

And there are many more Canon users on here than Sony users.

@Thoughts R Us

//There was a video Canon put out showing a pro using the 1DXIII photographing surfers...obviously exposing the camera to a lot of water, heat, etc...no problem.//

I know there was a video, you linked to it four times in the same thread.

You realise that the Canon camera was in an underwater housing, don't you?

Here's article by Fstoppers as to why the A9ii was a disappointment.
Key issues were CFexpress cards and weather sealing.
So please Sony fanboys go back to playing with your PS4 Playstations and don't worry at least Sony will have the PS5 later this year... ; )

David so many of us have used the A9 in the rain with no problem and have no trouble with buffering via SD cards. So if those are the two reasons, then the A9 is perfectly suited for many many people..

Oh and who are you calling fan-boy? Look in the mirror... your whining comment about PlayStation makes you look like a child who feels threatened.

@ David Ramos:

Have you tested, or do you have links to the A9 and A9II weather sealing? Or is this just an assumption by Fstopper, and by you?

And what is wrong with SD cards that are fast enough to handle high frame rate and video capture?

Well, I should not have answered one that need to name others fanboys ... what people do when they lack factual arguments.

So please go enjoy your A9 and stop comparing it Canon.
I mean if your A9 is so great and your having so much fun with it, why would you waste your time talking about inferior cameras...
So please keep replying so as to show you'd rather talk about your camera than use it. (Let me guess the menus suck)

@ David Ramos: Not comparing cameras? On a gear site? Populated with geeks? Taking away so much fun? You must be joking! :-)

@David Ramos

//Key issues were CFexpress cards and weather sealing.//

The FStoppers article is a short opinion piece worked up from a press release, not a test, but you misrepresent it anyway. They don't knock the weather sealing at all, they actually just point out that Sony says it's been improved. He does complain that the camera hasn't had an increase in resolution to 30mp or in the EVF, revealing that he doesn't understand the market for the camera or the technology underlining it. CFExpress cards are not needed in any stills camera - they were designed for video. Wait till DPR publishes their A9II test - you'll see how good the camera is. Here's the link you forgot to include:

https://fstoppers.com/originals/sony-a9-ii-massive-disappointment-414320

//So please Sony fanboys go back to playing with your PS4 Playstations //

Canon makes more money from sales of office equipment than cameras but we don't talk about the 'photocopier company' because we're not stupid and petty.

YES, Rubber dial please keep talking about your Sony camera and pretend that it's not gathering dust... Please keep comparing it with other Cameras so that you'll never pick it up, or take it out of the camera bag and be reminded why you really rather be talking about other cameras. LOL
Would you like to know why my Canon camera never goes into my camera bag?
That's because i'm always using it. Over 100,000 thousand shots... When will you say that? Yeah let me guess NEVER...

@MikeRan

Indeed. He even managed to top his Playstation remark for irrelevance.

I edited my comment deciding instead not to engage with that character. Instead I reported the comment. Dude is crazy.

Rubberdial you almost have 5000 comments on DPReview...
Do you even have time for anything else?? Do you ever even wonder why you’d rather talk about your camera than to use it?
It’s kind of sad.

Of course, this needs a separate discussion (might go looking), but it does raise an interesting point about the R5:
If there is a rolling shutter problem with video, I won't be too fussed as I don't do a lot of video, or at least none to the standards where rolling shutter makes or breaks the footage.
However, as a stills photographer, it is going to be annoying to see the R5 priced out of my reach because of some very impressive video specs, that MAY not live up to expectation, for those that rely on them. Too soon to know...

Thats the big issue, and you will be forced to wait for a lesser model, that doesnt do everything the R5 does, features you actually wanted.

@EthanP99, Peak Freak

Canon appears to be targeting the cinema crowd with their latest cameras. This fact seems to have passed a lot of users by for some reason.

8K and RAW video are not hybrid videographer or youtuber features, they far outstrip the needs and resources of even most amateur film-makers. And they are certainly not the 'next big thing' in consumer video. RAW video and 8K will likely never enter mainstream use - they are CINEMA specifications. Canon has clearly decided to shift more of their focus to this market, which is wealthy, to make up for the lost sales in the stills arena.

This will have an obvious effect on their milc range. The cameras aren't going to be cheap. Their probably won't be too many cheap lenses either. Canon is a tough competitor, but I think they will accept some long-tern loss of their stills base in making this sideways move. Whether Canon stills shooters will accept it is another matter.

@Peak freak

Canon likes to go its own way. It is the last manufacturer to add IBIS and I don't think they would have made the R5 45mp if it wasn't for the 8K spec (assuming it is 45mp). This is amazingly the first prosumer camera they've made without a fixed rear screen!

That said I can't see how it would disappoint prospective purchasers, there isn't really anywhere they can fail.

I think a few people might find the body too small, and a few people might dislike the top plate controls (that would put me off). I do think it will be expensive though, but that isn't going to be because of the 8K spec. Mirrorless cameras are video cameras essentially, so video features come for free.

It is better. Still not everywhere unlike SD and that memory does not fit into my system either. If Nikon introduced a battery grip with SD ability I would change my mind. Biggest bust for the Z6, uncommon memory. Otherwise Z6 is my choice.

You realize that Canon is going XQD or better said they are going CFEXPRESS which is the same form factor as XQD, it’s kinda like how SD cards have UHSI and UHSII SD cards.
In fact Nikon cameras use both.

I personally appreciate the doses of humor and personality, and find these videos by Chris and Jordan to be very well done and engaging.

It would be even better if DPR can use voice-to-text to generate a transcript for its videos.

It is not difficult and helps people who need to read instead of watch.

My point is that we still publish the reviews you were saying you wanted, and more, even if you chose to ignore the videos we publish.

Our written comparison article doesn't compare the cameras by feature, so there's no point at which it puts 'Nikon's AF second.'

We work pretty closely with Chris and Jordan to make sure what we write reflects as much of our collected experience as possible, and vice versa. But obviously Chris and Jordan don't just read out our reviews.

Actually, I like the fact that Chris and Jordan, gives their opinions off the testing charts and studios. This way I could both read and watch two different contents and make my mind, according to the need.
Most of my cameras, that I bought recently, were bought without seeing the final score or wordict, so it doesn't matter who is rating what feature slightly higher.
Also with the passage of time, these features improves with firmware updates. So really not much point to follow it too obsessively.

Sounds like someone’s a little jealous of Chris’ hair.
I know I am. 😏

The post below is an example.
Which means your post is nonsense.

If you search for Canon colors on a Sony of course you can find bits. But I really don’t think this is a big deal. I see many people perfectly happy with their Sony colors. It’s a preference thing.

If the Sony colors bother you buy something else.

Mike, I agree, all those Sony owners asking about colors would be better off buying something else.

Actually it’s not the Sony owners. It’s the non Sony whiners. And yes. They should buy something else.

So you don’t mind all the threads and discussions started by Sony owners complaining about Sony colors and wishing for Canon colors, you don’t like anyone else to mention it,
Is that what you are whining about?

This is a very common comment in the Sony forum (a real quote) “ I think most can agree certain brands are a bit better to work with.”
And while most agree, a vocal minority always attack those posters and whine about them.

Thy neighbor’s grass..

@Raynaud

//So you don’t mind all the threads and discussions started by Sony owners complaining about Sony colors and wishing for Canon colors.//

Many of these people are not Sony users they are users of other brands like yourself posing as Sony users.

//Wishing it had better video like the Canon and Nikon//

The EOS R doesn't have better video than the A7III. The A7III 4K is downsampled from 6K. The R video is a 1.8 crop from the centre of the sensor. From the DPR EOS R review:

"Although the big story on the EOS R is usable autofocus while shooting 4K, we must note that the camera's 4K capture is fairly soft. In full-frame shooting, Nikon's Z7 isn't much better, showing plenty of stair-stepping artifacts, but switching that camera into its APS-C mode improves things quite a bit. But the EOS R simply can't match the level of detail that the Sony a7 III and Fujifilm X-T3 exhibit, both of which capture oversampled footage before downsizing to 4K output."

@Rubberdials
Are you confused or purposefully misleading.
The quote you referred to is on the Z7 NOT the Z6 which was the camera that was compared to in this review.
The Z6 outperformed and was given the top billing in this review against the A7III, so please do not try to convolute the conversation by bringing in cameras not in question.

I think the different between Sony color and Canon color is getting less. I watched a side by side comparison review between A6600 and M6 Mark II. The different is very small.

I doubt people are stupid enough for fall for your new lie that there is a great conspiracy where all those posts from Sony owners who want Canon colors were written by people “ posing as Sony users.”

Ray, Why are you here bickering?
What does it gain you?
Seriously... what’s in it for you?

The truth matters.
When Rubberdials lies and says 27 Sony APSC cameras can stabilize the new Tamrin lens , it is important to point out he is lying.
When he says all the posts from Sony owners asking how to get Canon colors are faked by non-Sony owners, he is lying.
The truth matters.
Unless you are a Sony fan.

You provide nothing material either. You're guilty of the same things you say he is.

I just realized I had a similar he-said-no-she-said chat with my twin 8-year olds.

You lied to your twins and said there were 27 Sony APSC cameras that can stabilize the new Tamron lens???
That plain sick.

@Raynaud

//When he says all the posts from Sony owners asking how to get Canon colors are faked by non-Sony owners, he is lying.//

I didn't say ALL I said MANY.

Most people don't post endless comments trashing their own gear that they paid good money for. They find a way to make it work for them or sell up.

Go through the comments under any Sony article and you'll find a lot of unhappy Sony users. Many of them complain about the same thing over and over - literally - Sony's abandonment of A-mount, low bit rate of the video, colours.

Nothing wrong with that, right?

Except many have a few defining characteristics in common. They all joined recently. They disappear equally quickly, sometimes into 'unknown user' and they post in the Micro43 forums. There's not much crossover between Sony FF and M43. Not many users with both. But weirdly nearly all the posters bashing Sony in the comments section are very knowledgeable about M43 and post sometimes exclusively in the M43 forum.

@Raynaud

//When Rubberdials lies and says 27 Sony APSC cameras can stabilize the new Tamrin lens , it is important to point out he is lying.//

I didn't say that either. You didn't post in the Tamron 70-180 comment thread, but 'Kyle Style' did and he also accused me of 'lying' several times like you.

https://www.dpreview.com/videos/2685153969/dpreview-tv-tamron-70-180mm-f2-8-di-iii-vxd-review?comment=4245271052

Lying is not a word that is used much on here. There's actually a cultural prohibition in the West about accusing others of lying, even when you know that they are. It's so rare on here that you can google it and get a good result.

Most of the time people are talking about 'lying on the ground' to get a shot or 'jpegs lying'. When it comes to posters accusing others of lying it brings up a post from Oskar P and a post from an 'unknown user' There are more examples in the comments.

Unfortunately for you your history will always follow you around on here. And so it should.

In the thread I read there were four or five people who replied and pointed out you got busted for telling a lie. I bet there are many others where you were busted.
Just like you said 27 Sony APSC cameras can stabilize the Tamron lens and just like here where you accuse many honest Sony owners who want better colors.

Did you ever admit you were wrong about the 27 cameras, or did you make up more fake cr@p?

Just saw Rubberdials was caught again by some one else Today!
“@Rubberdials
Are you confused or purposefully misleading.
The quote you referred to is on the Z7 NOT the Z6 which was the camera that was compared to in this review. ”

It seems like ever post of his is purposely misleading.

@Raynaud

All those self-declared Sony users who just joined and bash Sony continuously but post in the M43 forums.

Vs

All those Sony users who've been here for years, don't bash Sony every post and never post in the M43 forum.

Who to believe. It's so difficult.

$4000 does seem to be the consensus for the R5. Pretty much no one is suggesting it will cost less than $3500. Not sure why that comment made you so angry.

It didn't make me angry...I just was amused that someone made an assertion like that as if it were fact.

@Thoughts R Us
Yes obviously it's not coming in at $2000 for 10 bit, articulating screen and new EVF/LCD. I never said it would, it just has to be reasonable price increase.
Thats the leading consensus given it's market segment and specs. 5D Mark IV was $3500 4 years ago($3800 with inflation today) . a7R IV is $3500. Z7 MSRP was $3400.

"Also, they would undermine the case for buying the a7RIV"

Sort of like how the A7III had a much better autofocus, and better FF video mode at $1200 cheaper over the A7RIII? My point isn't predicting that Sony makes the camera exactly how I described...I am simply stating those three things would really make Sony standout as an all around camera from the pack and all three things I mentioned are all overdue to be updated.

"who knows if Sony will even want to stay in the dedicated camera business."

Sounds like everyone. Didn't Canon just announce Imaging Profits Down 80% in Q1 and that their Office business was most lucrative division?

@Thoughts R Us "It didn't make me angry...I just was amused that someone made an assertion like that as if it were fact."

Like how you keep stating Canon has superior colors? Those facts?

Richmond, first Canon does have superior colors!

Second, you stated a definite price as if it were the real thing...most people would have said, well, it will be in this price range, or about...but the way you worded it was definitive. That's what I thought was funny.

My point about Sony maybe abandoning the camera biz is one that many have made, and even a big time investor was advocating it. Sony has innovated and then gotten out of businesses before, when they don't find them big enough. Sony invented the walkman and CD player, yet they are not much of a presence in the audio world any longer. They had the VAIO computer line...no longer. They had A mount...no longer. Their CEO has said their priorities are services, entertainment and video games. It's a logical question to ask.

@ TRU - ”.. is one that many have made ...” - please point to someone who talked about Sony abandoning camera business more times than you have. Remember it has to be at least 3 digits in the number of times.

Sillen I had the same thought. All those times I recall seeing someone said Sony would get out of the camera business it was TRU

And that investor didn’t say anything about shutting down the camera business. They just wanted some divestment so they could get rich.

@what_i_saw These aren't $$$ professional cinema cameras aimed at crews. These are affordable mirrorless cameras aimed at photo/video many times with single operators. Articulating screens are the future.

Dunno but write dynamic range and a Canon user sure will throw an excuse. Works everytime.

Legend has it, if you type the word "Pentax" on a camera website no results return.

Colors are one of the most important ways that an image makes an impression. Painters have known this for centuries. It's an important part of visual art. Videographers know this as well.

Canon and Nikon have spent a long time figuring out color science because they understand it is so essential. Arri has the same reputation as Canon in the video market.

So yes, colors matter, and Canon and Nikon make it easier to get pleasing colors. One can try to downplay that based on brand bias but that doesn't make it any less true.

Thought R Us: Your "theory" on "color science" here is at best questionable, or more precise, laughable, I would say. Do you always make up arguments like this? Empty claims?

That's why in blind tests people prefer Sony colors.

It's only when years of bias crop up and people know the brand some long time users of Canon brand prefer Canon colors.

Same goes for Leica myth.

Magnar, would you care to actually discuss the issue or just make insults?

zxaar: what blind tests? I've only seen the pseudo scientific one by the Northrups. That's the problem: to conduct a truly scientific "blind test" one has to observe more rigors in the procedure than what Youtubers may have done.

The same thing about superior colors is said about Arri in the video space; are those film makers also wrong?

You may not like to hear it, but yes Canon and Nikon have superior colors. That's why so many discuss it.

Thought R Us: Read your post a few times again, and compare your claims to general facts. Not just your extremely selective "facts", picked carefully to "prove" your point.

@Richmondthefish

Hahaha! It's so true! And I'm a Pentax user. (^o^ )

Hey Magnar, how do u feel about processing colors in video? Is that as simple as fixing a raw photo? People forget, ML are hybrids now, thats a huge selling point for ML, video is big now too. And people also forget color science isn't just about jpegs, it's baked into video files too.

Anybody care to explain how fixing color is soooo easy for video and therefore it doesn't matter?

Max iso: For video work you either want pretty realistic color for more reportage style stuff, or you apply color to trigger emotions, to strengthen the content, the story told. With color within the ball park, everything works fine, since perception is pretty forgiving when it comer to color, and major focus should be on the story that is told, and audio.

@Thoughts R Us

//I've only seen the pseudo scientific one by the Northrups.//

There's nothing pseudo scientific about Tony's test, you just don't like the results of it.

And it's clear from what most people write about it that they haven't actually watched the whole video. I bet you haven't either.

Tony's test is actually excellent and it completely smashes the colour science BS.

Firstly he asked people which brand they thought had the best colour. The majority had no view but of those that did most said Canon followed by Fuji. He then showed people four photos and asked them to pick the one with the best colour.

He then showed people the same photos in a different order with a brand name underneath them. Only 8% chose the same photo as having the best colour. 92% of people chose a different photo as best and worst when the camera name was printed on it – showing that for most people their brand loyalty far outweighs any perception of colour.

Contd.

Sony was chosen as having the best colour by the most people, followed by Fuji. Canon and Nikon scored negatively despite being nominated as having the best colour at the beginning of the test.

So most people who think colour is important believe that Canon has the best colour science but when they chose pictures based on colour they prefer Sony and actually dislike Canon.

Sample size was 1500.

Here's a link to Tony's video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMfCDujQywY

It’s just dynamic range. The canon guys have been claiming dynamic range isn’t important for a decade. I agree except for a few special cases 8 bit is plenty.

Stoned? Not exactly. I've been editing video 10 hours a day since the beginning of April for online streaming. If I can make hundreds of cell phone videos look good, I can certainly deal with 8-bit Sony footage. I even have some 12-bit footage from my FS5 for comparison. That's RAW delivered the way God intended - SDI.

Every camera manufacturer has the ability to create the exact same camera's these days. Luckely there not allowed to do so.
It's not that they couldn't create the same colors, why would they in the first place?

It's all about inovation and building your own customer needs. We should be thankfull for what all the brands are doing for there customers. Whitout loosing there main goal out of sight wich is making profit out of there business.

When I first moved to Sony from Canon I did notice the colour. I now have a preset which I use on import to light-room and find it to be just as good as canon. If money was no object I would look at the canon R5 once out but money is a factor especially with no work coming in.

@Williams359

It is easy to replicate Sony color. Make skintones green and you're good :)

Canon needs to make skin tones more green to attract Sony owners.
Those “golden hour” colors are too darned pleasing for them.

If your knowledge of color and grading is limited to what comes right out of the camera, you are in the Kodak Brownie stage of digital photography. That's okay if you don't have the time or knowledge to take charge of your results.

Even with post processing, it can be difficult to make a Sony image look as pleasing as one from Canon or Nikon. It's not always trivial as some would like us to believe.

Also there is nothing wrong with wanting a great image with great colors SOOC. Many people don't have the time to always fix in post. Maybe some would rather be out shooting and perfecting their photography techniques rather than sitting in front of a computer for a while.

It's also ironic that many pro's need to have great SOOC jpegs to deliver to clients in a very fast fashion for certain types of work. The head of photography for Getty Images remarked that Getty makes a promise to customers to deliver the image in 1 minute or less; that SOOC jpeg had better look great. In fact he had tested the Nikon D6 and remarked that one of the things most important to him about it was the great SOOC jpegs.

So let's not be condescending and pretend that everyone who wants great SOOC colors is some noob.

When you look at the best photos and award winning photos you learn real IQ is about beautiful colors and not DR and noise.
Content and color are what matters (content and contrast with B&W). A great photo can have a little noise or a little less DR and it won’t matter. But if the have Sony SOOC colors it does and many instantly find them displeasing.
We notice colors first, and that’s why so many Sony owners complain about Sony colors not looking as good as Canon, Fujifilm, Olympus, Nikon, or most film.

Sony concentrates on accurate color, and accuracy is not always what makes the best impression. We want to see ourselves as we look in a mirror, not under fluorescent lights in a dressing room.

When a Sony camera is used to copy slides, the results come out looking like film, very true to the original.

Another way to say you don't like Sony cameras.

So your gear choice is decided by the inspiration and/or lens selection of the DPReview staff member taking test shots with each camera on a given day? Weird.

It is true that generally the Canon and Nikon galleries look the best. And one major reason why is their color science. Some will try to downplay that but it really makes an impression, and Canon and Nikon have perfected their color science through the years.

The only reason Canon and nikon camera galleries look better is that the people using them are experienced and have been in photography for a long time. Specially they have long association with Canon or nikon.

The same people will do same with any other brand. Cameras now are pretty good.

Canon and Nikon have also been in photography for a long time and have deep experience getting the art of photography right, including colors.

Anytime you give creators more tools, some will find creative ways to use them to good effect. Same as it ever was.

It's like when the 5DII hit; all of a sudden you saw a lot of very creative indie creators, with small budgets, release some great stuff. You also saw more established video creators find creative ways to use the small hybrid camera in their productions as b-roll stuff on movies and TV shows.

Now sure, in the grand scheme of things the most important factor is still the creativity of the person making the video. But the tools can expand what they can do with their creativity.

One can make the argument that no new tech is needed going back decades; hey, why not go back to the old black and white film era in the 1930s/40s?

It's in the human condition that we always seek to create better tools.

Canon "colors" are anything but natural colors, but if you like them go for them.

About natural colors, take a look here: https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/?fbclid=IwAR2_qLkewfXIV5QiUTCOHIFl_xAlY928TsyOGi1ZKR01Fo4RUE1TOM70REc

The Nikons just got their 2nd major FW update didn’t they?
It’s a little late to say they never will get one.

Of course the S1H is a more expensive model; this video is about a lower price tier for FF.

But it is very revealing that Panasonic has been chosen to be the camera of choice for these videos. There is what people say and what people spend their money on. What people spend their money on is the big tell.

At this point one would have to say that in the hybrid FF space Panasonic leads. That may change with the EOS R5, but for now it's Panasonic.

I don’t know if you read the recent DPR article:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8695762793/full-frame-mirrorless-compared-z6-vs-s1-vs-eos-r-vs-a7-iii

about FF cameras where DPR made a clear distinction for different video needs:

Video - Controlled shooting
Video - Run & gun

And different cameras were recomended in those categories, for good reasons

Yes, everything comes out of Chris' wallet...all expenses for DPR :)

I would say that DPR bought the camera; it was not given to them. And yes, that means that someone or some group of people at DPR decided it was the best camera for them to use for their video work. But it still means that someone (or some group) with experience and knowledge in video work decided on the S1H. That says a lot.

I am glad you admit people did not spend their money on S1H. Even if you tried to make it look like you didn't :-)

From what I remember Jordan likes to manually focus for video work, so the AF may or may not be in use.

Stone jack, he said he uses the GH5 for stills too.
But you are right besides the S1H it’s the best for video these days.

The only thing that would give me pause about Panasonic for video is their AF system. AF flutter may be a forgivable annoyance for stills, but it ruins video. Also, it's still not clear that any L-mount lenses other than Panasonic's own are compatible with their AF system, defeating the entire point of having a shared lens mount.

I know that AF is irrelevant for many types of videography, but for others it's super important. Me personally, I don't ever see myself with a follow-focus or focus puller, shooting choreographed scenes. I would be shooting documentary-style nature photography, where subjects move unpredictably. For that, a tenacious AF tracking system would be extremely valuable.

Would be great with a blindtest on this subjective question. Previous blind tests have shown people cant tell which one is which.

Google works.

Almost every link it finds is about trying to get Canon colors on Sony, but not the other way around.
All those of Sony owners are if anything biased towards Sony, and yet they all say Canon colors are better.
That is irrefutable evidence.

https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/?fbclid=IwAR2_qLkewfXIV5QiUTCOHIFl_xAlY928TsyOGi1ZKR01Fo4RUE1TOM70REc

Sony is all about more accurate colours.

"Sony is all about more accurate colours."

In a bad way. Somehow Sony finds a way to be close but unpleasant , rather than not quite as close, but very pleasing. Sony colors are very difficult to fix also because shifting one color tends to affect similar colors. Think of skin tones, they are actually made p of thousands of hues/colors. Also, when you fix a color you often are limited in which direction you can change the color. This is why Sony colors have their deserved bad reputation.

and in reality most people prefer even Sony Colors. So stop please stop this bull.

That's precisely why Photoshop exists. If you have accurate colours you can tweak them however you want. Those who keep complaining about Sony colours can't reliably tell them apart from blind tests anyways.

More of this "best color" nonsense. I am pretty sure those claiming loudly that a certain brand is best would fail on any blindfold test.

Acting like there is a universal standard for "best color", which is of cause matches their own brand and personal taste, doesn't make such a claim worth a cent.

Perception is way more than measured color. Color response vary from person to person (some are even color blind), how we experience color do not only depend on the subject, but also environment, color temperature, reflected light from colored surfaces, creating color cast, etc. Those working with graphic design know well how simultaneous effect can also play a significant role. Color perception also has also a lot with experience and expectations to do.

So this "I know what is best color" is just a claim without arguments.

Oh look, Thoughts R Us is in the comments again posting multiple times, and they all have the same theme: anti-Sony.

You wouldn't be able to pick out Canon from Sony or Nikon colours in a blind test with photos taken in the same place. And you definitely wouldn't be able to choose a Sony shot from a Canon shot of different subjects.

This colour nonsense really has got to just stop. It's irritating. Next are you going to tell me how one camera filled with microchips has more soul than another camera filled with microchips?

It's embarrassing. Give it a rest.

Thought R Us: When photographers fail on blindfold tests about color, there isn't that much of a difference, and for sure nothing that really matters.

You can also adjust color with in-camera profiles for jpg, and software profiles for raw. Or are you one of those who think default settings should please all?

There are just too many Sony owners complaining about Sony colors and asking how to fix them or make them look like Canon colors for anyone to fall for the “Sony colors are not bad” argument.

You really need to go after the Sony camera users who complain all the time about Sony colors.

Raynaud: Repeating the "best color" myths doesn't make color worse or better. But many find vague arguments fine for brand wars, like you are doing here.

@lukecookphoto

//Next are you going to tell me how one camera filled with microchips has more soul than another camera filled with microchips?//

Thoughts has already been there Luke, several times:

"Sony's are kind of machines without a soul. I imagine most Sony's are bought due to specs, but are used far less because no one really likes using them."
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61610775

With other brands, Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Leica, etc...you read about how much people enjoy them, how they have that certain something special... If it's about heart and soul, then it's not about Sony."
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61718220

There are many more examples in the comments sections.

I added the individual rankings to my comment as well. Feel free to introduce your weights and recalculate.
The overall message of A7III and Z6 being on par and R falling behind will hardly change. It becomes obvious that the R5 is overdue, maybe R6 in this category :-)

S.connor: your comment doensr make any sense

One Achilles heel of Sony is its usability, handling, ergonomics. This is actually fairly typical of a lot of Sony equipment through the years: very advanced tech inside, but not so easy or fun to use.

A lot of their products have had confusing, overly complicated menu's and external buttons and controls that are too small and poorly placed.

What good is advanced tech if consumers cannot or do not want to use it due to poor UI? How many Sony cams will be remembered like the D700, where even to this day you have people praising it and enjoying it as a classic?

Sales figures show that people want Sony. D700 is memorable because there was no memorable Nikon camera after that.

Sales figures show more buy Canon overall than Sony. The market is not just FF. And far more use Canon than Sony; past cameras sold don't just disappear but many stay in use. And the vast majority of pro's use Canon and not Sony.

And even then, sales show more than anything else a severely contracting market, so Sony is maybe a head right now in a small niche of a small and ever shrinking market. And I bet that given time that Canon becomes top seller in FF MILC. Heck, they may be now because it's so hard to get accurate sales data.

But overall Canon is still king. And everyone talks about Canon colors and how desirable they are, even Sony users.

@Johans81
The sense is that it doesn't make sense - but I really loved the feel and operation of my EOS 1DS II - independent from size and weight ; )

Currently using A7R3 and A7III and when the other day i was holding D810 again in my hands i was blown away how great it felt. Finally to hold camera again not some ugly toy brick :) That say im not going back D810 and will keep using Sony. I will have to live with crap ergonomics but will have Eye AF, nearly perfect AF, smaller, lighter body, usable video etc etc.

Price wise in the US the Z6 is on sale which puts it at the same price as the EOS R which has been reduced. (It was initially overpriced.). The Sony A7III was also recently on sale for $1799 in the US market but has since returned to its regular price.

Basically at this point these cameras are all close enough price wise that price is not the likely deciding factor.

@MikeRan
The Z6 is priced at $1800 USD. I know that many websites, including Nikon USA, have it "on sale" but, the price drop at Best Buy happened months ago and was labeled as such. It's $1800.

@MikeRan
Because it really isn't. It's just $1800. The "sale" vendors keep showing, from $2000 going down to $1800, is a bit dishonest because that sale has been happening for months now. Customers are not getting a deal here. The price drop already happened, the vendors should reflect it as such.

Also with sony you get a much bigger choice of non native glass. As these cameras are not top of the line price must be a factor. look at the cost of the Tamron 28-70 f2.8 compared to any similar lens for Nikon mount and Canon mount.

@Niko Vita - "However, most of the Sony lenses in their lineup are just average."

I see that the Nikon forum is the only place you post, so it's understandable that you aren't familiar with sony.

sony users however know that the e-mount lens lineup has overall far better glass than the competition, including practical lenses like the 20fps-capable fe200-600; canikon has never made any 600mm superzoom, despite the fact that it's an overwhelmingly popular zoom length... in fact canikon doesn't have any lenses at any focal length, that are rated at 20fps af-c.

canikon also doesn't have any ff powered video zooms.

@Niko Vita - "Only the latest ones come close to Canon and Nikon."

one example proving that wrong is the fe90, that came out back in 2015, long before canikon was even thinking about ff milc… the fe90 is the second-sharpest lens that dxo has ever tested, and it does an honest 15fps af-c on the a9, so it doubles as a sports lens: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60889046

I don't understand why you all ignore the fact Canikon has adapters that work flawlessly with their EF,F mounts. Even most of 3rd party lens for those mounts work as well adapted. Maybe Sony has a lot of choice now, but even now, five or so years later still no tilt shift lenses, so you either gotta mount Nikkors or Canon's L lenses. But yeah, not everyone shoots interiors, architecture. Just wanted to remind you that adapters work quite well, especially Canon's. Sadly Nikon didn't put in af motor in adapter so only G lens work.

Who exactly is ignoring that fact? I’m simply refuting a statement that the majority of Sony lenses are just “average” compared to the new nikon and canon lenses. This is simply false.

Oh and there are a few great options to marry all of those Canon EF lenses with your Sony cameras as well. (In fact I regularly shoot a Canon 200/2 on my Sony.). So that argument is also mostly negated.

Working with adapters is only a stop gap solution, been there, done that.

Adapters suck. We know because we tried them. But go ahead, waste your time on them.

Adapters work when they are from the same company that builds the camera and lenses. The Canon EF to RF adapter works great. The Nikon FTZ adapter works great.

But sure, when one company builds the camera, another company builds the lens, and yet another makes the adapter, you have compromises.

I have used OEM adapters. You have to switch adapters between lenses, awkward. You can leave it on the body, but where do you put it when you mount native lenses? It's a hassle.
Even so, DSLR lenses are not up to the same standards as mirrorless lenses are. So at most, you are getting DSLR experience. That means no good AF during video, noisy AF, back and front focus, mediocre resolution depending on the lens, heavy weight, oversized DSLR optics, no CDAF.
Lenses that are more than 10 years old are not up to par on state-of-the-art mirrorless cameras. 10 years ago 10 MP was the bomb. Today I want my lens to resolve 100 MP and more (it's not like I'm going to use it today only, it has to stand the test of time).
Obviously you never tried using an adapter. Hence you are quoting Canon and Nikon marketing department. Professionals hate adapters, I can tell you that.

I think you would have to be working pretty hard to NOT find a good enough lens for any of these cameras. Sony? Fine, no problem. Nikon? The native Z mount glass is very nice, and adapted F mount works just fine (and hey, you can get the Zeiss Otus in F mount!). Canon? Exciting native glass, and damned good compatibility with EF mount stuff.

So what's the problem?

We need more than one good lens Bob. We need an extensive mirrorless lens line-up and Sony is the only one to offer that right now. That's your problem.

@Alannn123 I am not ignoring the adapters but on of the things people love about mirrorless is the weight adding an adapter and large SLR lens defects the object. The Nikon one also only works well with newer glass and if using your camera for work you would need two adaptors because if one breaks you cant use any of your lenses.

"We need more than one good lens Bob"

What the hell are you talking about?

"Any company that wants to maintain leadership needs to really keep pressing forward, because if you let your foot off of the gas, so to speak, someone else will pass you by quickly" Well, the Sony is with some distance the oldest (and all round still best) camera off the 3, let's see what the A7IV brings to the table.

The Sony a7III is the "oldest" of the 3 but not by much...it was released in April 2018, the EOS R in Oct 2018 and Z6 in Nov 2018. It's not like they were separated by years in terms of release.

The really new tech will be showcased by Canon in the EOS R5, and by all accounts it too is going to leapfrog the competition. We will see what Nikon brings in any new higher end FF Z.

Sony has of late been a bit slower in advancement, and most expect the a7 IV to be basically an incremental upgrade, same sensor, tweaked image processor like the a7R4 and a9II, the slightly bigger gripped body of the a7R4.

But we shall see.

The R5 is irrelevant to this comparison. What do you know about the R5 except it finaly has IBIS and uncropped (8K) video?

Well we started talking in broader terms about tech leadership and one brand leapfrogging another. As for the R5, there are many specs revealed:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/product-showcases/cameras-and-lenses/eos-r5

Of note, it will adopt the live view AF tracking from the 1DXIII, which is exceptional.

The R5 will probably also adopt the QA issues of the 1Dx3. Canon is rushing their cameras to market because they have to. But no one is leapfrogging Sony, they are still the best (mirrorless) cameras on the market. Wishful thinking is not going to get them ahead of the others.

Thoughts, I read the Canon marketing @ your link but have learned nothing I already knew about the R5, like the "up to" specs though :)

Leitz, you mean like every camera manufacturer uses the terms "up to" in their promo materials, as they cannot guarantee same performance across the board with every lens with every possible setting?

For instance, on the Sony website, they list the a9II as having
"High-speed continuous shooting at up to 20fps" and have a footnote next to that.
And the footnote reads "Hi” continuous shooting mode. At shutter speeds of 1/125 sec or higher. In AF-C mode the maximum continuous frame rate will depend on the shooting mode and lens used."

That same promo page for the a9II has 29 such footnotes and qualifications for the specs claimed.

Sony cameras are real not promo. Canon R5 is promo because there is no other decent Canon mirrorless camera available.

For a start I still didn't learn anything new about the R5 from your Canon link, from the A9 we know what it is capable of, R5 remains to be seen.

There are no bad cameras but they are not all created equal, also native lens lineup is very important when choosing a system.

And all 3 have extensive lenses available. Sony has a lot of FE lenses, along with third parties. Canon has RF plus their EF stable of lenses, with the Canon adaptor. Also third party lenses for EF with adaptor. Nikon has their Z lenses plus their F mount lenses with adaptor and again, third party F mount lenses w/ adaptor.

No one owning any system is particularly lacking in choice. And again, the key is that the lenses you want are available for that system.

Well I want a reasonably priced portrait lens and Canon/Nikon are not offering that for mirrorless. It's not my job to save Nikon and Canon from going bankrupt. They pretend to be Leica and sell their lenses at ludicrous prices. I want decent lenses for fair price.

Agreed S_Connor. Thoughts, adapted lenses will work (on any of the systems) but are cumbersome once you bought your first native lenses, don't ask me how I know...

Adapters are not as elegant as having a native lens, but using OEM adapters is not that hard either. Please, don't pretend it's this herculean task.

Also, if using OEM adapters is hard on Canon/Nikon, what does that say about all of the people using non-OEM adapters with Sony cams? I guess all of those poor souls are really lost, and need to switch brands.

Using adapters on any system are a pain in the *ss once you start investing in native glass, found that out years ago.

OEM adapters are available to Sony users but they don't have to use them (anymore) because E-mount lens line-up is the best at the moment.

Mirrorlesslessons studied AF extensively and found the Z7 was better than the A7RIV and A7RIII.
The A7iii and Z6 were better than those 3 probably due to lower res sensor.

It should be Z6 in this competition

Hi Brev
well the title has been corrected, so now we know!
I'm still busy taking photos each week. Posting mainly in the m43 forum recently. Hope you're fine too.
I am thinking about getting the Z7 for its better resolution. Not interested in video and the iso performance would certainly be better than my OMD EM1 ii.
Just have to work out if I really want to carry the extra weight of the heavier lenses.

Actually, both Z6 and Z7 are great in video, but obviously Z7 is more also photography-inclined due to more pixels in its sensor. However, in video both act similarly. I saw a music video shot on Z7 - it would look identical to Z6, and Z6 would be better for video because its files are not that large and a number of other reasons.