UPDATE: At 1:08 I labelled the left photo as Sony a1 when it was from the Sony a7R IV. I just selected the wrong photo when recording the screencast, but the summary of the sharpness section remains the same: All the cameras capture basically the same detail.
Hello Tony & Chealsea, thanks for this great review. That's a lot of work. In the video I see you can use Lightroom with the alpha 1's pictures. Does it mean that Lightroom is updated to support the alpha 1's RAW files? My Lightroom does not support the alpha 1's RAW files and it slows my workflow a lot. Thanks
Tony, why do you keep saying, "The A1 is a high speed camera and gives you both high resolution AND high speed...", (paraphrased slightly) - and THEN saying at the end that the Canon R5 won when clearly it can't compete speedwise (...and it has h'orrendous rolling shutter)? This is the second time? (Beyond the fact that you left out the REST of the advantages to the A1 over the R5)! Highly annoying... (and erroneous that your conclusion would be summarized as a win for R5, when it can't even compete in the same league when looking at the entirety of its offerings). The Alpha 1 was the ONLY camera that could give you a clean image in that room, yet you say the R5 didn't do that bad? The A1 also preserved more of the highlights, and the shadow test fractional and you (of course) gave it to the R5? Z5 comparison was with totally incompatible ISOs! This is getting ridiculous? Then you say R5 was best all around? Laughable? --- Tony: "The Alpha 1 gives you all the megapixels AND gives you the high speed." The comparison should have just ended with that. It was over at that point because the R5 (and all the others cannot do that, and probably not for a few years!) - The other 14 minutes are a waste... Especially with the false conclusion at the end! __ Also, there are some problems with your test procedures, but nobody's perfect. But anyway, sad to see you have it out for Sony to this degree... What did they do to you? (It appears Tony isn't a PPA member? Why is it advocated?)
@@cogmission1 Have you used an R5? The rolling shutter is really no big deal and isn't 'horrendous' as you claim. I shoot BIF mainly and rarely encounter it and can shoot 20fps full raw with no problem. I have to pan really quickly against a background containing lots of vertical uprights to induce it.
Except from that BIG MISTSKE you mentioned above, you didn't even show a head to head shot of r5 and a1 in terms of details! Also lens sharpness has a major role in detail comparison, again using an old zoom lens by Sony which in term of sharpness is nothing comparable to recent lenses from all manufacturers including Sony itself! Why not using prime lenses? And final note; you skipped talking about Sony A1's awesome flash sync speed of 1/400s at 2:42 jumping from a7r4 to pixel-shift term and then showing the pixel-shift result of A1! I'm not going hard on you Tony but just mentioned these to tell you we understand that! But I'm OK with your recent take on Sony's products as remind me of your past attitude to canon products like original R which lead them to make this big leap to the r5....so yes keep going to get harsh on Sony to push them to get better and better! Thank you
I am as well. This "review" (if you can call it that), leaves out a TON of other advantages to the Alpha 1: 1. Full size HDMI 2. 2x faster USB at 10Gb/s! 3. Ethernet port 4. Micro USB control port 5. Digital hot shoe (Cordless microphone!) 6. Simultaneous recording (to even different media types). 7. 6x Much longer 8k recording (infinite when using dummy battery) 8. Better heat dissipation design (on TOP of more compact body size) 9. Blazingly fast cool down vs. Unusable R5 after first heat warning (basically). 10. Negligible rolling shutter vs. Extreme R5 Jello. 11.1/400s master sync speed vs. 1/250 for R5. 12. 1/32000 to 30sec. shutter vs. 1/8000 to 30sec. for R5. The list goes on... (except when reviewed by the Northrups)
@@cogmission1 Dan Waston shows that in sun light the R5 lasted a little longer than the Sony in overheating . But yes the Sony cools down quicker and has a better heat override! If you think that's good great . I don't see any rolling shutter . But that's what you think then fine . All the other stuff yes your right but will make not difference to the way I shoot photos any I can hold the R5 nicely in my hand . Oh you can get a battery grip with a Ethernet port and better WiFi and it still would be cheaper
@@Tainted-Soul Re: In Sun overheating, it **may** be true but I'm HIGHLY suspicious because out of like 10 reviewers, he's the ONLY ONE who's gotten that result? Potato Jet put it in an OVEN ffs! :-). (
Thanks for the nice comparison, but I'm missing some details: * what lenses/focal length did you use for your IBIS test? Did the Canon lens have integrated image stabilization too (since it's the only one which can benefit of having both!) * Were all photos taken as RAW - you didn't mention as far as I can tell * was noise reduction (of Lightroom) turned off for high ISO test? * why not use primes for sharpness test or even try using the same lens?
@@tkermi yeah... the Canon approach claims that having IBIS + lens IS should give you even longer exposure times without camera shake induced motion blur. Also... how many shots did you take for the test at each exposure-compensation per camera. Not saying that the Northrups don't know how to do a proper test, but I'm a physicist, I miss those details... maybe even standard deviations or boxplots. Sometimes I wish I had the time to go and engage in such tests for a week. I'd probably go way overboard but I like my quantitative analyses.
@@andreasbrand3191 I know, I would like to make that kind of intensive testing too 😂. Well I actually now have the time but not the health/energy - limited from doing that nevertheless. I also like to keep myself up to speed of the recent camera tech. Can't wait to see what EOS R1 brings.
Well, the af test is way more relevant. Differences in image quality are minuscule and those cameras will all be indistinguishable in the real world. If a camera can't keep the subject in focus however, that's a big deal and means lost shots.
@@youknowwho9247 For you. My af needs are fairly easily satisfied. Have had no problems from film days through my 12 af point D90 to me D610 and D500 today. Since I want to stay with Nikon, the presence of banding in pushed shadows is a concern. I will have to look at that more closely.
@@lsaideOK don't worry about banding. Only in extreme situations. And if you are an old timer like me, you will not have to push your shadows. My Z6 even doesn't have banding issues.
@@lsaideOK I wonder if you've actually tested any of the Nikon mirrorless options. Because I have, and they're all far, far worse than the D500 in terms of af. Also, why would anyone upgrade to mirrorless from a top end DSLR, if not for edge to edge focusing and eye af? What else does a mirrorless camera do that your DSLR doesn't?
Wow. The fact my “ancient” A7R IV is still totally hanging in there; the fact two 8K video cameras can also shoot the best stills; and the fact Nikon finally has a great mirrorless camera body. It’s definitely a trophy for everyone. Really informative!
@@detectivejonesw Keeping my old camera for another year, or several years, is even cheaper! (Or purchasing a used one as it’s been around the longest and many have been sold.)
@@bobsykes AMEN to that. I feel no desire to "upgrade" to the latest and "greatest." I'm still doing fine with my Nikon D500 and I also still use a Panasonic GH4 for video. Very pleased with both and no customers have ever complained. When Panasonic releases the GH6 - I'll weigh the options on whether to buy that - but most likely that's when I make my move on the GH5 - as it will go down in price considerably. Also - I tend to take a lot of pics with the GH4 (I do nature mostly) and the pics out of that are just fine.
I went with the Z7II which is arriving tomorrow upgrading from my D810 hoping I’ve made the right choice as the Z9 wasn’t an option financially and I’ve already invested in Nikon glass including the Nikon 200-500mm, Nikon 24-70mm, Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 & Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8. Thank you for your brilliant videos :)
Good to hear :) Being a Canon user, I want solid competition from all sides, otherwise they might fall asleep on their already high prices. And a brand like Nikon I don't want to see vanish. I already found it hard to see Olympus go.
Hello Tony and Chelsea, thanks so much for the in-depth evaluation of these 4 cameras. As an owner of the Z7 II, I’m very pleased with the image quality, and I am very curious to know if you’ve had the opportunity to evaluate the Z-series f/2.8 trinity of zoom lenses. I’m really impressed with these lenses, but I’d love to hear your opinion.
I'm really surprised by your stabilization results! How did you get to that conclusion? Sony never communicated that they changed something about the A1 stabilization. It's supposed to be the same as the A7r3 and A7r4.
I love my Nikon Z 7 II. It takes amazing pictures. Haven't had the need to use silent shutter with LED lights. For my use-cases it does everything I need.
@@gosman949 I have the Z7ii myself and have just underexposed 5 stops and brightened 5 stops in Lightroom. I don't have banding. But I don't know how to get the test right. Maybe I did something wrong! I would be interested how Tony did it!
Good eye! I definitely just selected the wrong photo for the screencast but the actual result doesn't change... no real difference in captured detail between any of the cameras.
Another fun perk of that low base ISO on the Z7ii is you can push it to ISO 32, then shoot at 0.95 in daylight 1/8000, which is a niche and fun advantage. Plus, it’s great for landscapes.
The Canon and Nikon photo's appear too yellow / greenish and muted, vs Sony more true color with higher contrast. Does anyone else see that here? Tony & Chelsea, how were the raw imaged processed prior to showing them to us here?
Thanks for this! We, pixel peepers really appreciate this! Would have really liked to see Fujifilm GFX 100 and how it compares, since the GFX 100s price will be in the same ballpark as the Sony a1
08:33 Tony, so far scholars have agreed that Sony's IBIS is far inferior to CANON's. Some spoke of twice to four times the exposure time, which CANON is said to be possible without blurring compared to SONY. Is there an explanation for the good results of the SONYs?
Hi, thanks for another great video. I currently shoot with Nikon D850 and like the lack of AA filter. Does the R5’s AA filter impact sharpness in a noticeable way? You mentioned the A1 but didn’t specifically dive into the impact of the AA on the R5’s image quality. If Nikon don’t hugely lift their game, I’m looking to switch systems. AA filter is putting me off Canon, so would like to know how much of a real world problem it is.
Well spotted 😲 - the Sony A1 retains much better details = legibility of the dial's numbers. - the Nikon Z7 II looks like denoised and flattened. It seems to denoise RAWs (at base ISO 64!), and sacrifice details for that of course, like any denoising would do. At least this is what seems to happen in the darkest shadows.
What Tony says is it’s a tough comparison, but the Nikon has better highlight detail, and some details being more visible in the shadows. To me, the highlight detail was noticeable, although frankly all the cameras performed very very similarly. The shadow improvement is definitely the less clearcut, and that’s what’s being shown when he says it; also consider TH-cam compression, etc.. I think it’s fair that if that was their conclusion from actually looking at all the files in Lightroom, that’s what they experienced.
Let’s face it, if you can’t take a good photo with ANY of these cameras then photography probably isn’t for you! I’d take the R5 as a good all rounder and for the innovative RF lenses.
I don't understand how an electronic and mechanical shutter would change the effect of banding from flickering lights. I expect that the camera would represent the available light at a particular shutter speed, if the shutter speed is fast enough it should freeze the bands right? How would a camera solve this problem and still maintain the correct exposure?
Question: does electronic first shutter (mechanical second) qualify as electronic for your testing. Is the a difference between Electronic first and fully mechanical shutters. Think all the camera in this review have both.
12:36 - So I think this is the thing that people miss or overlook when discussing the Sony A1, namely that it provides everything that's great about the 1DX III or D6 *and* then some with higher resolution, better AF abilities, much better video options, etc. I agree that the R5 seems to come close, and for a lot of people probably makes more sense given the price differential -- but if you're a high-end sports shooter with fast turnarounds, Sony looks like they've sealed the deal in that niche, and for a competitive price (remember the 1DX III is also $6500).
Hey Tony & Chelsea! Anyway that you know how to read A1 raw files? I got my camera, but can't view the images on my computer - any help would be appreciated!
Hi You are both great to watch, very informative. I have a question about the Sony a7r4 and capture 1, the answer of which I can't find on the internet. I did a shoot with the a7r4 tethered to a laptop and Capture 1. When I went to look at the images there were 3 of each, but with 3 consecutive numbers. What have I done to get this, I now have triple the data I needed? Thanks for your answer.
Hello Chelsea and Tony, I have long been your videos always very interesting. Today, when I am almost determined to buy a Canon R5 and a rf 24-70 I am still wondering which camera to buy as many posts mention indented details due to the AA filter. What I'm looking for is a camera capable of giving me as much detail and sharpness as possible with good noise management ... Could you help me in my choice while I hesitate between the sony A7r4 and the Canon R5? I thank you wholeheartedly! Claude from France .
Hi Chelsea and Tony ! I am very impressed in all the test you did to compare the A1 vs R5. To be honest and not partial I believe you get a lot for your money when you buy the R5. This camera is still amazing with all the nice firmwares we got in the last years. Have a good day !
loved the results of the canon r5, what is the price of that camera, and what are the average prices for the lens of the canon r5? that camera seems to be the b+ camera that is just about good at everything, but at a decent price
Hi @Tony . Can you consider shooting in the other sony a1 resolution i believe is 21 megapixel. I want to know in particular sharpness, dynamic range and noise level of the 21 megapixel setting of the sony a1. Thanks
I'm confused about the detail portion of the test. Why isn't the a7r4, with 20-33% more pixels, not noticeably sharper than the others? Is the lens the limiting factor?
Howdy. Thanks for this comparison video. What about the R5's extended L low iso (50). Custom settings in the menu. Looking at upgrading to the R5 and would be interested in a brief review of that feature. Thanks again for putting this video together.
Is the A1 shot done in electronic shutter or mechanical (in DR test)? Ps There are evident difference in highlights, A1 have more info rather than canon but is the exposure that is a little different, maybe the transmission of the lens. It seems a little darker so it have more in high and less in low.
So is it really true that the r6 has better low light capabilities than the r5? If so is it just bc of the lower megapixels? I've heard both that it is and it's the same.
Your comment at the end of the video brought to mind a question I’ve been wondering about. With all the high megapixel cameras hitting the market, how do you know what lenses will be capable of resolving all that detail? Or put another way, how would I discover what lenses I might need to replace if I purchased one of these cameras?
Found this comparison really useful as I was lusting after the Sony A7riv, but the Nikon Z7ii looks like it'd suit my workflow quite well (never thought i'd say that!). Such a great time for cameras, but not for my wallet! I've been researching Topaz Gigapixel AI and wonder if you could use that software to upscale an image from something like an A9ii/A7iii to see if that can compete with any of these high megapixel bodies in a blind test? Imagine shooting and storing everything at 24mp and using Gigapixel to upscale it if you want to print a larger image!
@@CryoftheProphet Also gotta remember that A7R4 is the only camera that's released before 2020, so considering every newer model should learn and be improved from it, it still gets compared to newer generations ^^
I don't really see marked banding on the A1 at 1/1000s shutter speed.. but clear banding by 1/2000s. I wonder if APSC mode would allow less banding, since it would only have to deal with 66% less pixels.
I have a somewhat unrelated question: Fujifilm just came out with a GFX 100S. This has twice as many megapixels as their GFX 50S, but on the same size sensor. So each pixel on the 100S must be smaller. Is the 100S better? If so, how much better? Love your videos. Very informative with real information and very pleasant to watch. Thanks.
I know Tony has no respect for panasonic but that's where you will find those most hardcore enthusiasts and it would have nice to have had the S1R included in this test.
Canon R5 sync speed is reported in DPReview as being 1/200 sec From the Canon Website: "Note that the maximum flash synchronization speed varies depending on the [Shooting: Shutter mode] setting. It is 1/250 sec. when set to [Elec. 1st-curtain] and 1/200 sec. when set to [Mechanical]."
General comment: unless you need ultra-high-speed sports shooting ability or extended 8K video performance, I see no reason to buy an Alpha 1 when the other 3 bodies in this comparison seem to at least match it. The R5 actually looked sharpest to me in the first image comparison. The Alpha 1's clear win was in artificial light banding. As for "fatal flaw": I have one. The over $2000 price increase for the Alpha 1 over the other 3 bodies. Only sports and events pros are going to use the Alpha 1's high-speed advantages enough to make it worth that money. Last: you maybe could have used a "migraine sufferers and epileptics beware" banner before that LED demo at 9:35. Oof.
I have a S1R and it's nothing but awesome! At least, for landscape (that's 99% of what I do) because DFD is not that good o' moving subjects! But the body itself is awesome, dslr like ergonomy. If the weight don't bother you, it's a wonderful body 😁
Another note, I still think that going with Sony right now (barring the A1) is the best system to go with for most people because of the reasonably priced 3rd party lenses available to it. With Nikon or Canon, you can easily be over $10,000 with just 2-3 good lenses.
@@MrAyybee2cold 😁😁😁 you dont get it. It is one Adapter which stays on the camera and you can apply every EF Lens to the RF mount on it. Please search in TH-cam, it is obvious that you dont know what you are talking about
But don't forget: lens contrast greatly affects the amount of dynamic range that a camera-lens-combination can achieve. If you test dynamic range, you should use the same lens, if possible. A Canon EF 35 L II e.g. offers a lot of contrast, so a camera will show more detail in shadows and highlights. An old EF 35-135 with really bad coatings on the internal lenses will wash out the picture, so the picture has less contrast, the highlights will be clipping faster, you have to expose darker etc. - i don't have numbers, and lenses on these expensive camera bodys seem to all be of very high quality, with good coatings. But this is something to consider, when pairing a new camera with older glass, or especially the other way around. And lens contrast has definitively been improved in the last years as the dynamic range of sensors has.
Thanks a lot Chelsea and Tony! But I always have a question: What is the impact of the AA filter on the sharpness of the R5? What can be the stakes? Thanks afor your posts always full of details! Claude.
BTW, the multi shot looks more so a stacking of images to process and create a sharpness based on the multiple images. If you look at the 2 samples, the info IS there, it is just not well defined. If the info does not resolve, you cannot simply take more frames of it to resolve it. You have some data and that data is being processed to have a more accurate way it applies sharpening, perhaps with internal use of different ISO sensitivity. Add having these overlaps helps create a upresolution more accurate larger file size image
In 2015 I bought a Nikon D5500 APSC camera which already had a flip screen as Tony mentioned. I found it clumsy for having to flip the screen to the left side first and then turn the screen 180 degrees backwards in order to begin shooting. After shooting you have to reverse your action by turning the screen 180 degrees to the front and then flip it back. Most of the still photo shooter don't like that.
Store it with the screen facing the camera. That helps protect it from scratches and then you only have to flip it open. Or keep it with the screen facing out and don't flip it out at all. Your problems are solved.
D850 owner here... time to switch teams and upgrade, or wait until Nikon’s secret flagship is released later this year around time of the Olympics maybe?
Interesting review and comparison. Clearly the A1 is an awesome camera but it does put into perspective that the R5 is actually good value for the money.
Even the Z7ii is a grt value n priced accordingly when compared to R5.. They jst compared image quality as they have Similar amount of pixels.. Purchase decision purely depends on brand ecosystem in which we are in n for what we need.. End of the day These videos r jst for fan boy knowledge bank.. Lol
So basically unless you need a camera for 1 specific purpose, any of the above will do an amazing job. Just choose what you want to invest in and just crack on and get out and get shooting.
The quality of the pictures may not be much different for the expensive camera costing thousands of USD and are made by such well-known companies, but the differences can be the specific feathers of the camera that makes one more more experiensive than another.
My takeaway? All these cameras are great. Buy the one you want (if you can, because they are not inexpensive), and enjoy shooting. I have Nikon Z7II and love it. I think I would enjoy all the others as well.
Actually impossible on bayer sensors. Each pixel can only record one color channel - even for stills. So on a 24mp sensor, some of the color info in the 6000x4000 pixels are actually interpolated - more lies camera companies tell you. Foveon and three chip sensors do provide full rgb data at each pixel but marketing markets the megapixel count as the sum of the pixels of all three sensors (or layers for foveon) combined. In theory downsampling should provide the equivalent of full color info at each pixel but most in camera codecs do not support 4:4:4. If you shoot in 4k and downscale that onto a 1080 timeline you get 4:4:4 equivalent data to work with for color grading. Once that data is displayed on the 1080p monitor though, you are likely only seeing 4:2:2 as most consumer hdmi protocols is 4:2:2.
UPDATE: At 1:08 I labelled the left photo as Sony a1 when it was from the Sony a7R IV. I just selected the wrong photo when recording the screencast, but the summary of the sharpness section remains the same: All the cameras capture basically the same detail.
Hello Tony & Chealsea, thanks for this great review. That's a lot of work. In the video I see you can use Lightroom with the alpha 1's pictures. Does it mean that Lightroom is updated to support the alpha 1's RAW files? My Lightroom does not support the alpha 1's RAW files and it slows my workflow a lot. Thanks
Tony, why do you keep saying, "The A1 is a high speed camera and gives you both high resolution AND high speed...", (paraphrased slightly) - and THEN saying at the end that the Canon R5 won when clearly it can't compete speedwise (...and it has h'orrendous rolling shutter)? This is the second time? (Beyond the fact that you left out the REST of the advantages to the A1 over the R5)! Highly annoying... (and erroneous that your conclusion would be summarized as a win for R5, when it can't even compete in the same league when looking at the entirety of its offerings).
The Alpha 1 was the ONLY camera that could give you a clean image in that room, yet you say the R5 didn't do that bad? The A1 also preserved more of the highlights, and the shadow test fractional and you (of course) gave it to the R5? Z5 comparison was with totally incompatible ISOs! This is getting ridiculous? Then you say R5 was best all around? Laughable?
---
Tony: "The Alpha 1 gives you all the megapixels AND gives you the high speed."
The comparison should have just ended with that. It was over at that point because the R5 (and all the others cannot do that, and probably not for a few years!) - The other 14 minutes are a waste... Especially with the false conclusion at the end!
__
Also, there are some problems with your test procedures, but nobody's perfect. But anyway, sad to see you have it out for Sony to this degree... What did they do to you?
(It appears Tony isn't a PPA member? Why is it advocated?)
@@cogmission1 Have you used an R5? The rolling shutter is really no big deal and isn't 'horrendous' as you claim. I shoot BIF mainly and rarely encounter it and can shoot 20fps full raw with no problem. I have to pan really quickly against a background containing lots of vertical uprights to induce it.
Except from that BIG MISTSKE you mentioned above, you didn't even show a head to head shot of r5 and a1 in terms of details! Also lens sharpness has a major role in detail comparison, again using an old zoom lens by Sony which in term of sharpness is nothing comparable to recent lenses from all manufacturers including Sony itself! Why not using prime lenses? And final note; you skipped talking about Sony A1's awesome flash sync speed of 1/400s at 2:42 jumping from a7r4 to pixel-shift term and then showing the pixel-shift result of A1!
I'm not going hard on you Tony but just mentioned these to tell you we understand that! But I'm OK with your recent take on Sony's products as remind me of your past attitude to canon products like original R which lead them to make this big leap to the r5....so yes keep going to get harsh on Sony to push them to get better and better! Thank you
So which one does better in low light for both photo & Video? I Love to know!
So to sum things up: If you have any one of these cameras and your images don't look perfect YOU are the problem! :D
Nicely done. Looking forward to getting my hands on an A1. I'm leaning towards dropping my RIII and a9 and going with a single A1.
I am as well. This "review" (if you can call it that), leaves out a TON of other advantages to the Alpha 1:
1. Full size HDMI
2. 2x faster USB at 10Gb/s!
3. Ethernet port
4. Micro USB control port
5. Digital hot shoe (Cordless microphone!)
6. Simultaneous recording (to even different media types).
7. 6x Much longer 8k recording (infinite when using dummy battery)
8. Better heat dissipation design (on TOP of more compact body size)
9. Blazingly fast cool down vs. Unusable R5 after first heat warning (basically).
10. Negligible rolling shutter vs. Extreme R5 Jello.
11.1/400s master sync speed vs. 1/250 for R5.
12. 1/32000 to 30sec. shutter vs. 1/8000 to 30sec. for R5.
The list goes on... (except when reviewed by the Northrups)
Yessss sir! Please make it...so we finally can see a definitive review of this camera by someone we can always trust!👍
Dustin, looking forward to your review!
@@cogmission1 Dan Waston shows that in sun light the R5 lasted a little longer than the Sony in overheating . But yes the Sony cools down quicker and has a better heat override! If you think that's good great . I don't see any rolling shutter . But that's what you think then fine . All the other stuff yes your right but will make not difference to the way I shoot photos any I can hold the R5 nicely in my hand . Oh you can get a battery grip with a Ethernet port and better WiFi and it still would be cheaper
@@Tainted-Soul Re: In Sun overheating, it **may** be true but I'm HIGHLY suspicious because out of like 10 reviewers, he's the ONLY ONE who's gotten that result? Potato Jet put it in an OVEN ffs! :-). (
Barely a mention of lenses, which make a large difference in some of these tests.
probably for the sharpness test. Not really for the others.
Exactly! Lenses will have much more of an impact than the camera will.
The lens information is visible in the Exif details in the Lightroom screen
We all know they used a bunch of 1.4 primes
Nikon Z7 II have new firmware update 1.10. have you test that?
1dx III worse dr than a apsc camera? Did you even test it? It's the same sensor as in the r6 and has great dr similar to the r5
Yes, I did not get it. My 1DX2 has excellent DR. The large pixels provide some benefits in IQ.
He was probably talking about the the original 1DX. But even this camera has similar DR to other Canon FF cameras of its time.
Exactly!
Thanks for the nice comparison, but I'm missing some details:
* what lenses/focal length did you use for your IBIS test? Did the Canon lens have integrated image stabilization too (since it's the only one which can benefit of having both!)
* Were all photos taken as RAW - you didn't mention as far as I can tell
* was noise reduction (of Lightroom) turned off for high ISO test?
* why not use primes for sharpness test or even try using the same lens?
Your first questions about lenses used for IS testing particularly interests me too.
@@tkermi yeah... the Canon approach claims that having IBIS + lens IS should give you even longer exposure times without camera shake induced motion blur. Also... how many shots did you take for the test at each exposure-compensation per camera.
Not saying that the Northrups don't know how to do a proper test, but I'm a physicist, I miss those details... maybe even standard deviations or boxplots. Sometimes I wish I had the time to go and engage in such tests for a week. I'd probably go way overboard but I like my quantitative analyses.
@@andreasbrand3191 I know, I would like to make that kind of intensive testing too 😂. Well I actually now have the time but not the health/energy - limited from doing that nevertheless. I also like to keep myself up to speed of the recent camera tech. Can't wait to see what EOS R1 brings.
Nice to have a review about image quality instead of eye af in erratically moving subjects. Very well done
Well, the af test is way more relevant. Differences in image quality are minuscule and those cameras will all be indistinguishable in the real world. If a camera can't keep the subject in focus however, that's a big deal and means lost shots.
@@youknowwho9247 For you. My af needs are fairly easily satisfied. Have had no problems from film days through my 12 af point D90 to me D610 and D500 today. Since I want to stay with Nikon, the presence of banding in pushed shadows is a concern. I will have to look at that more closely.
@@lsaideOK don't worry about banding. Only in extreme situations. And if you are an old timer like me, you will not have to push your shadows. My Z6 even doesn't have banding issues.
@@lsaideOK I wonder if you've actually tested any of the Nikon mirrorless options. Because I have, and they're all far, far worse than the D500 in terms of af. Also, why would anyone upgrade to mirrorless from a top end DSLR, if not for edge to edge focusing and eye af? What else does a mirrorless camera do that your DSLR doesn't?
@@youknowwho9247 silent shooting ! Which for my subjects is a real bonus. But for gods sake Nikon SORT OUT THE LOUSY AF
I'm guessing the Z7 ii was not running with the 1.10 firmware update, which I think addressed the banding problem. Is that right?
Wow. The fact my “ancient” A7R IV is still totally hanging in there; the fact two 8K video cameras can also shoot the best stills; and the fact Nikon finally has a great mirrorless camera body. It’s definitely a trophy for everyone. Really informative!
And the Nikon costs the least of the bunch too, it's closer in price to an r6 than an r5
@@detectivejonesw Keeping my old camera for another year, or several years, is even cheaper! (Or purchasing a used one as it’s been around the longest and many have been sold.)
@@bobsykes it certainly is cheaper, free in fact
@@bobsykes AMEN to that. I feel no desire to "upgrade" to the latest and "greatest." I'm still doing fine with my Nikon D500 and I also still use a Panasonic GH4 for video. Very pleased with both and no customers have ever complained.
When Panasonic releases the GH6 - I'll weigh the options on whether to buy that - but most likely that's when I make my move on the GH5 - as it will go down in price considerably.
Also - I tend to take a lot of pics with the GH4 (I do nature mostly) and the pics out of that are just fine.
@@bobsykes I just bought a used Z6 for under $700. Excellent camera! So don't hang on to those old SLRs!
I went with the Z7II which is arriving tomorrow upgrading from my D810 hoping I’ve made the right choice as the Z9 wasn’t an option financially and I’ve already invested in Nikon glass including the Nikon 200-500mm, Nikon 24-70mm, Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 & Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8. Thank you for your brilliant videos :)
And how is it going with the Z7II ?
Good to hear :) Being a Canon user, I want solid competition from all sides, otherwise they might fall asleep on their already high prices. And a brand like Nikon I don't want to see vanish. I already found it hard to see Olympus go.
Hello Tony and Chelsea, thanks so much for the in-depth evaluation of these 4 cameras. As an owner of the Z7 II, I’m very pleased with the image quality, and I am very curious to know if you’ve had the opportunity to evaluate the Z-series f/2.8 trinity of zoom lenses. I’m really impressed with these lenses, but I’d love to hear your opinion.
Those lenses are Epic, I have all 3!
I'm really surprised by your stabilization results! How did you get to that conclusion? Sony never communicated that they changed something about the A1 stabilization. It's supposed to be the same as the A7r3 and A7r4.
I love my Nikon Z 7 II. It takes amazing pictures. Haven't had the need to use silent shutter with LED lights. For my use-cases it does everything I need.
and I bet you don't find any banding either do you? Banding is fake news.
@@gosman949 I have the Z7ii myself and have just underexposed 5 stops and brightened 5 stops in Lightroom. I don't have banding. But I don't know how to get the test right. Maybe I did something wrong! I would be interested how Tony did it!
@@gosman949 Banding isnt fake but its overrated
@@gosman949 not fake news, but very uncommon.
At 12:00 what has happened to the Sony autofocus? Have they borrowed Panasonic's DFD AF? ;-)
At 1:08 the exif data for the left image labeled as "Sony a1" says it is actually the Sony a7riv. Correction required?
Dont expect that .. There intent is to clearly pramote a1 through this video n subdue Z7ii.
Good eye! I definitely just selected the wrong photo for the screencast but the actual result doesn't change... no real difference in captured detail between any of the cameras.
The Z camera did just fine in this test.
Cameras are getting that good now, that really there is no need to upgrade or switch between systems that often anymore. Good!
5:27 The lens actual T stop is also a deciding factor for exposure.
Nikon holds its own though , pixel peeping grrrr
Another fun perk of that low base ISO on the Z7ii is you can push it to ISO 32, then shoot at 0.95 in daylight 1/8000, which is a niche and fun advantage. Plus, it’s great for landscapes.
Agree
The Canon and Nikon photo's appear too yellow / greenish and muted, vs Sony more true color with higher contrast. Does anyone else see that here?
Tony & Chelsea, how were the raw imaged processed prior to showing them to us here?
Thanks for this! We, pixel peepers really appreciate this! Would have really liked to see Fujifilm GFX 100 and how it compares, since the GFX 100s price will be in the same ballpark as the Sony a1
I thought Nikon fixed the banding in shadows with Z7II? Was this a version I or II series?
08:33 Tony, so far scholars have agreed that Sony's IBIS is far inferior to CANON's. Some spoke of twice to four times the exposure time, which CANON is said to be possible without blurring compared to SONY. Is there an explanation for the good results of the SONYs?
Was the blue color fringing around 4:00m from chromatic distortion? Or caused by the super resolution gimmick?
Artifact of screwed up Pixel Shifting
Which to get, the Nikon or a7r iv??? For the life of me can’t decide ( the other two are out of my budget )
Hi, thanks for another great video. I currently shoot with Nikon D850 and like the lack of AA filter.
Does the R5’s AA filter impact sharpness in a noticeable way? You mentioned the A1 but didn’t specifically dive into the impact of the AA on the R5’s image quality.
If Nikon don’t hugely lift their game, I’m looking to switch systems. AA filter is putting me off Canon, so would like to know how much of a real world problem it is.
On another video A1 vs R5 you mention that the R5 has better stabilization. What changed?
Are you talking about the EOS R5 m? And how do you find the adapter with canon lenses? Thank you
6:31 you say that right as you're showing that the Sony does seem to be noticeably better in this example.
Well spotted 😲
- the Sony A1 retains much better details = legibility of the dial's numbers.
- the Nikon Z7 II looks like denoised and flattened. It seems to denoise RAWs (at base ISO 64!), and sacrifice details for that of course, like any denoising would do. At least this is what seems to happen in the darkest shadows.
What Tony says is it’s a tough comparison, but the Nikon has better highlight detail, and some details being more visible in the shadows. To me, the highlight detail was noticeable, although frankly all the cameras performed very very similarly. The shadow improvement is definitely the less clearcut, and that’s what’s being shown when he says it; also consider TH-cam compression, etc.. I think it’s fair that if that was their conclusion from actually looking at all the files in Lightroom, that’s what they experienced.
The shadow recovery is pretty much the same across cameras, these difference are negligible in real situations.
@@KungPowEnterFist Yeah I'm missing something for sure, wasn't properly looking at it from a sony haters viewpoint, my bad.
Sony looks sharper with more detail
What camera was used for recording this video? Image seems to be super sharp and clean.
Let’s face it, if you can’t take a good photo with ANY of these cameras then photography probably isn’t for you! I’d take the R5 as a good all rounder and for the innovative RF lenses.
If it gives you joy, I'd say it is for you regardless if you get good photos or not 🙂
Let me correct you: If you can't take a good photo with a high-end fullframe camera from 2012, photography is not for you.
@@dtibor5903 I still shoot wedding with my a99 ii. Not the best camera but does the job.
I don't understand how an electronic and mechanical shutter would change the effect of banding from flickering lights. I expect that the camera would represent the available light at a particular shutter speed, if the shutter speed is fast enough it should freeze the bands right? How would a camera solve this problem and still maintain the correct exposure?
Question: does electronic first shutter (mechanical second) qualify as electronic for your testing. Is the a difference between Electronic first and fully mechanical shutters. Think all the camera in this review have both.
On the flickering lamp photo, did you use the anti-flickering setting on the R5?
12:36 - So I think this is the thing that people miss or overlook when discussing the Sony A1, namely that it provides everything that's great about the 1DX III or D6 *and* then some with higher resolution, better AF abilities, much better video options, etc. I agree that the R5 seems to come close, and for a lot of people probably makes more sense given the price differential -- but if you're a high-end sports shooter with fast turnarounds, Sony looks like they've sealed the deal in that niche, and for a competitive price (remember the 1DX III is also $6500).
All cameras were amazing but i love my R5 and i can not wait to get more lenses for it!
Curious how the fujifilm gfx 100s would have compared to this line up.
Hey Tony & Chelsea! Anyway that you know how to read A1 raw files? I got my camera, but can't view the images on my computer - any help would be appreciated!
Hi You are both great to watch, very informative. I have a question about the Sony a7r4 and capture 1, the answer of which I can't find on the internet. I did a shoot with the a7r4 tethered to a laptop and Capture 1. When I went to look at the images there were 3 of each, but with 3 consecutive numbers. What have I done to get this, I now have triple the data I needed? Thanks for your answer.
Nikon is still king of dynamic range!
And color science
hilarious
R5 is better
@@ryanb8736 Ha!
@@Joseph-iu6ip color science doesn't apply to raw, heck even to jpgs. who shoots SOOC any more.
What about the front focus issue on the Alpha 1 that you previously reported relative to the R5?
This is exclusively about image quality i think
Hello Chelsea and Tony,
I have long been your videos always very interesting.
Today, when I am almost determined to buy a Canon R5 and a rf 24-70 I am still wondering which camera to buy as many posts mention indented details due to the AA filter.
What I'm looking for is a camera capable of giving me as much detail and sharpness as possible with good noise management ...
Could you help me in my choice while I hesitate between the sony A7r4 and the Canon R5?
I thank you wholeheartedly!
Claude from France
.
What about regular cameras for regular people?
You mean a smartphone? Try the Sony Nexperia Pro.
Hi Chelsea and Tony ! I am very impressed in all the test you did to compare the A1 vs R5. To be honest and not partial I believe you get a lot for your money when you buy the R5. This camera is still amazing with all the nice firmwares we got in the last years. Have a good day !
Tony,
I like the case and wrist strap you have on your A7R4. Who makes it, where can it be purchased?
Your videos look great! At least 4k (or is it 8k downsampled to 4k?)
loved the results of the canon r5, what is the price of that camera, and what are the average prices for the lens of the canon r5? that camera seems to be the b+ camera that is just about good at everything, but at a decent price
Why no Panasonic S1R?
Hi @Tony . Can you consider shooting in the other sony a1 resolution i believe is 21 megapixel. I want to know in particular sharpness, dynamic range and noise level of the 21 megapixel setting of the sony a1. Thanks
I'm confused about the detail portion of the test. Why isn't the a7r4, with 20-33% more pixels, not noticeably sharper than the others? Is the lens the limiting factor?
因为放大的比其他机器多,应该缩小到一样大对比,像素越多越清晰,这是毋庸置疑的。
Howdy. Thanks for this comparison video. What about the R5's extended L low iso (50). Custom settings in the menu. Looking at upgrading to the R5 and would be interested in a brief review of that feature. Thanks again for putting this video together.
The correct answer is... Any of the above. All these cameras have amazing IQ. From there on, it's our job to produce good photography with them ;)
Do u need really expensive lenses for high megapixel camera s though. If so are there any cheaper manual focus lens you can use instead ?
Is the A1 shot done in electronic shutter or mechanical (in DR test)?
Ps
There are evident difference in highlights, A1 have more info rather than canon but is the exposure that is a little different, maybe the transmission of the lens.
It seems a little darker so it have more in high and less in low.
So is it really true that the r6 has better low light capabilities than the r5? If so is it just bc of the lower megapixels? I've heard both that it is and it's the same.
so, who is the winner?
I wonder if you can compare the Z6ii vs Z7ii
So the Nikon Z6ii will perform better in low light due to lower megapixels ?
Yes. Less pixel density means the pixels are bigger in the z6ii and are able to absorb more light = better low light performance
Your comment at the end of the video brought to mind a question I’ve been wondering about. With all the high megapixel cameras hitting the market, how do you know what lenses will be capable of resolving all that detail? Or put another way, how would I discover what lenses I might need to replace if I purchased one of these cameras?
goog job how come Panasonic s1r not there?
Is the Sony A1 better than the A6000?
Found this comparison really useful as I was lusting after the Sony A7riv, but the Nikon Z7ii looks like it'd suit my workflow quite well (never thought i'd say that!). Such a great time for cameras, but not for my wallet!
I've been researching Topaz Gigapixel AI and wonder if you could use that software to upscale an image from something like an A9ii/A7iii to see if that can compete with any of these high megapixel bodies in a blind test?
Imagine shooting and storing everything at 24mp and using Gigapixel to upscale it if you want to print a larger image!
What made you decide on the z7ii?
Great video as always. Well-guys. Which camera was used to shoot this video please?
So r5 has same dynamic range as a1 and riv?
Makes my A7RIV look like even more of a bargain. I am content.
@@CryoftheProphet Also gotta remember that A7R4 is the only camera that's released before 2020, so considering every newer model should learn and be improved from it, it still gets compared to newer generations ^^
@@CryoftheProphet that's what I ended up doing. I even got a discount on the A7RIV and got it for slightly less than $2500
I don't really see marked banding on the A1 at 1/1000s shutter speed.. but clear banding by 1/2000s. I wonder if APSC mode would allow less banding, since it would only have to deal with 66% less pixels.
I have a somewhat unrelated question: Fujifilm just came out with a GFX 100S. This has twice as many megapixels as their GFX 50S, but on the same size sensor. So each pixel on the 100S must be smaller. Is the 100S better? If so, how much better? Love your videos. Very informative with real information and very pleasant to watch. Thanks.
I know Tony has no respect for panasonic but that's where you will find those most hardcore enthusiasts and it would have nice to have had the S1R included in this test.
But how do they compare to Canons flagship the 1D ?
Canon R5 sync speed is reported in DPReview as being 1/200 sec
From the Canon Website:
"Note that the maximum flash synchronization speed varies depending on the [Shooting: Shutter mode] setting. It is 1/250 sec. when set to [Elec. 1st-curtain] and 1/200 sec. when set to [Mechanical]."
Does PPA support photographers who are not US citizens, and who live elsewhere in the world? Some clarification would have helped.
General comment: unless you need ultra-high-speed sports shooting ability or extended 8K video performance, I see no reason to buy an Alpha 1 when the other 3 bodies in this comparison seem to at least match it. The R5 actually looked sharpest to me in the first image comparison. The Alpha 1's clear win was in artificial light banding.
As for "fatal flaw": I have one. The over $2000 price increase for the Alpha 1 over the other 3 bodies. Only sports and events pros are going to use the Alpha 1's high-speed advantages enough to make it worth that money.
Last: you maybe could have used a "migraine sufferers and epileptics beware" banner before that LED demo at 9:35. Oof.
I hate to spoil such a fine review with this question. How does Panasonic FF stack up?
I have a S1R and it's nothing but awesome! At least, for landscape (that's 99% of what I do) because DFD is not that good o' moving subjects!
But the body itself is awesome, dslr like ergonomy. If the weight don't bother you, it's a wonderful body 😁
R5 and Alpha 1 both have the option for iso 50 in menu, so they are only iso 100 in default settings
Thanks for the awesome reviews! What camera and lens combo do you guys use for this clip?
If you can get the A7R3 on sale for $1000 off, you’re laughing...
Will you be testing canon r5 image quality with EF lenses?
Another note, I still think that going with Sony right now (barring the A1) is the best system to go with for most people because of the reasonably priced 3rd party lenses available to it. With Nikon or Canon, you can easily be over $10,000 with just 2-3 good lenses.
No, because you can adapt every 3rd Party and EF Lens to the Canon system without compromises.
@@airb1976 unless you’re gonna buy an adaptor for each lens it’s a pain to take the adaptor off everytime.
@@MrAyybee2cold 😁😁😁 you dont get it. It is one Adapter which stays on the camera and you can apply every EF Lens to the RF mount on it. Please search in TH-cam, it is obvious that you dont know what you are talking about
@@airb1976 Why is this such a touchy subject? What if I was a Nikon user moving to Canon?
@@Martinez_Photos No Problem at all
Hi, what camera use to shoot this video? Thks
But don't forget: lens contrast greatly affects the amount of dynamic range that a camera-lens-combination can achieve. If you test dynamic range, you should use the same lens, if possible. A Canon EF 35 L II e.g. offers a lot of contrast, so a camera will show more detail in shadows and highlights. An old EF 35-135 with really bad coatings on the internal lenses will wash out the picture, so the picture has less contrast, the highlights will be clipping faster, you have to expose darker etc. - i don't have numbers, and lenses on these expensive camera bodys seem to all be of very high quality, with good coatings. But this is something to consider, when pairing a new camera with older glass, or especially the other way around. And lens contrast has definitively been improved in the last years as the dynamic range of sensors has.
They used modern lenses which are Not differntiate between each other Like your 30 Year old lenses
@@airb1976 Absolutely, but not every buyer has this in mind and might use older (e.g. "vintage") lenses even on modern cameras.
@@dominicvideograph6426 every photographer who uses Vintage lenses know for sure what Vintage lenses do
Thanks a lot Chelsea and Tony! But I always have a question: What is the impact of the AA filter on the sharpness of the R5? What can be the stakes? Thanks afor your posts always full of details! Claude.
BTW, the multi shot looks more so a stacking of images to process and create a sharpness based on the multiple images. If you look at the 2 samples, the info IS there, it is just not well defined. If the info does not resolve, you cannot simply take more frames of it to resolve it. You have some data and that data is being processed to have a more accurate way it applies sharpening, perhaps with internal use of different ISO sensitivity. Add having these overlaps helps create a upresolution more accurate larger file size image
Where is the best place to ask a question, about a different subject?
Pornhub
In 2015 I bought a Nikon D5500 APSC camera which already had a flip screen as Tony mentioned. I found it clumsy for having to flip the screen to the left side first and then turn the screen 180 degrees backwards in order to begin shooting. After shooting you have to reverse your action by turning the screen 180 degrees to the front and then flip it back. Most of the still photo shooter don't like that.
Store it with the screen facing the camera. That helps protect it from scratches and then you only have to flip it open. Or keep it with the screen facing out and don't flip it out at all. Your problems are solved.
Too late ! I've already ordered a Z7II and I expect to be uber happy with it :-) Very useful shootout video. Thanks.
Does the Z7II have an AA filter?
no
D850 owner here... time to switch teams and upgrade, or wait until Nikon’s secret flagship is released later this year around time of the Olympics maybe?
Upgrade a camera body? IF anything, you're downgrading your glass lol.
Interesting review and comparison. Clearly the A1 is an awesome camera but it does put into perspective that the R5 is actually good value for the money.
as a Sony shooter I can only agree with your comment, the R5 is absolutly a steal compared to the overly priced a1
Even the Z7ii is a grt value n priced accordingly when compared to R5.. They jst compared image quality as they have Similar amount of pixels..
Purchase decision purely depends on brand ecosystem in which we are in n for what we need..
End of the day These videos r jst for fan boy knowledge bank.. Lol
@@saibhargavamanda1062 I never understood the hate about nikon z6 and z7. Yes there was some caveheat, but it produces fantastic images.
So basically unless you need a camera for 1 specific purpose, any of the above will do an amazing job. Just choose what you want to invest in and just crack on and get out and get shooting.
This is not a camera comparison, it’s about which manufacturers have better lens though
True for the sharpness test (which Tony said at the end). The other aspects still pertain to the sensors and processors.
In now days whatever you pick,you can't go wrong...which is perfect :)
Interesting and very well conducted. One of your best reviews.
Glad you liked it!
The quality of the pictures may not be much different for the expensive camera costing thousands of USD and are made by such well-known companies, but the differences can be the specific feathers of the camera that makes one more more experiensive than another.
My takeaway? All these cameras are great. Buy the one you want (if you can, because they are not inexpensive), and enjoy shooting. I have Nikon Z7II and love it. I think I would enjoy all the others as well.
Would have been interesting to throw an outlier into the low light companions. Something like a D6 or EOS 1DX Mkiii
Perfect! Just the photography cameras I wanted compared
PPA is great organization... been a member for over 30 years..like many organizations one benefits more if one participates more.
Why can't there be a 4:4:4 12 bit raw video mirrorless?
Actually impossible on bayer sensors. Each pixel can only record one color channel - even for stills. So on a 24mp sensor, some of the color info in the 6000x4000 pixels are actually interpolated - more lies camera companies tell you. Foveon and three chip sensors do provide full rgb data at each pixel but marketing markets the megapixel count as the sum of the pixels of all three sensors (or layers for foveon) combined.
In theory downsampling should provide the equivalent of full color info at each pixel but most in camera codecs do not support 4:4:4. If you shoot in 4k and downscale that onto a 1080 timeline you get 4:4:4 equivalent data to work with for color grading. Once that data is displayed on the 1080p monitor though, you are likely only seeing 4:2:2 as most consumer hdmi protocols is 4:2:2.