These people are making fools of themselves, they do everything to force things to go wrong with Nikon. They show a perfectly lit Canon video vs a Nikon video without light at 12800 iso... it's embarrassing, the best thing is that most people realize it in this comment thread.
Tony, your Nikon 60 frames/second vs. Sony 10 frames/second autofocus test is wrong - you should have used the same speed for all cameras. If Sony was slowest at 10 frames per second but highest for 'in focus' rate then you should use the same speed for Canon and Nikon to have apples to apples comparison. Also, other condition / setting should be the same, and If you set Nikon shutter 'focus' release at 10 frames / second, I am sure 'in focus' rate would greatly improve.
That shouldn't make a difference, given that the Z6 III was designed for the small-ish niche of 'action photography', therefore assuming its fastest FPS as its standard working condition. The AF / the entire processor was surely sized sensibly fast enough to accommodate such FPS easily, w/o becoming faulty or compromised then.
@@tubularificationed What the heck are you even saying? Makes complete sense to shoot as close as possible to the same fps when comparing keeper success rate. Along with lens focal length and aperture and shutter speed etc. Use of similar focusing modes on each body too, of which none of those things are mentioned in this testing.
You aren't buying the Nikon to shoot 10fps. If the Nikon AF can't keep up with the FPS, then it shouldn't be doing it. This is information people need to know.
@@MrJleash I agree that it makes sense to shoot at the same FPS to compare success rate. But in the end, what you really want is to know how many sharp photos I can take per second, which is the combination of FPS and keeper rate at that FPS. Having a camera with 120 FPS and 30% success rate just gives more sharp photos, and that is what sport/wildlife photography is all about.
Tony's review on Nikon system nowadays; Trust me bro and people are not buying it. The reviews are more like why this system is not like Sony's. You're missing 55% portraits on a stand still subject on Nikon and Canon, seriously? Bashing Nikon DR again and again even after making 2 separate videos just about that (no review still.) It's not even that bad, who're these so called photographer that won't crank up their ISO to 800 but rather take a - 6 EV shot, are you serious? After watching other videos on Ziii system, one thing is clear, just know your gear before taking it out on the field, know what AF system works better in what situations, feel free to change it, its not a smartphone comparison where you see how's the camera out of the box. It's people's right to know that the DR performance is almost the same, after the second base ISO of 800, in all the cameras. Don't create scenarios specifically targeting the brand you don't like anymore. Also it'll be better if you'll provide people with more information, settings used, lenses used, values, etc, side by side comparisons. Stop these trust me bro kind of reviews, that'll only hurt your credentials.
@@igorrutsch Its funny that in the same test, Nikon shot about 36 sharp photos in a second but what could be better than that? A 92% hit rate Sony, with a massive 9 photos per seconds. And eventually you might miss a big moment on a Nikon system, XD.
Something is seriously flawed with this test. I am shooting Nikon z6iii now I almost never get out of focus shots even when people are moving fast, etc, even at extreme darkness. Also Nikon is slow at getting the face in focus, wtf, it finds a face in pics darkenss even If the face is covering an extremely small portion of the frame, or even if the person is not looking in the camera, so you see only the back of the head. The noise is maybe a bit worse at 100 iso, but its fine noise which can be easily corrected in post, at higher iso settings its the same. Especially against the sun portraits with z6iii are way easier at af works amazing. Z6ii had issues with this.
Nikon is still behind on auto focus. This is just common knowledge at this point. Sony and Canon are basically neck and neck, then Nikon, then Fujifilm.
@@RiposteThisPanasonic just surpassed Nikon in autofocus. Sony, Canon, and now Panasonic have the best autofocus in 2024. Overall Nikon is still far behind.
you only think it is not out of focus because you never compared it to a sony side by side, which is good news for you. ignorance is bliss. what nikon and fuji user define as sharp would be what people complain if sony or canon deliver that result
Honestly I’m not surprised at your review once again about the Nikon Z 6III. Watching this video just makes me feel you have a beef with Nikon and it clearly shows in the video. You aren’t telling us what settings you had the camera on or even what ISO, AF. All you just did in the entire video was lament about dynamic range like as if that’s the only thing that makes a camera.
What are you complaining about? They literally said many people don't care about dynamic range and the ones who do, here are some techniques so its not an issue. How are you seeing "beef with Nikon" when they are very glowing about them and said multiple times how all three are great cameras?
@@arthurmarshall6825 Because they clearly have a "beef with Nikon". They keep nagging about dynamic range, but did not even mention the faster readout speed, which is the reason the Z6III has a lower DR. Also, the EVF on the Nikon is the best of the three, but they also did not mention it.
@@Ausknutz That is just silly. If dynamic range is important to me, I don't care WHY, I would just care if it is an issue and if there is anything to be done to make it not a issue. And they covered that. Its only a 11 minute video so of course they are not going to cover everything. Their premise is that all 3 are good so they have to hit the highlights of why someone would or would not pick a camera. Dynamic range is a reason someone would or would not buy a camera for. EVF, less likely.
Odd you do not mention Nikons strengths like the refresh rate. I'm a Sony shooter but the A7iv's silent mode is unusable in a lot of situations like indoors under lights and with anything moving. Your extremely low hit rate on the eye with the Nikon makes me think you have it set wrong or you have a bad copy. I played with a Z8 and Z7 and both would have higher scores than you are giving the Z6III for eye Af in portraits.
I really don’t care which camera is the best, as all new cameras are more than good enough for most users. That being said, those guys are acting like the youtube camera Mafia, spreading misinformation while purposely doing flawed tests when it comes to Nikon. It is not about being a Nikon user or not, it is about having some dignity and not let people like Tony abusing their position. The best thing you can do is report for misinformation/spam and stop watching their videos so we get to have less people like these doing reviews/driving the market.
Nikon syncs at 1250, set your auto fp on .Sonyband canon may have better dynamic range but nikon color science trumps whatever advantage these other cameras may have. Took your time to underline the autofocus and dynamic range performance but don't get to mention the wonderful viewfinder of the nikon and how faster its latency is compared to the sony and canon. No mention of the superior codecs that are available in the nikon compared to the sony and canon. I believe you have had these cameras for quite sometime but your comparison is shallow at best .
This is absolute nonsense. First of all, they are talking about sync speed without going into HSS. With HSS, the Sony and Canon can sync at any shutter speed you want. But using HSS drops your flash power considerably. So they're most certainly correct in pointing out that the regular sync speed of the Nikon is slower. Second, colour science is a marketing buzzword with absolutely no real world impact. Anyone who cares about colour will shoot raw, which means you'll be able to make any camera look like any other camera in terms of colour with one click in post. Third, the Nikon has a worse viewfinder than the Sony, so what are you on about there?
@@benoittissier58 Same. I got he R6 II because for sports it never misses. I shoot hockey with the 70-200 2.8 and it will nail eye AF even through cages and visors well over 90% of the time. It's incredible. Also didn't want that 4k crop on the Sony. It's still a nice cam though.
When comparing the dynamic ranges, you fail to say that those numbers are _at base iso_. At higher iso values the three cameras have identical dynamic ranges, so they are equally good at shooting in darker places (and better than an APSC camera).
On top of that z6iii dynamic range is actually better than R6ii in Electronic shutter by about the same difference highlighted in the review. There’s a lot of nuance that’s missed in their reviews.
@@livejames9374 Agreed. At what ISO are we measuring? Many situation don’t allow for shooting at lower ISOs of 400 and lower. And yes, I think most people will want to take advantage of the faster fps and use ES so your point is correct but they didn’t point out the advantage of dynamic range with ES.
@@skandhaprasath2767 That's because Nikon no longer invites them to launch events. Their channel has become such clown nonsense, especially at the news reports where Tony takes his glasses off. So childish. And worst of all, they really have no technical knowledge and testing. They talk about video, but its about focus, nothing about waveforms, zebras, peaking, etc.. how they have 1m subscribers is astonishing. It's like someone who has NO clue about a car has a channel talking about cars. Sure, they know how to turn a steering wheel, use the radio, but mechanical know-how like valves, cams, timing, compression, stroke.. they're absolutely clueless.
It is worth noting that the Canon R6 Mk II is $500 cheaper than the others. I think you ought to mention how old each model is and what the current prices are at Adorama (or another major retailer). These both factor heavily in decision making.
You are right about how old each model is but everytime they really talked about a camera they had the price in the corner. They didn't "say Canon is $500 cheaper" but the info is right on the screen.
And Canon lenses and I mean each lens you purchase will cost DOUBLE what you can purchase from Sony and its e-mount options from Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, Viltrox, Artison and many others.
Hmmm… my Z6iii finds eye autofocus immediately. It’s really sticky and I only need to try again if it grabs the wrong persons eye. I use 3D autofocus most of the time.
Busted out the old Z6ii with Z 85 1.2 and hit well over 50% for sharp iris. How do you guys manage to get lower with R6ii and Z6iii. Your tests always amaze (confuse) me. You still didn’t address all the comments pointing out how you compared video with noise reduction vs a video mode that didn’t have any noise reduction in last video. Why would you compare 60fps jpeg to 40 fps raw and 10 fps raw? All of your tests seem oddly designed to have a desired outcome lol e.g. “if I raise shadows 6.3 stops” in dynamic range tests.
We are rigorous and precise with our tests. We addresed the noise reduction in the video comparison dozens of times in the comments. We generally shoot sports in JPG, and I mentioned the Nikon is limited to JPG in that mode.
@@TonyAndChelsea the comments you kept repeating showed you didn’t have any understanding of the noise reduction issue and worse didn’t try to gain an understanding. I find that odd for someone that claims to be rigorous and precise
Would have been interesting to compare AF performances for sports at different frame rates (6, 10, 20, 40) instead of using only the max frame rate of each.
There's no discussion about the pros in Z6iii like fast readout speed, good EVF in this "review". Only a sponsored video to make Sony look the best and Canon the 2nd best.
I didn't buy the A7IV because its eye AF has a front focus issue (well known in the forums) and it has cropped 4K. I got the R6 II instead and it's so much better for eye AF which is opposite what T&C found for some reason. I can shoot hockey with the R6 II and 70-200 2.8 and use eye AF and get 95% hit rate - it nails the eyes even through visors and cages! I also never hit the buffer but I always shoot at 12 FPS mechanical for the best IQ. I shot as a pro with the 1D cams for years at 10 FPS and never missed a shot due to FPS speed so 12 FPS is way more than enough. I hate culling even 12 FPS bursts let alone 40. I also found the R6 II to be about 1/3 stop cleaner than the A7IV at high ISOs and also slightly less shadow noise than the A7IV when recovering shadows. The resolution doesn't really matter much. I found that the lens sharpness and AF accuracy makes a bigger difference to detail than a few extra advertised megapixels.
Never noticed front focus issue with the A7iv. But I had severe focusing issues for sports. Tracking in the EVF is about perfect, but actual focus point that you see when reviewing pics on the camera is somewhere else. I switched to the A1 and AF problem is gone.
That eye AF front focusing issue was with some samples from the earliest batches produced 3 years ago. Nowadays you would be safe, but only IF you buy a new camera of course. On the used market, I'd be aware of the issue, especially if a very old/early A7 IV is offered too cheaply 😉 But that could be a steal of course, if you don't care for portraits, but use it for general purposes, travel, landscape, tripod work, etc.
92 % focus accuracy with the A7iv for sports, that is magic to me ! I was happy when I got more than 70%. I have switched to the A1 now and get 98% sharps with the same lenses
If the rumors are true and Canon wants to stay above the new Nikon Z6 3 meaning a R6 mk3 is coming , then the MK2 will be a great value. Lets consider R5 and R5 mk2 . Right now R5 is around ~3k . So it dropped significantly in price with R5 mk2 released. That will happen with R6 mk2 as well . Id expect the R6 mk2 to drop close to R8 prices which will make this camera probably the best value on the market. $1500-$1700 for a camera with exceptional auto-focus / IBIS / no crops on video / Clog 3 and other cool features... thats a good camera.
I've had the A7RIII since 2019 and to this point, for my photography, I don't need anything else. So thankful to be GAS free. Still like watching all your camera gear reviews though. Good stuff
@@aliendroneservices6621 I bought the camera with the 24-105 f4, added the 14-24 Sigma a few months later or whenever it came out. Can't really remember exactly when. And just recently got the 100-400 Sigma for a trip. So I'm all set. Don't need anything else for the work that I do.
I upgraded to A7R IV from A7R III for a more reliable auto focus capability. For fast moving, A7R III was not very reliable. For landscape or portrait, A7R III should suffice anyone with a better low IOS performance.
The more you abuse Nikon Z6 III their sales will increase 😅 These videos of yours clearly shows you want to promote Sony and everyone understands it 😂😂
The dynamic range only matters at very low ISO. They are all about the same at higher ISO. I think this inflates the issue. Pretty much means it only matters if you are doing still photography like landscape + have a high dynamic range scene + don't want to bracket which you probably should do anyways. For sports the readout speed in electronic matters a lot, the SONY is really bad compared to the others. The Z6III sensor is better compared to other stacked sensors which pretty much all show that low ISO DR loss.
This channel has 1.6M followers but all i see is that a lot of people are criticizing their reviews. Did I miss something? I haven't watched their videos in a while. Did it start at some point or is it about few reviews only?
They are here to make money and seemingly they force it to bash on particular camera brands like Nikon. This shows that Nikon is making pressure on the competition and they are not liking it! They were laughing first now they are worried lol.
It looks like they get paid by Sony there is no way auto focus is better on he Sony over the canon. I see reviews so many times but they are always lean towards Sony and I think all TH-cam are getting paid well by sony
I have iPhone 14 Pro, and Apple has an SD to Lightning adapter, and it might not be as fast as USB-C, but it’s still WAY faster than transferring with the app. It’s also an awesome option to quickly share pictures with folks at events, people love it when you share on the spot!
If you shoot a backlit subject you should be exposing for the subject and not the overall scene forcing you to pull up the shadows by 2 stops in post and then complain about increased noise. Expose properly, or a least close, and none of these cameras will have any problem with dynamic range and noise. Also, to improve the speed/behavior on the Nikon video focus, you can adjust settings such as the g6: AF Speed and g7: AF Tracking Sensitivity menu items. I’m not sure if they’re numbered exactly the same as on the Z8 (don’t have the Z6 III) but they are likely the same or close to those.
I feel like I’ve been lied to. I always thought bsi and stacked sensors were supposed to give better low light performance and less noise. Now that we have them it seems to provide the opposite. I’m so glad I didn’t wait to get the R5 m2 and just got the R6 m2. Low light performance is incredible compared to the RP it replaced. And everything new coming out as well. Surprisingly.
That's back side illuminated (BSI) - moves the circuitry behind the photosites. Adding the stacking seems to reduce dynamic range. Most new cameras coming out now are both BSI and stacked
Definitely, particularly because it's at least 1000 euros cheaper & in many respects (for example Open Gate or proper-quality, while still pretty 'lean", H.265) has better video support than these cameras.
@@truthseeker6804 it's not only for Instagram / Tiktok folks. Not in the least. Basically, you have a 8K camera, just without the leftmost / rightmost around 2x4 Mpixels.
Landscape guy here (some macro and birds, Astro, and some street) Overall, I was curious if you think I’d be just fine with my z6iii? I don’t do photography for a living, but do like social media posting and I love it when folks critique and compliment my photos. Of these 3 cameras, would any one of them show a noticeable difference with what I mentioned earlier for what I shoot? I don’t think anyone actually pixel peeps my photos and heck, I’ve been published by the Wildlife Audubon and American Rivers corporation when I used my Nikon D3200 many moons ago. Thoughts?
Thanks for the comparison. Looking for a back up body for my Canon R3 and was wondering if i should get the R6II or if I should dust off the A73 im no longer using.
Always feels ashame that you fail to include Lumix in these tests. They are a viable market option. I'm sure your reasoning is their small market share, but companies like Sony grew partially from review coverage found here on TH-cam. Eh, it just seems odd to me. ✌️
2:42, so she is basing what she's saying off Photons to Photos. For those who don't know, Photons to Photos is a ONE man operation, not a lab. William the owner of PtP has brand bias which immediately disqualifies him and he has the most idiotic testing methodology like using JPEGs for some test and RAW for others. This is why no one trusts PtP, nor Northrups. I hate when biased people review cameras, because you can't help but see their bias in reviews. DXOMark remains the one lab that accurately tests camera sensors. As for redundant recording, you have to realize that SD UHS-II can't record NRAW. Neither would the Sony or Canon.... if they even could shoot RAW in the first place. The heat generated would be insane. Tony negates to add that critical fact. Where he is right is that when shooting H.265, Nikon does not have redundant recording which is pretty ridiculous, especially marketing it as a video camera. UHS-II and CFExpress slots are capable of H.265 redundant recording, so no excuse.
Thank you. I know these comparisons are difficult and everyone thinks their brand has been mistreated. I’ve owned all three brands. AF accuracy, dynamic range, and improved resolution are my needs but in a smaller body with excellent smaller lenses which is why my everyday carry is the newer Sony A7CII. I use bigger full size full frame cameras when I need two CFexpress card slots or faster FPS. Yes, I know everyone cannot afford multiple cameras but if I were buying today I might get a great price on the A7CII and see what the A7V looks like in six months. After all it is the oldest of the three and that greatly influences the comparison. Also Sony first and Nikon second when you look for reasonable but high quality FF lenses at a lower price. (Sigma and Tamron)
I really wanted to love my R6II, but the AF has been less than impressive so far. I also own an a6700, and the autofocus in many situations vastly outperforms the R6II. Not sure how the a7IV AF compares to the a6700, but if it is close I'd probably go with the Sony. Particular areas where the R6II fails relative to the a6700 are eye tracking (or any tracking, really) when there is camera movement. The a6700 just locks on, while the R6II loses accuracy greatly when the camera is moved, even slightly. No matter the tracking case or slider settings. Also, when eye/face/subject tracking, the R6II will have difficulty locking on or lose the subject if it is in a "busy" scene or when other objects pass between the camera and the subject relative to the a6700. Maybe not dealbreakers for many, but for shooting sports and panning it has been frustrating. Even simple portraits have been frustrating if the camera position has to be adjusted slightly, as the tracking will miss the eye for several frames.
@@livejames9374I have both and couldn’t tell you the difference… both are really capable. The a6700 doesn’t have IBIS and, well, who the hell wants to shoot on aps-c these days? Don’t bother making the case btw, I listened to the arguments for aps-c for years and it held me back. FF for the image quality in photo and video is a different league and anyone who says otherwise is wrong.
The older iPhones actually have a SD card reader dongle that allows you to plug your SD card straight into the phone via the lightning port, and it’s what I had been doing ever since my old iPhone 7
3:38 what? Why? You know that that apsc crop mode is still oversampled and still it is interesting to see how it compares. I highly doubt that Sony apsc mode would loose that hard to others in ff mode in terms of dr and sharpness, while autofocus is the best and slog 3 may be the most flexible and mature. And after that you go on and say that most people shoot 30fps anyway when the thrown out "looser" sony oversample 7ks worth of resolution in that mode and is probably the best not counting readout speed? What the hell was that Tony? Lazyass copout and a contradiction.
As you often say, but not in this video its about the eco system and with 3rd party lens support for Sony and Nikon I think that's definitely a consideration as well.
At 3.56mins you say with the Sony A7iv in 60fps that there is a APSC crop and that means worse lowlight performance, how?? considering that it's a full frame sensor with large light gathering pixels and you are only cropping into the middle of the sensor not making the pixels smaller as in an ASPC sized sensor with smaller light gathering pixels. The pixels don't change size just because you crop to APSC for video in camera.
You are really confused about light gathering, in short, pixel size has very little to do with low lighting capabilities (despite everything they write on the internet), while sensor size has a lot. Of course large sensors tend to have larger pixels and less density, but that’s not the point.
i've used the A74 extensively for work and their DR isn't what it seems, they pull a bit of a 'trick' with the raw files; their deep shadows are low-contrast / flat, this can give the illusion of better DR on charts. If you've never used one of the new sony's before, try one out. they are good cameras! but not all is what it seems. their 'colour science' i think is down to what they're doing with making their raw files 'flatter' than other brands, it also slightly desaturates. you can boost saturation, sure, but that's when issues of green-ish skintones start to show themselves. i really don't want to bash sony too much because i think the a74 is a bargain for what it is, especially on the video side of things, but nikon have acquired RED and internal raw video is HUGE. shame they didn't mention or test that in this video. i'll continue to use the a74 at work (it's their camera) and i'll enjoy it, but if i were to buy my own i'd say now is the time to get on the nikon mount / system. just my opinion. also, the DR thing with nikon, who is consistently underexposing 3EV? lol.
I have the Sony a7iv and mostly love it. I'm a little jealous of some of the features on the newer bodies, but I can say from experience that 33 megapixels is a lot more than 24 when you crop. I can't go back down. All I really want now from an a7v is a better EVF, uncropped 4k 60 and a lot less rolling shutter. Everything else is just gravy at this point.
At one time the cost and color of lenses had a major factor in the choosing of a system. This was the late `80s. Do you see the color cast of lenses as any part of your decisions since the start of digital in the late '80s early '90s?
Not really sure why there was a special iPhone mention when it’s just 20% of global sales, can you just talk about phones in general? They all work with USB C, is that what you wanted to say? Not really relevant to a camera comparison if some older phone still uses a lighting port, very confusing
Tony, great educational video, as always, I was checking to see if there is a Canon R6 mkiii already on the market, as you have it listed... on your video timeframe 3:14 :) Looking to see and learn more from your videos, Cheers!
I used to really enjoy their reviews. There is nothing wrong with anything you buy at this point, everything is just great these days. Technology has proven that with all camera systems. More settings, more choices = better results. I still use my D750 for events and portraits.
@@TonyAndChelsea I mostly just come to see your opinion and comparisons on various models. However it's hard to take some of your testing methods seriously.
Forced HDR bracketing just to overcome an under-performing DR is probably not a good solution for everyone. Not everything is static stills stuff photographed from a tripod. - Some also photograph people or animals (in difficult light, e.g backlit, or in other high-contrast / deep shadows situations), or - just don't want to bother carrying a heavy tripod (or being slowed down by hassling with a tripod) when on a vacation or on a hike. Also, sometimes photographers are already 'occupied' with other forms of multiple-shot-workflows, such as - focus stacking (often landscapes with wide angle lenses, when having a relatively close foreground) - panoramas - night sky stacking (many exposures with same parameters over a longer time to reduce noise, while the slow sky rotation is compensated in special stacking software).
I think your conclusion would have been better served to match your analysis. The Sony system at this mid tier range is head and shoulders above the competition, in most circumstances except very fast moving subjects. But can still do 80% of sports and wildlife scenarios so it is the most logical choice. 🤷♂️
Only a fool would think that dynamic range is not necessary, the Sony has saved me so many times with miss fire from the flash and using the raw file allows me to still get the shot the a7iv rocks 🔥
But especially for pros, Sony seems to become the dominant brand, if you look around. Especially outside of the (actually very small) sports niche. Pros are businesses / entrepreneurs, they look for best cost/value ratios, and best technology. For them, cameras are their tools, so they don't care about "retro" or "nostalgia" feelings etcetera. They have different criteria than a lot of hobbyists (who tend to be older nowadays).
Well done comparison but you neglected what many would conclude to be the most important criteria for selecting among the three: LENSES. And unless money doesn't matter the winner is Sony and its e-mount offerings from Sigma, Tamron and several others.
The Sony had everything but high frame rate, and full-frame 4k60. But Sony has something the others don't. Third-party lenses. Canon has none for full-frame, Nikon only has third-party lenses it doesn't want to make.
While it is a good point, how many third party lenses a brand has does not affect the function and performance of a camera. It does affect decision making while purchasing which maybe a whole other matter for another video.
@@h.o.j2375 It STRONGLY affects the value proposition of buying into a system. If a Canon body is $500 cheaper than its Sony counterpart, but a buyer can save $1500, buying Sigma Art lenses (or even more for Sigma's i-series lenses) for the Sony, is the Canon really a better deal?
It took several years for Chelsea to go off the rails and I support this. I would like for her to go full Will Friedle from Boy Meets World college years. Get weird. Also, could you review the Megadap? I feel like the Megadap with small Sony lenses with aperture rings really makes the Zf a more fun experience.
Hi, your videos are awesome, I wonder if you can compare Canon R8 with budget lenses to Sony a6700 with best possible glass, sharpness, image quality, low light, performance, heating, battery, etc. Because these two cameras are comparable by price. Sony has best glass for apsc but canon don't. But Canon has R8 with APSC price and sony don't.
The in focus test should be the most important test. Nikons 64% is a failing grade and explains a lot. I just got rid of my z7II because many of my shots were out of focus and ordered the z8 which I will now cancel. Looks like I should be buying either Sony or Canon instead, just can't decide which to buy for taking pictures of a toddler running around and travel. I just want a camera that is better than my iPhone otherwise there's no reason for a fancy camera.
Rolling shutter makes 7A IV useless for video. Nikon‘s videos suffer from oldfashioned microphone preamp, still causing annoying audio noise while recording
@@Chow0012 Definitely not, Sony's sensor is by far the slowest and notorious for really severe RS. Canon and Nikon do not show rolling shutter to a significant extent in either 4K 30 or 4K 60 video recordings - no crop! - but with Sony, even a quick pan to the side is a risk.
> Rolling shutter makes 7A IV useless for video. Yeah no, it doesn't matter 99% of the time. It's a great video camera, with low light performance close to A7 SIII while not in S-LOG3's second base ISO and with enough bells and whistles for your typical hybrid work. The real issue here is crop factor for 60 FPS.
I also thought, isn't it rather 9% than 90%? 🙂 Or even less. Let's not forget, only 0.1% run a TH-cam channel, and over 90% don't care any more about video, than what their smartphone could and would cover sufficiently?
The auto focus of the z6 iii is not good? You are the only ones saying that. You are the only source of this complain. Maybe your review is with and earlier firmware. Well this video is quite low on the list of search
@@tubularificationed I find that passive aggressive laughing emojis or xd at the sentence end usually point to a person that's oblivious and at the peak of Dunning-Kruger wave form. You are not an exception to the rule.
How is it that many other YT reviews have really good results with the Nikon Z6iii and then yours seem to always contradict the many other reviews when theirs are backed with facts? Do you need to go back to a photography basics class to be on par with other good photographers? I strongly would not recommend your channel to anyone after seeing the bias that you produce. I understand having a bias for a product that you personally like. But leave that out when reviewing products and review them equally with other brands to show a true review, which I’ve never seen from your channel.
These people are making fools of themselves, they do everything to force things to go wrong with Nikon. They show a perfectly lit Canon video vs a Nikon video without light at 12800 iso... it's embarrassing, the best thing is that most people realize it in this comment thread.
Tony, your Nikon 60 frames/second vs. Sony 10 frames/second autofocus test is wrong - you should have used the same speed for all cameras. If Sony was slowest at 10 frames per second but highest for 'in focus' rate then you should use the same speed for Canon and Nikon to have apples to apples comparison. Also, other condition / setting should be the same, and If you set Nikon shutter 'focus' release at 10 frames / second, I am sure 'in focus' rate would greatly improve.
Thank you, I was going to comment this.
That shouldn't make a difference, given that the Z6 III was designed for the small-ish niche of 'action photography', therefore assuming its fastest FPS as its standard working condition. The AF / the entire processor was surely sized sensibly fast enough to accommodate such FPS easily, w/o becoming faulty or compromised then.
@@tubularificationed What the heck are you even saying? Makes complete sense to shoot as close as possible to the same fps when comparing keeper success rate. Along with lens focal length and aperture and shutter speed etc. Use of similar focusing modes on each body too, of which none of those things are mentioned in this testing.
You aren't buying the Nikon to shoot 10fps. If the Nikon AF can't keep up with the FPS, then it shouldn't be doing it. This is information people need to know.
@@MrJleash I agree that it makes sense to shoot at the same FPS to compare success rate. But in the end, what you really want is to know how many sharp photos I can take per second, which is the combination of FPS and keeper rate at that FPS. Having a camera with 120 FPS and 30% success rate just gives more sharp photos, and that is what sport/wildlife photography is all about.
Tony's review on Nikon system nowadays; Trust me bro and people are not buying it. The reviews are more like why this system is not like Sony's. You're missing 55% portraits on a stand still subject on Nikon and Canon, seriously? Bashing Nikon DR again and again even after making 2 separate videos just about that (no review still.) It's not even that bad, who're these so called photographer that won't crank up their ISO to 800 but rather take a - 6 EV shot, are you serious? After watching other videos on Ziii system, one thing is clear, just know your gear before taking it out on the field, know what AF system works better in what situations, feel free to change it, its not a smartphone comparison where you see how's the camera out of the box. It's people's right to know that the DR performance is almost the same, after the second base ISO of 800, in all the cameras. Don't create scenarios specifically targeting the brand you don't like anymore. Also it'll be better if you'll provide people with more information, settings used, lenses used, values, etc, side by side comparisons. Stop these trust me bro kind of reviews, that'll only hurt your credentials.
missing 55% on a still subject and achieving much better results on a running subject at 40 fps 🤣
if you're a canon portrait photographer, just ask your model to run towards you, you'll help the eye af a great deal 🤣😂🤣
@@igorrutsch Its funny that in the same test, Nikon shot about 36 sharp photos in a second but what could be better than that? A 92% hit rate Sony, with a massive 9 photos per seconds. And eventually you might miss a big moment on a Nikon system, XD.
Nikon Z6iii just doesn’t look like a great value proposition compared to the competitors for general photography.
@@shubhamsingh6293 exactly !🤣
Something is seriously flawed with this test. I am shooting Nikon z6iii now I almost never get out of focus shots even when people are moving fast, etc, even at extreme darkness. Also Nikon is slow at getting the face in focus, wtf, it finds a face in pics darkenss even If the face is covering an extremely small portion of the frame, or even if the person is not looking in the camera, so you see only the back of the head. The noise is maybe a bit worse at 100 iso, but its fine noise which can be easily corrected in post, at higher iso settings its the same. Especially against the sun portraits with z6iii are way easier at af works amazing. Z6ii had issues with this.
th-cam.com/video/9r3tlQaVqPA/w-d-xo.html
Nikon is still behind on auto focus. This is just common knowledge at this point. Sony and Canon are basically neck and neck, then Nikon, then Fujifilm.
@@RiposteThisPanasonic just surpassed Nikon in autofocus. Sony, Canon, and now Panasonic have the best autofocus in 2024. Overall Nikon is still far behind.
@@alphaandomega2709 Oh shit, that's wild. I haven't paid much attention to Panasonic but that's amazing.
you only think it is not out of focus because you never compared it to a sony side by side, which is good news for you. ignorance is bliss. what nikon and fuji user define as sharp would be what people complain if sony or canon deliver that result
Honestly I’m not surprised at your review once again about the Nikon Z 6III. Watching this video just makes me feel you have a beef with Nikon and it clearly shows in the video. You aren’t telling us what settings you had the camera on or even what ISO, AF. All you just did in the entire video was lament about dynamic range like as if that’s the only thing that makes a camera.
What are you complaining about? They literally said many people don't care about dynamic range and the ones who do, here are some techniques so its not an issue. How are you seeing "beef with Nikon" when they are very glowing about them and said multiple times how all three are great cameras?
@@arthurmarshall6825 Because they clearly have a "beef with Nikon". They keep nagging about dynamic range, but did not even mention the faster readout speed, which is the reason the Z6III has a lower DR. Also, the EVF on the Nikon is the best of the three, but they also did not mention it.
@@Ausknutz That is just silly. If dynamic range is important to me, I don't care WHY, I would just care if it is an issue and if there is anything to be done to make it not a issue. And they covered that. Its only a 11 minute video so of course they are not going to cover everything. Their premise is that all 3 are good so they have to hit the highlights of why someone would or would not pick a camera. Dynamic range is a reason someone would or would not buy a camera for. EVF, less likely.
@@arthurmarshall6825 It’s not about what they said, it how they said it and what wasn’t shown.
Odd you do not mention Nikons strengths like the refresh rate. I'm a Sony shooter but the A7iv's silent mode is unusable in a lot of situations like indoors under lights and with anything moving. Your extremely low hit rate on the eye with the Nikon makes me think you have it set wrong or you have a bad copy. I played with a Z8 and Z7 and both would have higher scores than you are giving the Z6III for eye Af in portraits.
Shoot tight headshots at 200mm f2.8, vertically, so depth of field is shallow. Then we look closely to verify the iris is perfectly sharp.
Thank you for being a honest camera lover and not a brand loyal prick like these youtubers
I really don’t care which camera is the best, as all new cameras are more than good enough for most users.
That being said, those guys are acting like the youtube camera Mafia, spreading misinformation while purposely doing flawed tests when it comes to Nikon.
It is not about being a Nikon user or not, it is about having some dignity and not let people like Tony abusing their position. The best thing you can do is report for misinformation/spam and stop watching their videos so we get to have less people like these doing reviews/driving the market.
Nikon syncs at 1250, set your auto fp on .Sonyband canon may have better dynamic range but nikon color science trumps whatever advantage these other cameras may have. Took your time to underline the autofocus and dynamic range performance but don't get to mention the wonderful viewfinder of the nikon and how faster its latency is compared to the sony and canon.
No mention of the superior codecs that are available in the nikon compared to the sony and canon.
I believe you have had these cameras for quite sometime but your comparison is shallow at best .
I totally agree
This is absolute nonsense. First of all, they are talking about sync speed without going into HSS. With HSS, the Sony and Canon can sync at any shutter speed you want. But using HSS drops your flash power considerably. So they're most certainly correct in pointing out that the regular sync speed of the Nikon is slower. Second, colour science is a marketing buzzword with absolutely no real world impact. Anyone who cares about colour will shoot raw, which means you'll be able to make any camera look like any other camera in terms of colour with one click in post. Third, the Nikon has a worse viewfinder than the Sony, so what are you on about there?
@@youknowwho9247Nikon gives you option to sync at 200 or 250 ,so to say the canon and Sony has advantage there is not correct .
I've just bought the A7 IV for landscape photography and I'm over the moon with it!
@@afinney88 It’s great for landscape and portraits, but I would advise against it for sports since my results were far worse than theirs.
why not z7ii?
Sony the best!
Just sold my Nikon and looking at A7iv :] soooon
@@benoittissier58 Same. I got he R6 II because for sports it never misses. I shoot hockey with the 70-200 2.8 and it will nail eye AF even through cages and visors well over 90% of the time. It's incredible. Also didn't want that 4k crop on the Sony. It's still a nice cam though.
When comparing the dynamic ranges, you fail to say that those numbers are _at base iso_. At higher iso values the three cameras have identical dynamic ranges, so they are equally good at shooting in darker places (and better than an APSC camera).
They pull down nikon as much as they can as usual. Nikon lacks.. But it's not as pathetic as they make it sound.
On top of that z6iii dynamic range is actually better than R6ii in Electronic shutter by about the same difference highlighted in the review. There’s a lot of nuance that’s missed in their reviews.
Wow you make it like apsc is trash, as long as we have a fast enough lens and bump the iso a tiny bit apsc gets the job done!
@@livejames9374 Agreed. At what ISO are we measuring? Many situation don’t allow for shooting at lower ISOs of 400 and lower. And yes, I think most people will want to take advantage of the faster fps and use ES so your point is correct but they didn’t point out the advantage of dynamic range with ES.
@@skandhaprasath2767 That's because Nikon no longer invites them to launch events. Their channel has become such clown nonsense, especially at the news reports where Tony takes his glasses off. So childish. And worst of all, they really have no technical knowledge and testing. They talk about video, but its about focus, nothing about waveforms, zebras, peaking, etc.. how they have 1m subscribers is astonishing. It's like someone who has NO clue about a car has a channel talking about cars. Sure, they know how to turn a steering wheel, use the radio, but mechanical know-how like valves, cams, timing, compression, stroke.. they're absolutely clueless.
It is worth noting that the Canon R6 Mk II is $500 cheaper than the others. I think you ought to mention how old each model is and what the current prices are at Adorama (or another major retailer). These both factor heavily in decision making.
You are right about how old each model is but everytime they really talked about a camera they had the price in the corner. They didn't "say Canon is $500 cheaper" but the info is right on the screen.
And Canon lenses and I mean each lens you purchase will cost DOUBLE what you can purchase from Sony and its e-mount options from Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, Viltrox, Artison and many others.
Hmmm… my Z6iii finds eye autofocus immediately. It’s really sticky and I only need to try again if it grabs the wrong persons eye. I use 3D autofocus most of the time.
Nikon fanboys can’t accept “Facts” 😂😂😂😂😂
@@JimVajda82 This video was a total mess. They deliberately set up the Z 6III to fail. They didn’t even mention all their settings for AF or IOS.
They said that the system is good. Just not as good as the others. Have you used the Sony and canon? If not, what are you basing your critique on?
Even if the box follow your subject/eyes, it doesn't mean that the iris will be in focus. In all the camera, those AF boxes are extremely misleading.
@@alphaandomega2709It seems you are got the wrong way by the unaccurate review/testing from youtuber to argue nikon😌
Busted out the old Z6ii with Z 85 1.2 and hit well over 50% for sharp iris. How do you guys manage to get lower with R6ii and Z6iii. Your tests always amaze (confuse) me.
You still didn’t address all the comments pointing out how you compared video with noise reduction vs a video mode that didn’t have any noise reduction in last video.
Why would you compare 60fps jpeg to 40 fps raw and 10 fps raw? All of your tests seem oddly designed to have a desired outcome lol e.g. “if I raise shadows 6.3 stops” in dynamic range tests.
We are rigorous and precise with our tests. We addresed the noise reduction in the video comparison dozens of times in the comments. We generally shoot sports in JPG, and I mentioned the Nikon is limited to JPG in that mode.
@@TonyAndChelsea the comments you kept repeating showed you didn’t have any understanding of the noise reduction issue and worse didn’t try to gain an understanding. I find that odd for someone that claims to be rigorous and precise
@@TonyAndChelsea nub channel
Would have been interesting to compare AF performances for sports at different frame rates (6, 10, 20, 40) instead of using only the max frame rate of each.
There's no discussion about the pros in Z6iii like fast readout speed, good EVF in this "review".
Only a sponsored video to make Sony look the best and Canon the 2nd best.
I didn't buy the A7IV because its eye AF has a front focus issue (well known in the forums) and it has cropped 4K. I got the R6 II instead and it's so much better for eye AF which is opposite what T&C found for some reason. I can shoot hockey with the R6 II and 70-200 2.8 and use eye AF and get 95% hit rate - it nails the eyes even through visors and cages! I also never hit the buffer but I always shoot at 12 FPS mechanical for the best IQ. I shot as a pro with the 1D cams for years at 10 FPS and never missed a shot due to FPS speed so 12 FPS is way more than enough. I hate culling even 12 FPS bursts let alone 40.
I also found the R6 II to be about 1/3 stop cleaner than the A7IV at high ISOs and also slightly less shadow noise than the A7IV when recovering shadows. The resolution doesn't really matter much. I found that the lens sharpness and AF accuracy makes a bigger difference to detail than a few extra advertised megapixels.
Never noticed front focus issue with the A7iv. But I had severe focusing issues for sports. Tracking in the EVF is about perfect, but actual focus point that you see when reviewing pics on the camera is somewhere else.
I switched to the A1 and AF problem is gone.
That eye AF front focusing issue was with some samples from the earliest batches produced 3 years ago.
Nowadays you would be safe, but only IF you buy a new camera of course. On the used market, I'd be aware of the issue, especially if a very old/early A7 IV is offered too cheaply 😉
But that could be a steal of course, if you don't care for portraits, but use it for general purposes, travel, landscape, tripod work, etc.
92 % focus accuracy with the A7iv for sports, that is magic to me ! I was happy when I got more than 70%. I have switched to the A1 now and get 98% sharps with the same lenses
You turn off everything lens compensation option on the A7iv and focus will be awesome
Very helpful review, thanks. We're living in a golden age for photography gear as there aren't really any truly bad cameras anymore.
If the rumors are true and Canon wants to stay above the new Nikon Z6 3 meaning a R6 mk3 is coming , then the MK2 will be a great value.
Lets consider R5 and R5 mk2 . Right now R5 is around ~3k . So it dropped significantly in price with R5 mk2 released.
That will happen with R6 mk2 as well . Id expect the R6 mk2 to drop close to R8 prices which will make this camera probably the best value on the market.
$1500-$1700 for a camera with exceptional auto-focus / IBIS / no crops on video / Clog 3 and other cool features... thats a good camera.
@@Jin.Sensei R6 2 is a fairly new body. I think there will be no upgrade before 2025
Not really relevant when the lenses are super expensive, a body is useless without good lenses
Why was the LUMIX S5II/S5II X excluded from this review?
I've had the A7RIII since 2019 and to this point, for my photography, I don't need anything else. So thankful to be GAS free. Still like watching all your camera gear reviews though. Good stuff
Bought any lenses since 2019?
@@aliendroneservices6621 I bought the camera with the 24-105 f4, added the 14-24 Sigma a few months later or whenever it came out. Can't really remember exactly when. And just recently got the 100-400 Sigma for a trip. So I'm all set. Don't need anything else for the work that I do.
@@aliendroneservices6621 2 lenses since 2019
I upgraded to A7R IV from A7R III for a more reliable auto focus capability. For fast moving, A7R III was not very reliable. For landscape or portrait, A7R III should suffice anyone with a better low IOS performance.
I would match the fps to see the hit rate. Obviously, 60fps will have less time to AF than 10 fps.
Hey Tony & Chelsea...Throw the Lumix S5 II into the mix. I'd really like to know how it stacks up against the 3 "big boys"
I am using Sony A7IV with 16-35mm f2.8 GM and really enjoying clicking
The more you abuse Nikon Z6 III their sales will increase 😅
These videos of yours clearly shows you want to promote Sony and everyone understands it 😂😂
You think we want to promote Sony so we demonstrated that it was a loser in video and sports.
@@TonyAndChelsea most people don't shoot at 4K 30fps as you mentioned for Sony. lol 😂
The dynamic range only matters at very low ISO. They are all about the same at higher ISO. I think this inflates the issue. Pretty much means it only matters if you are doing still photography like landscape + have a high dynamic range scene + don't want to bracket which you probably should do anyways. For sports the readout speed in electronic matters a lot, the SONY is really bad compared to the others. The Z6III sensor is better compared to other stacked sensors which pretty much all show that low ISO DR loss.
For me the winner is… the one that natively supports all my Canon lenses 🤪👍 great video! 👏👏
Really loved yall guys did this. Would love to see yall do this with Apsc bodies from different makers seeing how so many use aps-c cameras.
This channel has 1.6M followers but all i see is that a lot of people are criticizing their reviews. Did I miss something? I haven't watched their videos in a while. Did it start at some point or is it about few reviews only?
It's the same every time Nikon looks bad in comparisons.
They are here to make money and seemingly they force it to bash on particular camera brands like Nikon. This shows that Nikon is making pressure on the competition and they are not liking it! They were laughing first now they are worried lol.
They are the CNN of camera reviews
It looks like they get paid by Sony there is no way auto focus is better on he Sony over the canon. I see reviews so many times but they are always lean towards Sony and I think all TH-cam are getting paid well by sony
Did you use the cameras out the box, or did you change the controls and settings to get the best out of each?
How many more Nikon z6iii videos are you going to launch? We see the love! 😂
Nice review. Thank you again, Tony and Chelsea.
Could you please share your settings on the Sony for the tracking shots? Which lens did you use?
I am puzzled by your comparison. Nikon keeps 36 fps focused in action, canon 33 fps. Why would then you prefer canon?
Tony: Dinamic range is the ability to lift up shadows??? Really?? Isn’t the range between highlights and shadows?
Yeah but usually the highlight recovery is equalized between images so where you see the difference in practice is shadow recovery.
I am buying Z6iii
You’ll love it! I love mine!
I have iPhone 14 Pro, and Apple has an SD to Lightning adapter, and it might not be as fast as USB-C, but it’s still WAY faster than transferring with the app. It’s also an awesome option to quickly share pictures with folks at events, people love it when you share on the spot!
Unfortunately you can't buy that adapter anymore
@@TonyAndChelsea i see it still offered on the Apple website. Lightning to SD Card Camera Reader
@@TonyAndChelsea Since when? It's listed on Apple's webstore and available for pickup at my local Apple store.
Tony & Chelsea.. you are wrongly mentioning in some places in your video the Canon R6 II as Canon R6 III. See 3:15
If you shoot a backlit subject you should be exposing for the subject and not the overall scene forcing you to pull up the shadows by 2 stops in post and then complain about increased noise. Expose properly, or a least close, and none of these cameras will have any problem with dynamic range and noise. Also, to improve the speed/behavior on the Nikon video focus, you can adjust settings such as the g6: AF Speed and g7: AF Tracking Sensitivity menu items. I’m not sure if they’re numbered exactly the same as on the Z8 (don’t have the Z6 III) but they are likely the same or close to those.
And then your sky is COMPLETELY blown out. Unrecoverable pure white.
I feel like I’ve been lied to. I always thought bsi and stacked sensors were supposed to give better low light performance and less noise. Now that we have them it seems to provide the opposite. I’m so glad I didn’t wait to get the R5 m2 and just got the R6 m2. Low light performance is incredible compared to the RP it replaced. And everything new coming out as well. Surprisingly.
That's back side illuminated (BSI) - moves the circuitry behind the photosites. Adding the stacking seems to reduce dynamic range. Most new cameras coming out now are both BSI and stacked
3:05 why does it say “D850” in the top left corner of Lightroom?
Just the example that I pulled to illustrate the concept of recovering shadows.
@@TonyAndChelseagot it. I missed if you said that I was working and had this video running in the background. 😊
Should have included Lumix S5ii
Definitely, particularly because it's at least 1000 euros cheaper & in many respects (for example Open Gate or proper-quality, while still pretty 'lean", H.265) has better video support than these cameras.
@@mostlyfinnishlifeeventsand5112 Open Gate is overrated.
@@truthseeker6804 it's not only for Instagram / Tiktok folks. Not in the least. Basically, you have a 8K camera, just without the leftmost / rightmost around 2x4 Mpixels.
Nikon has the best colour
Thanks for this comparison video that others do not provide. I have always appreciated these videos.
Landscape guy here (some macro and birds, Astro, and some street)
Overall, I was curious if you think I’d be just fine with my z6iii?
I don’t do photography for a living, but do like social media posting and I love it when folks critique and compliment my photos.
Of these 3 cameras, would any one of them show a noticeable difference with what I mentioned earlier for what I shoot? I don’t think anyone actually pixel peeps my photos and heck, I’ve been published by the Wildlife Audubon and American Rivers corporation when I used my Nikon D3200 many moons ago.
Thoughts?
Thanks for the comparison. Looking for a back up body for my Canon R3 and was wondering if i should get the R6II or if I should dust off the A73 im no longer using.
Always feels ashame that you fail to include Lumix in these tests. They are a viable market option. I'm sure your reasoning is their small market share, but companies like Sony grew partially from review coverage found here on TH-cam. Eh, it just seems odd to me. ✌️
2:42, so she is basing what she's saying off Photons to Photos. For those who don't know, Photons to Photos is a ONE man operation, not a lab. William the owner of PtP has brand bias which immediately disqualifies him and he has the most idiotic testing methodology like using JPEGs for some test and RAW for others. This is why no one trusts PtP, nor Northrups. I hate when biased people review cameras, because you can't help but see their bias in reviews. DXOMark remains the one lab that accurately tests camera sensors. As for redundant recording, you have to realize that SD UHS-II can't record NRAW. Neither would the Sony or Canon.... if they even could shoot RAW in the first place. The heat generated would be insane. Tony negates to add that critical fact. Where he is right is that when shooting H.265, Nikon does not have redundant recording which is pretty ridiculous, especially marketing it as a video camera. UHS-II and CFExpress slots are capable of H.265 redundant recording, so no excuse.
Thank you. I know these comparisons are difficult and everyone thinks their brand has been mistreated. I’ve owned all three brands. AF accuracy, dynamic range, and improved resolution are my needs but in a smaller body with excellent smaller lenses which is why my everyday carry is the newer Sony A7CII. I use bigger full size full frame cameras when I need two CFexpress card slots or faster FPS. Yes, I know everyone cannot afford multiple cameras but if I were buying today I might get a great price on the A7CII and see what the A7V looks like in six months. After all it is the oldest of the three and that greatly influences the comparison. Also Sony first and Nikon second when you look for reasonable but high quality FF lenses at a lower price. (Sigma and Tamron)
I got a question would it make the big difference if you shooting 4K on a crop sensor camera versus a full frame camera?
Yeah it's a pretty big difference. Check SDP.io/crop
How’s the boktoneh?
I really wanted to love my R6II, but the AF has been less than impressive so far. I also own an a6700, and the autofocus in many situations vastly outperforms the R6II. Not sure how the a7IV AF compares to the a6700, but if it is close I'd probably go with the Sony. Particular areas where the R6II fails relative to the a6700 are eye tracking (or any tracking, really) when there is camera movement. The a6700 just locks on, while the R6II loses accuracy greatly when the camera is moved, even slightly. No matter the tracking case or slider settings. Also, when eye/face/subject tracking, the R6II will have difficulty locking on or lose the subject if it is in a "busy" scene or when other objects pass between the camera and the subject relative to the a6700. Maybe not dealbreakers for many, but for shooting sports and panning it has been frustrating. Even simple portraits have been frustrating if the camera position has to be adjusted slightly, as the tracking will miss the eye for several frames.
A7iv doesn’t af like A6700. You’ll need to get the A7r5 for that the AI af performance.
Pretty sure the R6 murders everything in its class when it comes to autofocus. Which means it’s you doing something wrong.
@@TegneaufreakYou write from experience, then? I do.
@@livejames9374What are you saying? The a6700 has the new Ai auto focus features. Like tracking and other new algorithms
@@livejames9374I have both and couldn’t tell you the difference… both are really capable. The a6700 doesn’t have IBIS and, well, who the hell wants to shoot on aps-c these days? Don’t bother making the case btw, I listened to the arguments for aps-c for years and it held me back. FF for the image quality in photo and video is a different league and anyone who says otherwise is wrong.
The older iPhones actually have a SD card reader dongle that allows you to plug your SD card straight into the phone via the lightning port, and it’s what I had been doing ever since my old iPhone 7
Yes but it's no longer available.
@@TonyAndChelsea oh really? Thank God I just got a spare not too long ago lol. Thanks for the update, Tony and Chelsea! 😃
3:38 what? Why? You know that that apsc crop mode is still oversampled and still it is interesting to see how it compares. I highly doubt that Sony apsc mode would loose that hard to others in ff mode in terms of dr and sharpness, while autofocus is the best and slog 3 may be the most flexible and mature. And after that you go on and say that most people shoot 30fps anyway when the thrown out "looser" sony oversample 7ks worth of resolution in that mode and is probably the best not counting readout speed? What the hell was that Tony? Lazyass copout and a contradiction.
I got very excited when your video showed the Canon R6 Mk III available for $1999 (3:14).
Hey Tony ya no vas a probar los google pixel?
I like the Canon R with 30 mp. Bit clunky but I like using it more than my R6mk2.
As you often say, but not in this video its about the eco system and with 3rd party lens support for Sony and Nikon I think that's definitely a consideration as well.
What about Lumix S5ii?
At 3.56mins you say with the Sony A7iv in 60fps that there is a APSC crop and that means worse lowlight performance, how?? considering that it's a full frame sensor with large light gathering pixels and you are only cropping into the middle of the sensor not making the pixels smaller as in an ASPC sized sensor with smaller light gathering pixels. The pixels don't change size just because you crop to APSC for video in camera.
You're gathering less total light because the surface area is smaller. Pixel size is unrelated. Check SDP.io/CROP
You are really confused about light gathering, in short, pixel size has very little to do with low lighting capabilities (despite everything they write on the internet), while sensor size has a lot. Of course large sensors tend to have larger pixels and less density, but that’s not the point.
Did you ever solve the eye focus problems w Sigma 24-70mm v2?
i've used the A74 extensively for work and their DR isn't what it seems, they pull a bit of a 'trick' with the raw files; their deep shadows are low-contrast / flat, this can give the illusion of better DR on charts. If you've never used one of the new sony's before, try one out. they are good cameras! but not all is what it seems. their 'colour science' i think is down to what they're doing with making their raw files 'flatter' than other brands, it also slightly desaturates. you can boost saturation, sure, but that's when issues of green-ish skintones start to show themselves. i really don't want to bash sony too much because i think the a74 is a bargain for what it is, especially on the video side of things, but nikon have acquired RED and internal raw video is HUGE. shame they didn't mention or test that in this video. i'll continue to use the a74 at work (it's their camera) and i'll enjoy it, but if i were to buy my own i'd say now is the time to get on the nikon mount / system. just my opinion. also, the DR thing with nikon, who is consistently underexposing 3EV? lol.
I have the Sony a7iv and mostly love it. I'm a little jealous of some of the features on the newer bodies, but I can say from experience that 33 megapixels is a lot more than 24 when you crop. I can't go back down. All I really want now from an a7v is a better EVF, uncropped 4k 60 and a lot less rolling shutter. Everything else is just gravy at this point.
At one time the cost and color of lenses had a major factor in the choosing of a system. This was the late `80s. Do you see the color cast of lenses as any part of your decisions since the start of digital in the late '80s early '90s?
Not really sure why there was a special iPhone mention when it’s just 20% of global sales, can you just talk about phones in general? They all work with USB C, is that what you wanted to say? Not really relevant to a camera comparison if some older phone still uses a lighting port, very confusing
Thanks for the video. I hope you will make a video of the settings Canon R5 mk ii for landscape shooters. Take care.
3:14 says Canon R6 III :P
and only 1999.00! 🙂
Very nice comparison. But you missed S5iix .
Hi, I my primary camera d5300. Proven best camera is which camera you have right now 😅.
I have the same d5300 wanna upgrade yo full frame as a freelancer event photographer... Completely confused with z6iii and sony a7iv
Tony, great educational video, as always, I was checking to see if there is a Canon R6 mkiii already on the market, as you have it listed... on your video timeframe 3:14 :) Looking to see and learn more from your videos, Cheers!
without watching the video at all i can tell sony A7 4 is the winner as per them .....
I used to really enjoy their reviews. There is nothing wrong with anything you buy at this point, everything is just great these days. Technology has proven that with all camera systems. More settings, more choices = better results. I still use my D750 for events and portraits.
Just came here for the Nikon dynamic range bashing. What a surprise. Found it.
Well, it's a serious issue that potential buyers need to be aware of. We offered solutions, such as bracketing with HDR.
@@TonyAndChelsea I mostly just come to see your opinion and comparisons on various models. However it's hard to take some of your testing methods seriously.
@@TonyAndChelseadepends what ISO you are using and you didn't say that.
No mention of the R6ii abysmal electronic shutter DR?
Forced HDR bracketing just to overcome an under-performing DR is probably not a good solution for everyone. Not everything is static stills stuff photographed from a tripod.
- Some also photograph people or animals (in difficult light, e.g backlit, or in other high-contrast / deep shadows situations), or
- just don't want to bother carrying a heavy tripod (or being slowed down by hassling with a tripod) when on a vacation or on a hike.
Also, sometimes photographers are already 'occupied' with other forms of multiple-shot-workflows, such as
- focus stacking (often landscapes with wide angle lenses, when having a relatively close foreground)
- panoramas
- night sky stacking (many exposures with same parameters over a longer time to reduce noise, while the slow sky rotation is compensated in special stacking software).
I think your conclusion would have been better served to match your analysis. The Sony system at this mid tier range is head and shoulders above the competition, in most circumstances except very fast moving subjects. But can still do 80% of sports and wildlife scenarios so it is the most logical choice. 🤷♂️
I'd like the see the Lumix S5ii thrown in the mix.
Only a fool would think that dynamic range is not necessary, the Sony has saved me so many times with miss fire from the flash and using the raw file allows me to still get the shot the a7iv rocks 🔥
where's the mention of internal-raw-video of the nikon ???
What camera did you use to shoot this video.
Sony a7S III with 35mm F1.4
These days it doesn't really make any difference... I personally go for Sony just because cheaper 3rd party lenses. I am not a pro shooter though
But especially for pros, Sony seems to become the dominant brand, if you look around. Especially outside of the (actually very small) sports niche. Pros are businesses / entrepreneurs, they look for best cost/value ratios, and best technology. For them, cameras are their tools, so they don't care about "retro" or "nostalgia" feelings etcetera. They have different criteria than a lot of hobbyists (who tend to be older nowadays).
Great!! Can you guys do a side by side video of R5 & R5 mk II?
Thanks!
Yes, soon. We're testing them now.
@@TonyAndChelsea
Thanks a lot!!!
Well done comparison but you neglected what many would conclude to be the most important criteria for selecting among the three: LENSES. And unless money doesn't matter the winner is Sony and its e-mount offerings from Sigma, Tamron and several others.
@ 3.14 the Canon has an R6 III out?? or typo?
The Sony had everything but high frame rate, and full-frame 4k60. But Sony has something the others don't. Third-party lenses. Canon has none for full-frame, Nikon only has third-party lenses it doesn't want to make.
While it is a good point, how many third party lenses a brand has does not affect the function and performance of a camera. It does affect decision making while purchasing which maybe a whole other matter for another video.
@@h.o.j2375 It STRONGLY affects the value proposition of buying into a system. If a Canon body is $500 cheaper than its Sony counterpart, but a buyer can save $1500, buying Sigma Art lenses (or even more for Sigma's i-series lenses) for the Sony, is the Canon really a better deal?
It took several years for Chelsea to go off the rails and I support this. I would like for her to go full Will Friedle from Boy Meets World college years. Get weird. Also, could you review the Megadap? I feel like the Megadap with small Sony lenses with aperture rings really makes the Zf a more fun experience.
Why does it say Canon R6 II in the title but R6 III in the video? Which one is it?
There is no R6 III so I must have just gotten confused with the numbers. Sorry.
Northrupian slip?
Hi, your videos are awesome, I wonder if you can compare Canon R8 with budget lenses to Sony a6700 with best possible glass, sharpness, image quality, low light, performance, heating, battery, etc. Because these two cameras are comparable by price. Sony has best glass for apsc but canon don't. But Canon has R8 with APSC price and sony don't.
"you should get all of them" haha...good answer!
Just to say that at least one of the captions referred to a Canon R6 mk 111
The in focus test should be the most important test. Nikons 64% is a failing grade and explains a lot. I just got rid of my z7II because many of my shots were out of focus and ordered the z8 which I will now cancel. Looks like I should be buying either Sony or Canon instead, just can't decide which to buy for taking pictures of a toddler running around and travel. I just want a camera that is better than my iPhone otherwise there's no reason for a fancy camera.
Rolling shutter makes 7A IV useless for video. Nikon‘s videos suffer from oldfashioned microphone preamp, still causing annoying audio noise while recording
The same could be said for all 3 cameras
@@Chow0012 Definitely not, Sony's sensor is by far the slowest and notorious for really severe RS. Canon and Nikon do not show rolling shutter to a significant extent in either 4K 30 or 4K 60 video recordings - no crop! - but with Sony, even a quick pan to the side is a risk.
> Rolling shutter makes 7A IV useless for video.
Yeah no, it doesn't matter 99% of the time. It's a great video camera, with low light performance close to A7 SIII while not in S-LOG3's second base ISO and with enough bells and whistles for your typical hybrid work. The real issue here is crop factor for 60 FPS.
Thank you guys. Top quality content. Much appreciated.
And the S5ii?
90% shoot stills and videos? Really?
I also thought, isn't it rather 9% than 90%? 🙂 Or even less. Let's not forget, only 0.1% run a TH-cam channel, and over 90% don't care any more about video, than what their smartphone could and would cover sufficiently?
Love the DJI app for the pocket 3 early on after getting one. Maybe one day the big 3 will get on the level
Yeah that app really shows the potential.
The auto focus of the z6 iii is not good? You are the only ones saying that. You are the only source of this complain. Maybe your review is with and earlier firmware. Well this video is quite low on the list of search
Thanks for the great review!!!
Glad it was helpful!
I like the Sony but that shutter is too loud. It makes you the centre of attention. I would have concerns at a wedding.
For situations where this would be a concern, there is this great invention called 'electronic shutter', really as if made for such situations 😉
@@tubularificationed Unfortunately, the same people also invented rolling shutter and banding.
@@tubularificationed I find that passive aggressive laughing emojis or xd at the sentence end usually point to a person that's oblivious and at the peak of Dunning-Kruger wave form. You are not an exception to the rule.
How do you guys film this without a million photographers in the background? I’ve been to that park and it’s always crazy busy!
Haha yeah this is true! We commented to each other that it was weirdly free of portrait photogs.
How is it that many other YT reviews have really good results with the Nikon Z6iii and then yours seem to always contradict the many other reviews when theirs are backed with facts? Do you need to go back to a photography basics class to be on par with other good photographers?
I strongly would not recommend your channel to anyone after seeing the bias that you produce.
I understand having a bias for a product that you personally like. But leave that out when reviewing products and review them equally with other brands to show a true review, which I’ve never seen from your channel.
Why not include the Sony A7RM5?