White House photographer drops Canon for Sony
- Thread starter Reef Bass
- Start date
You seem pretty enamored with the Sony... Mirrored or Mirrorless, 5DIII or this Sony, both sound like amazing cameras.
Sony blows everyone away with their sensor. The newest one can damn near see in the dark and can be pushed to 10-12 spots of dynamic range without adding noise. I'll be dumping my Canon bodies next upgrade cycle. With metabones adapters you can keep on using your Canon glass. I've got several professional photography friends who have already switched.
jroovers
New member
I potentially understand the jump for some professional photographers depending on their work, but that said, I'm sure there are plenty more pro photographers sticking with their Canon bodies. There is always going to be the temptation to buy the next best body out there as technology advances, and they are not always going to be made by the company that you currently shoot. I'm sure this camera will push Canon and Nikon to catch up however, especially if it continues to get such rave reviews.
This isn't a fad thing. Song's latest sensor has twice the dynamic range. Canon keeps focusing on denser pixel count not range. Most of the time I don't pay that much attention to this stuff but Sony can do things I can't make my camera so.
Three of my friends that have switched were sponsored by Canon and they still jumped ships.
Three of my friends that have switched were sponsored by Canon and they still jumped ships.
IPT
Active member
Hey Doug can you elaborate in what you're seeing in the dynamic range. Maybe I have just become so accustomed to seeing images with more contrast that some of the Sony images I've seen look sort of flat. I also saw one of the Aurora but it looked fake, and flat. Now I'm not sure if that was due to the post processing or if it was the characteristic of the Sony image. I've never seen a fresh unaltered Sony image compared to a Canon one Apples to Apples.
jroovers
New member
And I'm sure there is an equal and greater number of photographers that will keep shooting their Canon gear. Heck, I know wedding photographers who use pretty old gear, including P&S cameras, and their work is amazing. For photographers that know their gear and already get great results, why change? Not every one feels they need even more DR or 42 MP.
In terms of DR, also where it is really useful as well... If you are going to shoot a man at a desk, I know DR capabilities above what a 6D or 5DIII is capable of is mandatory lol. I know this sounds like an amazing camera, and good for Sony I'm sure its a huge boon for them, but I highly doubt its going to cause a max exodus away from Canon and Nikon DSLRs. That said, I'll be curious to see if Ken moves away to the Sony and what his take is.
IPT
Active member
I shoot only RAW. So I to be clear. if I shoot a mountain scene where I need a split ND (or to merge two exposures in PS) this won't be any different. It's not going to "see" the foreground with less contrast (vs the lit mountain) then my Canon would? What it would do is allow there to be details in the brightest whites of the snowy peak of the darkest darks of the shadows without clipping them? Like highlight details with a bright lit glacier or in the dark shadows of foliage for example.
jroovers
New member
I'm using various JPEG settings more often now with family photos and the like. The in-camera HDR mode on the 6D only combines three exposures (but only in JPEG mode), so its not going to compare to what you can do in post with 5 exposures or with a program like Photomatix. But I've used it more and more and gotten some ok results, and I don't think it overcooks the HDRs.
This is an in-camera HDR taken with a ND filter on. This day was overcast with scattered showers, and the sky was a very flat white/dull grey. Not the greatest lighting IMO (probably the worst really). I was at least able to get some detail out of the clouds by using the HDR. I probably would have had better results with 5 bracketed photos, but I was ok with the results given the flat lighting. We were on a day trip several portages and a few hours from base camp, so there wasn't really an option to come back at dawn/dusk.
dendronepthya
Premium Member
Where did you find Canon and Nikon only having 7 stops of dynamic range? I looked at DXO and they both are around 12 according to their sensor tests. Canon's cinema cameras like the C300 II have 15 stops.
I agree that the quote about Canon only having 7 stops of dynamic range is inaccurate but I also agree with the larger point that Canon has been falling behind in the sensor department to the point where if the 5D Mark IV doesn't offer some compelling reasons to upgrade then it might be time for me to consider making a move. It's not an easy decision though, I have a lot (for me) invested in Canon gear and prefer Canon's controls and feel to any of the other major manufacturers' products.
dendronepthya
Premium Member
Right now, I do half video and half stills, so the video functionality to me has a lot more weight than most in this forum I imagine. I've come to find there is a huge difference between camera specs and the final output going from consumer cameras (Panasonic GH4, Sony A7s, etc.) to semi-pro video cameras like the Canon C100/300. Heck, a GoPro can shoot 4k video internally, but until recently a Canon couldn't??? It's because there is a huge difference between trash 4k you get from smartphones and GoPros and broadcast-quality 4k you get from a Canon 1Dc/C300, ARRI Alexa, or RED.
Canon though is disappointingly lagging behind on high frame rate recording though. I really wish the new C300 could do 4k at something higher than 30fps. At least it can do 1080p at higher frame rates I guess. That is literally the only feature that really disappoints me for the way I shoot. I am with you as far as lackluster 5D's in the past several years. I purchased a 5D II when it first came out and it changed my life (because of the video), but I've never once considered a 5DIII or whatever they are up to now. The closest DSLR bodied camera Canon makes that I would buy if my 5DII died would be the Canon 1Dc.
Having said all that, I am considering getting a Sony A7s to use on a CAME single hand-held stabilizer as a second camera. There are definitely some nice things about having something that small with a nice feature set. For me to run and gun with my C100, I have to rig it to my shoulder and it's not all that stable up there if I start moving.
Canon though is disappointingly lagging behind on high frame rate recording though. I really wish the new C300 could do 4k at something higher than 30fps. At least it can do 1080p at higher frame rates I guess. That is literally the only feature that really disappoints me for the way I shoot. I am with you as far as lackluster 5D's in the past several years. I purchased a 5D II when it first came out and it changed my life (because of the video), but I've never once considered a 5DIII or whatever they are up to now. The closest DSLR bodied camera Canon makes that I would buy if my 5DII died would be the Canon 1Dc.
Having said all that, I am considering getting a Sony A7s to use on a CAME single hand-held stabilizer as a second camera. There are definitely some nice things about having something that small with a nice feature set. For me to run and gun with my C100, I have to rig it to my shoulder and it's not all that stable up there if I start moving.
You know your Nikon has a Sony sensor, right?
jroovers
New member
You win lol! :headwally:
All he said was he is a professional and prefers Nikon. I'm sure it has more to do with just the sensor. Maybe his private information was compromised in a Playstation hack in 2011, and last year's well publicized hack on Sony reaffirmed that their security is suspect, and he doesn't like Sony products as a result. Maybe he has had great customer service and support through Nikon, and doesn't want to change as a result. I think it is pretty silly to think that just because a Sony camera has the "best" sensor/mirrorless body right now based on industry reviews, everyone should/will move to that brand. There are just way too many factors that come into play.
rickztahone
New member
As someone who has been shooting Sony for quite a few years I will try to weigh in a little bit. I have shot almost all the main brands, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus and so on. I think each offers things that give them great edge over the others, but I will say that as a Sony user, Sony has been lack luster with listening to their customers. From what I hear, this isn't really the case for CaNikons. We would like that support. Furthermore, as an A-mount shooter, Sony a99, I feel left out that Sony has basically abandoned the mount and gone over to the FE mount.
Don't get me wrong, I really like what they are doing with the FE mount, I especially want the A7rii for the dynamic range, but my pro gear is A-mount and Sony seems to have forgotten us.
Sony sensors are so great to deal with in post. The latitude that they give is amazing for recovery. I can only imagine the a7rii compared to my a99. I hear their 15k ISO looks like my 3200, lol.
Don't get me wrong, I really like what they are doing with the FE mount, I especially want the A7rii for the dynamic range, but my pro gear is A-mount and Sony seems to have forgotten us.
Sony sensors are so great to deal with in post. The latitude that they give is amazing for recovery. I can only imagine the a7rii compared to my a99. I hear their 15k ISO looks like my 3200, lol.
