No point in watching this comparison as you are using the newest and greatest Sony lens against an adapted old Canon lens which was known for being soft and mushy! what's the point. Not bothering to watch any further, Bye.
They don't care about that stuff. Look at the description and all the affiliate links. They made a horrible bad comparison only to use the title to attract people. For the 15 years old lens, that just the lens they had lying around.
Would have liked to see you use the native RF 50mm 1.2 from Canon. Not that it is going to make the 20MP higher resolution, but it has been shown the RF is sharper than the EF version. Autofocus is also much better on the RF version. You really should have worked to compare the newest Canon lens and the newest Sony lens to make this more apples-to-apples, or used an older Sony.
The RF would have much better coating so it would probably handle flare and ca better as well. I have the EF 50 1.2L and I’d say it’s probably the softest L series lens in Canons line up.
6 FPS in RAW just isn't acceptable, also comparing the new G Master 50 1.2 to an OLD EF mount isn't a good comparison, get an RF 50 1.2. Biased. Infact I'm completely disregarding your entire review. Lenses also render colours differently. What a joke man. What a joke.
Sharpness and autofocus is always the camera and the lens working together. The sharpness test would have been better with a Sigma 50 art adapted to each camera and the autofocus with a native RF L lens. I do not believe that old 50 L is fast focusing at all, Older canon primes tend to be sharp in the center only, even when stopped down.
the EF 50 1.2 is less sharp and slower to focus than the RF version. it is actually less sharp than the EF 1.4 which is a 20 year old design compared to the current generation canon and sony
@@TheSlantedLens They were asking to have you use the RF mount 1.2 versus the EF 1.2, both Canon lenses. Putting a 15-year-old design lens against the latest and greatest Sony seems a bit odd.
@@TheSlantedLens This doesn't really solve the problem here. Your comparisons are naturally going to favor the better corrected and more modern Sony over the older EF 50 f1.2 due to better AF technology and lens correction. The comparison really needed to feature the top end native mount 50s against each other to be a more fair comparison if you were going to feature the Sony 1.2. Both the RF and FE 50 f1.2's are much, much better corrected and faster/more accurate than the old EF design. This is objective and a fair criticism of the video.
Canon RF 50/1.2 is much better in terms of focusing speed and sharpness. EF 50/1.2 is a great lens and probably my favorite one, but it's pretty old and cannot compete against modern glass in technical tests.
It almost feels like you're trying to make up for your A1 vs R5 comparison by using a less ideal lens for Canon this time. I guess we can call it even now and hope that in your next comparison you'll match the lenses more wisely...
@@TheSlantedLens it sure looks like you purposely made the Canon look bad, each side by side you obviously cropped in more on the Canon than the Sony to make the Sony look better. Sure reminds me of all those old magazine before and after pics lmao. Lost quiet a bit of respect for you on this video. What does Jarred Polin call it? Oh the Sony money truck just pulled up lol. Totally un equal and trick photography comparison, whatever gets views I guess.
I really like your channel and videos, but I have to admit, I was disappointed you did not test the RF 50mm f1.2. It would provide a more relevant comparison, I would have loved to have watched. Hopefully you will consider doing another video comparing the 50 GM and 50 RF.
@@TheSlantedLens I’ve tested both those lenses on R5 and R6’s and respectfully disagree. The motors in the RF lens line and the overall lens “intelligence” is designed to be efficient in autofocus when it comes to interfacing with the camera. That’s why you had a few misses on the EF and it slightly scored less than your GM comparison. Although I can agree that EF lenses do work well with R bodies for sure, and maybe even better than on DSLr’s, it’s not appropriate to do a comparison of an adapted lens against a native lens from another camera system. On top of that, although there are aesthetic qualities between the EF and RF, that you could argue about since that’s purely subjective the technical optics of the RF are also superior to the EF version. You would have been better off comparing the EF to the RF lens within the system which would be an extremely valuable comparison but comparing the old 50 EF 1.2 adapted to a Sony 50mm f1.2 G master on an stove body is not a fair comparison and just doesn’t make sense. And I’m actually a predominantly Sony user myself but also use Canon from time to time for my shoots. So I’ve had experience with both systems.
I really expected Sony to look like a winner but not by cheating ... You're probably the most fake tester I've seen in a long time. Not even using RF lenses is just a big mistake .... Throw this and do it again, do it right.
Dude 🤔 right out of the gate you bias the tests to favor Sony, i.e., new G master lens vs an adapted Old EF lens. EVERYBODY knows the RF 50mm 1.2 blows the EF version away.
I usually like your stuff but I don't understand why would you use Canon's EF 50 f/1.2 instead of RF version. EF version is quite soft and at it's best resolves 15 megapixels on a 20 megapixel sensor, it's sharpness is 15 P-Mpix for a 20 megapixel sensor, there is a big difference in resolving power between EF and RF versions. Also, on the first comparison photo it looks to me that foreground (grass) on the Canon side was much sharper which indicates that focus on this comparison image was on two different focal points, background on the Sony and closer to foreground on the Canon. Regardless of this review flaws, Sony seems like a great deal. Thank you for putting in the effort and providing the content for us!
They don't care about that stuff. Look at the description and all the affiliate links. They made a horrible bad comparison only to use the title to attract people. For the 15 years old lens, that just the lens they had lying around.
Why on earth would you not use the RF 50 1.2 on the R6? This serioulsy makes the whole comparison pretty questionable. I normally enjoy your comparisons though...
@@TheSlantedLens Are you serious??? Have you seen how much better the RF is on IQ and much faster and accurate focusing? The fact that you area trying to defend this shows a clear intentional bias
Really unfair comparison. The RF 50mm 1.2 blows the EF version SO far out of the Water in EVERY aspect its not even funny. So quite fishy move to use the ef... but ok, in that way Sony can win more easily...
I like your reviews but as soon as you mentioned you are using the EF 50 1.2 against a brand new camera and lens set up I stopped watching as it’s not even a fair comparison lol
I think using old canon EF lens 50mm f1.2 on R6 and compare to native Sony 50mm f1.2 GM lens on Sony a7iv is utterly insulting and arrogant to Canon. It is absolutely No Common sense it get different auto focus result not using native lens. Use old Sony lens then compare. Canon does have native RF lens 50mm f1.2.
i see people are commenting that the canon was put in a disadvantage because of the lens, but looking at colors in video, canon (at least according to this video) looks much better at all iso's..
As per 90% of the comments down below its a shame the RF 50 was not used BUT both these camera are fantastic in their own right as a Canon R6 owner I absolutely love it loads of videos I made on my channel using different lenses. But I would be equally happy if I had the Sony A7 iv with Sony lenses. What a time to be alive to have all these amazing cameras at a relatively affordable prices!
The R6 will go to ISO 204,000 in video mode. I use it all the time at that speed for low-light framing of dark nightscapes. You didn’t take the time to learn to use its menus to make the proper adjustments for the comparison, which makes the video comparison suspect, if not the other tests.
just wanted to point out during 8 minutes on, on the ISO test at 1600, there's a red light shining on the subject, which is messing up that result. you can clearly see it shining on her neck. That is clearly what is casting that redish hue on the white paper and also probably having a slight effect on the face.
it's pretty minor but there's definitely at least some of the red light getting to her face in that shot. I took a screenshot and compared the sony 1600 shot and 3200 shot, and there's definitely a touch of redness added to the shadows of her cheeks on the 1600 shot.@@TheSlantedLens
You need to do this test with Rf 50 1.2 way sharper and will resolve more pixels. The gmaster is sharper than the ef plus more megapixels. Prob not super accurate and could get more clarity out of the canon.
You used the wrong lens, the Canon RF is incomparably faster than its old version. It's like comparing Spacex rockets to Sputnik. Canon EF 50mm is the release date of 2006, it is almost 15 years. I myself have used a reduction camera, both Sony and Canon, and I know that communication through the reduction ring, although original, causes slow communication and blurring when focusing, and for videos the focus speed is about 40% worse. I don't mean that it's a bad lens, it's just very, very, very, very old. The second thing is that this lens was not designed to create a video, but only to create a photo. Otherwise the dynamic range on Sony is amazing. Thanks for the video.
This was a pretty bias comparison and a little suspicious.. since Sony has been buying out so many RU-vidrs lol. You compared a Sony mirrorless lens to an old canon DSLR EF lens……. And everyone know canon has better shadow recovery than Sony while Sony has more dynamic range in the higher end…. Yet you just compared unedited images…. But obviously Sony crushes it with ISO comparisons. But the rest.. lost some trust.
Hello from Mexico!! A very good comparison that clears up many doubts. You have done a good job. There's just one thing I don't quite understand. There in your dynamic range comparison, there is an aperture of f5.6 in both cameras, the sony looks clearer, when you lower the shutter speed to 1/320s, the same, sony looks better. I ask you, in those cases, WHICH IS BETTER? Put a more open aperture like 2.8 to help the dynamic range? Or does the dynamic range benefit more with slower shutter speeds? You are the expert, we await your answer
I think you are confusing the dynamic range with the exposure. The shutter doesn't affect the dynamic range and the aperture shouldn't affect the dynamic range. But it will give you the impression that it affects the dynamic range because it affects the exposure and depth of field. You will be super happy with the a7 IV or the R6 II.
@11:24 you can see that a7iv lose the ISO battle, the a7iv became full resolution @100% while the canon is still at 250%, not to mention the 50mm 1.2 classic and it still beat the a7iv in all margin. Also being 1year advance with 60p @4k Canon is dominating now.
A lot of us started out on Canon cameras, for me, it was the Canon SL3, about a year later I moved to the Canon 90D and yesterday I upgraded to mirrorless with the Canon R6. The salesmen in B&H ask me why would you even buy a Canon camera and I could not respond. The truth is, it's just unintentional brand loyalty. I, am starting to lean towards Sony, and I have until February 1st to make the switch entirely free. Great Video! Positive for Canon R6: Comes with 24-105mm lens (Super Versatile) Positive For Sony: Everything else.
I hate to tell you, but there is way more positives to Canon than a kit lens that comes with the R6. If you want the Sony, why not just buy the Sony? I personally can't stand the menus and ergonomics of any Sony I have ever used. Good luck🤷♂️.
Stick with Canon. I am like you..a loyal Canon user. This comparison is good but doesn'tdo the R6 much favor. You got to keep in mind that the a7iv is a newer camera..let's say for argument sake, Canon released a R6 mkii or an R6c the same time the a7iv came out...most of us would agree Canon would be pulling ahead in this comparison easily.
@wolftickvideos i believe it, i’ve ran through 3 different canon cameras only using kit lenses because i wasn’t going to invest much into a non mirrorless platform in this day and age moving away from the mirror realm. Now im on full frame mirrorless i dont mind spending on lenses now. Can you believe most photography apprenticeships in New York wont hire you without full frame or mirrorless now.
@@zodyking4595 That's crazy considering if the photographer is any good you couldn't tell what they shot with. I have about 8 different bodies and I feel good about producing great results with all 8. On the flip side, I have also failed to get the results I was looking for on all of them before. It is all about knowing your equipment and lighting really. How is that R6 working out for you?
@@WOLFTICKVIDEOS its a much better camera than what i had previously, performing better in lowlight, less noise overall. I do video and photo so I really needed a well versed camera. The EOS 90D did well on the photography side of things but if you want to know what noise is flip it to video lol.
The dynamic range in those backlit images is fantastic on the Sony. I've always been a Canon person, but I haven't bought a Canon since I stopped doing weddings - the overly-red images made too many headaches for me. Haven't been able to pull the trigger on Sony yet, but those backlit images were extremely impressive on the Sony!
Hi, congratulations for the very interesting video. I'd like to ask you a question. For me the stabilization of a camera is very important because I make all my 4K documentaries around the world freehand, without tripods and without stadyshot. I DON'T take stills. If I had to buy the Sony A7 IV and the Sony FE 24-105mm f / 4 G OSS, could the two stabilizations, both of the camera and that of the lens, work together and in synergy? Do you think the Sony A7 IV with Sony FE 24-105mm f / 4 G OSS might be the right camera for me or is it better that I look to another camera with better stabilization? Thank you very much
If you are doing strictly video you might be happier with the Sony a7S III: bhpho.to/3ExLfN1 And the Sony FE 24-105 F/4 should work great with that. I do however love shallower depth of field so you might want to consider the Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 although it is heavier and larger.
@@TheSlantedLens check out Christopher Frost he compared the EF to the RF and the RF lens is way sharper. He is a professional lens tester should subscribe
I am having a hard time debating whether or not to get the canon R6 Mark II or to get the Sony A7CII. I shoot some portrait photography but lately I have been shooting photo and video of my 12 year olds basketball team. which one would you say is better for this? I currently have a Canon 5D Mark III. I can't really find any review videos comparing the two cameras. Thank you for your help.
Once they showed the Canon EF version I already knew the Sony would be rated as “sharper” and better colors which isn’t fair to the R6….and this coming from a Nikon Z6ii user.
I don't get it. I can't get past the minute mark if the entire premise of your comparison is that flawed. Should've rented the RF glass, but oh well, guess I'll watch someone else.
I would like to see the Panasonic S5 compared here! It's seems to almost always Nikon & Sony? There are others that could be compared in this range! The S5 is as good or better other than AF only in Video mode, and doesn't shoot 4K 120fps. Otherwise, feature for feature, the Panasonic blows both these cameras away including low-light. I think the S5 is a superior Hybrid camera for about 5600 less that the A7 IV body! You can buy the Panasonic S5 in a kit with the S 20-60mm f/4 for the near the same price.
Nikon isn't really good in the Video world, Their Dynamic range is lousy in lowlight and the Autofocus is crap not mention the N-Log is not that good. Canon & Sony is what dominates the Video world, Panasonic is really good too but I don't know why they won't improve their AF System, if they do I am switching to Panasonic directly. Good Color Science, Decent Lowlight Performance, cheaper, the IBIS is great, ALL-I Format, 10bit capabilities, no overheating, unlimited recording time, basically a very well rounded camera, if AF is as fast as the R6, Panasonic would blow Canon and Sony out of the abyss in the video world if such improve AF Systems happens.
How about test shots of the Sony a7iv 4k crop 60fps with Sony 16-55 f2.8 lens? The new Tamron aps-c Zoom lenses and the Sigma new aps-c Zoom lenses. Also, do several similar tests with Fuji aps-c prime lenses for Sony e-mount: Fuji 16mm f1.4; Sigma 19mm f/2.8; Sigma 30mm f/1.4; Sigma 56mm f/1.4.
I seen a lot of reviews on a lot of different things but man is this one of the top ones. So much depth into each test … I love how it’s a very fair comparison and I appreciate the amount of time that it took to do all of these test
@@TheSlantedLens No ... Not at all ... But it is well in class with what you just showed here. Very bad of you not to use RF lenses ... Because you are not a beginner after all? So you must have done this consciously. Which just looks super ugly and colored. And why did you not set them up and film with both at the same time. .. you have managed to get everything sloppy ... redo and do the right thing. Or do you want to make another weird video? Then you can get an adapter for Sony and use Canon EF lenses on it as well.
Hello The Slanted Lens. Thanks for your video. A lot of people have seen your video and some are already "complaining" that the jpeg colors from the Sony are terrible. May I ask what is your opinion on that and did you or did you not set up or adjust any of the jpeg settings from the Sony? Or is the Sony jpeg output really that bad? Could it be the lenses you had on?
I’m not going to mention the adapted ef lens you used for this comparison. What’s up with your dynamic range test? You realize you actually have to lift the exposure in post (adjust shadows, reduce highlights etc) to test dynamic range, right?!
Hello sir thanks for this video❤️❤️❤️❤️ I do have an r6 should i switch to a74 or its almost the same? I shoot video mostly not long videos maximum 5 min 😊
They are very similar. And if you already have Canon lenses it might not be worth it to switch. It really is a personal decision. Try renting the a7 IV and see how you like it.
I am going to start vloging + . And confused which camera is better ? I tried to buy canan 80d ! They told me its not good ? Then 90d they told me there is better . Sony also zv 2 -10 ? Which one is better recoding vidoes and pic ? Thank you
If he redo the review with native RF lens i think Sony A7 IV still wins overall. Dynamic Range and Resolution. Similar price ill go with Sony this time and there's some great third party value lenses.
This is absolutely not a great review… if you’re going to compare competing products at least try to understand the latest technologies available for both products. Using a 30+ year old lens when there is a newer version for that Mount is mindless
@@mbismbismb You sound like you just read specs and have never used either one. The R5 is clearly inferior to the A1 as a pro camera and that’s not saying the R5 is not good. Just say you don’t like Sony cameras in general.
I think using old canon EF lens 50mm f1.2 on R6 and compare to native Sony 50mm f1.2 GM lens on Sony a7iv is utterly insulting and arrogant to Canon. It is absolutely Common sense it get different auto focus result not using native lens. Use old Sony lens then compare.
I think using old canon EF lens 50mm f1.2 on R6 and compare to native Sony 50mm f1.2 GM lens on Sony a7iv is utterly insulting and arrogant to Canon. It is absolutely Common sense it get different auto focus result not using native lens. Use old Sony lens then compare.
I did this test vs the A9 having the subject running towards the camera and the R6 was just a good. The difference? I didn't crippled the R6 with a super old lens. Shame on this channel
Sorry if I also ask you another question because I have great trust you and your professionalism. What variable ND filter would you put on the Sony SEL 24-105mm f / 4 G OSS 77mm zoom lens? I would like one that decreases the definition of the clip as little as possible. I'd like to know the brand and dimension of the VND filter. My budget is max 150 euros. THANKS
I think in that price range Tiffen makes a good variable ND filter. You might want to check out our video about ND filters. I just picked up a Nisi filter that I will be testing soon. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XPvjIYLzW4c.html
Very good review. Thank you. However, it would have helped me when you were describing ISO stills differences that you use the camera name when describing your opinion. I didn't know if you were talking about the Sony or the Canon.
Great review. My experience as a videographer is that the A74 will overheat in some circumstances. I use a couple of A7s3 as my main cameras, and had an A73 as a 3rd back up option. I bought the A74 to replace my A73 - unfortunately we've had this camera overheat whilst shooting video during weddings, something we've never experienced with the A73 or of course the A7s3. So we sold the A74 and held onto the A73 as our 3rd camera as its never over heated. If video is your main thing, just spend the extra money and get the A7s3.
I am eyeing the A7s3 but would rely semi-heavily on it for photography as much as videography. Do you have a personal opinion on using a 12mp camera as a primary for stills?
I specialise in video, so I'm probably not the best person to ask regarding stills. Once upon a time 12mp was plenty big for photos, but these days it seems rather small doesn't it. I would imagine that for most applications 12mb is fine, but if you're doing corporate work that requires heavy cropping or the requirement for very large photos, then I'd stick with the A74 instead of the A7s3. - having said that, you can get amazing photos on the A7s3, and in low light you'll even get a cleaner photo thatn the A74.@@86london
Jay P, Thanks for sharing this helpful video. I'm ready to go mirrorless and non-professional video-ing with the about-to-be-bought Sony a7 IV (no existing investment in lens worth worrying about). Please suggest the Tamron lens I will want for Vlogging and indoor video green screen use. Maybe the 24-70 you list below?? I have no video experience yet but I hear wide-angle is best?? I like zooms for flexibility. My home studio is about 12x12'. Do you still like this from your list: Sennheiser G4 Wireless Lav? Your experience is helpful and appreciated!
@@TheSlantedLens Appreciate the response, both are on my list to purchase now. Thanks. PS- Found your Basic Videography for Photographers to be very helpful, learned a lot, and enjoyed it!
Would you recommend the Sony A7IV or the Canon R6 for Astrophotography (and low-light shooting in general)? I read that the lower MP Canon R6 (20MP) is better for low light and astro shooting because it has fewer and bigger pixels, therefore producing less noise, compared to the 33MP Sony A7IV. Then again, I read that the A7IV is advantageous in low-light as it has a back-illuminated sensor, whereas the R6 doesn't. Which would you recommend?
Got news for you no semi-pro or pro is watching your review of semi-pro/pro cameras. They already know what you know and also know what they need. Anyone else buying either without a comprehensive knowledge of photography risks the camera becoming a closet queen which will show up on eBay or FB marketplace down the road with
*I think in 3 Years, when Canon has some more native lenses I need, I might buy a successor to the Canon R5* *I will NOT buy a camera* when I already know I'd have to waste money on an adapter, just to mount OLD DSLR lenses that are expensive and heavier and bigger than they need to be for mirrorless... Its like spending a ton of money on things you really don't even want, because you have no choice...
Hi i was wondering where did you set the brightness in imac? How many squares from left to right? Struggling to set it right . Ps nice job with those videos
Comparing autofocus on an older adapted EF lens, to a new sony lens? The AF is so much faster and accurate on the new RF 1.2... The sonys a great camera, with newer technology, but this isn't really a fair comparison specifically in tracking a moving subject/sharpness IMO.
I guess my eyes are not as good as they once were, but I like the JPEG images of the R6 better. They seemed more color rich and more pleasing. I know the Canon R6 is an amazing camera. As a Canon user I would purchase it if it had 33 megapixels. I am disappointed with Canon's offering in my price range. The need a Canon Rii and/or increase the sensor size in the R6. I am seriously considering the Sony a7 iv with an adaptor.
All these people whining about the EF instead of the RF lens…actually the EF is nicer in some ways…the RF is overly sharp in comparison and has less pleasing bokeh from other reviews I have watched on the subject….but yes the RF lens is a touch faster than the EF in focusing speed. I was on the fence for a few months about which camera I wanted- canon vs. Sony…but the deciding factor is the lens eco system is wayyy more affordable AND you have more interesting choices from Sony Zeiss and or G master: Character vs. clinical perfection…Canon it’s clinical EXPENSIVE perfection or clunky cheap all made by Canon kinda boring imho.
Interestingly enough. A good friend who shoots wedding feels like the EF is much more pleasing and romantic for weddings. It just depends on what you want.
