@@TheSlantedLens мне так не кажется, тут наверное во всех тестах был использован jpeg фаил у Sony... Я хорошо знаю модель A7R IV и знаю как там выглядит jpeg и RAW и сам лично сравнивал Canon R5 (друга) и Sony 7R IV и при прочих равных у sony гораздо больше деталей и мелких текстур, если использовать хорошие объективы.
I have shot canon for the last 15 years, Got R5, Love every feature of the brand from having many glass choices and picture quality, I have missed some moments because of Autofocus, Finally pulled the trigger and bought the Sony a7R V, build quality is OK, The Auto Focus is Spot on. I got 24-70 and 85MM E mount, I will be selling my R5 and all my Glass , Just need to get more glass for the sony
I went with the A7R5 just because of the autofocus but honestly the Canon images look much better to me. Even in the high ISO with the grain, it still looked like a better image and Canon was definitely sharper. Only thing I wish I knew the whole time was what the models actual skin tone was. Maybe you can tell us which one was closer to her skin tone? The Sony looked very magenta.
I think the same, I'm thinking about buying the a7rv but after watching this video I think the Canon is a great option. Contrary to what the author of the video says, in most images I see more sharpness in the Canon as in the ISO test, at low ISOs I still see the Canon better in this review even though the author says otherwise. I'm going to rethink the team change.
1st off...Salute to you for constantly doing these especially since people can fanboy out about their favorite brand. 2nd... great work, it is greatly appriciated.
Yup 100%, I picked up my a7RV a couple of days ago and am waiting for camera raw to catchup, I am sure when the R5 Mk 2 comes out, it will be better than the A7RV and that is great for all of us :)
Now the owner of the a7r V..and what I have noticed is that the camera is way better at focusing in low light. Probably the greatest camera I have ever owned.
That was pretty shocked at the color difference between the two cameras. Sony much warmer. I just bought the Sony and it hasn't arrived yet but I'm upgrading from the A7rII, so I'm looking forward to being blown away by the A7rv
Wow surprised at your findings on the R5 for focus! I feel like I can’t even MAKE it miss. So much so that I look at my client most of the time and don’t look I’m the viewfinder or screen when I’m in studio. R5 just never misses the eye. I also shoot A7IV which is very good but still not Canon good.
Yeah - I switched from Nikon to Canon (after 20 years) for better focus and haven't looked back. Wonder what Michel's focus mode was on, e.g, Person vs Animal vs off. Capture One and DxO's PL handle color space for Canons much better than LR, as well. In fact, I rarely use LR anymore.
The problem causing the Canon to miss was the walking behind the tree. And a lot of cameras miss at that point. This new Sony technology is changing that.
@@TheSlantedLens AF scenarios in Canon R5/R6 have a setting for that. Subjects entering the frame or holding on to the same subject even if its obscured by an object. Try moving the slides in AF Scenario 2 or 3.
you should change the af on the canon menu to case 2 (ignoring possible obstacles), that would do the trick in my opinion, so the af it would be stickier
I don't understand how you can say that high ISO files are worse on Canon when they're WAY sharper, while Sony's files look badly processed in camera...
@@TheSlantedLens Canon has a sharper image, with sharper noise, that you can reduce in post without affecting quality, meanwhile Sony is mushy and not sharp at all, and you can't fix any of that in post...
Been a Canon user for more than 8 years, last year I decided to go with the Sony A7SIII, its a great camera, but my main issue was the colors! Canon colors are hard to match and on th Sony it does not look as good unless you shoot Slog 3 and apply LUT to match but lots of extra work, also the menu navigation is not as good as the Canon. Decided to sell it after 1 year of using it, I own the R5 now and never been so happy with a Camera! Canon for life! 😀
Thank you for the interesting comparisons….I’ve been a Sony shooter for years, but in your ISO comparison the Canon images were much, much more pleasant IMHO. Nicer, cleaner colors, better detail and smoother transitions between light and dark. The Sony images were dark and harsh by comparison with ugly colors. I love many things about the Sony cameras but the image files have always been on the dark side for me, and the colors have always needed lots of post processing. I’ve thought about moving back to Canon for those reasons and honestly this comparison makes me want to even more. ;)
I agree that the Sony is generally a little darker and the color is not as pleasing. I find the post processing works pretty well. Canon does tend to be more yellowish, so if you don't like that look than other brands might work better. Sony is cooler, Panasonic and Fujifilm have nice rich colors. And Nikon has great color as well!
@@TheSlantedLens Thank you for that, agreed! 😉 Never tried Panasonic, but always loved Fujifilm colors right out of the camera. If they had ever offered a full frame camera I probably would have been a Fujifilm fanboy hands down. 😊
Yeah. The whole time I was watching this I kept thinking this sounds like a Sony promotion. I’ve had my R5 for a year now and my results are nothing close to the results this guy is going on about. Like you would have to force the camera to do those things that make it less than the Sony in this review.
A7R5 is a great camera, can't deny it, but it's set to work with this type of use out of the box, while canon will not work so well without setting af for the use you plan to do. It's set universal, and when set properly this tree test would be 100% hit, but when set opposite, you will struggle to have any good results.
The Canon has 4 different case scenarios each with 4 levels of tracking sensitivity, acceleration/deceleration for example. Which settings did you have?
WEIRD. if canon AF fail many times why dont you show us the pictures when it fails. instead you showed to us when its succees ?. again in hi iso test it seems you forgot to make sure both of cameras using same comparable high iso noise reduction settings. canon looks noisier but give sharper & better detail while sony gives cleaner although with less detail.
Yeah I felt like in the ISO test, the Canon looks noticabely better in terms of the details and colors. Yes it has more noise, but it seems like a better image overall. Also, the color is way better in the Canon too... I also felt that in Sony A7RV's color at 5:26 looks really unnatural, as in it's quite red. (I may be more used to iPhone like neutral color tone).
I shoot both Canon and Sony and planned to get the new A7RV to replace my A7RIV and A7IV but also have an EOS R5 and I’m wondering if I should just save $3900 and wait until mid 2023 when Canon releases the R5 II. Need to make a decision to reduce the number of RF or FE lenses I own. Thank you for the video.
Your title has an ERROR IN IT!!! I wasn't going to watch it, because I thought why are they reviewing that older Sony camera? Shouldn't they be reviewing R version 5? But I decided to watch and low and behold you are reviewing the Sony RV
Frames per second with an electronic shutter are completely irrelevant because both cameras don't have a stacked sensor. That means all action type of photos will be horribly warped if you use an electronic shutter. That means you cannot really use it for action. It's a completely useless irrelevant number.
...and image bit depth is lower. Electronic 1st curtain (at least on the Canon) is the "happy medium" to preserve the highest image bit depth possible and a fairly decent 12 fps.
not irrelevant since the sensor readout on the canon r5 its like 8 or 10 times faster than the sony a7rv.. so you can actually use eletronic shutter in the r5 which is not the same situation on the sony a7rv
@@dragSD666 Yeah, I had never any problems with electronic shutter and sports with the R5. The only problem with the electronic shutter are flickering LED Lights. You need to have a really really fast moving ball (Baseball, Golf, Tennis) to see any "warping" and even then it is minimal.
I'm guessing you are a Sony shooter because that's true for Sony but as others have said not for canon. My mate shoots a lot of BIF with R5 in silent with no problems.
I switched from Canon to Sony because of the better low light and ISO values. But when I look at the sharper photos from the R5, I really wonder if I should switch back to Canon. If I didn't have the expensive Sony lenses, I would even do that. Sorry Sony.....you can do that better!!
Excellent comparison! Thank you! I switched from Canon to Sony a few years ago and am heavily invested in Sony mount lenses, so I have no interest in switching again or supplementing my Sony gear with Canon gear. The two brands are great and they push each other to get better and better. Clearly the A7rV has the upper hand now between these two except if you need the higher frame rate. I'm debating on picking up the A7rV, as I have come to prefer the rangefinder style bodies, and also really like the no-blackout viewfinders like in the A9 and A1 cameras. So debating whether to wait to see if 2023 brings me a body that clicks those boxes for me.
9:20 why you looking at grains much instead of looking at picture quality and overall details and sharpness at iso 6400 grains are noise which can be fixed in post but can you bring back details and sharpness in post?
Excellent comparison video. You got right to the most important features of both. How about low-light sensor capabilities in the Sony? Canon Bulb Mode has always been great. Does the Sony compete in that area? Thanks.
I believe the auto white balance and metering are updated on.the A7R5. Many reviews have said the auto white balance is now useable for the first time.
Interesting review. My Canon R5 renders skin tones that are warmer (less green, more red, then the Sony A7r4, the reverse of this comparison. I haven't compared the images to an A7R5. I'm glad Sony has improved the autofocus from the A7r4 as the R5 autofocus was more accurate and stickier than the Sony r4, for me. I haven't heard of many complaints on the R5's focus capability before. I wonder if there are camera to camera sample differences within a given manufacturer? Thanks for the comparison. These day, I see little reason to jump between manufacturers anymore once you have a stockpile of lenses.
Same, love my A74 for usability (zebra and metering from focus spot, don’t know why Canon can’t do this) but prefer the more magenta in skin tones from Canon
I owned an a7r IV and the colors was, eeh..well, not that good in some cases. The worst part, having moire in the clients clothes. Some assignments I nearly had to dump most of the images. I have bought an r5 now as I like the skin colors more. The A7r V seems to be a nice camera, though.
Could you take a moment and look back at your previous review of the canon r5 vs the Sony riv . You had a different opinion of the auto focus at that time when it came to the canon r5 , I believe you stated it missed focus 1 out 10 not sure if the variables were the same and had a slight edge over Sony . What lens were you using for this time for each camera in case I missed it .
@@TheSlantedLens Canon has 4 different case scenarios each with 4 levels of tracking sensitivity, acceleration/deceleration. This feature is use when objects come in front of the subject you’re tracking.
Comparisons of cameras that are used with default settings are often invalid. The Canon R5 has adjustments in the menu to change the "stickiness" of the autofocus when shooting moving subjects. If you don't know this or don't make the correct adjustments in the menu you can get results like you got. It surprises me that you use a scenario to test autofocus that no other camera has passed. As to the noise test, it was pretty obvious to me that the Sony in camera noise suppression was blurring the image. Looking at the model's forehead in those close ups made it pretty obvious. Based on those two observations I would consider your evaluation to be invalid.
The fact that Sony was able to do something where other cameras couldn't should definitely add some validity to the review. Seems like you're letting a bias not appropriate this through review.
I think it’s all very close, I think it’s down to personal preference, generally speaking Sonys are much better in low light, especially the alpha s series, and canon are much better with colour and until the last two years, auto focus. Sony has improved that area now. I’m a Sony user because I’m a videographer but did look into the r5 if it wasn’t for it’s overheating issues I probably would have chosen it.
Great video. I'm debating A7RV vs Canon R5, it's a really close comparison but I think the Sony wins out with higher MP, better autofocus, and the flip-out screen. I'll be doing lots of portraits and landscape, so I don't care about sports or anything super fast.
@@TheSlantedLens Not a fan of any brand, but dude, comparing a new camera to an old camera? Really? if it was backwards I would say "Nice Canon ad", just saying.
It's weird that most reviewers claim that Canon's AF is far superior and your test shows the opposite. I think you did not set the camera properly. I wish you had some some low light AF test as it's pretty important for me. I'm buying one of these 2 and retiring my 5dMIII. I find this a pretty tough decision
The larger the bit depth the more information the video carries. 10 bit is more information than 8 bit. 4.2.2 gives more information than 4.2.0. Hope that helps a bit.
I quite like the tests that you do and I know you moved to sony many years ago and you are very happy with the system. What is your take on CFExpress type A used on the sony? It almost feels like their "Memory Stick" - very proprietary and not well accepted. Is this the item that may push people away from the otherwise fantastic system?
@@TheSlantedLens a big concern (for me) is price and availability. Sony have mad a fantastic choice to open the E mount (and this attracts users who are interested to switch. At the same time - the memory card format does rise concerns and does push people away.
Great review. I have the A1 and A7R4 with a pre order for the 7R5. The thing I disliked about the 7R4 was that it quickly bogged down writing images and showing 100% views, making it sluggish for even landscape. Hoping that the 7R5 will be better with that.
@TheSlantedLens Yeah. I'm just saying that in the video the sony image in high iso was wrose. Sorry, I made some writing mistakes in English because I'm Brazilian and English is not my native language
Great Comparison! I am a Sony fan Boy! I have used Canons including the R5, I find easy for me to Navigate the menus on the sony. The Sony Autofocus is Top Notch
4:58 The Sony only has 16% more linear resolution, which is not enough to really see a big difference in detail. You'd really have to double the resolution to make a huge difference and even then, some of that benefit would be offset by diffraction and noise.
You forgot to mention that sony gets 10fps only in lossy compressed raw, while up to 6 in loseless. Also it has 1/10 readout speed when on ES, while R5 has usable 1/60. Canon uses CF express that can go 1.7GB/s, when using single card write, and lossless compressed, you can shoot 12fps continuously to fill the card, and probably 20fps too. I can't make R5 miss when subjects turn around or run behind something for a moment, but I have set the AF to be aware of sport scenario. Set it different way or universal, and it will start to look for other objects to focus on, set it inproperly, and it will almost never pass your test. Lab tests show that R5 has better DR than any sony camera released prior A7R5, and as it uses the same sensor as A7R4, I think it still be the case. ISO - true, R5 has some noise going on, but at least it doesn't denoise RAW like sony does, look at your mooshy photos. I preffer to DxO Pure RAW 2 files from R5, than sharpen lost data from what you showed to us. Anyway, A7R5 is a great camera, has some downsides, ha some strenghts, it's a very good body if someone is loaded in E lenses. I would definietely enjoy using it and for sure produce somengreat results with one. Ending the comment, O think this comparison it worthless, it looks to be made just to say that sony is better, it doesn't show all the details that would tell the otherwise. You ommit everything that don't fit the narrative and show the results the way you want it to be seen, like avoiding showing noise it detail (because details were gone on sony).
@@Yupthereitism it is older, but still a better option in general use if expensive RF lenses are not a problem. Problem with youtube comparisons is that they are biased depending on who does them.
I am about to buy a canon R5 .. but now I am confused... I always find canon more user-friendly. I am switching from m50 to R5 now.! I mainly work in stock photography.
Get the r5 from canon this review is bass more to sway people to Sony not homes at all I sold my canon 5dMK4 to get the a7r5 and I’ve since send it back and replaced it with the canon R5c I still have my a7riv which I’m much more happy with and to give you my honest and someone who shoots both systems on the consistent basis the SONY A7RV IS THE SAME CAMERA AS THE A7RIV WITHOUT THE IA FOCUSING CAPABILITIES SO MY ADVICE TO YOU WILL BE TO TEST OUT BOTH FOR YOURSELF AND MAKE YOUR DECISION BASED ON YOU LIKE AND EXPERIENCE
In some reviews say that Canon R5 it is good for Weddings in Churches (low lights and very dark places to take photos) specially some Pastors and Priests are very picky with flash cameras and photographers but the other thing about Canon it is that the option in lenses or glases (specially now) it is very limited, no Tamron or other options for Canon Cameras
This is the only review I’ve seen that has found any issue with the canon auto focus. And that includes turning subjects and subjects that leave and re-enter the frame. I guess the only way to know is to hire and shoot them yourself. Too many kick backs taint open honest reviews imo☹️
Hi, I have a question, can anyone help? I want Sony a7R V but I want len that have 67mm, is it possible? Because I used Xiaomi 67mm... and stupid of me, I bought about 60 different types of Lens that is 67mm, turned out, 95% of them don't work with Xiaomi Camera at all. Only a few of CLP or CPL do works... the rest of Lens such as UV or Prims or IR Lens don't works at all. I'm looking to shooting some video for my DIY Project, so I don't need any fancy ones up to 77mm or to 105mm... and I think 67mm is enough for me. But I don't know how to get one. I'm 101% NEW TO CAMERA! I was going for EOS-R5 but my brother said if I focus on Video, I should get Sony a7R V instead because it has better AI focus when shooting any fast moving objects. I found this Sony FE 35mm F1.4 GM (SEL35F14GM) on Amazon. Not sure if the mount fit, can anyone tell?
I think comparing the low light performance is okay but these cameras are more than likely going to be used for portraits and maybe outdoor sports or with a flash. I primarily shoot sports and I would not use 61mp shooting indoor sports the way the lighting is inside these gymnasiums. I use the Canon R6ii and it performs very well in low light sports shooting…I was very impressed. The Sony focusing system on this camera is incredible though 👍🏼
I could hardly listen to this video while watching the pics. The most important thing to me is image quality. Especially on people of color. It will mean you have to color correct every person with the Sony. The skin tones from the Sony disqualify it for me. The correction for one part changes the entire look of the photo. Humans are extremely triggered when skin tones are off. It’s not just a preference but subliminal reaction to your photos if the skin tones are off.
As a sony shooter this disgusts me: a7r5 had noise reduction to the gills from iso 3200 and up, her hair turned to mush….and he has the nerve to call that a win? (Keep in mind, im a sony shooter and fan, but this angers me so much as its so dumb and unfair)
In higher ISO shots, the canon still has details but Sony images looks washed out like a digitally zoomed picture on a phone camera. So later while editing you have more room to play with the canon image. Reduce 😊light and color noise and the picture will look good with a bit sharpness added.
Yes Canon has more noise at 3200 and up. But it is also a LOT sharper and detailed. The Sony files are just a mushy mess. I'd rather have the R5 file. A litte NR would do wonders but the atroucious Sony file can't be saved since the detail is lost already.
After using Sony cameras for professional work for the past 5 years, I'm in process of transitioning to Canon. What changed?...I started building my RF lens collection while shooting video on Komodo. Now, I can't unsee how awesome the RF L series glass is. They say, date the bodies but marry the lenses. Bodies come and go, but the RF glass is who I want to marry.
Again, you missed out on the opportunity to prove or disprove other reviewers who claim that in low light the Sony autofocus is not as good as Canon's I couldn't care less who is better, but it would be a shame if someone does not buy the Sony if this is not true (as you claim).
Just wow, look at that stuff at 9:15 and 9:22 Ladies and gentleman, this is a perfect example why it's not all about pixels, both cameras suck at high ISO, terrible dynamic range, awful color degradation, destructive banding and artefacts all over the place, Sony looks mushy with no detail retention, banding all over her face, just terrible image quality from both sensors. And this is just at ISO 6400, embarrassing for both companies. For some reason, when talking about image quality, everybody means just pixels but forgets to take into account dynamic range throughout high ISO range, color depth throughout high ISO range, detail retention, etc. Sensor performance measured at base ISO looks great but that's just not realistic and doesn't translate into real world usage. This is why I sold my R5, as a wildlife photographer, I more often than not have to shoot with very high ISO settings, and I was quite disappointed with it's low light performance. This is why I still appreciate lower MP sensors for low light photography.
Spot on comment. Nowdays lower MP does not correlate with better high-ISO performance (or the other way around) any more, but these cameras suck big time in this department. I would take better ISO performance and dynamic range over millions of frames per second and super-sticky autofocus any day.
C’mon, Jay! Each camera intended for different uses. The Canon is an “every situation” high MP camera, while the Sony a portrait landscape camera and a poor sport/ action choice at only 5 FPS electronic or 7 mechanical when shooting uncompressed raw. I’m surprised by your AF experience w / R5. It must be something in your settings - speak with a Canon rep. R5 has worked great for me w sports, and popular sports / bird youtubers find it as good as the a1 AF after extensive shooting. I own the a7rii - sharpest pics ive ever had (w 55mm Zeiss) , but the a7rV is not a Sports Camera for me as much as I wish it were at that price point. A1 is Sony’s comparable sports camera and it is $2500 more expensive plus you need to spend several hundred dollars more for CFx A cards.
@@Yupthereitism Not quite. Canon battery cutoff is 60%, not 75%, and frame rate doesn't drop to 6 fps . You'll never get 20 fps elec or 12 mech on this Sony shooting uncompressed raw. PS - Sony's Manual: "Maximum continuous shooting speed is 6 fps when shooting uncompressed RAW / uncompressed RAW+JPEG images." To my point, not a sports camera for me, perhaps for some.
@@Yupthereitism cool. keep telling yourself that. Apparently you haven’t looked at the time stamps of a sequence of R5 images. The Sony in question far inferior for sports.
Sony imaging edge does NOT give you any kind of good raw demosaicing for the A7RV raws right now. They only do a quick fix for every new camera, and the quality will be a bit better in a couple months. However it will never reach the quality that Capture One gets out of the Sony Raws. Capture One already supports the A7RV raws, and you could have used the free express version to develop your raws. That you didn't do that means that your whole "image quality" segment does not show anything close to the real quality of the A7RV files, which are a huge step up over the A7RIV, and miles ahead of the mushy, noise reduction baked into raws, stuff you get from a Canon R5.
@@TheSlantedLens sorry for being a bit polemic about the Canon R5. It's also a good camera, and I was mostly reacting to some other comments here (that still regurgitate the old "color science" myths, as if it was 2014). I respect that you guys reply to comments here so fast. Check it out yourself. Use the free express version of Capture One and compare the demosaiced files. Imaging edge is miles behind at this time.
@@denis5850 in reality, the files of the A7RV are much better. I know it’s mostly Canon bros who watch this channel, but that’s an American/ UK thing mostly. The rest of the world is not on that Canikon DSLR trip you guys are still on, like it was 2012. In blind Test a majority of people prefers Sony colors over Canon. „Color science“ is just something that Canon marketing in the US desperately clings to.
I don’t know I will look at a different pictures the way I see this Sony has no focus it’s darker and me as a professional photographer I don’t know what are you talking about my man all the best with your commercial,Canon is performing way better than Sony. All the best with your financial future😂.
