Mattias Burling

7 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Seen it before.

Part of the problem with Sony is that their colour matches a chart but looks clinical on real-world subjects.

We are talking about video by the way, not RAW where the colour processing is in post.

In warm sunlight, the Sony too often looks dead.

Canon 1D X JPEG:

Sony A7S II JPEG:

On some screens this will vary. The Canon might look like it has too much magenta and red in the skin tones. That's the display that's at fault or the browser, not the camera file.

The Sony looks dead no matter what you view it on

This. The image at the end of the day is what counts. Charts and spec doesn't mean jack.

The vent isn't flush with the plate.

7 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

They are not lined up because they have way different MP sizes. And that test is from Imaging Resources. They have used the same test for 15 years on just about every camera made. I don't think you Can see to be honest.

Thats incorrect. Its not even the same scene.. and my eyes are supposedly bad.. lol

 

Any who, this is shot (by me) with the same lens and the 5D + 6Dmii. The lights have obviously changed a tad between shots and sure, some variation is there.
But I do absolutely not see a huge difference of color tones granting me to question eyes and monitors of those that don't. DR I see a slight difference in, one is also a smidge warmer. But nothing groundbreaking. Tomato, tomato.

9 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I think you either need your eyes examined or a new Monitor if you think Canon still has the same Color Science on the 5D versus the 6D mk II.

What settings did you use in the two cameras and why haven't you lined them up?
Also, why did you change the scene in between your shots? Can you share the raw files?
My eyes and monitor are just fine thank you.

7 minutes ago, austinchimp said:

However Sony have, in the last few years, released a number of cameras which have pushed the boundaries in technology, giving us new capabilities in Log, slow motion, resolution, size, hybrids etc. They haven't all been a huge success, but you do get the feeling they're pushing their own technology to see how much they can fit in to the cameras and straining at the limits. Remember how much criticism they get for overheating, which is proof they're pushing the tech pretty hard.

Canon, on the other hand, have been proven to deliberately hold back technology, and sit very conservatively in old tech with outdated specs, when we know they're sitting on things that could do better. Given how many people were invested in their systems, it's rubbed people up the wrong way.

I agree with a lot of this. But it is user dependent. Looking at it from a Canon user perspective its Canon that push boundaries and offer innovative technology while Sony are holding back.
It all depends on who you ask, no right or wrong. But if someone makes a review saying that they are willing to live with the missing features and shortcomings of the A7iii thats ok. Just their opinion. If the same guy says the same thing about a Canon he is a payed idiot fanboy. 

But you are right, Sony gets a lot of flak for menus, skin tones, etc. But not their users in the same way that Canons do.
Since I have a youtube channel with a fairly large number of comments from the average camera dudes on line and read alll of them. I get a pretty good picture of the over all tone. And rarely if not never do I see Sony, Panasonic or Fuji users called "paid", "idiots", "fanboys" etc. But a Canon and Leica users are receiving it daily. 
With Leica its easier to understand since it has so much to do with the price and the fact that you really need to be a photographer to "get" Leica, not just a camera dude. But Canon has products in all tiers and prices. 

Your right, it is an interesting discussion. 

9 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

"we adjust the color...anyway.  As soon as you do...you invalidate the color science."

I find that to be incorrect. Even when adjusting raw, the original color science is in effect and dictates how and how much adjustments are needed. Otherwise for example all LUTs would work the same on all footage. But they don't. Anyone with two different raw capable cameras can easily try for themselves. Take a side by side. Adjust one and copy the settings to the other. It won't look the same.

And that is the key. Sure I can fiddle with images but sometimes there are a lot of them. In a project I was leading recently we where a couple of photographers that took roughly 15 000 photos. And I edited out maybe 5000 keepers that are going to be used in various marketing material. I was pretty happy that it was only one photographer that used a different brand and the rest of us all had the same color science.

If I ever for some reason would start to work full time as a photographer or filmmaker again. Spending a huge amount of time processing pictures. Then I would definitely want to minimize the time spent in post. 

5 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah like it or not they have changed it.

My favorite Canon color wise was the original 5D. It was a wedding shooters dream camera.

I did some side by side with the original 5D and the 6Dmkii this sumer. Virtually indistinguishable.
So they have kept their colors very well.
 

5 hours ago, gelaxstudio said:

If canon throw something better than sony at  the same price，I  will definitely shut my mouth

Maybe you can help bring some light to my original question.

Imo Sony are the once that doesn't match the Canon specs at the same price. Which is ok, we all have different preferences. 
But you won't see me accusing people who like the A7iii to be apologists, fanboys, etc. I just figure they are willing to live with a camera crippled in some respects because its excelling in others. In the very same way that a Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, BMD user would.

But my observation that I find weird is that its trendy to bash Canon reviews, canon marketing trips (ignoring Sonys) and in some instances Canon users..
Why do you think that is?
(Im not saying you are doing all of these things, Im just asking since you seem to feel strongly about the subject.)

My theory is because its big and mainstream.

5 hours ago, gelaxstudio said:

not some fanboy BS

Exactly, but why does it seem so brand dependent?

Sliders, drones and gimbals are all over used when first becoming popular and will later on fade a bit to be used only when needed.
Personally I can't stand unnecessary gimbal shots and don't get me started on drones

Why don't we ever see the same criticism against Panasonic and Sony excuses. I mean I think the GH5 and A7iii are great cameras, but Im not gonna ignore the severe crippling and lacking of certain features. Yet the positive reviews never get the same bashing or called apologists, etc. Its cool to decide to live with the short comings of some cameras but not others. Im wondering if its because they are so mainstream and there for trendy to bash? 

Sony for example are always flying reviewers to exotic and expensive events but don't get as much flak for it. 
One of the biggest youtube reviewers was saluted as unbiased and fair because he went down hard on the Canon and said the Sony was better.
The same youtube have been traveling on the Sony account and said, "usually I never review Sony because they don't invite me to things.. but now I got to go to..."... 

Just a bit weird imo.

I often feel like the critics are asking for BMD to turn the pocket into a camera that they already made, the Ursa Mini.

2 hours ago, dvcrn said:

 

• Control ring EF adapter is sweet. I like having a versatile dial directly where the lens is
  • Too bad it adds even more size to the camera at all time, at least until we get more affordable and smaller R lenses.

Nice write up!

In most cases adapters doesn't add any size. Without it the lens is either bigger or slower. The adapter + EF 50/1.2 is roughly the size or maybe even smaller than the RF version. Same goes for Sony E-mount which size wise is pretty much as big or bigger than a DSLR with an equal lens. Another example are Sigma lenses which are bigger in E-Mount than EF or F.

Mirrorless is only really smaller if the sensor or aperture is smaller. 

Two under exposed, one zombie, one dying and a Canon.

Im currently reviewing the new and sharper Mark 2 version of the Kipon 40mm f0.85. Have been using it sporadically for a week or so but this weekend I will hopefully get to use it for a full day. So far its been dreamy.

12 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

At least Fro was honest in that video about the 6Dmk2 now being "dead in the water" (exact quote from Fro!).

 

I tend to agree, thats how good the AF and EVF on the EOS-R is. Its twice the price if course, but other than that it has it down for counting.

I still haven't had time to use it much outside of professional use, so a review is still a few weeks away. But Im already playing around with titles. Im thinking along the lines of "EOS-R - Can it save the mirrorless camera?"

No RS what so ever in my handheld HD footage. I use the IS at all times and still the footage looks awesome when done.
I also watched some of it on my 42" Samsung LCD which has its sharpness turned down, but still in true Samsung fashion ads a lot of it.
Soft and/or low detail are not words I can use to describe it. Its sharp and detailed.

Skin tones.... Pure class.

6 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

why this camera

For me its easy. The competition doesn't offer anything that can match it on paper, let alone in practice, for my usage and needs.

The first RED hydrogen has already showed up on the classifieds here but I still don't fully understand what it is. Just checked an official commercial video made by RED. It was 1.5 min and didn't mention what the device is, does or why I would want one

14 minutes ago, frontfocus said:

At the same time I don't get, why anyone should praise the Canon for things that it's not. This is the reason why canon gets away with a lot of awful decisions 

Any examples if things it is not but still gets praised for?

All I see is hate after cherry picking a couple specs and ignoring things it does have.

4 minutes ago, Yurolov said:

The same thing happened with the xc10. Specs were crap but the image was unmatched for a s16 look. It is the nature of canon. If u like good images then the Eos r will give u that. Talk about absolute sharpness in 4k is complete nonsense; its unimaginative and any artist worth anything could care less about it. 

This.

Thats why I felt so confident that I even preordered. After using the 6Dmkii and XC-10 I knew I wasn't going to be disappointed. The only surprise so far is the vast improvement in control and handling making it even more efficient to operate. 

We say it over and over, but it seems it needs to be said over and over. Every persons needs and wants are different. There is no superior camera. It all depends on what you need. 

14 minutes ago, Aussie Ash said:

 

I was hoping for a discussion on the quest of background blur. Is it more for the photographer than the client, etc. 

Had another in house video gig today (portrait of a person and her profession). Used the EOS-R with mostly the 50/1.8 and my regular goto 28/1.8. All handheld with the digital IS. Everything went great, the camera delivered. The natural profile really is filmic in the right type if light. 

As always Im using the Xume adapter so my ND can quickly change lens. But still, really looking forward to the ND adapter. Its gonna be gold.

I use external recording for audio and the cameras internal for scratch. But I must say, the internal mics are really good, as far as internal mics go. I actually noticed it already a month ago with the 6Dmkii. I had an interview made spontaneously with only the internals end up in the finished video. Not because it was good enough, but because it was solid audio. Today it happened again. Guess its another nod from Canon to vloggers.

As always with audio it really isnt about the mic. The placement and location is all that really matter to get good audio, even if its just the internal (maybe someone remembers my old $300 vs $1500 mic comparison).

Another thing I did today was test my good old Godox flash and wireless trigger. Zero issues and the 1/8000 sync works perfectly.

Btw, the shutter sound.. I love it. Its loud compared to my X-H1 which of course is too bad. But the way it sounds is cool. I do however wish it, and all other cameras, would copy Fujis implementation of turning of the EVF sensor as soon as the screen is open.

For those that don't have the energy to watch the video the conclusion was basically: people dont like to blurry backgrounds.

2 hours ago, noone said:

Amount of BLUR is NOT repeat NOT, BOKEH!      Bokeh refers to the quality, not quantity for want of a better expression.

Yes, yes we know. But you know what he means.

2 hours ago, noone said:

What he was comparing was simply looking at ONE lens, used at different apertures and looking at the subject/background and asking what people liked.

No he used more than one lens.

Very interesting test, imo.