Arikhan Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Hi guys, I am brand agnostic. I read starkinsider.com for a while now and I like their content oriented and unblased style and their work. After 10 years of shooting Canon, Clinton Stark was about switching from Canon to Sony (for filming). Now he went on travel to Europe and tested the Sony A6500 vs Canon 80D. Here are some of his thoughts: getting in overheating issues with the a6500 jello "terrible ergonomics" - as he says This topic isn't new at all but more relevant than ever. Canon is kidding his filming DSLR customers by offering overpriced 720p "soft" footage and poor DR (stills) - corresponding technical requirements from 2009 - and Sony delivers wihin its "non professional" cameras spectacular specs, in fact beeing "baking & cooking solutions" and never carrying about balanced, just working products, without elementary technical limitations (overheating). And Panasonic kidding us about AF - AF working great in a DVX200, hc-x1 - ag-UX - and unreliable AF-features in their new consumer cameras. Unlike Canon (DPAF) and Sony (A6000, A6300, A6500, FS5, etc.) they just don't want to offer consumers reliable AF... We all (consumers/buyers) are guilty because - beeing brain washed by fanboyism and specs enthusiasm - we lost our criticism. We pay them (pretty all manufacturers) by far too much for their toys...Costiveness and public (harsh) criticism are arguments making manufacturers to move - it simply diminuate their profits but spare our wallets... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Have you read this forum before? Theres nothing but criticism going on Phil A and kidzrevil 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 5 hours ago, Arikhan said: Hi guys, I am brand agnostic. I read starkinsider.com for a while now and I like their content oriented and unblased style and their work. After 10 years of shooting Canon, Clinton Stark was about switching from Canon to Sony (for filming). Now he went on travel to Europe and tested the Sony A6500 vs Canon 80D. Here are some of his thoughts: getting in overheating issues with the a6500 jello "terrible ergonomics" - as he says This topic isn't new at all but more relevant than ever. Canon is kidding his filming DSLR customers by offering overpriced 720p "soft" footage and poor DR (stills) - corresponding technical requirements from 2009 - and Sony delivers wihin its "non professional" cameras spectacular specs, in fact beeing "baking & cooking solutions" and never carrying about balanced, just working products, without elementary technical limitations (overheating). And Panasonic kidding us about AF - AF working great in a DVX200, hc-x1 - ag-UX - and unreliable AF-features in their new consumer cameras. Unlike Canon (DPAF) and Sony (A6000, A6300, A6500, FS5, etc.) they just don't want to offer consumers reliable AF... We all (consumers/buyers) are guilty because - beeing brain washed by fanboyism and specs enthusiasm - we lost our criticism. We pay them (pretty all manufacturers) by far too much for their toys...Costiveness and public (harsh) criticism are arguments making manufacturers to move - it simply diminuate their profits but spare our wallets... Is the a6500 AF-C in video really all that great? Up until yesterday, all I've ever seen online is how extraordinary it is. But I just watched a video showing that when selecting an AF point in video mode, then if the subject or the camera moves, there is no way to know whether the subject will be in focus, because the camera gives no indication of this on the screen. I don't know whether or not this is true, but if there isn't any confirmation until reviewing clips on your computer at home, this sounds a little hazardous to say the least. With the G85 in manual mode at least, if I hit AF, I can confirm focus by watching the focus peaking on the screen. First of all, it's important to differentiate between AF-S and AF-C. When it comes to AF-S, Lumix cameras are exceptional, except in very low light, but most cameras struggle there as well. Secondly, I think most buyers of Lumix cameras are aware that AF-C is not on par with Canon's top-of-the-line or even Sony or Fuji (if they're even aware that Fuji has 4K video!). I don't believe that Panasonic is intentionally crippling their consumer cameras, if that's what you mean. But until they adopt PDAF, it's hard for me to believe they will be able to compete. But who knows? Double the sensor readout speed, focus points, a better processor, improved algorithms... even if it's not as good, it just might be good enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikhan Posted January 22, 2017 Author Share Posted January 22, 2017 @jonpais When shooting video: AF-S is useless for moving subjects. If you are an one man band, you need AF-C for unpredictably moving subjects. Without a reliable AF, minimum 75 percent of your shots (subjects moving substantially forth and back, from left to right, etc.) will be pure garbage. For capturing a non recuring moment, you need a maximum of reliable AF-C. And Pana delivers that only partially - thousands of miles away from Canons DPAF or some current Sony models. Their engineers as surely not worse than Sony or Canon, but they just don't want to integrate a reliable AF in consumer cameras, as they do in their camcorders. They should be honest and communicate this fact: "Reliable AF features are only availbale for our camcorder product line." But they don't do it...When crying this out, sales would drop for their Lumix line , so they mostly relativise flaws and cons and prefer to remain vague... As the GH5 was announced and NOT ONE of the "first movers" said something about AF quality, I knew it. It remains the same wobbling DFD + contrast AF-C as known...Please don't misunderstand me: In some cases, it's usable, but in many situations not reliable at all...If the AF was near Canon or Sony, they would have scremed it out loud...Manufacturers and their paid and unpaid henchmen always talk about "outstanding features" - only buyers talk about flaws, after buying the in many cases overpriced gear... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrgl Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 I don't get it. If you want good IQ and reliable AF, Canon has the 1DXII and C100. What's the problem with those cameras? webrunner5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 13 minutes ago, Arikhan said: @jonpais When shooting video: AF-S is useless for moving subjects. If you are an one man band, you need AF-C for unpredictably moving subjects. Without a reliable AF, minimum 75 percent of your shots (subjects moving substantially forth and back, from left to right, etc.) will be pure garbage. For capturing a non recuring moment, you need a maximum of reliable AF-C. And Pana delivers that only partially - thousands of miles away from Canons DPAF or some current Sony models. Their engineers as surely not worse than Sony or Canon, but they just don't want to integrate a reliable AF in consumer cameras, as they do in their camcorders. They should be honest and communicate this fact: "Reliable AF features are only availbale for our camcorder product line." But they don't do it...When crying this out, sales would drop for their Lumix line , so they mostly relativise flaws and cons and prefer to remain vague... As the GH5 was announced and NOT ONE of the "first movers" said something about AF quality, I knew it. It remains the same wobbling DFD + contrast AF-C as known...Please don't misunderstand me: In some cases, it's usable, but in many situations not reliable at all...If the AF was near Canon or Sony, they would have scremed it out loud...Manufacturers and their paid and unpaid henchmen always talk about "outstanding features" - only buyers talk about flaws, after buying the in many cases overpriced gear... I only mentioned AF-S, because it really is necessary to make the distinction. The GH5 testers only had pre-production models, but yes - one of the very first things aside from overheating that the lucky invitees to Sony's launch of the a6500 tested was the AF-C at rodeos and water sports events. I doubt Panasonic would try that! It's good to be skeptical, even when reviewers get their hands on these, they'll gloss over the shortcomings and go on and on about everything else - all in the name of getting you to click on the link so they can get a small percentage. Even now, everyone and their uncle is uploading videos on YouTube about the GH5, sometimes merely reciting the specs, just in order to get hits. Soon, I wouldn't be surprised if some enterprising individuals begin to post 'footage' from the GH5 even though they've never handled one. This is all part of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikhan Posted January 22, 2017 Author Share Posted January 22, 2017 @andrgl Quote I don't get it. No? You don't get the marketing lies? Canon's marketing statements, calling the 720p soft footage out of their most DSLRs "top notch Full HD"? They just simply take (potential) buyers for fool, their 1080p beeing far away from nowadays standards and existing technology. Quote Canon has the 1DXII and C100. What's the problem with those cameras? 1DXII is by far overpriced for filming (no peaking, no C-Log,l tons of hard disks needed to archive footage...). And for stills, same level as D4S years ago with much worse DR. So, simply vastly overpriced... The C100 m2 is at the end of the day perhaps the most realistic (not vastly overpriced) Canon offer for high quality 1080p in the S35 area....Worse buying in mint condition at about 2.800-3.000 Euro...The difference to the current price at 4.000 is for paying marketing lies as this blatant one.... ;-) Guys, top notch 1080p is not a "special feature" nowadays...It should be a minimum for a serious imaging company, just delivering good up to date devices and not trying to fool buyers and customers.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrgl Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 Haha, ok dude. You want everything and the kitchen sink for no money. Good luck with that! Edit: can we see your work? Are you delivering to theaters or perhaps IMAX screens? webrunner5, kidzrevil and Ehetyz 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikhan Posted January 22, 2017 Author Share Posted January 22, 2017 @andrgl Did you ever shoot 1080p with the 5d m4 (4.000 Euro camera) and the 1DX m2 (6.000 Euro camera) ? I did it for testing...You know what? The 1080p footage is much more worse than the IQ of my FZ1000 (700 Euro). Don't try to declare the 720p out of the Canons as "gourmet food". It's simply trivial fast foot compared with IQ of competition. Nothing to do with "production for theatre or IMAX". Quote You want everything and the kitchen sink for no money. Please read my posting. There is no lunch for free, surely...But I am not willing to pay manufacturers marketing morons with their phantasy driven by steroids. There are the engineers, developers and workers work which should be paid...And don't forget: Consumers first! - and not manufacturers profit first...You should care much more about your wallet than about manufacturers profit and adopting marketing claims... Please consider, that Canon is (probably) not paying you for the 720p advocacy... IronFilm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 2 hours ago, Arikhan said: But I am not willing to pay manufacturers marketing morons with their phantasy driven by steroids. Back it up a little there Dudeman. These guys are not driven by steroids, they are driven by J-Pop teen queens and lots of 'quality' pharmacopoeia. For God's sake, let's not confuse this any further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmcindie Posted January 22, 2017 Share Posted January 22, 2017 3 hours ago, Arikhan said: Did you ever shoot 1080p with the 5d m4 (4.000 Euro camera) and the 1DX m2 (6.000 Euro camera) ? I did it for testing...You know what? The 1080p footage is much more worse than the IQ of my FZ1000 (700 Euro). I disagree, the 5d mark IV looks considerably better than the A6300, even in 120fps mode. Here's my little test of the 5d mk IV with the a6300 relegated to b-roll. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpQxYtqhYl8 You can see some of the a6300 shots in the b-roll. Shot with slog2/sgamma3 with a lut applied. What I learned from the 5d mark IV: Easy to use. Focusing is a snap. Great image quality in 4k (no sharpening, a6300 has lots of sharpening artifacts and halos on edges even on minimal detail settings). Color is good and a surprising amount of information is hidden in the shadows which you can pull up. 1080p is "mushy and soft" but guess what? The 1080p on the a6300 is worse. Also the 5d is a WAY better photography machine too. What a shocker. You claim the FZ1000 looks better? Well post some samples? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikhan Posted January 24, 2017 Author Share Posted January 24, 2017 @hmcindie Quote 1080p is "mushy and soft" but guess what? The 1080p on the a6300 is worse. Of course, I know it...That's my criticism: Manufacturers fooling us by NOT offering "real" 1080p in their devices. No real good 1080p in the 1.000 Euro A6300 and no real 1080p in the 4.000 Euro 5D m4. THIS is truly a shocker and demonstrates how fast the manufacturers got us consumers brain washed, accepting their costly and endless brazeness... Quote You claim the FZ1000 looks better? Well post some samples? That's not a claim but a known fact. Here you go - please set your comparison for each camera on 1080p (DPReview - Video image comparison tool). Just compare the FZ1000 with the oberpriced 5D m4. Apart of that, I am just working on a AF test (FZ1000 vs XYZ) and there you can watch the IQ of a 700 Euro 1080p. Quote Also the 5d is a WAY better photography machine too. Of course, but not at 4.000 Euro. At a maximum of 2.700 Euro (new). Please, you don't have to tell me about Canon. I (my family) own them all, except 80D, 5Dm4 and 1DX m2 and probably one of the vastest Canon lens collection in Germany. But Canon is gone here, it became inexistent in our house (I'm still shooting 5dm3, cause I don't own the Nikon tele lenses I need yet). Not because it's bad, because it's not innovative, ultraconservative (hearing only on lazy journalists and photographers who don't want or need shooting RAW or refusing to modernize/reinvent their work) and meanwhile vastly overpriced. It's the world of 2009 - it was not a bad world, not at all. But it's gone. Canon is nothing but nostalgy. I love Canon, but not so much to buy any DSLR at the moment...I know, they are still very successful, but no more with my money. You can pay them even 10.000 for the mushy 1080p 720p out of the 5D m4, it's your money... ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 I used to own a Canon Powershot, great little camera, no bigger than the size of a pack of Marlboros. I don't shoot stills, but can someone here tell me, when you play back your pictures on a Canon, are they supposed to look blue and a full stop overexposed? Because everyone here uses Canon, and when they proudly show me what they've just shot, that's how they look. Just wondering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikhan Posted January 24, 2017 Author Share Posted January 24, 2017 @jonpais I don't exactly know what you are talking about...Never shot Powershot, only xyzD or xyD / xD / 1DS x / 1DX...Never had a "blue look" effect (excepting photographer's failure with WB and in this cases it was WYSIWIG) in the cameras I shot with. In my eyes, the screen colours (LCD) are a personal matter, the operator gets used to. There are people prefering Nikon and other prefering Canon colour rendition when playing back their pictures on camera's LCD. After some times, the operator gets used to his camera and knows (in 98% of cases) exactly how the stills look - when talking about colours. When talking about sharpness and OF, revision on LCD becomes much more important because of catching up details/mistakes of the respective shot. It's interesting you talk about this. During last months, I am using more and more big control monitors for beauty shots (video and stills) - not for mobile shooting...HDMI...Just dreaming about wireless HDMI control, but with latency in mind, the fast and reliable solutions are still quite expensive though...And you need to hire some Sherpas to carry you gear... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eleison Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 On 1/22/2017 at 1:09 AM, Arikhan said: Hi guys, I am brand agnostic. I read starkinsider.com for a while now and I like their content oriented and unblased style and their work. After 10 years of shooting Canon, Clinton Stark was about switching from Canon to Sony (for filming). Now he went on travel to Europe and tested the Sony A6500 vs Canon 80D. Here are some of his thoughts: getting in overheating issues with the a6500 jello "terrible ergonomics" - as he says Canon is good for Vlogging/documenting real life - something that Clinton Stark seems to be doing. Sony is not. The a6500/a7x are basically better suited for "cinema" film making where there are actors, dollies, scripts, etc. That being said, most people aspire to "cinema" film making even though a canon 80d would probably be more realistic gear for them. It's like the guy that buys the corvette or Porshe. He aspires to track his cars, perhaps even to race in scca events. But at the end of the day, the car is usually just kept in the garage or used to pickup the grocery (something a honda accord could do.. and do more economically). That does not mean, there wouldn't be some people who will ultimately race their Porshe.. it's just that very few do.. and those that do, give hope to the majority that they will also race their cars (which they will not). In addition, just like people who appreciate sport cars for what they are -- some people just like to buy "cool" gear :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 So, here we go again.. Is it even possible to shoot a Sony a6500 without S-log and get a pleasing image with skin tones that don't make people look like martians, or must it be graded? Because at least with Panasonic cameras, while the color may not be so spectacular that you jump out of your seat and shout 'Eureka!', it is do-able. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikhan Posted January 25, 2017 Author Share Posted January 25, 2017 @andrgl Quote Edit: can we see your work? Sure...Some of it, at least...Shot last weekend with the 5dm3 and the stellar 300mm F2.8 at the WorldCup Grand Prix in LElPZlG (Germany) - only altered ownership and serial number in EXIF because of privacy... And now one with the phantastic 17-40mm F4 USM lens...That's me in a composition (shooting against light and exposing ETTR) visualizing the flaws of the 5D mX: ZERO dynamic range (compared with Nikon / Sony sensors), no shadows can be recovered in post, because dark tones getting noisy as hell, etc....OK, when carrying reflectors and wireless HSS + strobes with you, it should work...But at this time our Sherpas were on vacation... ;-) Shooting more than 1.000.000 stills and more than 800 hours of film, I could say to have some experience...Even considering that I still go to school and do digital imaging as "professional hobby"....So, it's not necessary to enlighten me about Canon DSLRs advantages and flaws... @andrgl & @hmcindie If you would have seriously shooted video with the D750 (1.700 Euro) and the D8xx (about 2.500 Euro), you would have to admit, that even these two DSLRs offer by far more 1080p quality than any much more expensive Canon DSLR...So, no reason to advocate Canons mushy 720p packed in 1080p marketing bla bla... ;-) BTW: Put the 300mm 2.8 or the 400mm 2.8 with a cheap 20 Euro adapter on the 1.300 Euro NX1, shoot (stills & 1080p video) and compare with the 5d m3 (up to 300 ISO)...You will be shocked, how the NX1 (APS-C) blows the 5d m3 away...A cheap APS-C camera blowing a expensive FF flagship away...In stills and 1080p video (again: in stills up to 300 ISO)... @kidzrevil Quote I completely understand the requirements of a hobbyist or someone who just shoots casually is a lot less stringent however I do this to keep the lights on. You have to deliver an impeccable image to remain competitive as a freelancer so I am picky with the tools I depend on for my trade Well said, and so true...It's all about content and an impeccable IQ, corresponding to todays "industrial" standards...When doing serious work, it's about delivering best possible quality...For your clients, for your targeted audience and/or for your own eyes. Though, you should consider, that the XC10 is a 1" device. Pushing too far (means also in low light and high ISO) is not the strength of a 1" sensor.... @jonpais Quote So, here we go again.. Is it even possible to shoot a Sony a6500 without S-log and get a pleasing image with skin tones that don't make people look like martians, or must it be graded? My mom bought now the A6500, we got a very convenient and cheap deal from a guy selling it with receipt and German warranty, just 4 weeks after buying it. He had huge hands and the camera was not a good device for this guy...But a good deal for us...First I will take it to a buddy of mine (electronics and hardware programming freak) to make some changes - making the cam to not overheat at all...After that, I will begin shooting with it and sending the footage to a professional colorist, who promised me to help in fundamental Sony colour grading/correction (mainly skin tones, greens and sky gradations to avoid banding and other artifacts with a 4:2:0 8bit footage). After that, I can discuss on this topic... jonpais 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 my unit was showing image artifacts at its native 500 iso @hyalinejim & I pointed that out in multiple tests as we exchanged footage. The 1" sensor of the RX10ii did no such thing at any ISO. I think we are misrepresenting sensor size here because sensor performance has come a long way. A full frame canon 5d mark iii and its huge sensor isn't even touching the quality of an rx10ii 1" sensor in video. Out of experience and sheer common sense I have never attempted to push a small sensor camera past 800 iso so I hope im not giving the impression that im complaining about a hardware flaw while im shooting at 3200+. No. This was happening at very low iso's. The attached video is shot on an RX10ii btw @Arikhan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikhan Posted January 25, 2017 Author Share Posted January 25, 2017 @kidzrevil Ah, OK...thank you for clarification. This behaviour should be a shame at ISO 500. And yes, excepting the 1DX m2 and the CX00 series, Sony handles low light and high ISO much more better than Canon. Canon is (excepting the 1DX m2 and the CX00 series) nowadays something for guys who refuse to adapt and to break out of their comfort zone. They sell more of "warmish looking and pleasing" image illusions - something like an "illusion factory" - than serious DSLR devices corresponding modern requirements in matter of flexibility, DR, technical precision and accuracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 2 hours ago, Arikhan said: @jonpais My mom bought now the A6500, we got a very convenient and cheap deal from a guy selling it with receipt and German warranty, just 4 weeks after buying it. He had huge hands and the camera was not a good device for this guy...But a good deal for us...First I will take it to a buddy of mine (electronics and hardware programming freak) to make some changes - making the cam to not overheat at all...After that, I will begin shooting with it and sending the footage to a professional colorist, who promised me to help in fundamental Sony colour grading/correction (mainly skin tones, greens and sky gradations to avoid banding and other artifacts with a 4:2:0 8bit footage). After that, I can discuss on this topic... I have no grudge at all against Canon, like I said, I loved my little pocket camera when I had it. What does bother me is when professionals here always ask why I don't shoot with a Canon. Canon really does have a stranglehold on the market. But what do they know anyhow? People in these parts still believe that Heineken is a premium beer! So it is an encouraging sign that more and more, I'm seeing professionals shooting with Sony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.