WHY I WAS SO WRONG ABOUT MIRRORLESS. CANON R5 VS SONY A1. 6 MONTH REVIEW.
2021 ж. 20 Шіл.
33 889 Рет қаралды
One of the biggest problems I had with action photography is nailing super fast action while getting creative composition at the same time. In this review, I reviewed Canon R5 and Sony A1, after owning both for months.
Follow me at instagram.com/tinmanlee
Website: tinmanlee.com
Nicely created, Tin Man. I appreciate your judgement of both of these cameras being worth a photographer's time and consideration. As a Sony a1 owner/user I find great joy in what this camera can do, but having photographed next to those Canon photographers using the R5 and R6, I feel they too have quality gear that makes so much possible. The EVF makes photographing a whole new game and I love it. FINALLY, this is how it should be. Thank you again for all the years of work you have done and shared with us all. :)
Hello Tin Man. Hope you are keeping well. Found your review this evening, and your raise some key points. Took the plunge a couple weeks ago and went for the Sony a1 with the 100-400mm and the 600mm lenses. Just added the Sony a7R iv and the 70-200mm for portraits, with the high resolution with 61 megapixels. It's an amazing shift from the Nikon, and I agree with your findings. Something that doesn't often come up in reviews, is the importance of hand size and the size and weight of the camera bodies. The Sony bodies are smaller and lighter that Nikon and Canon, and what a difference it makes. The ergonomics of holding a camera body, and changing settings on the fly, is made phenomenally easier with a camera body size that fits your hands. And, for some of us that are dealing with arthritis, the Sony bodies for smaller hands are what I'd call Arthritis Friendly. More expensive of course, but if it makes the difference of not aggravating your hands, it's the difference between still being able to enjoy photography, or having to give it up. Stay safe and wishing your wondrous travels ahead.
I switched from an R5 and 600mm F4 to an Olympus OM-1. If you really want portability and low weight it's the way to go. Much lighter than the Sony and bomb proof build and great lens options. I don't regret the change.
Great review as always TinMan! Very interesting that the eye details are sharper for the Sony.
Lee, I admire and adore you have the spirit in Yellowstone for 60 days during wintertime. It was just too cold, and too much snow, I visited there. I love the R5 Eye AF capability and its camera setting flexibility. It is certainly much powerful and useful than my 5D4 when taking Still/Video of moving wild animals. Especially, the BIF Still photography.
Very good information! I love my R5. Has greatly improved my photography along with your awesome coaching! Thanks!
Awww that’s so kind of you. Can’t wait to photograph with you very soon. Isn’t it exciting!
@@TinManLee Yes. Can’t wait to spend a week in Alaska with you!
Great to see you again Tin Man! Really enjoyed this - look forward to your review of mirrorless lenses. I've been on the fence about the upgrade path but it looks like the higher iso option might be the choice for me. Cheers from the dark land of Canada.
Quicker initial acquisition is super critical... AND, the other issue is that of course you are going to have to buy killer expensive glass. You don't want to buy EF glass really do you? And Aside from that... there is SO MUCH excellent e-mount used and third party glass available for when you are not going to be buying the super demanding high end glass. When you compare how much TOTAL native glass is out there that you will not feel like you will want to replace when the RF version of your EF mount lens comes out (I have been there with Sony, it will happen to you) The difference it the price of the body... gets very negligible.
Good review Tin Man! Glad you joined the mirrorless community.
I LOVED your honesty ! Yes, I have also heard about the darkness of sony...Yet the details are so sharp. :)
Thanks, Tin Man. I have the A1 and absolutely love it.
Welcome to Mirrorless. I moved when the A7r2 came out but back then I did not do fast action. Just architecture and landscape and I needed to be able to fly a 4K camera and it was light and worked with my DJI M600Pro. But, the A7r3 and better are light years ahead of the A7r2 in terms of autofocus. I know you looked exactly at the wrong time at mirrorless. But, I am glad you have arrived. I love my A1/600mm f4 and A1/200-600mm combo... Cant do two brands so I think I have the best set up in the world right now. Now I need to figure out how to be able to stay out for 2 months in Yellowstone at a time.
Excellent review. I am able to shoot fast action bird behaviour shots with the Sony real time tracking AF. I was not able to get results with a DSLR AF system.
I adore you. I love the way you teach, your sense of humor, and how you always help coach your students to achieve their best results. The stuffed animals are a hoot! Love them. Thanks for making more videos - I have so much left to learn!
I was hesitant about the whole mirrorless thing until I finally just made the jump (Sony a7iii as the a1 is way beyond my means). I LOVE it and I can't believe how many more photos I get in focus now. Great video! Loved seeing the side by side with the Canon and Sony cameras.
So glad you mentioned it. Yes exactly! I think it really has to do with the newer technology. I used to think it must be me that missed the shot but now I think there were some design flaws in digital SLR that make getting super fast and erratic shots not possible. It’s just awesome looking forward.
Thanks for your nice review. Both cameras are so close in terms of quality and functions. They both produce professional results.
Yes indeed. I got so many more sharp photos than before it’s unbelievable how technology has changed.
Hi Tin Man As usual nice presentation. Got Canon R5 RF 600mm f4 and RF 100-500mm and Rf 70-100 f2.8 so no going back. Have to play around with RF 600 and see how it works with AF and eye
Those shots are beautiful man! I gotta get myself the A1 😎
Question: If you were looking to buy and had the money for either camera but not enough to have both, which one would you purchase?
in regards to the initial lock on focus, 5-6 shots between 2 different people could definitely have more to do with the reaction time of the person and not the camera. You would need a far more extensive test to determine this
I'm looking forward to seeing what the R5 AF can do.
Hi Tin Man, The bigger had of the vox has not to do with the Mpixels. This is due to lens compression. The Sony has a lens connection what is taken from the APC sensor type camera. You always see this difference!
Oustanding review and photos! Regarding the detail in the eye of the fox, I see that the Sony seems to be darker by at least a third to a half a stop. I wonder if you turned down the exposure on the Canon by a similar amount if some of that detail would appear. I have always felt that the Sony cameras really had a darker exposure compared to Canon in almost every instance. Anyway just keep shooting and showing us these great photos and videos!
Excellent Video! I appreciate your honest assessment of each camera. How much better are the RF lenses over the EF lenses? Is it worth the difference?
Oh my you just reminded me to do another video. I had a chance to compare the 50 1.2 and 85 1.2 old and new ones with my friend the other day and I have to say it’s mind blowing these new lenses. The super tele photos though, have the same design so shouldn’t be too much different.
The 85 1.2 looks great and 50 1.2 also promising. The old EF versions of these lenses struggled with very strong CA which they have finally fixed. Myself I use Zeiss Otus 85 1.4 which has the best image quality of any lens that I have tried. Manual focus though so a bit harder to use, you can find used versions that are much cheaper than the new prices.
@@TinManLee It was just announced that the RF super teles will have faster focus than their EF counterparts when using compatible camera (assuming they mean the soon to be released R3). Same design, but apparently the RF versions allow for more power to be delivered vs EF with adapter.
10:40 what lens were you using for the canon and the sony.
Did you use too low speed shutter while recording this video ? I noticed some choppy motion on the video. If wrong I’m sorry about it.
What about the “dual native” ISO of A1. Did you notice any difference using the “second” one?
Nice video. I am getting my A1 now. With my Sony 600mm 4.0 GM it’s possible to make fully use what the A1 is offering. Especially the 30fps. That’s the issue with the Canon system, if you have the EF Version of the 600mm 4.0, does not matter if II or III, with the R3 or R1 you will be limited on 20fps most probably. 20fps is still enough for most Wildlife though.
I don't think u can get 30 fps with mechanical shutter with any camera so far. And shooting wild life with electronic will mess up images alot.
@@CZOV Oh really? Did you ever use an R5 or A9II or A1? If so then you would not say this. Mechanical shutter is a relic from DSLR times. The A1 is setting here a new benchmark of what is possible. Stunning in performance and stunning in image quality.
@@Stefan1968ful close. Yes I have 20fps on my R5, but it only allows1sec bursts at this frame rate. Where as the mech shutter mode is 12fps, and even with full raw plus large jpeg, I can shoot a 110 frame burst b4 hitting the buffer. Mostly I prefer mech to give some sound feed back (the R5 is fully silent in e shutter mode) to avoid shooting too many frames. If waiting for a small birds to take off, the 20fps e shutter is good, but, the rolling shutter effect can be noticeable with some wing angles, eg, when the wings are coming together vertically, the tips seems to bend towards each other. Otherwise, the e shutter is fine. Mech shutter isnt dead, but it is nice to have the option to choose.
What lens did you have on the Canon and the Sony? Canon RF L glass is pretty fast, i cant believe Sony outperformed it 5 shots to 1. Aldo at 20 frames per second, that is 0.2 seconds differnce, not something to cry about :)
Thanks for the review....I have the R5 and have been also trying a Sony a1. Have you been able to get the sony colour in post to look as good as the canon? What raw processing software are you using with it and which colour profile are you using when processing the raw? Thanks
This still a thing? Sony color is as good as any.
@@TorresinhoLFC I'm sure it is. I'm just after practical solutions to getting the colour right in my own workflow. Hence my question.
Great video, I recognize that coyote!! Looking forward to the next video! Beth BTW !
Such a great time! So good to see you Beth and I see that you are travelling and talking lots of good shots lately.
@@TinManLee Well, I'm hoping Zimbabwe lifts the quarantine requirements before my Sep. trip! When do you leave for your trip?
Great info; appreciate your video.
Great review! Will you be reviewing the R3 when its released?
If I’m not broke by then I will get it for sure. Not sure how many pixels it will have. If it’s less than 45 mega pixels I will have to think about it because now I’m spoiled by the R5.
@@TinManLee Probably 30 megapixels to give you 30 frames per second shooting.
@@TinManLee Eh, you don't need 30 fps...
@@frostybe3r 30fps helps me a great deal for my birds in flight photography......more shapes to choose from at fast action moments.
@@plinkyplanky9651 If you need 30 fps to get a pic of a bird, the camera isn't the problem, sorry to say.
Great video. Thank you!
Tin Man - the difference in quality between the photos you showed certainly isn't worth the difference in price. I am assuming the percentage of keepers is pretty close to the same? When you are not comparing them, but just looking at the Canon are you saying, "Damn, I wish I had shot this with the Sony"? If not, that reinforces the impression. Finally, there are other issues besides the image quality - weather sealing is really important when you are out in poor conditions, did you notice a difference? Did you find the ergonomics and ease of use, set up etc equal (has Sony finally caught up with their new menu system)?
The difference in price makes sense to me, it’s the only hybrid camera that can shoot 8k video without overheating, fastest electronic shutter in the market, class leading image quality and iso, best evf, fastest flash sync speed, etc. The r5 is an incredible camera too but not on the same league as some canon fanboys make you believe.
Great review - interesting that I recently used an R5 and compared to the A1 the R5 seemed to show more detail - perhaps the lenses - we were using the 100-500 and 200-600. The Canon was also much faster to acquire focus on birds but the Sony was a bit better at focus tracking for birds in flight. A1 has poor video stabilisation and no animal/bird af tracking in video mode. Pretty annoying.
I continue to be on the fence between my 1DX and the R5. I have committed so much $ to the Camera obsession, that I must step carefully. I appreciate your comments. Any idea when the R3 will be for sale? My camera sales person, tells me to go with the R5....and not to wait for the R3. Your thoughts..
R3 coming sept/oct now, in the shops maybe Christmas or most likely March-April with the problems with chips production at the moment. R5 beats 1DX Mark 1 maybe Mark 2 as well, but not Mark III, except for number of focus points. R3 will be The Camera of the decade, simply because R1 will cost too much (likely 9K).
Wait for the R3 if you can afford it. Global e shutter will be a game changer for Canon shooters. Yes I have 20fps on my R5, but it only allows1sec bursts at this frame rate. Where as the mech shutter mode is 12fps, and even with full raw plus large jpeg, I can shoot a 110 frame burst b4 hitting the buffer. Mostly I prefer mech to give some sound feed back (the R5 is fully silent in e shutter mode) to avoid shooting too many frames. If waiting for a small birds to take off, the 20fps e shutter is good, but, the rolling shutter effect can be noticeable with some wing angles, eg, when the wings are coming together vertically, the tips seems to bend towards each other. Otherwise, the e shutter is fine.
Global E shutter is fantasy at this point maybe the R1 but it will be gimped to 24meg if it ever appears, in answer to Chris if you shoot birds etc R5 or A1 24 meg doesn’t cut it anymore for cropping enough, good for journalists who just throw them to Instagram etc. Plus the weight of the pro body is nice to hold but a pain to carry about no real reason for it nowadays other than ergonomics at the side of a track and then it’s on a tripod with a 600 attached. Personally if your a canon guy get the 5, the 3 lacks luster it’s the 1 that will be a defining statement from Canon if they can pull it off. Sony will then counter with a firmware most probably
Loved the red fox :-)
Good content as always. What you probably missed is canon having AA filter which cuts down sharpness a little. I am happy with my R5 though but I want canon to give choice to consumer whether to have AA filter or not.
That’s a fantastic point. That’s true. I was discussing with my friend Protik (mentioned in the video) about the AA filter but I completely forgot about it until you mentioned. I wonder if that’s why. But when at higher iso, the difference is negligible. So the reason they put AA filter there is just to avoid aliasing on clothes?
Out of camera, the A1 will expose 1/2 stop darker than the R5. Just does. Lower the exposure of the R5 and then compare. It will require extreme pixel peeping to see any difference between 45 and 50 MP.
Thanks for the good review. I owe the R5 as well as the Sony A7R4 and A7S3 (for video). As the R5 has still the overheating issues and the 4K 60p and 120p quality is only ok and was testing the other day the A1, as this camera would be the perfect one-stop solution for me. While video was impressive in all modes and I had no overheating issues (filmed and photographed birds in very harsh conditions of 40 degrees plus, high humidity and under direct sunlight), the image quality was really bad. 80% useless images and 20% quite soft. I was not using a prime lens but the EF 200-600mm (my wildlife video lens) which in theory should be able to perform well on the A1. Have you had a chance to use the A1 with the 200-600mm, and if so what is your opinion. Thanks
I see the issue here, you paid thousands for a bunch of cameras you probably don't necessarily need and cheaped out on the lens, if you want the highest possible quality, get a 500/600 f4.
@@frostybe3r Thanks. I also have and use the 400mm prime (which I probably also don’t need). The question is on the 200-600 as my main video lens, which I would loved to use for stills as well.
@@AlexFBuchholzPhoto The 200-600 is generally quite sharp, not quite RF 100-500 level but I'm not sure why you wouldn't be getting sharp images from it unless your shutter speed is astronomically low with alot of movement?
It's likely user error.
just moved from Nikon D850 to the A1.
Try the nikon Z72...you may be impressed...
Very good video but I would disagree that the Sony system is more future proofed than the Canon mirrorless (and definitely not as future proofed as the Nikon Z mount). The point here is that Canon (and Nikon) has gone away and built a new system entirely from the ground up and are quite simply a better platform for future development. Canon has a larger throat mount as does Nikon. The Sony cameras have the worst of the three. So for future proofing, it is pretty much a given that the most future proofed system is the Nikon Z mount, followed by the Canons and in a poor third with no future proofing, is the Sony system. Note that at this point in mirrorless time, in the focussing world only, the Sonys and Canons are pretty much level pegging with the Nikons coming in in third position. As far as eye-acquisition focusing is concerned, and purely on this, it seems to me that it goes Canon, Sony then Nikon. But photography is a continually changing world and each time one company brings out a new model they trump the others. Now if you take the focus factor out of the equation, then Nikon comes to the fore with better sensors, colour tech, sensor noise (marginally) and ergonomics - and quite frankly these are the more important aspects of a camera anyway. But it is incorrect to state that the Sony system is more future proofed because they already have the big primes out... that is not the future, it is the present and Sony is stuck with what they have. Canon and more so Nikon, have the world at their feet and it all comes down to the size of their lens mount throat. And who said that size does not matter!
Hey Tin great video! Any thoughts on the R5 and Lightroom or Adobe Camera Raw? How do the raw images look straight out of camera? I've read not so well, but I wanted your opinion on this. Thanks so much!
I have an R5. Canon RAW conversion is always best done in Canons DPP software. This is how Canon designed their cameras to be used. I started using DPP 5years ago, and my images are noticably sharper - only Canon makes the best lens correction profiles for Canon lenses. Yes, you could use lighroom after the DPP RAW conversion. Most reviewers do not bother to use DPP and are mostly unaware just how good the CANON lenses are.
Now what about all of your super expensive Nikon glass (600 F4, 400 F2.8, etc)?
"old" AFS 500mm f4.0 ii ( no VR)" + Fringer adapter + Fuji XT4 was a supprise. lost off keepers and Megapixels at a distance.. 99% you can not fill the frame in birding, Fullframe needs just some extra crop , ... even DX needs most off the time a crop... All the youtube photographers seems to can create zoo like conditions, everthing is close filling the frame or man can walk towards it a bit more then the Sony guy with a 200-600 and say , see the shorter focal length of the canon 100-500 is not a problem. In our wildlife group we see : It happens twice a year that 500mm on DX is to close...
Thanks for the honest video Tin Man - I’m still undecided on which system to switch to. Which camera did you shoot the wolf video with - canon or Sony?
Canon, always Canon, in few months when R3 comes, everyone will be telling you this, and i won't even mention the R1 with its focus by eye system the military uses in their airplanes.
@@CZOV It is cool that Canon is coming out with something to compete with the 24 Megapixel Sony A9... Of course it (the A9) has been out for 4 years.
I understand your point about you paid for the pixels why would you want to crop them away. But also because you paid for all those pixels, you can now crop in :P
Yup, thats the idea of the many pixels :)
Also the fact Instagram and the majority of online websites won't support 45mp, just a few pixels across lol, just crop your image.
Will you consider testing the Nikon Z7II?
Frank I shoot the A1 and friend uses the Z7II, obviously it doesn’t shoot as fast think 7 tops out at around 10 but if that’s enough for what you do the 7 is fantastic and it’s what my friend knows too being Nikon all his life, Nikon has some great features like extended time before bulb mode Sony’s is 30 max then bulb think Nikon will do 900 seconds before bulb. And he’s gobsmacked at sharpness on both, he came from DSLR world. You could wait for the 9 for the speed but I honestly think my only apprehension with the 9 would be the size I’m no Pro so don’t need the old school ergonomics. I played with is Raws and I like them definitely up there
TinMan use back Button Focus!!!
LoL, you can't compare iso numbers like that. Iso numbers are now very relative compared to the film days. Iso400 on sony and canon don't mean the same thing, you need to calibrate the two cameras to have the same exposure to judge which one is sharper. Personally I think the canon version of the fox is overexposed
You have a good point. With the same settings, the Canon photos are always brighter. The sony photos have a bit more details if I zoom all the way in but mostly un-noticeable. And the difference maybe due to a faster focus speed on the Sony so less relative movement from the animal.
Canon looks brighter with the same ISO.
Most of photographers told us R5 focus is better than a1, especially for animal eye tracking, but obviously you are not the one.
I'd like to know your thoughts on the Canon RF 100-500 lens, is it close to the Image quality of the Canon 600 f/4 II? I have the Canon R5 probably not switching due to the costs of these lenses.
I cannot imagine that Johnathan. We have the EF 100-400 IS II and it is a very flexible and useful lens, but nothing can compare to the 600 F4 IS II. Ideally you would have both. the 100-500 as a standard lighter lens and the 600 for smaller animals or when you need extra distance and light.
@@andreasoberg2021 I actually have both the EF 100-400 II & the 600mm f/4 II. I’m thinking of selling my EF 100-400 & purchasing the RF 100-500 mostly for the extra 100mm & improved optics, closer to the CMOS, lighter lens. I knew that Tin Man purchased the RF 100-500 so thought I’d ask how he likes it or if he still uses it. I will say between my 100-400 II & my 600mm f/4 II it’s difficult to tell the difference if your fairly close to the subject. With the 100-400 you can get comparable photos, the bigger difference is grain introduction at distance due to light the 600mm f/4 is definitely better. I was curious if the RF 100-500 got even closer to that mark at 500mm.
@@photoapeal From the tests I have seen the quality is quite good with the 100-500. I think the upgrade would be worth it as you mentioned, lighter, extra 100mm, no adapter and also better IS.
Most of us out here, cant afford to switch systems yearly as new advances in technology. Replacing high priced glass on a whim is not a consideration for most of us. tools are half of equation, most creative part takes place 7inches behind the camera.
In the video around 12.50 minutes you mentioned that the Sony images are darker than the Canon ones; I have experienced the same when comparing both in the field and you are correct that it appears that there is and f 1/3 stop difference in ISO. I concluded that the ISO variance between the brands is due at not been factory calibrated equally to the ISO standard. These variances may also apply to shutter speeds and f stops, and not just between camera brands but among their different models.
As you said, this is an opinion and not a very scientific test for the cameras. Like you said, the Sony has newer glass designed for mirrorless. It would have been nice if you would have included what version model of glass and 1.4 adapter for the Canon. Also in your fox example, there appears to be grass that is out of focus in front of the Fox subject, but not in the Sony. I have seen other real world tests that said the Canon had better AF but they were not that scientific either. To me, your fox example, shows the Sony might not have anything to do with the camera but with the glass. You would hope the Sony a1 is actually better for the price but it is not. Wait for the flagship Canons mirrorless; It will be a better comparison.
Thanks, Tin Man! I guess I'm going to go forward with my original plan..purchase the A1 (even tho I just purchased the R5)! :D Why have one, when you can have BOTH? Canon = King of high ISO, but Sony = Sharp as a knife!
Kerry, are you spending someone else's money? Sony or Canon makes no different which camera u use today, its all about what lens you put on it. Better buy good lens for Canon with the money u gonna waste on Sony A1. Or just waist a couple of months and get yourself Canon R3 which will outperform A1 by a mile.
@@CZOV correct. In the meantime, R5 users can enjoy using the eye tracking focus when shooting video, A1 shooters cannot.
@@nordic5490 a1 users can actually shoot video, while the canon is melting from its overheating
Tin Man, I have a question. I finally bought the R5 back in April when it dropped to US$3.5K over here in Hong Kong as I decided the A1 was overpriced. But, the problem is at first I was adapting the Sigma 150-600mm as another KZheadr told me it worked fine which turned out to be not entirely true. This means I will almost have to get the RF 100-500mm. This is where the problem lies, I really don't want to as it is massively overpriced over here. Due to the lack of availability, the price has been driven up to almost HK$28K or over US$3.5K, essentially the price of another R5 over here. And at that price point, the RF 100-500mm is shorter in focal length than the Sony FE 200-600mm, its maximum aperture when wide open is smaller than the Sony, it is also an inferior external zoom design with a stiffer and much longer throw. And the price point of the Sony? HK$12,350 or US$1,589. In other words, the Canon is more than double the price of the Sony. I know you bought the RF 100-500mm when you first bought the R5. While I think the A1 is overpriced, but now once you look at it as a package together with a superzoom, all of a sudden the price difference has been reduced to a reasonably small amount. Basically, only HK$5,500 or just over US$700. This means the A1 is no longer overpriced anymore if you will. I just refuse to be bullied by Canon. There is just no way, the RF 100-500mm can be 2.2x more expensive than the Sony FE 200-600mm. My thinking is to trade in my R5 and migrate over to Sony to grab the A1 and FE 200-600mm. What do you think? What would you do? Would love to hear your point of view.
I guess this video can help you. Canon is 2X the price, but 1/2 the weight and also the minimum focusing distance is only (0.9m - 1.2M) vs 2.4m. BTW, I don't think external zoom is inferior, if that save 1.2 Kg off the lens. kzhead.info/sun/ipmcaMNvpWKvfHA/bejne.html
@@keima1110 I respectfully disagree. I will give it to you on the Canon's light weight, but that's about it. Shorter minimum focusing distance doesn't really affect me in the field. And the external zoom design is absolutely inferior in my humble opinion and I will explain why. If you are a Canon shooter, you probably own or have used the EF 70-200mm before, be it the f/2.8 or f/4. So, what are the key differences by default of the internal vs the external zoom design? Unmatched buttery smooth zoom ring and in the case of the Sony FE 200-600mm a much shorter throw. The Sony only requires a 90 degrees or 1/4 turn and it will get you from 200mm to 600mm in an instance which is fantastic especially when it comes to BIF. The Canon will probably take you at least 3 twists in shooting position. It takes me 4 twists to get from 150mm to 600mm on my Sigma. To add, when you adjust the zoom ring on an external zoom, it isn't a seamless action and it will knock you out of the act of shooting if you will. Imagine a bird is flying directly at you whereby you need to zoom in during the act of shooting, you can only do that with an internal zoom. The external zoom's zooming action is too stiff. And if the bird is closing the distance fast, with the RF 100-500mm, you simply won't be able to zoom in in time. It is what it is which was why I never bought the EF 100-400mm, be it version 1 with the pump action design or the current external zoom version which is too short for birding anyway. Whereas I still have my EF 70-200mm, you should take it out and let it remind you how smooth it is to shoot with vs the RF 100-500mm. As for the Canon's weight advantage, although I am not getting any younger, I am not at a point whereby weight is a massive factor for me. But, let's say even if it was, whenever you are buying something that is 2.2x more expensive, in my personal point of view I don't think it will ever justify itself for such a ridiculously massive premium. Just no way. I repeat 2.2x and it isn't as if the Sony FE 200-600mm is some rubbish lens neither. In fact, it is the one and only internal superzoom on the market. A ton of people love it, so I am not the only one. As for the video link you gave me, LOL, you might not have noticed, but I discuss with Jan all the time. If you look at the comment section I am there and he knows how strongly I feel against the RF 100-500mm. In fact, I did agree with him the A1 is overpriced, but I am quite objective when I look at these things as I will shoot with any brand. By the very same token, if I can call the A1 overpriced, then I have to say the RF 100-500mm is also massively overpriced and I would argue much more so than the A1. This Canon RF 100-500mm has now single-handedly put the A1 in play for a lot of people once you compare the A1 and the R5 as a package together with a superzoom. The combined price difference then all of a sudden drops to HK$5.5K or just over US$700. And with that small premium, you get 30 fps, no blackout and a bigger buffer? Not too unreasonable I would say.
@@Rascallucci everyone has different considerations and there is nothing wrong with that. I think you will be happy with your decision.
@@Rascallucci btw, if you are able to get discounts, you can get a1 at 40k. That’s will make it cheaper than r5 and 100-500. That’s should justify the switch for you i guess.
@@keima1110 HK$40K? Wow, that would be a fantastic price, I don't think I can get such a huge discount. Did you hear about the coming lenses for Sony? Apart from the recent Tamron 150-500mm, Sigma is now launching the E-mount and L-mount alliance 150-600mm Sport. And Sony is also launching a new version of the FE 70-200mm GM. This is the versatility of Sony as you have so many choices with lenses. Having said that, if I go the Sony route, I would of course still take the native FE 200-600mm over the Sigma. I am thinking if it took Sigma this long to come out with an E-mount 150-600mm, it will probably take at least another couple of years before they will have an RF-mount version. Things are beginning to look clearer and clearer to me. If I really can't wait for the A7R V, perhaps it is really time to pull the pin on the A1 and the FE 200-600mm. Just a shame because the R5 is really a very good camera and the colours it renders is beautiful. Will probably trade it in together with the 90D and the Sigma 150-600mm. But, if Canon comes out with the R7 APS-C body and as long as the AF and tracking is as good as the R5, I will most likely get it as a second body.
come on , comparing a camera that is 2.5k dearer is crazy
Don’t hate me! I bought the R5. Haha! It arrived today. Now I am watching this video. Ugh! Onward!
I have an R5 - you will love it. You might not love the small evf delay, or the sometimes rolling shutter effect with the e shutter - it can bend the tips of wings at certain angles. I have not used my 5d4 since, not even once. If you shoot video, you will love the video eye tracking that the a1 doesnt have.
You'll like the camera a lot if you shoot stills. If you do video than return it and get something better
Canon is better in eye AF..
Welcome to 2019 with animal eye autofocus.