(01-31-2021, 09:02 PM)toni-a Wrote:Well, the first test is out, and apparently AF is not as good as the EOS R5. Tracking with AF is equal, but with every other option the EOS R5 is better. And the Sony does manage 29 fps when used with still images, but with tracking on, or with telephoto lenses, with or without teleconverter, it manages only 15 fps, while the Canon always manages 20 fps. So, from that PoV the Canon R5 appears to be better.(01-31-2021, 02:36 PM)Brightcolours Wrote:(01-31-2021, 01:11 PM)toni-a Wrote: Well, one notable thing about this camera, is it is for practically everything, from sports to landscape, it seems also good for wildlife and portraits.
Canon's EOS R5 does "everything" too, from sports to landscape, wildlife and portraits, for significantly less.
Yes, but at least on paper Sony has a slight edge in sports 30 vs 20fps (both electronic shutter mode) and a better EVF, i it worth it ??? can't say, If I were buying I would go for R5and spare 2000$ others have other opinions
It is very good with rolling shutter, however, apparently there is none, so it beats the Canon here.
Anyway, if you want to see, or rather hear, the results, check out Tony Northrup: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvGnZTIpOVs
HTH, kind regards, WIm
P.S.: 8K overheating is an issue: standard mode shut down after 16 minutes.
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....