Help - canon 5d mark 4 or sony a7riii ?

Messages
1
Name
Ruben
Edit My Images
No
#1
Hey guys,

I am thinking getting a new camera but i am kinda between canon 5d mark iv and sony a7riii.

I have already a canon 70D, lenses i have sigma 35 mm art 1.4, canon 50mm 1.8.

I do mainly portrait photography and fashion.

If you guys could give me some feedback from your cameras or advices i would appreciate.

Thanks
 
Messages
20,389
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#3
The eye AF from Sony is an invaluable tool for your use case. That alone would be worth it for me.
Even face detect is wonderful as with these things you don't need to focus and recompose or compromise on framing to ensure you've got a focus point where you want it, you just concentrate on framing and capturing the moment and let the camera sort out the focus. Some of this stuff may be possible with a DSLR in live view mode but Sony's eye detect seems to be the market leader and I much prefer looking at an evf to back screen shooting.
 
Messages
5,416
Name
Ryan
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
If you do portrait and fashion photography I would have thought you're smart enough to be able to focus on the correct part of your subject already. So with that in mind the main issue for your needs would be skin tones, colours, and resolution in regards to your final output. If you're printing to billboards the higher resolution of the canon might be essential. If you're only publishing to the web then the resolution won't be such and issue - only you can answer that one. I have never used a Canon 5D IV but i have edited the files. I wasn't impressed with the low light ISO performance. But again, if you're shooting portrait and fashion it may be you spend most of your time in the studio. A bit more about your your intentions and shooting environment would be useful in order to advise you more.
 
Messages
7,677
Edit My Images
No
#7
Hey guys,

I am thinking getting a new camera but i am kinda between canon 5d mark iv and sony a7riii.

I have already a canon 70D, lenses i have sigma 35 mm art 1.4, canon 50mm 1.8.

I do mainly portrait photography and fashion.

If you guys could give me some feedback from your cameras or advices i would appreciate.

Thanks
Hi ill edit this post more when I'm in front of my pc but I owned both
 
Messages
2,158
Edit My Images
No
#8
I am thinking getting a new camera but i am kinda between canon 5d mark iv and sony a7riii.
I think it's down to the cost, you buy the 5D IV and you're done but if you buy the Sony you also need to buy whatever lenses and accessories you want on top so realistically you'll spend twice as much to get the Sony setup.

The Sony does have a lot going for it but is it enough you're willing to pay that kind of premium for?
 
Messages
6,358
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
#9
I would put the Sony A7 III into the mix for the better AF, Eye-AF and FPS abilities over the Sony A7R III.
The Canon your looking at is 30mp, I don't feel its a big jump from the Sony A7 III's 24mp sensor to 30mp.
If you really need the higher resolution that the Sony A7R III offers, then it’s the option to go for.
A lot people forget that yes, a good photographer can get by with DSLR's with no Eye-AF and a small spread of AF points....... but for me, all the mirrorless features make taking the money shot easier and quicker.... gone are the days when you had to faff about with a AF joystick etc.
Time saved via the new mirrorless features results in more time focusing on getting great images.
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,677
Edit My Images
No
#10
OK IM BACK.

Bit of background.

I bought both the 5d4 and a7r3 at launch and sold the 5d4 last year and shoot primarily portaits with both

5d4
Jordan-Ebbitt Shoot-227.jpg
by Jon Richy, on Flickr

a7r3
TaniaShootTwo-318.jpg
by Jon Richy, on Flickr

Both produce sensational portait shots as you can see above with the 5d4 having a tiny slight edge when it comes to skin tones.

Here are the pros of the 5d4 over the a7r3:

slightly better skin tones
More robust hotshoe mount
Cheaper option as you pay just for this body vs a complete switch of systems

Now here are the pros of the a7r3 vs 5d4

More details(mp count)
evf with setting effect off means you can see in a dark studio (typical when you want to kill all ambiant lights)
Eye AF
lighter and smaller camera thats easy to handle for overhead shots with one hand:
untitled-260.jpg
by Jon Richy, on Flickr

Bigger buffer

Its up to you if you want to jump ship.
You need to make a decision now though before investing more on canon because you dont have too many canon stuff to shift(it has taken me over a year to shift mine)

Have you considered the EOS R?

Some of the benefits of the EOS R are same as the a7r3 ie eye af and evf
 
Messages
22,918
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#11
Hey guys,

I am thinking getting a new camera but i am kinda between canon 5d mark iv and sony a7riii.

I have already a canon 70D, lenses i have sigma 35 mm art 1.4, canon 50mm 1.8.

I do mainly portrait photography and fashion.

If you guys could give me some feedback from your cameras or advices i would appreciate.

Thanks
These are both high-end, professional grade cameras and while there is plenty of scope for argument over which is better, at the end of the day it's a personal decision that only you can make according to your particular wants and needs. We're all different. Check the specs, go and handle them, check lens availability, do the sums, listen to your head and then follow your heart ;) If you're not sure, then wait until you are because you'll be living with the decision for a long time.

Ferrari or Lamborghini? Both bluddy quick and they go about it in much the same way, basically the same but very different in certain details that will be important to some but not to others. I'd be very happy with either* same as a 5D4 or A7R3.

Welcome to TP :)

*Edit: actually, I wouldn't. Probably a (slightly) more anonymous 911 or maybe a big fat Merc... See what I mean?
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,006
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
#12
This is a great video to showcase the A73 face and eye detect along with AF-C speed. The A9 is more responsive, but it's like comparing 100% performance against 110% performance!

 
Messages
348
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
Im not sure about the Sony but Canon 5d cameras hold their value incredibly well.

It seems like the 5D MK 3 never goes down in value, It has been £850 - £1250 range used for what seems like years lol.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,869
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
I would put the Sony A7 III into the mix for the better AF, Eye-AF and FPS abilities over the Sony A7R III.
Its not really that much better. It has better screen coverage (68% vs. 93%). They both shoot at 10FPS.
 
Messages
7,677
Edit My Images
No
#16
If you are anything like me you would likely appreciate true optical viewfinder and a body you can comfortably hold in your hands and not between two fingers. Need more res? There is 5DsR. Other than that and personal preference both are fine systems.
Can't see s*** on optical view finder in a dark studio compared to an evf.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,869
Edit My Images
Yes
#17
I am not one to join in on bashing bodies but the sensor in 5dsr is a joke. It's highest native ISO is 6400. We are not in 2009!

Want a decent FF high res body with OVF then get the D850.
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,088
Name
Nightmare
Edit My Images
No
#19
I am not one to join in on bashing bodies but the sensor in 5dsr is a joke. It's highest native ISO is 6400. We are not in 2009!
I hear you, but frankly in a studio you'd be at ISO100, maybe 400 max in rare cases. I very very rarely go over 800.
 
Messages
22,918
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#21
That are way less powerful then ceiling or ambiant lights?
Modelling lamps are designed to be used and all mains powered studio heads I've tested are more than adequate with a 100w or equivalent normal light bulb kind of output, or more. That's plenty and will overpower normal room lighting. Edit: they're even bright enough to actually shoot with and are sometimes used like that if you want portraits with super-shallow DoF at f/1.4 when the flash itself won't turn down low enough. Bump the ISO a little and f/2.8 is usable.

Many battery-powered heads are less impressive. I would say a 10w LED is minimum for set up and shooting (eg first gen Godox AD600 ). I've not had a problem with those, though some are less bright and for that reason alone I personally wouldn't buy them. They're as good as anything else outdoors when no modeling lamp is any use at all but not for proper studio working. The newer Godox AD400-Pro and AD600-Pro models are much brighter (y) and both Elinchrom and Profoto are up there too.
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,677
Edit My Images
No
#22
Modelling lamps are designed to be used and all mains powered studio heads I've tested are more than adequate with a 100w or equivalent normal light bulb kind of output, or more. That's plenty and will overpower normal room lighting. Edit: they're even bright enough to actually shoot with and are sometimes used like that if you want portraits with super-shallow DoF at f/1.4 when the flash itself won't turn down low enough. Bump the ISO a little and f/2.8 is usable.

Many battery-powered heads are less impressive. I would say a 10w LED is minimum for set up and shooting (eg first gen Godox AD600 ). I've not had a problem with those, though some are less bright and for that reason alone I personally wouldn't buy them. They're as good as anything else outdoors when no modeling lamp is any use at all but not for proper studio working. The newer Godox AD400-Pro and AD600-Pro models are much brighter (y) and both Elinchrom and Profoto are up there too.
I've got elinchrom lights and it's very dark looking in an ovf vs evf. Again I'm a seasoned portrait photographer and used both these cameras
 
Messages
22,918
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#23
I've got elinchrom lights and it's very dark looking in an ovf vs evf. Again I'm a seasoned portrait photographer and used both these cameras
Can't you turn the EVF down a bit? :D
 
Messages
17,194
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
#25
I am not one to join in on bashing bodies but the sensor in 5dsr is a joke. It's highest native ISO is 6400. We are not in 2009!

Want a decent FF high res body with OVF then get the D850.
If you are landscape shooting it's more than fine though. I cannot recall a time I shot beyond ISO200 on the D810.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,869
Edit My Images
Yes
#28
Use filters or exposure blend. I'm sure it would be fine.
So your suggestion is to spend my hard earned cash on a substandard sensor when alternatives are so much better and then spend more money on filters and software. No thanks.

Also re: filters they suck mostly. better to blend or just go with a camera with plenty of dynamic range.
 
Messages
17,194
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
#30
So your suggestion is to spend my hard earned cash on a substandard sensor when alternatives are so much better and then spend more money on filters and software. No thanks.

Also re: filters they suck mostly. better to blend or just go with a camera with plenty of dynamic range.
It’s not substandard though - it’s 50mp. The detail would be immense.

I don’t find filters substandard and as you say you can take two and blend them
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,869
Edit My Images
Yes
#31
It’s not substandard though - it’s 50mp. The detail would be immense.

I don’t find filters substandard and as you say you can take two and blend them
no filters is always better than filters unless you buy really expensive one which still leaves a cast to some extent. @LongLensPhotography will tell you all about this :D
Good quality square filters are really expensive (i.e. even more money you don't need to spend with a better sensor) and if you buy cheaper circular ones you are limited to horizons in the middle. All in all doing without them is cheaper and preferable.

Blending is fine, but not having to do so is even better. Blending comes with its own issues and does not alway work (not to mention need for a tripod, though I have done it handheld in the past). 50mp is not really that much more than 46mp. The 4mp is negligible, even 8mp is negligible at these high MPs. And If I need to use a tripod then I can pixelshift to get higher level of details than 50mp. So overall the trade off for ISO performance and dynamic range is not worth it (because the trade-off is rather huge with this particular sensor).

5DSR is not a cheap body. The competition provides over all better package. Image quality aside D850/A7RIII can provide better AF, faster shooting, better buffer and so on.

The recent Panasonic S1R is worth a look too but lack of lenses at this point and expenses thereof makes me not suggest them.
 
Last edited:
Messages
474
Name
Clint
Edit My Images
Yes
#32
Funny how the OP started the thread and never returned and now we are discussing landscape and DR as opposed to the initial request of fashion. Just saying.......
 
Messages
14,088
Name
Nightmare
Edit My Images
No
#35
5DSR is not a cheap body.
I very much hope your statement is or will be very soon wrong at least in the used market. They've gone down a lot already and will keep on that path. D850 is easily double cost if not more.

So your suggestion is to spend my hard earned cash on a substandard sensor when alternatives are so much better and then spend more money on filters and software. No thanks.

Also re: filters they suck mostly. better to blend or just go with a camera with plenty of dynamic range.
So here is the inevitable question - how much better is the mighty Sony / Nikon (same sensor?) than the humble Canon and does it COMPLETELY eliminate the need for multiple exposures of filters?
Let's consider a worst case ISO100 scenario. You are in the dark-ish room in bright daylight and sun is shining through the window on the walls. The highlights are brighter than even the sky from experience. You for whatever crazy reason you don't want to use flash (nothing small would overpower these until pretty high ISO anyway, and then you've got other things to work out). Would A7III give me a clean single exposure to work with? 5DmkIII requires bracketing from -3 to +3EV here.
Or an easier case - landscape shooting into the sun some 10 min before sunset, and maybe some of those lovely specular highlights in the water.

If you can do it - I might just go and buy one tonight. Otherwise I see little point for me as it would change almost nothing other than the end resolution
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,869
Edit My Images
Yes
#36
I very much hope your statement is or will be very soon wrong at least in the used market. They've gone down a lot already and will keep on that path. D850 is easily double cost if not more.



So here is the inevitable question - how much better is the mighty Sony / Nikon (same sensor?) than the humble Canon and does it COMPLETELY eliminate the need for multiple exposures of filters?
Let's consider a worst case ISO100 scenario. You are in the dark-ish room in bright daylight and sun is shining through the window on the walls. The highlights are brighter than even the sky from experience. You for whatever crazy reason you don't want to use flash (nothing small would overpower these until pretty high ISO anyway, and then you've got other things to work out). Would A7III give me a clean single exposure to work with? 5DmkIII requires bracketing from -3 to +3EV here.
Or an easier case - landscape shooting into the sun some 10 min before sunset, and maybe some of those lovely specular highlights in the water.

If you can do it - I might just go and buy one tonight. Otherwise I see little point for me as it would change almost nothing other than the end resolution
Well i can't comment on used market, but in new market I think the difference is about £200-300. that's about 10%.
As for used I have seen A7RII go close to £1000 on these forums and elsewhere, that's pretty cheap. If all you care about is the sensor, then its hard to beat at that price.

I am not against using flashes. I'd use one if it was appropriate :)

Any recent sony sensor body can easily handle 3 stops of shadow recovery if that's what your after. Even Sony APS-C sensors can achieve this.
Not sure where abouts you are but if you any where close to London you are welcome to try out my camera for a bit and see what you think.
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,088
Name
Nightmare
Edit My Images
No
#37
Any recent sony sensor body can easily handle 3 stops of shadow recovery if that's what your after. Even Sony APS-C sensors can achieve this.
But is three stops enough to save you from ever needing to bracket?

I am certainly not happy with Sony APS-C output which looks very overcooked and a little "fake" if you know what I mean. I am used starting with the most neutral Canon RAW files and these are the polar opposite. I guess consumers like it better that way.

I probably could get quite easily tempted to A7R3 as a 2nd or 3rd body for certain application, not mk2. They are very substantially improved in the last update, namely viewfinder, AF, battery, general ergonomics, stability, etc. The viewfinder in mk2 alone is a dealbreaker.
 
Messages
20,389
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#38
But is three stops enough to save you from ever needing to bracket?

I am certainly not happy with Sony APS-C output which looks very overcooked and a little "fake" if you know what I mean. I am used starting with the most neutral Canon RAW files and these are the polar opposite. I guess consumers like it better that way.

I probably could get quite easily tempted to A7R3 as a 2nd or 3rd body for certain application, not mk2. They are very substantially improved in the last update, namely viewfinder, AF, battery, general ergonomics, stability, etc. The viewfinder in mk2 alone is a dealbreaker.
Hmmm. Canon have been cooking their raw files longer than mirrorless has been available but I suppose if their recipe suits you better than Sony's then it's job done. However, recent blind tests by a well known blogger showed that the files that came out on top were Sony and the margin of lead was only reduced when people knew what brand of camera was used.

Anyway, we like what we like and if you're happy with Canon then that's the way to continue. Others see limitations which are negated or at least reduced with other brands.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,869
Edit My Images
Yes
#39
But is three stops enough to save you from ever needing to bracket?

I am certainly not happy with Sony APS-C output which looks very overcooked and a little "fake" if you know what I mean. I am used starting with the most neutral Canon RAW files and these are the polar opposite. I guess consumers like it better that way.



I probably could get quite easily tempted to A7R3 as a 2nd or 3rd body for certain application, not mk2. They are very substantially improved in the last update, namely viewfinder, AF, battery, general ergonomics, stability, etc. The viewfinder in mk2 alone is a dealbreaker.
You asked about 3 stops so I mentioned 3 stops :)
I don't bracket till I need more than 4 stops. I know people who go beyond that but that's my limit anyway. It also covers most scenarios I face.

Au contraire, I found canon the most non-neutral and saturated in terms of RAW. But I like output from canon cameras. Sony is pretty neutral even though their colour science wasn't great till A7RII. It's all in the eyes of the beholder in the end. A7RIII supposedly is better in terms of colours than A7RII but I preferred the A7RII. I found the EVF to be pretty good in A7RII, it was best at the time it came out. Obviously not so now.
 
Last edited:
Top