I am not saying that the A7RV is not a thousand times more practical camera than the 10D. I only present DOCUMENTED MEASURED FACTS on SENSOR DATA. If you have a beef with measured data (presented here, I did not create it!), take it up with DxO.... I just present their measurements to you, have altered none, and I think I have presented it within its implications. If you think it's a direct attack on your ego (there are many more bellicose Sony shareholders than I thought) then please do not bother with flaming comments, I will ban you from the channel unceremoniously. This channel is Shutter and CHILL.... chill, my friend! And many thanks for all the SUPERB sensible comments and observations from the awesome grown-up viewers. Thank you my friends! This video sadly attracted a lot of negative attitude, I felt it necessary to moderate a little.
Because the Canon 10D's pixels are 4 times the size of the A7RV. The fact that the A7RV can provide similar performance per pixel with 4 times smaller pixels is due to the advancements we've made. You can make a comparison between the A7Siii and the 10D. There you should see the real advancements over the last 20 years.
A7sII Because the A7sIII is just pixel binning, 4 pixels to make one large pixel, it really has similar performance to A7sII in dynamic range and low light performance but the A7sIII has way better noise reduction, removing a lot of the ugly pink noise that was common on the A7sII at higher ISO's
Yes, thank you. That would be a more accurate comparison. For this video I just went by what is generally considered as the "latest & greatest" and compare to 20y old antideluvian technology. All A7S-es beat the 10D, so do the R3/R6/R8...
First Canon DSLR is EOS D30, and all Canon DSLR also used CMOS sensor since 2000, the only Canon DSLR that used CCD is the original EOS-1D. EOS 10D is the first that used DIGIC image processor, anything older than that including original 1D and 1Ds seem to use old style image processor which (to be honest) I don't really like their color that much as they look pretty timid. EOS D30 and D60 are also APS-C camera. I think the original price for 10D is around $2000 and it's a very expensive item back in the day but it's still at a lower price than A7RV at launch
The problem is that image sensor 6 MP and display 6 MP. In displays you have three color informations (= dots) per pixel. In sensors, every pixel only receives one color information. One forth of the pixels are blue, another forth is red, and half is green. That means, all the color information gets interpolated so we get 6 MP. We basically need 4x the image sensor resolution per display resolution to get full real color information quantity-wise on our screens. In other words, we want to watch a chroma-wise perfectly sharp video on our TV device, we need video from a 8k camera. Though, it's easier to approximate luma information to the interpolated pixel number, which we grasp more clearly with our human eyes compared to chroma information. But there is still a reason why real monochrome image sensors can catch sharper pictures than color sensors. Every pixel in monochrome image sensors catches a luma information, while we have to combine several color informations to get a luma information. Luma information can be interpolated much more accurately and sharply compared to chroma information, but not at the level of a monochrome sensor. I'm sorry for being nerdy. Of course other aspects like lens and focus also heavily influences sharpness. You can also argue that a low resolution sensor makes focussing easier (you have to focus less precise) and also covers lens imperfections that are obvious at lower F numbers.
Yes, that is a real issue indeed. A "6MP" sensor is a 1.5MP blue, 1.5MP red, and 3MP green sensor... so, much less color info than luminosity, it works better for monochrome than color... no wonder the success of the Leica monochromes, which have true pixel per pixel counts. The Canon C100 has a 8MP sensor that they internally scale down to 2MP (1080p), so it has much better colors than the 2MP suggests. Surprisingly, the colors on this 6MP sensor are astonishingly good, I think the large pixels collect enough light to make rich color readout, even given the actual (pretty low) 1.5MP worth of color information. Given the 1.5MP is very close to the 2MP of a 1080p screen... probably that's why it works so well for viewing the images on 1080p.
Very interesting video. I am mainly a Nikon shooter but I’m a fan of using older DSLRs. My favourite is my Nikon D3S (12MP), but I’ve tried some older Canon bodies too. I tried a 20 D belonging to a friend last year and was impressed. I currently have a 40D borrowed from that same friend, and I like that too.
Let me translate for you, what you found out: What you found out is that IF you crop 61 Mpx photo and take and crop it to 6.52 Mpx which is little over 10% of it's resolution, then it will have slightly worse color rendition than 6.52 Mpx camera without the crop. So I don't know how did you fit word "Destroys" in here xD
Thank you for your kind comment. Anyway, I changed the title, was attracting too much riff-raff. I still do not get it how come people are so ignorant on how channels MUST give video titles to get any views at all... Do not blame me, blame the RUclips algorithm that kills every channel that names their videos with 100% accurate titles. I hope you noticed that what I said in the video had nothing to do with 10D destroying A7RV, just called attention to the fact that it does better at 3 DxO metrics out of 4 at all its working range. Nothing more, nothing less. Cheers, good luck on all your affairs, and I wish you to run into more sensible and practical people than I did with this video!
@@ShutterNChill yea i get you with yt needing click bait titties, but this was but too far fetched because his negligible the difference at the pixel lvl were, and title attracted mostly people that already knew it, and came kind of expecting this. You could go with something like "is this xx years old camera really better at pixel level that a7rV" you would attract people who don't know this and could maybe learn something. Probably less views but perhaps of the right kind of people for the channel. Anyway, best of luck to you
@@Deruzejaku I will go along those lines in the future. This was my first attempt at testing the waters. Everyone seems strained today. Probably big channels got where they were by banning angry commenters left and right. Anyway, as the channel name suggests, I will keep titles chill in the future.... not planning to grow channel anyway, more important to keep good company. Thank you for your helpful suggestion! Cheers, Janos
I am not saying that the A7RV is not a thousand times more practical camera than the 10D. I only present DOCUMENTED MEASURED FACTS on SENSOR DATA. If you have a beef with measured data (presented here, I did not create it!), take it up with DxO.... I just present their measurements to you, have altered none, and I think I have presented it within its implications. If you think it's a direct attack on your ego (there are many more bellicose Sony shareholders than I thought) then please do not bother with flaming comments, I will ban you from the channel unceremoniously. This channel is Shutter and CHILL.... chill, my friend! And many thanks for all the SUPERB sensible comments and observations from the awesome grown-up viewers. Thank you my friends! This video sadly attracted a lot of negative attitude, I felt it necessary to moderate a little.
Because the Canon 10D's pixels are 4 times the size of the A7RV. The fact that the A7RV can provide similar performance per pixel with 4 times smaller pixels is due to the advancements we've made.
You can make a comparison between the A7Siii and the 10D. There you should see the real advancements over the last 20 years.
A7sII
Because the A7sIII is just pixel binning, 4 pixels to make one large pixel, it really has similar performance to A7sII in dynamic range and low light performance but the A7sIII has way better noise reduction, removing a lot of the ugly pink noise that was common on the A7sII at higher ISO's
Yes, thank you. That would be a more accurate comparison. For this video I just went by what is generally considered as the "latest & greatest" and compare to 20y old antideluvian technology. All A7S-es beat the 10D, so do the R3/R6/R8...
Thankyou for not showing any pictures.
The word he chooses sound to me bias.
imo empirical evidence is more useful than comparing 2 images with inherit bias
Coming on Monday
First Canon DSLR is EOS D30, and all Canon DSLR also used CMOS sensor since 2000, the only Canon DSLR that used CCD is the original EOS-1D. EOS 10D is the first that used DIGIC image processor, anything older than that including original 1D and 1Ds seem to use old style image processor which (to be honest) I don't really like their color that much as they look pretty timid. EOS D30 and D60 are also APS-C camera.
I think the original price for 10D is around $2000 and it's a very expensive item back in the day but it's still at a lower price than A7RV at launch
The problem is that image sensor 6 MP and display 6 MP. In displays you have three color informations (= dots) per pixel. In sensors, every pixel only receives one color information. One forth of the pixels are blue, another forth is red, and half is green. That means, all the color information gets interpolated so we get 6 MP. We basically need 4x the image sensor resolution per display resolution to get full real color information quantity-wise on our screens. In other words, we want to watch a chroma-wise perfectly sharp video on our TV device, we need video from a 8k camera. Though, it's easier to approximate luma information to the interpolated pixel number, which we grasp more clearly with our human eyes compared to chroma information. But there is still a reason why real monochrome image sensors can catch sharper pictures than color sensors. Every pixel in monochrome image sensors catches a luma information, while we have to combine several color informations to get a luma information. Luma information can be interpolated much more accurately and sharply compared to chroma information, but not at the level of a monochrome sensor. I'm sorry for being nerdy. Of course other aspects like lens and focus also heavily influences sharpness. You can also argue that a low resolution sensor makes focussing easier (you have to focus less precise) and also covers lens imperfections that are obvious at lower F numbers.
Yes, that is a real issue indeed. A "6MP" sensor is a 1.5MP blue, 1.5MP red, and 3MP green sensor... so, much less color info than luminosity, it works better for monochrome than color... no wonder the success of the Leica monochromes, which have true pixel per pixel counts. The Canon C100 has a 8MP sensor that they internally scale down to 2MP (1080p), so it has much better colors than the 2MP suggests. Surprisingly, the colors on this 6MP sensor are astonishingly good, I think the large pixels collect enough light to make rich color readout, even given the actual (pretty low) 1.5MP worth of color information. Given the 1.5MP is very close to the 2MP of a 1080p screen... probably that's why it works so well for viewing the images on 1080p.
Very interesting video. I am mainly a Nikon shooter but I’m a fan of using older DSLRs. My favourite is my Nikon D3S (12MP), but I’ve tried some older Canon bodies too. I tried a 20 D belonging to a friend last year and was impressed. I currently have a 40D borrowed from that same friend, and I like that too.
WOW, nice video. The title was kinda clickbait but I learnt something, defe gonna sub
Thank you! ; )
Good Info, thanks for getting so deep into it.
Let me translate for you, what you found out:
What you found out is that IF you crop 61 Mpx photo and take and crop it to 6.52 Mpx which is little over 10% of it's resolution, then it will have slightly worse color rendition than 6.52 Mpx camera without the crop.
So I don't know how did you fit word "Destroys" in here xD
Thank you for your kind comment. Anyway, I changed the title, was attracting too much riff-raff. I still do not get it how come people are so ignorant on how channels MUST give video titles to get any views at all... Do not blame me, blame the RUclips algorithm that kills every channel that names their videos with 100% accurate titles. I hope you noticed that what I said in the video had nothing to do with 10D destroying A7RV, just called attention to the fact that it does better at 3 DxO metrics out of 4 at all its working range. Nothing more, nothing less. Cheers, good luck on all your affairs, and I wish you to run into more sensible and practical people than I did with this video!
@@ShutterNChill yea i get you with yt needing click bait titties, but this was but too far fetched because his negligible the difference at the pixel lvl were, and title attracted mostly people that already knew it, and came kind of expecting this. You could go with something like "is this xx years old camera really better at pixel level that a7rV" you would attract people who don't know this and could maybe learn something. Probably less views but perhaps of the right kind of people for the channel.
Anyway, best of luck to you
@@Deruzejaku I will go along those lines in the future. This was my first attempt at testing the waters. Everyone seems strained today. Probably big channels got where they were by banning angry commenters left and right. Anyway, as the channel name suggests, I will keep titles chill in the future.... not planning to grow channel anyway, more important to keep good company. Thank you for your helpful suggestion! Cheers, Janos