Great review. Pros of Canon: ibis, eye autofocus, colors sooc, 4k 60 Pros of Sony: customization, lens options, higher mp, Gm lenses are better and lighter than RF lenses I like both but will stick with Sony for the lens options.
@TheDustin Although A7iv has higher resolution evf, I don't know why, I like my friend's Canon M50 Mark 1's evf slightly more than my A7iv. But I feel A7iv's evf better than my Nikon D5300's vf. Also, this is my first mirrorless with Evf, and I dont have much experience with Evf.
That's only true for sony native e mount mirrorless..plus third party emount and use adapter for canon. Canon has limited very expensive rf l series some budget and use adapter use ef efs canon and third party lenses. There also manual rf third party but af rf third party lenses at moment are banned from samyang/rokinon tamron sigma.
I used to have Sony but now I have Canon and I only have a 50 1.2 for fashion, 24-70 2.8 for everything, 24 1.4 for video and 16 2.8 for real estate. I don't need any other lenses. I had a 85, 70-200 and a 24-105 and sold them because i never used them. So just becuase Sony has more lenses don't mean you will need them.
Thanks Oma. Great comparison. I went with the R6mkll because I do BIF and wildlife so AF, FPS and stabilization were key. I shoot mostly handheld. Thanks again.
I’m drawn to the Sony because it’s smaller. However, was looking at the R6II bc canon lenses are good. Looked at Sony A74 and like the colors. Big diff with IBIS wow. This video helped. They’re both easier to use and they’re both good.
I would choose the Canon over the Sony if there was a larger selection of lenses. The Sony E-mount has an incredible amount of lenes available from third party companies such as Sigma and Tamron with a handful of other manufacturers, plus all of the newer Sony brand lenses. Right now, the Canon RF system mainly supports a small number of RF mount lenses with the only other option to adapt older EF-mount lenses, some of which do not perform well, or are still expensive even though they are older designs.
I used to have Sony but now I have Canon and I only have a 50 1.2 for fashion, 24-70 2.8 for everything, 24 1.4 for video and 16 2.8 for real estate. I don't need any other lenses. I had a 85, 70-200 and a 24-105 and sold them because i never used them. So just becuase Sony has more lenses don't mean you will need them.
Its funny that everyone says that Sony has more 3rd party lens choice but most people don't own more than 3 lenses. Plus EF lenses on a Canon work as good or better than 3rd party lenses on a Sony and there are just as many EF lenses as 3rd party Sony lenses. FACTS!
You LEFT OUT 2 KEY things with the Canon. 1) EF to RF Conversion Mount.... Canon has WAY MORE options here hands down AND 2) Low light performance of both video and photos, Canon also is a win. So as an event and wedding photographer these also are important boxes to check making the R6 mkii a winner compared to the Sony
I was sort of shocked he didn't mention this. My EF lenses work great on my R6 using the adapter. With this option, not only can you use all of the same 3rd party lenses but you get the vast array of Canon lenses as well.
Hello Oma, thanks for this video. With the Canon you will buy a great camera, but with the Sony you get the better system around. The choice between this cameras is like a choice between two religions. Both have sun and shadows...
No doubt the R6 m2 surpasses the a7 iv, however, I am not ready for the move yey as first sony might come with a similar camera on budget.. and second because I owns tens of Sony gear and Lenses.
Thanks this was a hard choice for me. but I end up going with the canon bc I love shooting sports and it felt better on my hands. Really love the Sony colors though.
I have a 6D Mark II DSLR, and I'm thinking of upgrading to mirrorless for hybrid photography, but I don't know if I'll stick with the Canon R6MII, or switch to the Sony A7IV, any suggestions?
Dear Oma, thank you your great explainations…. I am looking forward on your video captured compare of 4K 60FPS , long hours usage, heat issues related comparison
I have the A7 IV since September and the R6 II since last week. I'll wait months for a definitive verdict also because canon has a young firmware, but I can say right away: the A7 IV has a stunning bird's eye autofocus and just as much real time tricking (while I expected the opposite, R6 better) The R6 II it's a pleasure to shoot with the electronic shutter, and in terms of image quality it gains 0.8 stops at high ISOs on the A7 IV. But sampled down to 24 megapixels it's the same
@@lewcehjitl3282 in the end I kept sony with me due to the vastness of the lenses available. however, if you shoot sports, the sony -despite having an autofocus on par with the canon- is limited to only 10 fps
I've had shutters fail on 3 different Sony cameras - 1 A7III and 2 A7IVs. The first A7III broke at 106,989 (2 days left on the warranty). I bought the A7IV at that time while the first camera was out for repair. I bought a 3 year extended warranty from the camera shop. The A7IV shutter broke at 98,850. The camera shop provided a loaner A7IV while that one was out for repair which almost immediately showed problems and eventually broke at 70-80K. From a reliability standpoint, I think it was a mistake to go with Sony. I realize that's a lot of photos in less than a year. My wife does family photography with kids and frequently holds down the shutter to capture the perfect moment.
I would like to see some comparison against the r6 photo wise. I’m curious if those extra megapixels make a big difference in cropping. I’m thinking to buy the R6 ii but i don’t know if it’s worth it.
If you’re planningto buy just because of the few extra megapixels, it doesn’t really worth it. But if because of the other new features it make sense. 👍🏻
It really doesn't make a difference. I shoot on both of these cameras. When you do the math you're only getting 472 pixels more in the height, and 1008 more in the width. So 504 pixels more on each side, and 236 more on top and bottom. That equates to about a 14% crop to meet the 24.2mp image size of the r6ii(Sony - 7008x6472, Canon - 6000x4000). Details in both side by side look identical even at their different sizes. The sharpness looks the same, the Sony images are just 14% larger. This would be a different story if the sensor was 14% larger on the Sony, but in actuality the sensor is a smidge smaller on the Sony compared to the Canon by like 0.3mm. So in the real world, say if you were printing your photos, it would be like printing a photo at 13 inches instead of 12. It hardly makes a difference.
If you shoot raw this isnt a valid argument, idk why canon fanboys keep defending canon for their "color science". Doubt most people even knows what color science MEANS more than they see more vibrant colors on the back of their camera screen.
The buffer in Sony needs an expensive CF express card I used the Sony at an air show the the buffer slowed down a lot with SD card and full raw photos. Keep that in mind.
I did tests for low light and the R6 II seemed to have slightly better dynamic range and high ISO noise (for photos). Also when upscaled to 33 MP the R6 II seems sharper which makes me think the AA filter is better on the Canon. It seems to depend a lot on the lenses. I really like your style and look forward to your Video and IQ comparisons! Edit: I'm using Sigma Art lenses adapted to the R6 II (like the 50mm) and they are stellar, better than they were native on DSLRs. In fact, on the R system the Sigma Art 50 focuses faster, is smaller and lighter, and way cheaper than the Canon RF 50 1.2 and almost as sharp. So I don't really see the lens options to be limiting. In fact I can get lenses I can't for the Sony system and they function like they were native RF lenses (better in some cases).
EF lenses work fantastic on Sony with the Mc-11 adapter. That’s another advantage of Sony at least on the photo wise. I’ve used the r6 with the 50mm art on both the A7iv and r6 and yes, it is sharp but that how art lenses are.
You have a point, I missed the idea that RF system supports EF lenses via adapters. I usually go native and don’t use adapters. I still didn’t deeply check the dynamic range yet. And will take your results into consideration 👍🏻 thank you for sharing that
Hi, I thank you for your comparison. Definitely explains the differences between the two cameras. I am upgrading from a Nikon D750, I have no previous equipment, so I am really trying to make the best choice for me because I will have to purchase equipment and lenses in addition to the camera body. I take portraits and I will incorporate video in the future. I understand the difference when it comes to buying lenses, but I think that a good result is a combination of good optics with a good body. At the moment, the sharpness of the images, a good focus system, good performance in low light situations, ISO and stabilizer in the camera body are important to me. I want to buy a camera that I will be happy with in the long run. I feel very confused even after your great video because apparently both can be good for me. I would love to hear from you, in light of what I wrote, which camera and system would you choose? Thank you in advance 🙂
wait for Z6 III probably, I got R6 II after D750 and I miss Nikon, although the Canon has great autofocus and feels very good in the hand, maybe slightly better than D750. I find the Nikon screen brighter and with better colors and the shadow recovery is so much cleaner to me in Nikon files, colors also are better to me and I like shooting landscapes, I don't think it's up to editing, maybe because the D750 has better color depth, not sure. I'll probably sell the Canon and get a Nikon.. lens options now with third party and Tamron/Nikkor 35-150 f2-2.8 is a must for me, because I like versatile zooms and what more could you want than f2.8 zoom like that, maybe VR/IS that it lacks, but still. Also f 1.8 primes are better from the reviews that I've seen and all I want is 35-150(waiting to be released), probably 16-35 and primes in the future.
Great comparison. I really enjoyed that you got all the way down to the little things, including the differences in showing the focal length in the display and the way the accessory port doors open.
Canon's expertise in color renderings and reproduction is superb in terms of portraiture photography but its lens lineup is over-priced and not entry-friendly with many of its buget-friendly lenses being chronically out-of-stock. Sony has a series problem with color management despit its superb image sensors; it's lagging behind Canon in terms of color renderings.
Your name (Oma) means 'grandmother' in my language, but your review certainly wasn't oldfashioned to me😁 nice style of videos and helpful advice, thanks!
If you can do tests of the A7 IV on the eye of birds and animals. It goes much, much better than on human eyes. I don't know why this difference but I can assure you that it hooks birds eyes like the A1. If it weren't for the few FPS the A7 IV would step on the toes of the A1 in birdlife.
That Canon lens is not great. Not the worst, but not great. For these comparisons you should be using the absolute best lenses available for both mounts. It's about seeing the extremes of what it's possible not averages. At least that's my opinion.. showin an average photo (iq) as a benchmark it doesn't make sense if you can get better by simply using better glass. + Not sure what city that is but that is some really nice locations for this type of work. Awesome.
I think most people will buy the average lens and not the $2400 extreme lens for these cameras. Why would you put a $2400 lens and a $2500 camera. These are not the Sony A1 and R1. He's showing you street photography.
@@presise well if you're just going to show the average then it's not a proper review because you're just going to get average results now isn't it. Unless this is framed as an average review for average results.. do you see what I mean? Think about it like this. Imagine somebody did a r62 review and they only took pictures of cats with the nifty fifty. That's obviously going to be very useless to a lot of people who are trying to see what the capabilities of the camera is not if it can take pictures of the most average stuff.
Great review R6 m2 for me; no problem with lack of 3rd party lenses ... I only buy canon glass. It's a confidence thing ... 3rd usually has a hiccup or 2 then 🤔 being the Mr. Fix it, guy 👦🏾 I get caught up in that loop. So just like when I gave up building my own computers 💻 I gave up on 3rd party anything 🙃. Turnkey Native only solution for me 📸😎
I have the Sony A7iv and it is unusable handheld. Footage comes out shaky with a lot of micro jitters. You need a gimbal. With the R6 II, at least you can shoot handheld.
Raw files. Sony is shooting medium raw canon is compressed Raw. Not the same. Compressed sucks. Medium is a better file unfortunately R line doesn’t offer
![[DOKKAN BATTLE] Worldwide Campaign Announcement Video](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zxfEiMksZQs/mqdefault.jpg)
I will be saying goodbye to Canon in favor of Sony. Unless Canon opens the RF connector to other lens manufacturers.
Great review. Pros of Canon: ibis, eye autofocus, colors sooc, 4k 60
Pros of Sony: customization, lens options, higher mp, Gm lenses are better and lighter than RF lenses
I like both but will stick with Sony for the lens options.
You can still use 3rd party EF lenses on R6 with adaptor.. Not a big deal unless you looking into lenses which are not in the EF mount line up
Also, most people don't need over 3 lenses
Lens choice is MVP of Sony Cameras. I only got A7iv just because of it.
I’m on the fence. How’s
The evf? Sharp?
@TheDustin Although A7iv has higher resolution evf, I don't know why, I like my friend's Canon M50 Mark 1's evf slightly more than my A7iv. But I feel A7iv's evf better than my Nikon D5300's vf. Also, this is my first mirrorless with Evf, and I dont have much experience with Evf.
That's only true for sony native e mount mirrorless..plus third party emount and use adapter for canon.
Canon has limited very expensive rf l series some budget and use adapter use ef efs canon and third party lenses. There also manual rf third party but af rf third party lenses at moment are banned from samyang/rokinon tamron sigma.
@@7743dustin no
I used to have Sony but now I have Canon and I only have a 50 1.2 for fashion, 24-70 2.8 for everything, 24 1.4 for video and 16 2.8 for real estate. I don't need any other lenses. I had a 85, 70-200 and a 24-105 and sold them because i never used them. So just becuase Sony has more lenses don't mean you will need them.
Thanks Oma. Great comparison. I went with the R6mkll because I do BIF and wildlife so AF, FPS and stabilization were key. I shoot mostly handheld. Thanks again.
I’m drawn to the Sony because it’s smaller. However, was looking at the R6II bc canon lenses are good. Looked at Sony A74 and like the colors. Big diff with IBIS wow. This video helped. They’re both easier to use and they’re both good.
Using the smaller Sony you will not space for your pinky finger just to let you know. This is why he has a cage on his.
I would choose the Canon over the Sony if there was a larger selection of lenses. The Sony E-mount has an incredible amount of lenes available from third party companies such as Sigma and Tamron with a handful of other manufacturers, plus all of the newer Sony brand lenses. Right now, the Canon RF system mainly supports a small number of RF mount lenses with the only other option to adapt older EF-mount lenses, some of which do not perform well, or are still expensive even though they are older designs.
I used to have Sony but now I have Canon and I only have a 50 1.2 for fashion, 24-70 2.8 for everything, 24 1.4 for video and 16 2.8 for real estate. I don't need any other lenses. I had a 85, 70-200 and a 24-105 and sold them because i never used them. So just becuase Sony has more lenses don't mean you will need them.
Its funny that everyone says that Sony has more 3rd party lens choice but most people don't own more than 3 lenses. Plus EF lenses on a Canon work as good or better than 3rd party lenses on a Sony and there are just as many EF lenses as 3rd party Sony lenses. FACTS!
Hi which camera has the true to life color (what your eye see at that lighting condition)
I wish sony released a firmware bringing that possibility to change from eye to another when working in Eye-Af in the same way is done in the R6
You LEFT OUT 2 KEY things with the Canon. 1) EF to RF Conversion Mount.... Canon has WAY MORE options here hands down AND 2) Low light performance of both video and photos, Canon also is a win. So as an event and wedding photographer these also are important boxes to check making the R6 mkii a winner compared to the Sony
What about the Dynamic range?
I was sort of shocked he didn't mention this. My EF lenses work great on my R6 using the adapter. With this option, not only can you use all of the same 3rd party lenses but you get the vast array of Canon lenses as well.
@@IamShado that's true
@@IamShadohi, does auto focus works on video too if use ef lenses with adapter?
@@milangurung4349yes it does.
Hello Oma, thanks for this video. With the Canon you will buy a great camera, but with the Sony you get the better system around. The choice between this cameras is like a choice between two religions. Both have sun and shadows...
No doubt the R6 m2 surpasses the a7 iv, however, I am not ready for the move yey as first sony might come with a similar camera on budget.. and second because I owns tens of Sony gear and Lenses.
but neither religion is true. all make believe BS. so bad metaphor
Thanks this was a hard choice for me. but I end up going with the canon bc I love shooting sports and it felt better on my hands. Really love the Sony colors though.
Sony is the cinematic look for portrait , vlog and street use.
Canon for landscape, wildlife and detail shot.
I have a 6D Mark II DSLR, and I'm thinking of upgrading to mirrorless for hybrid photography, but I don't know if I'll stick with the Canon R6MII, or switch to the Sony A7IV, any suggestions?
If you already have collections of EF lens then no reason for change religion 😅
@@okawedanta01 I just got my R6 Mii!
@@williebravo305 I have a plan to get R6 MK2.
Waiting for further review.
So what do you think about that camera?
@@okawedanta01 The camera works very well with the Canon adapter. I have Tamron and Canon EF lenses and both focus fast.
If you have lenes stick with Canon. Plus the Sony colors and functionality will throw you off if you are not used to them.
I have A7iii .I'm not sure upgrade between A7 iv and R6ii you have RAW file for bolt camera thx .
Dear Oma, thank you your great explainations…. I am looking forward on your video captured compare of 4K 60FPS , long hours usage, heat issues related comparison
Of course!
I think the color issue you had with them was the compressed raw. You lose color data.
I have the A7 IV since September and the R6 II since last week. I'll wait months for a definitive verdict also because canon has a young firmware, but I can say right away: the A7 IV has a stunning bird's eye autofocus and just as much real time tricking (while I expected the opposite, R6 better) The R6 II it's a pleasure to shoot with the electronic shutter, and in terms of image quality it gains 0.8 stops at high ISOs on the A7 IV. But sampled down to 24 megapixels it's the same
Which do you like better? Can’t decide between both 😅
@@lewcehjitl3282 in the end I kept sony with me due to the vastness of the lenses available. however, if you shoot sports, the sony -despite having an autofocus on par with the canon- is limited to only 10 fps
I've had shutters fail on 3 different Sony cameras - 1 A7III and 2 A7IVs. The first A7III broke at 106,989 (2 days left on the warranty). I bought the A7IV at that time while the first camera was out for repair. I bought a 3 year extended warranty from the camera shop. The A7IV shutter broke at 98,850. The camera shop provided a loaner A7IV while that one was out for repair which almost immediately showed problems and eventually broke at 70-80K.
From a reliability standpoint, I think it was a mistake to go with Sony. I realize that's a lot of photos in less than a year. My wife does family photography with kids and frequently holds down the shutter to capture the perfect moment.
Never had a problem here
I would like to see some comparison against the r6 photo wise. I’m curious if those extra megapixels make a big difference in cropping. I’m thinking to buy the R6 ii but i don’t know if it’s worth it.
If you’re planningto buy just because of the few extra megapixels, it doesn’t really worth it.
But if because of the other new features it make sense. 👍🏻
It really doesn't make a difference. I shoot on both of these cameras. When you do the math you're only getting 472 pixels more in the height, and 1008 more in the width. So 504 pixels more on each side, and 236 more on top and bottom. That equates to about a 14% crop to meet the 24.2mp image size of the r6ii(Sony - 7008x6472, Canon - 6000x4000). Details in both side by side look identical even at their different sizes. The sharpness looks the same, the Sony images are just 14% larger. This would be a different story if the sensor was 14% larger on the Sony, but in actuality the sensor is a smidge smaller on the Sony compared to the Canon by like 0.3mm. So in the real world, say if you were printing your photos, it would be like printing a photo at 13 inches instead of 12. It hardly makes a difference.
10fps Sony: 12 bit RAW
12 fps R6m 2: 14 bit RAW
May be I am wrong
And that doesn't make much of a different I guess..?
R6ii 12bit RAW in electronic shutter is 20fps/40fps.
A7iv has serious problems with jelly effects.
The real Canon RAW file size is closer to 45-55 megabites depending on lighting, way more than the 12 he was getting
Great Video! Thanks! What about color science? Do you see a big difference between both cameras?
If you shoot raw this isnt a valid argument, idk why canon fanboys keep defending canon for their "color science". Doubt most people even knows what color science MEANS more than they see more vibrant colors on the back of their camera screen.
Dudo que la gente que decís que disparar en RAW no afecta la ciencia de color sepáis qué conlleva tener mejor o peor ciencia de color...
The buffer in Sony needs an expensive CF express card I used the Sony at an air show the the buffer slowed down a lot with SD card and full raw photos. Keep that in mind.
Would you choose the fx3 over the r6 mark ii for a documentary/vlog?
I recommend FX3 over R6m2 in video.
You get more/better profile pictures, 4K 120, as well as better body design for video rigging.
@@OmaGhomrawi Thanks for documentary/vlog content. Would you choose the 16-35 gm 2.8 paired with the 24. 1.4 or pair the 20 1.8 with the 24-70
Yes. R6ii overheats in 4k60 plus Fx3 is more of a video camera. R6ii is mainly a photo camera.
I did tests for low light and the R6 II seemed to have slightly better dynamic range and high ISO noise (for photos). Also when upscaled to 33 MP the R6 II seems sharper which makes me think the AA filter is better on the Canon. It seems to depend a lot on the lenses.
I really like your style and look forward to your Video and IQ comparisons!
Edit: I'm using Sigma Art lenses adapted to the R6 II (like the 50mm) and they are stellar, better than they were native on DSLRs. In fact, on the R system the Sigma Art 50 focuses faster, is smaller and lighter, and way cheaper than the Canon RF 50 1.2 and almost as sharp. So I don't really see the lens options to be limiting. In fact I can get lenses I can't for the Sony system and they function like they were native RF lenses (better in some cases).
EF lenses work fantastic on Sony with the Mc-11 adapter. That’s another advantage of Sony at least on the photo wise. I’ve used the r6 with the 50mm art on both the A7iv and r6 and yes, it is sharp but that how art lenses are.
You have a point, I missed the idea that RF system supports EF lenses via adapters.
I usually go native and don’t use adapters.
I still didn’t deeply check the dynamic range yet. And will take your results into consideration 👍🏻 thank you for sharing that
The R6 has way more lenses when you factor in EF lenses.
yup
Hi, I thank you for your comparison. Definitely explains the differences between the two cameras.
I am upgrading from a Nikon D750, I have no previous equipment, so I am really trying to make the best choice for me because I will have to purchase equipment and lenses in addition to the camera body.
I take portraits and I will incorporate video in the future.
I understand the difference when it comes to buying lenses, but I think that a good result is a combination of good optics with a good body.
At the moment, the sharpness of the images, a good focus system, good performance in low light situations, ISO and stabilizer in the camera body are important to me. I want to buy a camera that I will be happy with in the long run.
I feel very confused even after your great video because apparently both can be good for me.
I would love to hear from you, in light of what I wrote, which camera and system would you choose?
Thank you in advance 🙂
wait for Z6 III probably, I got R6 II after D750 and I miss Nikon, although the Canon has great autofocus and feels very good in the hand, maybe slightly better than D750. I find the Nikon screen brighter and with better colors and the shadow recovery is so much cleaner to me in Nikon files, colors also are better to me and I like shooting landscapes, I don't think it's up to editing, maybe because the D750 has better color depth, not sure. I'll probably sell the Canon and get a Nikon.. lens options now with third party and Tamron/Nikkor 35-150 f2-2.8 is a must for me, because I like versatile zooms and what more could you want than f2.8 zoom like that, maybe VR/IS that it lacks, but still. Also f 1.8 primes are better from the reviews that I've seen and all I want is 35-150(waiting to be released), probably 16-35 and primes in the future.
Great comparison. I really enjoyed that you got all the way down to the little things, including the differences in showing the focal length in the display and the way the accessory port doors open.
Maybe fine to compare ISO and Dynamic !
Canon's expertise in color renderings and reproduction is superb in terms of portraiture photography but its lens lineup is over-priced and not entry-friendly with many of its buget-friendly lenses being chronically out-of-stock. Sony has a series problem with color management despit its superb image sensors; it's lagging behind Canon in terms of color renderings.
Your name (Oma) means 'grandmother' in my language, but your review certainly wasn't oldfashioned to me😁 nice style of videos and helpful advice, thanks!
You’re definitely German 😅
My name is Omar, however it is spelled Oma in Australiian accent and that sounds nice to my ears
I have a question: does the slow rolling shutter on the A7 IV affect photography or is it only a problem for video?
there is a small chance to be a problem in sport photography.
If you can do tests of the A7 IV on the eye of birds and animals. It goes much, much better than on human eyes. I don't know why this difference but I can assure you that it hooks birds eyes like the A1. If it weren't for the few FPS the A7 IV would step on the toes of the A1 in birdlife.
Which of these cameras is better to choose? I want to shoot video and take photos. It is very difficult to choose between these two cameras.
What system and lenses you use at the moment ?
@@OmaGhomrawi I had a Nikon Z5 and sold it. At the moment I'm not using anything, so I can choose any system.
Rent both and then decide. But If you record slow motion 4k60 video the sony has a large crop and overheats.
@@presise now i decided to only recording video, i choose zv e1
Catalyst browse is very useful
but its an extra step
That Canon lens is not great. Not the worst, but not great. For these comparisons you should be using the absolute best lenses available for both mounts. It's about seeing the extremes of what it's possible not averages. At least that's my opinion.. showin an average photo (iq) as a benchmark it doesn't make sense if you can get better by simply using better glass.
+ Not sure what city that is but that is some really nice locations for this type of work. Awesome.
I think most people will buy the average lens and not the $2400 extreme lens for these cameras. Why would you put a $2400 lens and a $2500 camera. These are not the Sony A1 and R1. He's showing you street photography.
@@presise well if you're just going to show the average then it's not a proper review because you're just going to get average results now isn't it. Unless this is framed as an average review for average results.. do you see what I mean?
Think about it like this. Imagine somebody did a r62 review and they only took pictures of cats with the nifty fifty. That's obviously going to be very useless to a lot of people who are trying to see what the capabilities of the camera is not if it can take pictures of the most average stuff.
@@simonmaduxx6777 It wasn't a lens review. He was just showing people the difference between to cameras so people can decide which CAMERA they prefer.
Great review R6 m2 for me; no problem with lack of 3rd party lenses ... I only buy canon glass. It's a confidence thing ... 3rd usually has a hiccup or 2 then 🤔 being the Mr. Fix it, guy 👦🏾 I get caught up in that loop. So just like when I gave up building my own computers 💻 I gave up on 3rd party anything 🙃. Turnkey Native only solution for me 📸😎
Rich kid
@saidharshini4187 nope a 65 yr old man who earned every penny 😇
Can you share the raw files of R6 2 and A7M4 in the video?
Share your email with me on instagram
@omaghomrawi
@@OmaGhomrawi sure
My dream is to give a camera a camera gift
The Canon "wobble" still kills me. The stabilization is better but comes with such a horrible caveat
I have the Sony A7iv and it is unusable handheld. Footage comes out shaky with a lot of micro jitters. You need a gimbal. With the R6 II, at least you can shoot handheld.
@kifley19 just curious what lens you use on the a7 iv
@@GatehiMwaniki 24-70mm 2.8 GM II and 35mm 1.4 GM.
Hi do you live in Florida?
I live in Dubai
1:50 which skin tone is closer to reality?
Sony a7 iv
Can we talk brother ?
Raw files. Sony is shooting medium raw canon is compressed Raw. Not the same. Compressed sucks. Medium is a better file unfortunately R line doesn’t offer
Does the canon not have an uncompressed raw option?
@@kifley19 Yes
@@kifley19 yes of course but when he compared the smaller raw files. One was compressed one not. Not the same. Canon sucks with that
R6 with higher fps but has very lower RAW files saving capability is a bit ironic, don't you think?
The high speed fps is there, and works for a very short period of time
🎉😂 yes love it thank you
why didnt you do an ibis test doing video?
Because it is a photography review like the title says.
Hi, I did test the stabilization with IBIS (sensor stabilization) in the second half of the review.
ruclips.net/video/UWp3JqsXSDc/видео.html
Same Price
You need use Sony A7R5 for compare
I Wait for Sony a75 😁
🫵
The colors on both these cameras are horrible. Stick to the Sony A7iii way better 😊
hahahaha :D :D :D lol
Great video