Thanks, Duade! I’m becoming a real fan of your vids. I shoot with the R6 and the 109-500. I’ve posted two questions and you've been nice enough to answer both within 24 hrs. I have no questions this time, so you're off the hook. Just wanted to say thanks, and keep up the great work.
Hi, I'm a german photographer living in Belgium. I've got the Sony a7iv and I confirm that af struggles with little or dark objects. So I learned not to trust af in these situations. On the other hand, (human) face detection works fantastic. It's a pleasure to listen to your videos, very human. Have a good time on the other side of the planet! Stefan Wasser u
You increased my confusion😂 I have a 90D with a 100-400 mkii and 1.4x iii. I was thinking of the following options and leaning towards option 2 until I saw this video. 1) Get a Canon R7 and keep my lenses. 2) Move to a used Sony a9 with a 200-600mm. My decision here will be based on your answer. I'm putting you on spot but please put an end to my confusion🙏🙏
G'day Ashish, I have not used the A9 so hard to judge. The 200-600 is an incredible lens, If Sony come out with a good APSC body I would get that combo. The R7 is a good option with your combo and might be a bit cheaper. Good luck, Cheers, Duade 👍
I really appreciate your style of presenting. Several years ago I made the switch from Canon to Sony. With 5 back surgeries, the Sony system was noticeably lighter. From my early ar7 to the current Alpha 9, I have accumulated several lenses from 16mm to 500mm mostly zoom. After recently acquiring the Tamron 150-500, I was especially interested in your assessment . While examining the images, I found myself with a bias to the Sony from your very same shots. Interesting. I wonder, in a totally blind test, just how much difference there would actually be. In the end, it’s like any electronic device such as the iPhone compared to the android. I’m an iPhone guy and the times I have tried to switch , I find the android less intuitive. Keep up your fine and interesting work.
With Sony you can have a 1.4 teleconverter but it had to be paired with the Sony also or you have to manual focus. And this would make you miss too many birds. So it is Sony camera to Sony teleconverter to Sony lens the only way to have auto focus. But this being said I very much enjoy your truthfulness and I thank you for not only showing what works for you as well as what hasn't worked. This for me has made me a watcher of what you have got to say. Well done on this and all what I have seen so far. All the best mate.
G'day Ralph, thanks for the feedback and comment. It is a shame Sony restricts fps of third party lenses. U was very impressed with this lens. Cheers, Duade 👍
Hope that Canon will open the RF-mount like what Sony did with E-mount so that Sigma and Tamron can join the party! And thank you so much for your review.
Sony opened their E mount out of necessity as their mirrorless body development was well ahead of their lens development. Canon have never opened their mounts. Third parties had to reverse-engineer EF lenses and, with fast animal/human eye AF being more complicated to design, it will take more time to reverse engineer autofocus lenses for the RF mount. That is unfortunate.
Hi Duade, great video as always! As a Sony shooter I'm really jealous of these new Canon bodies; they seem great! Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the Sony 200-600mm, since I think that lens really is the main selling point of Sony for semi-on-a-budget wildlife shooters! I now shoot it with a relatively cheap APS-C body and loving it! For me a good way to work around the lack of eye auto focus is to use the smallest autofocus spot with tracking, focus on the bird's eye and then keep focusing (so it starts tracking) while you recompose. That way the bird can even move and you still keep the focus, which gives this method a slight edge over normal back button focusing technique.
@@Duade Sony 200-600G is the best performing, best value, best quality zoom IMO and I own the 100-400GM and Canon 100-400L IS II which is optically as good as the 100-500L. Canon 100-500L may be as good optically, but stupidly expensive, only 500 and only f/7.1 and the TC can't be used for full zoom range.
Hi Niels I Shoot with A7RIII with Sonys 200-600 and I would love to try it with an A9II body with these high frame rates. I can see that your comment is almost one year old - I hope you have purchased it all ready :-)
@@Marskfoto hi, that also sounds like a great combo! A9 would indeed be really cool to shoot with, although you do get fewer megapixels then (for me at least relatively, since I use an APS-C body). For now I'm sticking with my current setup since it is really nice considering my budget!
@Sayak Ray হুঁ, ঠিকই। But, for cropping in wildlife photography, R6 is not ideal due to its lower megapixel count. So, a new Canon camera with lower price and higher megapixel count than R6 would be great!
Duade, I now have my Canon R6 and the Canon RF 100-500 L. The AF and tracking has helped me get shots of Birds In Flight that I couldn't get with my Canon 6D and Tamron 150-600. A bit pricey, but worth the money. The only problem I have is the lack of Canon's Color Profile while using Adobe Lightroom. Keep making these great videos and your down to earth style.
Gene, great to hear the camera and lens have arrived, glad it is helping increase your keepers. I have no idea why adobe have dropped the ball with the Canon files recently. I can only hope they fix this going forward. Cheers, Duade
The 6D has a decent sensor for the amount of money it costs, and that might be all you need for say landscape photography. But yeah, autofocusing and speed are not exactly strengths of the 6D. So, for anything involving fast action, you'd want something better.
@@Duade If dust is getting on your sensor, then it will get on your shutter if it's down. I would much rather give the sensor a quick clean with a blower than get dust stuck in something that needs to move at 1/8000 s, 12x a second.
Nice video bro... Happy to see the details in depth.. You were talking about focus mode. I use sony a9 and have tried R6.. I am so confident that birds in flight, zone+tracking+AF Priority + option 1 for stick to focus works amazingly well... I have 100.00% in focus result once it locks While if bird is not moving, flexible spot focus makes the best Put subject as Animal indeed A9 Has astounding focussing capability. However, eye focus on R6 works extremely well. But no comparison with a9 about hit rate
I Duade, I liked the comparison thank you. I am also a canon shooter the just want to let you know that the canon also have a recall option. I’ve set my AF point button to Register/Recall and effectively made it a third back button focus option. One for general focus, the second for eye tracking and the third as single point focus. You can try it out, but is is working well for me with the R5. I believe the R6 should have the same option. Thanks again
Fantastic review, thanks! I am using the Canon R5 and R6 with the RF 100-500. Sold my A9 with the 200-600 (Great glass, excellent camera) because of ease of operation using similar camera bodies. Somtimes, I am missing the precise (60 times per second calculated) AF of my former A9, resulting in more sharp pictures in a serie when tracking. But all in all, R5 and RF 100-500 is a very good, allthough costly combination.
Thanks for sharing your experience Marcel, the Sony is very good once it locks onto the subject, it is very rare to miss focus. The Canon system is very versatile and light making it a great all around kit. Cheers, Duade
Hi , as I commented elsewhere I have now this Tamron 150-500 with Sony a7IV which also has birds eye af. After some use I found they work very well together. Comparing birds eye af with my Canon R6 +RF 100-500mm ; the Canon is a winner ,for example small sparrows have very even color and low contrast and a7IV has difficulties to focus on eye which Canon made much easily. With large birds they are more similar. Sony has a very good IQ and you can make it better your camera by tweaking the buttons. So they are real competitors....
I think you're right regarding Sony autofocus. I have the A7R4 and I use spot/touch to track when shooting photos of birds. The Zone had trouble giving up the lock on a moving or dynamic background.
Awesome video, if I could make 1 bit of constructive criticism (sorry), to keep 1 camera brand consistently on the left and the other brand on the right to make it easier to review the images…..unless you are asking people to guess which one is which 😂. Appreciate the video and time it took to make.
Hey Duade, I posted a comment a while back about my Sony A7R IV back focusing and not picking up perched birds and how im having to do the pre focus technique. Its interesting you experienced this and showed it in action with the Wagtail on the rock. Thats a pretty easy subject as its a solid rock and it still wasn't picking it up. Its for sure pretty annoying and ive missed a few shots because of it. Its a big problem because the auto focus would otherwise be amazing.
@@Duade Just don't use zone or wide unless you are against a clean background. Expand flexible spot or flexible spot S, M, L or centre are the best modes for A9 and A7RIV in general.
As always, a terrific video, Duade. I have had the Canon RF 100-500 backordered for almost two months now here in the States with no estimated delivery date in sight. My R6 sits very lonely on my desk (mount converter on same backorder).
Have owned and used both the C R6 and S A9II extensively for birds in flight and perched birds. The problem with the R6 for me is the 7.1 aperture of the Canon 1-5 at 500mm . Add a 1.4 and you're at f9 . While it is heavier the Sony 200-600 is cheaper and faster than the 1-5 with no extension which I prefer. I have owned a Sony 600mm F4 as well that weighs in at 6.7 pounds. Wasn't the weight that bothered me as much as the sheer size of it.
Steve, thanks for the feedback, if I had a choice as my only kit, I would go with the R6 and Sony 200-600, unfortunately they do not work together :-( The Sony lens is the best value birding lens on the market and I only wish Canon had a version. The aperture of the RF100-500 doesn't bother me too much and the t-stops are very similar meaning they both let in similar light. Of course the Sony gives a bit more reach at 600 but does suffer more from focus breathing at close distance. The 100-500 is by far the more versatile lens as it is so light and the MFD is amazing meaning you can shoot macro etc. Cheers, Duade
Interesting comparison, I don't think I've seen the A9 II and R6 compared before and never realized how close the specs are. I have the Canon 100-500 and it's a great lens but I agree with you it's over priced but that's the price you pay for a native RF mount lens right now.
yes, I was also very surprised with just how well the R6 competes with the A9ii given the cost difference. Yes, the RF100-500 is very expensive, but it is a lovely lens. Cheers, Duade
Tremendous job Duade! I´m a Nikon Z system user, I valorize time spended doing this review. Soon we will be getting equivalent MILC Z for action, I guess with same performance as R6 and a9. Take care!
The main difference is that the A9II has a stacked sensor. Now for bird photos is not a big deal if the bird is almost stationary. Different situation if the bird is in flight and you need to follow like in panning. The R6 may have some rolling shutter in panning (the bird is not distorted but the background yes, especially vertical things like trees etc). But the good thing is that on the R6 you have a faster mechanical shutter (12 against 10 of A9II). And in electronic on R6 you can go fully to 20fps (but you cannot regulate the FPS like in Sony, is 20 fixed and silent), where on the Sony you can have different fps settings and as you mention the possibility to insert a fake shutter noise that may be useful. We hope Canon will insert these in next firmware update. I am both a Sony and Canon user. Canon is a bit slower in give attention to the customers' requests comparing to Sony.
Thanks Filippo, I have used both the Sony stacked sensor and the Canon R5/R6 and I did not have any adverse impacts in the field so far. There is no doubt the stacked sensor has a big advantage, it's just hard to know if it justifies an extra $2000. I admit I don't do a lot of bird in flight so it does not impact me as much. I also hope Canon introduce an audible shutter and the ability to change the FPS. Cheers, Duade
Really nice review. Bird eye-tracking is on my bucket list for a camera and the R6 and Canon 100-500mm might just make that possible. I like the idea of a "dust" shutter in the Canon as well.
Hi Duade. I am an Australian living in Japan and watch all your videos. Mate, thanks for the many great videos and tutorials you put out. Please know they have really helped my photography in general too, not just for bird photography. This video was really good because the question of getting the Sony set up or the Canon R6 has been on my mind. You have given me a clear answer. Cheers Mate.
Chiemi, my pleasure, the A1 is a big improvement on the A9 in regards to bird eye AF however it is very expensive. The R6 is a great camera for its price. Cheers, Duade
Just started watching and havent come to the conclusion yet. I am REALLY glad you are trying Sony, just wish you had a native Sony lens. I have a Sony 200-600 I use for my birding with a 1.4TC and it is amazingly fast and accurate with the birbs. Anyway, gonna watch now.
Thanks Duade, you and Jan have some of the most interesting videos for bird photographers on RUclips currently. Spot on relevance to questions I have currently as I can no longer lug around big prime lenses and I am trying to decide between Sony and Canon systems. The Tamron looks fantastic value, as you say its a shame it isn't yet in a Canon fit. Next on the wish list (despite the price difference) is Sony 200-600 on the A1 vs 100-500 on the R5 and R6 ! The Sony lens has a slight reach and aperture advantage over the Cnaon 100-500 on the R6 but maybe the R5 extra megapixels over the R6 could close the gap right up ?
John, keep an eye on our channels over the next month, there will be a lot of Sony content and we should hopefully be able to answer your questions. Cheers, Duade
Hope you don’t mind me butting in John but re your comment on the extra cropability of the R5 over the R6, I went for the R5 with the 100-500 for that very reason. For example, in the R5’s 1.6 crop mode you get an effective 800mm of reach with around 17.25MP. I did consider one of the the Alphas with the justifiably popular Sony 200-600 but that lens was bigger and heavier than the 100-500 and, crucially for me, I think the 100-500’s closer focussing makes it a better all round nature and wildlife lens for everything from insects to birds in flight. I haven’t been disappointed.
@@alanwood5590 . Thanks for your input Alan. I never thought about the crop mode because it will surely just throw away the pixels around the perimeter of the image and won’t actually give a reach advantage. The R5 has a higher pixel density than the R6 as it has 45 vs 20 mp on the same size sensor. More pixels per duck will effectively provide more reach.
@@wildcat1065 I agree that crop mode throws away pixels - I referred to it mainly as an example of the resolution of the R5 with that degree of cropping. However when and only when I know I’m going to crop that heavily in post anyway (eg for small insects) I will sometimes use crop mode to have the subject larger in the viewfinder at the point of taking as it makes it easier to see what part of the insect is in sharp focus - and yes I do use magnified view too but that sometimes gives too much magnification for a steady view when hand holding. The 800mm of effective reach in crop mode that I mentioned is really talking about the angle of view as in the case of all crop sensor cameras. Oh, and if I know, I’d be cropping that much in post anyway I figure that I may as well save a bit of disk space by using crop mode in camera.
Thats an interesting poll. Megapixels scored pretty low. For me megapixels was my main priority, went all out and got the Sony A7R IV 61MP, its sacrifices a bit on auto focus speed, high ISO performance and FPS but I love it! The concept for me was to have a full frame camera when birds get close but also a 26MP APS-C camera all in 1.
coming from mft, I almost went R6 but the 20mp killed it for me (wanted a bit more than 4mp bump but not too much either). Landed on a Sony a7iii. Still using my Lumix G85 for wildlife and the sony for landscape / people. I'm chilling here for a bit before I pull the trigger on a sony a6xxx with a 600mm zoom (both for $ reasons and to see if Sony releases an A7 body with a crop sensor). OF course, if Canon releases an aps-c R body, I'll know I made the wrong the decision. I do REALLY enjoy the sony's body and the images that come out of it. Only gripe is that Sony's touch screen (for focusing) is comically bad - both Lumix and Canon's are far superior. Menu sucks but only really use it once. Excellent review. I think either combo is great. Ultimately, i went sony because of the 3rd party lens support in 2021.
Thanks Ryan, if Sony came out with an APSC body with eye tracking at an affordable price I think I would buy that just to access the 200-600. Cheers, Duade
Hi Duade, I owned an A9II and got great sports photography results from it, but you do need to pair it with Sony G/GM glass to get the AF performance as well as the full frame rate. Other reviews have found some issues with AF performance on non-sony lenses so it may explain the AF issues you had. On top of that the Sony 200-600 G is an incredible lens at a bargain price, having 20% more reach than the Canon, a larger max aperture, and excellent optics at half the price of the Canon 100-500. That being said I am moving (back) to Canon. As you say, the Sony A9II is way over priced and cannot offer the same performance as the Canons. The R5 is available significantly cheaper than the A9II, and is pretty much superior in every way. The issue I faced is there is far more excellent 3rd party lenses for Sony (e.g.: the unbelievable Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8), and certain excellent GM lenses (70-200 GM II, 135 GM). Canon RF glass is expensive and seems a bit of a mixed bag. I have decided to take up the expensive Canon lenses for the deciding factor...support. Sony do not back their product, with woeful warranty for such high priced gear. I think it is because they know it isn't as durable as Canon gear and it also doesn't re-sell well. It is hard to sell second hand Sony gear, but when I sold my old Canon kit it sold well.
Thanks Roger, I agree with what you have said, the 200-600 is a fantastic lens that is for sure. The RF100-500 is a very sharp lens but is very expensive and 500 on a full frame is a touch short. Good luck with the Canon kit, Cheers, Duade
Very informative and super sharp images as always Duade one thing I notice in your delivery is that you are speaking directly into camera ( and your viewers ) rather than having a two angle approach that I have seen in earlier videos - just makes for a better connection ? 👍
Thanks for the feedback Glenn, If I am being honest I use the two cameras to hide the cuts where I make mistakes when shooting, I am trying to get more B-roll to hide these edits. Cheers, Duade
Very informative comparison, however, I believe you omitted one of the most important comparisons: e-shutter shooting on fast moving subjects (eg. birds in flight). From what I've seen, the R6 exhibits significantly more rolling shutter when using electronic shutter as it has a much slower read-out speed than the sony with it's stacked sensor.
Jale, yes in hindsight I should have mentioned that benefit, I currently use mechanical for fast moving subjects as 12fps is still very fast. I think overall the Sony system excels at BIF and has a distinct advantage over the Canon at this stage. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade I use nothing but Electronic shutter. The staccato lag in the EVF (using mechanical) on the R6 is not fast enough to keep up BIF...im talking really fast stuff here mind, like these peregrines, or swooping red kites were another.....I would not have a camera now without eye EF either...its game changer for bird shooters. www.flickr.com/photos/130542709@N06/
Jan Wegener showed the Tamron 150-500mm on the Sony A1. It's correct the A1 has animal-AF that works for birds. This Tamron lens works even better on the A1 than on the A9 ii (also according to Jan)! Thanks for this video! ;)
Thank you for the excellent comparison review, Duade! I found this from your comment on DPReview, and I'm glad that you pointed me here. I love the comparison of similar lenses from two different systems, and wish that more people would do tests like this. I'm a little disappointed by the sharpness of the Tamron, as I was able to tell the difference in each of your image comparisons. I shouldn't be too surprised given the much lower price. The R6/A9ii was an unexpected comparison, but very interesting. The upcoming Sony A7iv (rumored to be released in September) will be their closest competitor for the R6, though of course it you can't test a camera that does not yet exist. I expect the A7iv to have Sony's latest AF system (though perhaps not a dedicated bird eye AF mode). I'm planning a switch to full-frame from Olympus, and still a little torn on what to buy. The Canon 100-500 is very appealing, but there are many great and affordable shorter primes for Sony that I really want. And I envy Nikon users for the pf telephoto primes--I would love those instead of one of these telephoto zooms, even with the extra cost. But the Z6II can't match the Sony or Canon AF, or the Sony native lens choice. I was hoping that this Tamron would be a lens that I could love . . . anyway, the video was very informative.
Hal, the Rf100-500 is a wonderful light lens that when paired with an R5 gives you a lot of versatility. I will admit that 500mm can be a little short as I am used to 700mm with my prime and extender. If the A7IV has bird eye AF, then it makes the Sony 200-600 combo very attractive as your main birding kit. I think long term at the moment Canon and Sony seem to be leading the way. Canons new RF lenses are pretty amazing in terms of IQ, Weight and are a step up from the EF lenses. Good luck, Cheers, Duade
Canons bird eye AF is a game changer. I'm a Sony user and it's going to take a long time for that to filter down from the A1 to lower priced models, I'm hoping the A7IV will have it and pair up with my 200-600.
I am looking at purchasing a camera and visited the photography show at the NEC Birmingham (UK) on Saturday. I found the R6 had a much better feel and grip than the A9 (or any other Sony camera). Consequently the R6 plus 100 - 500 (plus battery grip) is my front runner.
David, yes, the R6 is a very impressive camera for the price, considering it has the flagship 1dx3 sensor and the AF of the R5. The RF100-500 is a little expensive and I do wish it was 600mm but the versatility of the lens is unmatched. Good luck with your decision. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Thanks Duade. I must confess to liking the Sigma 150-600 lens too. I also worry a little about the megapixel size of the R6 in comparison to the R5. May I ask your thoughts on this? The only reason for not going for the D850 is the move to mirrorless and not wanting to have out of date equipment in a short period of time. Thanks for your time and the grta videos. Take care, David
Great review. I also like to see the battery percentage on the Canon, I just set the MENU button to always start from the favourite menu and put it there, it is fairly quick.
Great comparison review! Would be nice to get a similar review now that sony actually has Bird eye AF even on their "cheaper" models. Value propositition will be different I believe, since Canon still dont allow for third party lenses.
Hi Duade, I was just reviewing this now as am trying to work out whether or not to stick to Canon or go back to Sony. I have been shooting Netball for years and went though A9, A9II and then to Canon R6 with RF 70-200L. Whereas I can see the wildlife advantage of Canon, it didnt translate to a small court sport that has many people moving around together. The A9/A9II AF was far superior in this instance, but am wondering if the new R6II has addressed the Canon issues in this scenario and I see they adopted one of the useful Sony AF modes in this situation (spot AF select and track). I dont know if someone else picked it up earlier, but you missed the fact the A9 has a stacked sensor so in that regard it performs more like the R3 (but was quite a few years ahead of it), hence the greater cost.
Thank you very much for the great comparison. I didn't know the a9 was that close to the r6 and even is worse with animal eye AF. However, the Tamron for RF would be a really good and relatively affordable combo. So I would happily trade my Sigma 150-600 C in for it!
One of the bigger differences is in the battery life but was sadly omitted. People who are price conscious would likely look at the A9 mark1, as it has much of the basic features in the mark2 and only lacks some of the updated connectivity features which isn't relevant to bird photography..
@@nosignal7156 i did not have any problems with batterylife for birding with my r6. However, another batterypack is always in my backpack, and i barely need it. And if you put a battery grip on the r6 you will not have any problems...
@@ralfseidler7141 At the end of the day it's still misleading to list the specs like this and omit one of the main advantages of one of these systems. That's kind of what I was getting at. Also, batteries get weaker towards the bottom of its capacity, so having 1 strong battery is better than having 2 weak batteries, although it's worth nothing the batteries have equal capacity, it's just that the R6 consumes nearly twice as just juice per mileage.
You really need the Sony 200-600 f 5.6-6.3 for a fair comparison, but the extra 100mm would be an advantage to Sony, so can see where your going ! I would go for the Cannon system over the Sony despite being a Sony user ! Just for the Eye autofocus alone but also you have the native glass as well quicker AF ! Obviously Sony A1 required but in a different league and price range ! Hardly use my A9 II now having the A1 ! Good work Duade as not everyone will be picking up an A1 !
Nice video Duade, good to see the R6 doing so well. A9II is a marginal update of the A9 and not worth it. A9 is often heavily discounted and has equal performing AF so making it the value proposition. Main advantage for the A9 is of course the stacked sensor which allows blackout free EVF. Duade note the R6 sort of cheats as it inserts frames to simulate blackout free shooting in the EVF. Also I hate how Canon only allows 20fps in e-shutter, unlike Sony which gives you 20, 10 and 5fps options. Eye AF is a game changer and can't wait until I get my A1 but will be keen to see how the R3 stacks up and we finally get a stacked sensor from Canon and fwiw the R3 looks sensational. I still have most of my Canon glass, which I still use on my Sony's including the 500 f/4L IS II and waiting for feedback from how it performs on the A1 with animal eye-AF. If the R6 was 30MP I probably would have bought one already just to use my Canon 500 and 300. Good news we can't really go wrong as birders nowadays and competition is going to keep improving the breed. Can't wait to see how the Nikon Z9 performs.
Thanks Whayne, totally agree with your comment, ultimately, I didn't find the stacked sensor offered me a huge advantage over the animal eye AF and if I had a choice I would go with the Canon. I agree the fixed 20fps and no audible shutter are very annoying. The blackout free shooting of the Sony is nice but having used the A9ii, A1, R6 and R5 extensively, the difference is minor and not one that I really even notice when shooting in the moment. Whatever Canon have done my brain seems to be able to ignore the blackout now. I can report that the A1 is a sensational camera and works very well. The Eye AF does not pick-up far-off birds as quick as the Canon however when the A1 locks onto the subject you very rarely get soft or out of focus shots. I also hope the R3 is everything we hope it is. Cheers, Duade
Phillip, I am unsure how long it will take Tamron to release RF lenses, the RF100-500 is a beautiful lens and you won't be disappointed by it. Cheers, Duade
Hi Duade. Thank you for your time and sharing your knowledge with your video! This may sound too harsh, but do you see that Canon's color science washes away the color saturation seen by the human eye in Nature and Wildlife that some other brands seem to capture more accurately, for example in this case comparing Canon with the Sony and in other cases compared with Nikon photographs? I am a beginner and seriously impressed with the performance of the R5 with its 100-500 lens. And I like that it has 45MP for cropping and large prints. I shoot with a G9 and Leica 100-400 right now and its a little beast for sure, but I am looking to upgrade in the next year or two to an even more powerful beast for photos and videography.
I am no colour expert to be honest and you have a lot of creative control in post to change a lot of these things. As I have always used Canon and only dabbled with other brands I guess I am used to Canon. The R5 and 100-500 is a beautiful combo. I am excited to see if Canon do release and APSC RF mount this year though. Cheers, Duade
Is this when you load it into lightroom? i think this is because lightroom has no good presets for handling canon files. If you use canon's own raw converter you get the proper files looking how you'd expect them to.
I say this as a Canon user--I think the A9 II has less rolling shutter (using the electronic shutter) than the Canon due to its faster readout speed, but it doesn't really bother me because I use mechanical on the R5 and R6. 20 fps is too much to sort through, haha.
Another great and useful video! Would be interesting if you did this comparison with the sony a9ii paired with sony 200-600, and the canon R6mkii with the rf100-500. Currently debating between these two sets ups. The canon set up seems great, however the sony having a stacked sensor and longer reach with its native lens is very attractive.
Sill don't know why Sony crippled everything from a decade ago when it comes to the rear screen, my 10+ year old A77 had a fully articulating rear screen as does my 2019 A99ii. If it wasn't for Covid I'd head down south and put an A7R4A and 200-600 in your hands for a test!
Thanks Johan, yeah, I have no idea why they don't do a flip screen either. Thanks for the offer, I should be trying out the 200-600 very soon. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade The 200-600 is a amazing lens for the price and the only fault I have with it is zoom ring can be easy to turn and to get from 600mm to 500mm would be like 2 degrees so im a lot of the im accidentally at 500mm. Im getting a camo lenscoat which ill overlap on zoom ring to add resistance. I think the sharpness is great but I can't compare to anything else so it would be nice to see your thoughts on it :)
@@Duade In hindsight regarding the high ISO shots and Sony files coming out darker. Sony warns in the manual about shooting 3rd party lenses with Electronic First Curtain Shutter using higher shutter speeds as it can darken images. Seen it in the past when using EFCS, the faster the shutter speed the darker the images get, using full mechanical shutter and the problem is usually gone.
I have been watching your video the 150 600 tamron and sigma ef mounts the eye tracking is not as good as the native mount . The rf 100-500 is the lens I am getting I have the Canon RP will let you know how the lens works . Was going to get the R6 but going to wait for R7?
Either system will be very good, it all depends on your needs. If it is purely reach at an affordable price the Sony 200-600 lens is unparalleled. However, if weight and size is more important than the RF100-500 is the answer. Good luck with whichever kit you get. Cheers, Duade
Richard, no I don't think we will see a Tamron lens for the Canon anytime soon, I believe they have to reverse engineer the RF mount first. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Such a shame Canon has locked down their mount, it's urgently needs cheaper third party glass, the 100-500L pricing IMO is absurd. You can currently get the faster, longer FL Sony 200-600G for $2K on discount and easily found for $2600 regularly and it's IQ with the 1.4x TC is excellent. Tamron pricing in Australia is too high and weight is not much lighter than the Sony. I would only pay Canon's pricing if it were a 100-500 f/4-5.6L IS and the TC could be used at all FL lengths. I would buy the Tamron for Canon if it were available however.
@@minusinfinity6974 Whayne, I agree that the RF100-500 is expensive in comparison to the Sony 200-600 and it would be nice to have an affordable 600mm on the RF mount. Cheers, Duade
At first I thought this was an odd matchup, but given they share a similar price I suppose it's reasonable to compare the two. To me it looked like the Canon combo took noticeably sharper images, but the Sony had better subject separation/bokeh, my guess is this comes down to that awesome Canon lens.
A really fair and neutral comparison. Well done on this video. I switched from Sony to Canon because of the better user interface and autofocus and I love the RF100-500 for its versatility and great image quality. I would even choose it over a big prime lense because it is so small and nimble.
You should try a native lens with Sony, focusing and image IQ are better than 3rd party lenses and might change your opinion 😉 I use a Sony a6400 with bird eye detection and mainly the 70-350 & 200-600mm and they are super sharp and quick to focus on moving birds. Tried a sigma lens and it just couldn't focus quick enough like the Sony lenses do for a bird thats moving around.
Thanks Adrian, yes, the Sony 200-600 is a wonderful lens and works well on the Sony bodies, be sure to keep an eye on Jans channel as he will be reviewing the Tamron and Sony lenses to compare. Cheers, Duade
@@ahmonon4352 haha don't get your knickers in a twist, a6400 has "animal eye detection" which will pick up on birds eyes if you have them large enough in the frame which gets super sharp pictures once that little green box covers the eye. No chance with tracking and eye detection though.
Appreciate the efforts and kudos to your knowledge and Photography quality... I wish you have compared with native lens (200-600) than a 3rd party one.
I couldn't agree with you more on this one, Duade. The dilemma of either shooting with a better value for money R6 over the A9 II (body) vs Tamron 150-600mm over the RF 100-500mm (lens) is no different to the issue I am faced with, namely my R5 over the A1 vs the Sony FE 200-600mm over the RF 100-500mm. And you know how strongly I feel against the RF 100-500mm. LOL. I also agree with you on the silent electronic shutter on the Canon. The only reason why I am not really using it is when it shoots silent I just can't get used to it, it makes me feel like I am detached from the camera whereby I don't feel like it is working. I really hope Canon can fix it with a firmware update. On a different note, I just found out Jan managed to get his hands on an A1/FE 200-600mm combo to test. This is the huge one for me as I've already told him I would be love to get his take on comparing that to the R5/RF 100-500mm combo. This could dictate what I am going to do next with my situation as I am still adapting my Sigma 150-600mm which is far from ideal. But, for you though, I think you did the right thing. You obviously love your R6 and if you are sticking with it long term, there is just no other option but to get the RF 100-500mm. That applies to me too if I so decide to stick with the R5 long term.
Thanks Alex, yes, it is a real dilemma as it sounds like the 200-600 is the perfect birding lens however it is only 100mm extra reach and it comes at the cost of size/weight/MFD but is a lot more affordable. I am hoping to catch up with Jan to try out the 200-600 for myself so hopefully I can give my thoughts on it. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade That would be great to get both of your opinions. What I would like to know from you guys is bottom line, budget aside, would you rather have the A1/FE 200-600mm or the R5/RF 100-500mm. So, it is a bit more than just the lens alone, you will have to weigh up on the difference between the R5 and the A1 as well. I already know you love the R5 when you swapped with Jan, so it will be interesting to see how you feel about the A1.
@@Rascallucci Gday Alex, I suspect if it was my only lens I would go with the Sony for the extra reach, however as I already have a prime the lighter and wider 100-500 makes more sense. Hopefully after some testing I will have a better idea. I believe Jan has tested them a lot more so he should release some good reviews. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade I just checked the prices, the RF 100-500mm has in fact gone up!! Is that even possible? LOL. Over here in HK, it is now more than double of the FE 200-600mm. RF 100-500mm - HK$26,580 = A$4,558. FE 200-600mm - HK$12,850 = A$2,204. Is beyond ridiculous now. LOL.
If you trick to a 1 pony system you get that system following, you as a canon shooter had said following, I value and have watched most of your content with admiration as you figured out above, picture this Nikon now Sony Sure maybe canon some day None will let you down It’s a brilliant pass time In other words you know Sony & Nikon exist
Hey Duade, coming back to this video again since it’s the only real R6 a9 comparo on the RUclips and it’s so good haha. Anyways, talking about the EVFs again, and disregarding the blackout free aspect of the a9, are the two EVFs same resolution in actual use ? Reason I ask is I don’t have any experience handling an a9 but do have some with an R6 and a7iii in a local store. And the r6 looked great, smooth and sharp and very life like. The a7iii was rather horrid I thought. Harsh colors and contrast, aliasing, and quite jittery, and also a notable jitter and drop in res when you hit the af on button and it actually starts focusing. Obviously the a9ii should be better than that, but how much better? Haha. I guess same would go for the a7iv you’re using now, which has same res and refresh specs as the a9 ii. Thank you, Duade! I’m just hesitant about the jitters and res drops when focusing on these Sony cameras after seeing what the a7 iii looked like. Thanks!
G'day Joseph, the Tamron 150-500 is the superior lens but is only available for Sony at the moment. It is very sharp and the AF is excellent. The Sigma is also a great lens but the AF is not quite as good. Cheers, Duade
Nice bird images Duade. I just wanna know when wildlife photography became so expensive? I currently use a Nikon D7500 (£1,000 new in UK) & the Sigma 150-600mm C lens + 1.4 TC (£850 new in UK). So for around $2,000 you have a perfectly good wildlife photography set-up (not so good for video though!) and of course the FPS with electronic shutter is very useful in some situations on mirrorless cameras. I also have the Tamron 18-400mm for my Nikon but image quality is only fair and I have to syop down to F8 to get a sharper imae, the V.C is not very effective & sometimes you get that viewfinder judder too! One plus point is that you can focus as close as 45cm throughout the zoom range which has been good for insect photography :-)
Steve, I agree the Canon Mirrorless system is very expensive, I think the R6 is probably the best value for money at the moment but the L series glass is eye watering in price. I suspect Canon is moving towards high margin low sales volume as the low end gear is being overtaken by phones etc. I agree that you can still take wonderful photos on much more affordable gear. I think the big difference is when the light is poor the new gear shines. Cheers, Duade
One that would be interesting for sure is comparing Canon 400mm f5, 6 to the rf100-500mm. I belive many are interesred to see if the rf is worth to upgrafe from their 400eds Best regards Jonathan
Hi Duade, in regards to the EVFs on both these, are they about the same when moving around and/or tracking / panning with a subject? Don't know if you noticed any lag with either when keeping up a subject, like the display itself falls behind real-time. Thank you!
Hi Mitchell, the R62 is the better option I think for its price point, the vehicle tracking and high FPS make it a very nice camera. The A9II is a great camera but at 2k more and 5 years old I do think they will update this camera in 2023 so might be best to wait if you want the Sony. I don't have any issue tracking in the viewfinder when using high FPS. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Thanks for your response , Duade! Really appreciate your input. In the States here at least, used a9 IIs are now below $3,000, just a hundred or so more than a new R6 II. I like the native lens choices better, their 200-600 is much more appealing and cheaper than a 100-500 for the longer work. A stacked 33 mp A9 III would be insane if it does ever happen (:
you can do super35 on sony to take it as APSC and has a 1.5X zoom range, so it become 750mm. so A7R4 is a better camera for super 35, as it has a higher resolution even after Crop
James, yes, the larger MP cameras do offer an advantage of being able to use a crop mode. I would be interested to see how the noise and AF performs when photographing birds. Cheers, Duade
Thanks for this video, again so interring, would be great to have your impressions on R6 and Sigma 150-600, maybe one day I’ll switch on canon 100-500 when budget will fit.
Christian, I understand the sport is a great lens however I have not tried either Sigma lens on the R6/R5 yet. I found the Tamron 150-600 was good but had some focusing issues. Cheers, Duade
I'm a Canon user, but I have to say that I'm fairly disappointed with how overpriced the RF line-up is. They should take some notes from Sony with the 200-600 which seems much sharper, has slightly better aperture and is a great amount cheaper. I could almost get 2 of them for the price of the Canon lens. Wouldn't expect them to really do anything about this for a while since they just attempted to fill that gap. I suppose somewhat similar could be said about Sony cameras, though.
Yes, the RF lenses are very expensive, and I do think they are overpriced. The Sony 200-600 is incredible value and I wonder why Sony has this so cheap. Keep an eye on Jans channel as he will do a thorough review of the Sony compared to the Canon in the future. Cheers, Duade
Great video !!! I am a Canon user, so i would go for the Canon of course. I am still using my 7d mk ii, but i am waiting a loooot for the R7. Hopefully it will be a great camera for wildlife, with better low light performance than the 7d mk ii.
Thanks, Duade! I’m becoming a real fan of your vids. I shoot with the R6 and the 109-500. I’ve posted two questions and you've been nice enough to answer both within 24 hrs. I have no questions this time, so you're off the hook. Just wanted to say thanks, and keep up the great work.
Daniel, it is my pleasure, good luck with the birding and the 100-500, Cheers, Duade
Hi, I'm a german photographer living in Belgium.
I've got the Sony a7iv and I confirm that af struggles with little or dark objects. So I learned not to trust af in these situations.
On the other hand, (human) face detection works fantastic.
It's a pleasure to listen to your videos, very human.
Have a good time on the other side of the planet!
Stefan Wasser u
You increased my confusion😂
I have a 90D with a 100-400 mkii and 1.4x iii.
I was thinking of the following options and leaning towards option 2 until I saw this video.
1) Get a Canon R7 and keep my lenses.
2) Move to a used Sony a9 with a 200-600mm.
My decision here will be based on your answer. I'm putting you on spot but please put an end to my confusion🙏🙏
G'day Ashish, I have not used the A9 so hard to judge. The 200-600 is an incredible lens, If Sony come out with a good APSC body I would get that combo. The R7 is a good option with your combo and might be a bit cheaper. Good luck, Cheers, Duade 👍
I really appreciate your style of presenting. Several years ago I made the switch from Canon to Sony. With 5 back surgeries, the Sony system was noticeably lighter. From my early ar7 to the current Alpha 9, I have accumulated several lenses from 16mm to 500mm mostly zoom. After recently acquiring the Tamron 150-500, I was especially interested in your assessment . While examining the images, I found myself with a bias to the Sony from your very same shots. Interesting. I wonder, in a totally blind test, just how much difference there would actually be. In the end, it’s like any electronic device such as the iPhone compared to the android. I’m an iPhone guy and the times I have tried to switch , I find the android less intuitive. Keep up your fine and interesting work.
Thanks for this, I have the R5 and RD100-500mm and I am very happy with them both.
That is great to hear, a very nice combo. Cheers, Duade
With Sony you can have a 1.4 teleconverter but it had to be paired with the Sony also or you have to manual focus. And this would make you miss too many birds. So it is Sony camera to Sony teleconverter to Sony lens the only way to have auto focus. But this being said I very much enjoy your truthfulness and I thank you for not only showing what works for you as well as what hasn't worked. This for me has made me a watcher of what you have got to say. Well done on this and all what I have seen so far. All the best mate.
G'day Ralph, thanks for the feedback and comment. It is a shame Sony restricts fps of third party lenses. U was very impressed with this lens. Cheers, Duade 👍
Hope that Canon will open the RF-mount like what Sony did with E-mount so that Sigma and Tamron can join the party! And thank you so much for your review.
Quyen, the Tamron 150-500 would be a fantastic option on the RF mount. Cheers, Duade
Sony opened their E mount out of necessity as their mirrorless body development was well ahead of their lens development. Canon have never opened their mounts. Third parties had to reverse-engineer EF lenses and, with fast animal/human eye AF being more complicated to design, it will take more time to reverse engineer autofocus lenses for the RF mount. That is unfortunate.
Hi Duade, great video as always! As a Sony shooter I'm really jealous of these new Canon bodies; they seem great! Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the Sony 200-600mm, since I think that lens really is the main selling point of Sony for semi-on-a-budget wildlife shooters! I now shoot it with a relatively cheap APS-C body and loving it! For me a good way to work around the lack of eye auto focus is to use the smallest autofocus spot with tracking, focus on the bird's eye and then keep focusing (so it starts tracking) while you recompose. That way the bird can even move and you still keep the focus, which gives this method a slight edge over normal back button focusing technique.
Thanks Niels, yes I believe the 200-600 will be fantastic and I cant wait to give it a go. Cheers, Duade Thanks for the tip on focusing.
@@Duade Sony 200-600G is the best performing, best value, best quality zoom IMO and I own the 100-400GM and Canon 100-400L IS II which is optically as good as the 100-500L. Canon 100-500L may be as good optically, but stupidly expensive, only 500 and only f/7.1 and the TC can't be used for full zoom range.
Hi Niels I Shoot with A7RIII with Sonys 200-600 and I would love to try it with an A9II body with these high frame rates. I can see that your comment is almost one year old - I hope you have purchased it all ready :-)
@@Marskfoto hi, that also sounds like a great combo! A9 would indeed be really cool to shoot with, although you do get fewer megapixels then (for me at least relatively, since I use an APS-C body). For now I'm sticking with my current setup since it is really nice considering my budget!
@@nielsaerts9971 I can see on your YT that you get fine videos with your setup - the most important thing is to come out and enjoy the nature.
I was waiting for this video 😊 thanks from Kolkata, India ❤️
I'm glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
@Sayak Ray Canon DSLR user, planning an upgrade to Mirrorless. This is a tricky point, cause I can change my system or else stay with Canon.
@Sayak Ray হুঁ, ঠিকই। But, for cropping in wildlife photography, R6 is not ideal due to its lower megapixel count. So, a new Canon camera with lower price and higher megapixel count than R6 would be great!
Duade, I now have my Canon R6 and the Canon RF 100-500 L. The AF and tracking has helped me get shots of Birds In Flight that I couldn't get with my Canon 6D and Tamron 150-600. A bit pricey, but worth the money. The only problem I have is the lack of Canon's Color Profile while using Adobe Lightroom. Keep making these great videos and your down to earth style.
Gene, great to hear the camera and lens have arrived, glad it is helping increase your keepers. I have no idea why adobe have dropped the ball with the Canon files recently. I can only hope they fix this going forward. Cheers, Duade
The 6D has a decent sensor for the amount of money it costs, and that might be all you need for say landscape photography.
But yeah, autofocusing and speed are not exactly strengths of the 6D. So, for anything involving fast action, you'd want something better.
Hi Duade, the A9-2 can this too. 22:29 time. Look at Menu: Setup 2 - Anti-dust Function - Shutter when Pwr OFF.
Thanks Thomas, I knew there would be things I got wrong, I wonder why it is not on by default. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade If dust is getting on your sensor, then it will get on your shutter if it's down. I would much rather give the sensor a quick clean with a blower than get dust stuck in something that needs to move at 1/8000 s, 12x a second.
Loved the review, nice and thorough Duade!
Thanks Robert, I am glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
Thanks for the honest, real world feedback.
Woody, I appreciate the feedback. Cheers, Duade
Nice video bro... Happy to see the details in depth.. You were talking about focus mode. I use sony a9 and have tried R6.. I am so confident that birds in flight, zone+tracking+AF Priority + option 1 for stick to focus works amazingly well... I have 100.00% in focus result once it locks
While if bird is not moving, flexible spot focus makes the best
Put subject as Animal indeed
A9 Has astounding focussing capability.
However, eye focus on R6 works extremely well. But no comparison with a9 about hit rate
Thanks for sharing your experience, I probably need more time with the Sony AF system to fully appreciate its strengths. Cheers, Duade
I Duade, I liked the comparison thank you. I am also a canon shooter the just want to let you know that the canon also have a recall option. I’ve set my AF point button to Register/Recall and effectively made it a third back button focus option. One for general focus, the second for eye tracking and the third as single point focus. You can try it out, but is is working well for me with the R5. I believe the R6 should have the same option. Thanks again
Thanks for the tip Johan, I appreciate it. Cheers, Duade
Great video mate. RF lenses are expensive but so good. I bit the bullet and got the RF70-200 and made my life so much easier and a real joy to use.
Tim, yes they are eye watering in cost compared to the EF versions. I agree however that the lenses are amazing. Cheers, Duade
Fantastic review, thanks! I am using the Canon R5 and R6 with the RF 100-500. Sold my A9 with the 200-600 (Great glass, excellent camera) because of ease of operation using similar camera bodies. Somtimes, I am missing the precise (60 times per second calculated) AF of my former A9, resulting in more sharp pictures in a serie when tracking. But all in all, R5 and RF 100-500 is a very good, allthough costly combination.
Thanks for sharing your experience Marcel, the Sony is very good once it locks onto the subject, it is very rare to miss focus. The Canon system is very versatile and light making it a great all around kit. Cheers, Duade
Hi , as I commented elsewhere I have now this Tamron 150-500 with Sony a7IV which also has birds eye af. After some use I found they work very well together. Comparing birds eye af with my Canon R6 +RF 100-500mm ; the Canon is a winner ,for example small sparrows have very even color and low contrast and a7IV has difficulties to focus on eye which Canon made much easily. With large birds they are more similar. Sony has a very good IQ and you can make it better your camera by tweaking the buttons. So they are real competitors....
Thanks for sharing Erkki, I was very surprised with the quality of this lens and great to hear you found a similar experience. Cheers, Duade
I think you're right regarding Sony autofocus. I have the A7R4 and I use spot/touch to track when shooting photos of birds. The Zone had trouble giving up the lock on a moving or dynamic background.
Thanks Andrew, I appreciate the comment, Cheers, Duade
Awesome video, if I could make 1 bit of constructive criticism (sorry), to keep 1 camera brand consistently on the left and the other brand on the right to make it easier to review the images…..unless you are asking people to guess which one is which 😂. Appreciate the video and time it took to make.
Thanks for the feedback, I agree, it wasn't until I had finished the video that I noticed the inconsistency, Cheers, Duade
Great video Duade. I have the R6/RF100-500 combo and agree that is an amazing system.
Great to hear, yes it is a very light versatile kit. Cheers, Duade
Hey Duade, I posted a comment a while back about my Sony A7R IV back focusing and not picking up perched birds and how im having to do the pre focus technique. Its interesting you experienced this and showed it in action with the Wagtail on the rock. Thats a pretty easy subject as its a solid rock and it still wasn't picking it up. Its for sure pretty annoying and ive missed a few shots because of it. Its a big problem because the auto focus would otherwise be amazing.
:gday Kurtis, yes, I had a few issues with the zone on rocks etc, I found the spot and tracking to work better. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Just don't use zone or wide unless you are against a clean background. Expand flexible spot or flexible spot S, M, L or centre are the best modes for A9 and A7RIV in general.
As always, a terrific video, Duade. I have had the Canon RF 100-500 backordered for almost two months now here in the States with no estimated delivery date in sight. My R6 sits very lonely on my desk (mount converter on same backorder).
Paul, that must be very frustrating, I was very lucky to get mine. Cheers, Duade
Have owned and used both the C R6 and S A9II extensively for birds in flight and perched birds. The problem with the R6 for me is the 7.1 aperture of the Canon 1-5 at 500mm . Add a 1.4 and you're at f9 . While it is heavier the Sony 200-600 is cheaper and faster than the 1-5 with no extension which I prefer. I have owned a Sony 600mm F4 as well that weighs in at 6.7 pounds. Wasn't the weight that bothered me as much as the sheer size of it.
Steve, thanks for the feedback, if I had a choice as my only kit, I would go with the R6 and Sony 200-600, unfortunately they do not work together :-( The Sony lens is the best value birding lens on the market and I only wish Canon had a version. The aperture of the RF100-500 doesn't bother me too much and the t-stops are very similar meaning they both let in similar light. Of course the Sony gives a bit more reach at 600 but does suffer more from focus breathing at close distance. The 100-500 is by far the more versatile lens as it is so light and the MFD is amazing meaning you can shoot macro etc. Cheers, Duade
Interesting comparison, I don't think I've seen the A9 II and R6 compared before and never realized how close the specs are. I have the Canon 100-500 and it's a great lens but I agree with you it's over priced but that's the price you pay for a native RF mount lens right now.
yes, I was also very surprised with just how well the R6 competes with the A9ii given the cost difference. Yes, the RF100-500 is very expensive, but it is a lovely lens. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade the lens is hard to get in the USA, none of the vendors have it.
A9 is similar price as R6 now. I'd skip A9ii and wait for A9iii.
The is very informativer and frank analysis. The combo on Canon seems to be on my wish list.
Thanks Vincent, it is a great combo but very expensive, Cheers, Duade
Tremendous job Duade! I´m a Nikon Z system user, I valorize time spended doing this review. Soon we will be getting equivalent MILC Z for action, I guess with same performance as R6 and a9. Take care!
Maxi, fingers crossed the upcoming Nikon has the bird eye af. Cheers, Duade
The main difference is that the A9II has a stacked sensor. Now for bird photos is not a big deal if the bird is almost stationary. Different situation if the bird is in flight and you need to follow like in panning. The R6 may have some rolling shutter in panning (the bird is not distorted but the background yes, especially vertical things like trees etc). But the good thing is that on the R6 you have a faster mechanical shutter (12 against 10 of A9II). And in electronic on R6 you can go fully to 20fps (but you cannot regulate the FPS like in Sony, is 20 fixed and silent), where on the Sony you can have different fps settings and as you mention the possibility to insert a fake shutter noise that may be useful.
We hope Canon will insert these in next firmware update. I am both a Sony and Canon user. Canon is a bit slower in give attention to the customers' requests comparing to Sony.
Thanks Filippo, I have used both the Sony stacked sensor and the Canon R5/R6 and I did not have any adverse impacts in the field so far. There is no doubt the stacked sensor has a big advantage, it's just hard to know if it justifies an extra $2000. I admit I don't do a lot of bird in flight so it does not impact me as much. I also hope Canon introduce an audible shutter and the ability to change the FPS. Cheers, Duade
Really nice review. Bird eye-tracking is on my bucket list for a camera and the R6 and Canon 100-500mm might just make that possible. I like the idea of a "dust" shutter in the Canon as well.
Bruce, I wasn't aware but the Sony does have the dust shutter if you turn it on. But yes, the Eye AF really is groundbreaking. Cheers, Duade
The Sony a9II has a dust shutter I believe..
Hi Duade. I am an Australian living in Japan and watch all your videos. Mate, thanks for the many great videos and tutorials you put out. Please know they have really helped my photography in general too, not just for bird photography. This video was really good because the question of getting the Sony set up or the Canon R6 has been on my mind. You have given me a clear answer. Cheers Mate.
Chiemi, my pleasure, the A1 is a big improvement on the A9 in regards to bird eye AF however it is very expensive. The R6 is a great camera for its price. Cheers, Duade
that superb fairy wren shot is jaw dropping.
Thank you, I appreciate the feedback, Cheers, Duade
Just started watching and havent come to the conclusion yet. I am REALLY glad you are trying Sony, just wish you had a native Sony lens. I have a Sony 200-600 I use for my birding with a 1.4TC and it is amazingly fast and accurate with the birbs. Anyway, gonna watch now.
Ok watched the whole thing. Maybe my other lens, the 100-400 GM would have been better match up. It has insanely close focus.
Thanks, I hope to try the 200-600 soon, Cheers, Duade
Thanks, yes I believe the Tamron is actually more in competition with the 100-400 then the 200-600. Cheers, Duade
Thanks Duade, you and Jan have some of the most interesting videos for bird photographers on RUclips currently.
Spot on relevance to questions I have currently as I can no longer lug around big prime lenses and I am trying to decide between Sony and Canon systems. The Tamron looks fantastic value, as you say its a shame it isn't yet in a Canon fit. Next on the wish list (despite the price difference) is Sony 200-600 on the A1 vs 100-500 on the R5 and R6 ! The Sony lens has a slight reach and aperture advantage over the Cnaon 100-500 on the R6 but maybe the R5 extra megapixels over the R6 could close the gap right up ?
John, keep an eye on our channels over the next month, there will be a lot of Sony content and we should hopefully be able to answer your questions. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade . Brilliant, thanks Duade.
Hope you don’t mind me butting in John but re your comment on the extra cropability of the R5 over the R6, I went for the R5 with the 100-500 for that very reason. For example, in the R5’s 1.6 crop mode you get an effective 800mm of reach with around 17.25MP. I did consider one of the the Alphas with the justifiably popular Sony 200-600 but that lens was bigger and heavier than the 100-500 and, crucially for me, I think the 100-500’s closer focussing makes it a better all round nature and wildlife lens for everything from insects to birds in flight. I haven’t been disappointed.
@@alanwood5590 . Thanks for your input Alan. I never thought about the crop mode because it will surely just throw away the pixels around the perimeter of the image and won’t actually give a reach advantage. The R5 has a higher pixel density than the R6 as it has 45 vs 20 mp on the same size sensor. More pixels per duck will effectively provide more reach.
@@wildcat1065 I agree that crop mode throws away pixels - I referred to it mainly as an example of the resolution of the R5 with that degree of cropping. However when and only when I know I’m going to crop that heavily in post anyway (eg for small insects) I will sometimes use crop mode to have the subject larger in the viewfinder at the point of taking as it makes it easier to see what part of the insect is in sharp focus - and yes I do use magnified view too but that sometimes gives too much magnification for a steady view when hand holding. The 800mm of effective reach in crop mode that I mentioned is really talking about the angle of view as in the case of all crop sensor cameras. Oh, and if I know, I’d be cropping that much in post anyway I figure that I may as well save a bit of disk space by using crop mode in camera.
Thats an interesting poll. Megapixels scored pretty low. For me megapixels was my main priority, went all out and got the Sony A7R IV 61MP, its sacrifices a bit on auto focus speed, high ISO performance and FPS but I love it! The concept for me was to have a full frame camera when birds get close but also a 26MP APS-C camera all in 1.
Thanks Curtis, yes that is a great advantage, the R5 is very similar in that you can use crop mode if needed. Cheers, Duade
That's like having a converter!
I love my r6! I really want that 100-500 tho!
G'day, yes it is a great camera and lens. Cheers, Duade 👍
coming from mft, I almost went R6 but the 20mp killed it for me (wanted a bit more than 4mp bump but not too much either). Landed on a Sony a7iii. Still using my Lumix G85 for wildlife and the sony for landscape / people. I'm chilling here for a bit before I pull the trigger on a sony a6xxx with a 600mm zoom (both for $ reasons and to see if Sony releases an A7 body with a crop sensor). OF course, if Canon releases an aps-c R body, I'll know I made the wrong the decision. I do REALLY enjoy the sony's body and the images that come out of it. Only gripe is that Sony's touch screen (for focusing) is comically bad - both Lumix and Canon's are far superior. Menu sucks but only really use it once.
Excellent review. I think either combo is great. Ultimately, i went sony because of the 3rd party lens support in 2021.
Thanks Ryan, if Sony came out with an APSC body with eye tracking at an affordable price I think I would buy that just to access the 200-600. Cheers, Duade
Hi Duade, I owned an A9II and got great sports photography results from it, but you do need to pair it with Sony G/GM glass to get the AF performance as well as the full frame rate. Other reviews have found some issues with AF performance on non-sony lenses so it may explain the AF issues you had. On top of that the Sony 200-600 G is an incredible lens at a bargain price, having 20% more reach than the Canon, a larger max aperture, and excellent optics at half the price of the Canon 100-500. That being said I am moving (back) to Canon. As you say, the Sony A9II is way over priced and cannot offer the same performance as the Canons. The R5 is available significantly cheaper than the A9II, and is pretty much superior in every way. The issue I faced is there is far more excellent 3rd party lenses for Sony (e.g.: the unbelievable Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8), and certain excellent GM lenses (70-200 GM II, 135 GM). Canon RF glass is expensive and seems a bit of a mixed bag. I have decided to take up the expensive Canon lenses for the deciding factor...support. Sony do not back their product, with woeful warranty for such high priced gear. I think it is because they know it isn't as durable as Canon gear and it also doesn't re-sell well. It is hard to sell second hand Sony gear, but when I sold my old Canon kit it sold well.
Thanks Roger, I agree with what you have said, the 200-600 is a fantastic lens that is for sure. The RF100-500 is a very sharp lens but is very expensive and 500 on a full frame is a touch short. Good luck with the Canon kit, Cheers, Duade
Very informative and super sharp images as always Duade one thing I notice in your delivery is that you are speaking directly into camera ( and your viewers ) rather than having a two angle approach that I have seen in earlier videos - just makes for a better connection ? 👍
Thanks for the feedback Glenn, If I am being honest I use the two cameras to hide the cuts where I make mistakes when shooting, I am trying to get more B-roll to hide these edits. Cheers, Duade
Great video Man... I use a Sony A7iii and sigma 100-400, the best AF for my is spot AF.... zone only use for birds in fly.
Thanks Alvaro, I found that the spot works well also. Cheers, Duade
Great comparison, always fun to listen
Thanks Bryce, Cheers, Duade
Very informative comparison, however, I believe you omitted one of the most important comparisons: e-shutter shooting on fast moving subjects (eg. birds in flight). From what I've seen, the R6 exhibits significantly more rolling shutter when using electronic shutter as it has a much slower read-out speed than the sony with it's stacked sensor.
Jale, yes in hindsight I should have mentioned that benefit, I currently use mechanical for fast moving subjects as 12fps is still very fast. I think overall the Sony system excels at BIF and has a distinct advantage over the Canon at this stage. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade I use nothing but Electronic shutter. The staccato lag in the EVF (using mechanical) on the R6 is not fast enough to keep up BIF...im talking really fast stuff here mind, like these peregrines, or swooping red kites were another.....I would not have a camera now without eye EF either...its game changer for bird shooters. www.flickr.com/photos/130542709@N06/
Jan Wegener showed the Tamron 150-500mm on the Sony A1. It's correct the A1 has animal-AF that works for birds. This Tamron lens works even better on the A1 than on the A9 ii (also according to Jan)! Thanks for this video! ;)
Yes, I am sure it does, the A1 is a fantastic camera, Cheers, Duade
Thank you for the excellent comparison review, Duade! I found this from your comment on DPReview, and I'm glad that you pointed me here. I love the comparison of similar lenses from two different systems, and wish that more people would do tests like this. I'm a little disappointed by the sharpness of the Tamron, as I was able to tell the difference in each of your image comparisons. I shouldn't be too surprised given the much lower price. The R6/A9ii was an unexpected comparison, but very interesting. The upcoming Sony A7iv (rumored to be released in September) will be their closest competitor for the R6, though of course it you can't test a camera that does not yet exist. I expect the A7iv to have Sony's latest AF system (though perhaps not a dedicated bird eye AF mode). I'm planning a switch to full-frame from Olympus, and still a little torn on what to buy. The Canon 100-500 is very appealing, but there are many great and affordable shorter primes for Sony that I really want. And I envy Nikon users for the pf telephoto primes--I would love those instead of one of these telephoto zooms, even with the extra cost. But the Z6II can't match the Sony or Canon AF, or the Sony native lens choice. I was hoping that this Tamron would be a lens that I could love . . . anyway, the video was very informative.
Hal, the Rf100-500 is a wonderful light lens that when paired with an R5 gives you a lot of versatility. I will admit that 500mm can be a little short as I am used to 700mm with my prime and extender. If the A7IV has bird eye AF, then it makes the Sony 200-600 combo very attractive as your main birding kit. I think long term at the moment Canon and Sony seem to be leading the way. Canons new RF lenses are pretty amazing in terms of IQ, Weight and are a step up from the EF lenses. Good luck, Cheers, Duade
Thank you so much a lot of work to put it together
it's my pleasure, Cheers, Duade 👍
Canons bird eye AF is a game changer. I'm a Sony user and it's going to take a long time for that to filter down from the A1 to lower priced models, I'm hoping the A7IV will have it and pair up with my 200-600.
Sico, that would be a great combo that is for sure. I think they will give Eye AF to subsequent models. Cheers, Duade
You must be happy to learn that it indeed trickled down.
I am looking at purchasing a camera and visited the photography show at the NEC Birmingham (UK) on Saturday. I found the R6 had a much better feel and grip than the A9 (or any other Sony camera). Consequently the R6 plus 100 - 500 (plus battery grip) is my front runner.
David, yes, the R6 is a very impressive camera for the price, considering it has the flagship 1dx3 sensor and the AF of the R5. The RF100-500 is a little expensive and I do wish it was 600mm but the versatility of the lens is unmatched. Good luck with your decision. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Thanks Duade. I must confess to liking the Sigma 150-600 lens too. I also worry a little about the megapixel size of the R6 in comparison to the R5. May I ask your thoughts on this? The only reason for not going for the D850 is the move to mirrorless and not wanting to have out of date equipment in a short period of time.
Thanks for your time and the grta videos.
Take care, David
Great vlog Duade. Cheers 👍
Thanks Michael, Cheers, Duade 👍
Thank you so much for this. Lovely pics, and your presentation is first-class
Thank you kindly!
Thanks for the video. I have the R6 and 100-500. Just waiting to make more use of it.
Matthew, a great kit, good luck getting out there and enjoying it, Cheers, Duade
Great review. I also like to see the battery percentage on the Canon, I just set the MENU button to always start from the favourite menu and put it there, it is fairly quick.
Yes, that is a good point and I also have it on the menu, I would just prefer an option to change it so its always in the viewfinder. Cheers, Duade
Great tip mate
Great comparison review! Would be nice to get a similar review now that sony actually has Bird eye AF even on their "cheaper" models. Value propositition will be different I believe, since Canon still dont allow for third party lenses.
Brillant detailed comparison !!! Thank you very much :-D
Kozitaju, it is my pleasure, Cheers, Duade
Hi Duade, I was just reviewing this now as am trying to work out whether or not to stick to Canon or go back to Sony. I have been shooting Netball for years and went though A9, A9II and then to Canon R6 with RF 70-200L. Whereas I can see the wildlife advantage of Canon, it didnt translate to a small court sport that has many people moving around together. The A9/A9II AF was far superior in this instance, but am wondering if the new R6II has addressed the Canon issues in this scenario and I see they adopted one of the useful Sony AF modes in this situation (spot AF select and track). I dont know if someone else picked it up earlier, but you missed the fact the A9 has a stacked sensor so in that regard it performs more like the R3 (but was quite a few years ahead of it), hence the greater cost.
Thank you very much for the great comparison. I didn't know the a9 was that close to the r6 and even is worse with animal eye AF. However, the Tamron for RF would be a really good and relatively affordable combo. So I would happily trade my Sigma 150-600 C in for it!
Thanks Ralf, yes, I was also surprised with how well the R6 competes with the Sony. Cheers, Duade
One of the bigger differences is in the battery life but was sadly omitted.
People who are price conscious would likely look at the A9 mark1, as it has much of the basic features in the mark2 and only lacks some of the updated connectivity features which isn't relevant to bird photography..
@@nosignal7156 i did not have any problems with batterylife for birding with my r6. However, another batterypack is always in my backpack, and i barely need it. And if you put a battery grip on the r6 you will not have any problems...
@@ralfseidler7141 At the end of the day it's still misleading to list the specs like this and omit one of the main advantages of one of these systems. That's kind of what I was getting at.
Also, batteries get weaker towards the bottom of its capacity, so having 1 strong battery is better than having 2 weak batteries, although it's worth nothing the batteries have equal capacity, it's just that the R6 consumes nearly twice as just juice per mileage.
I just bought the A9 for $2000 used. Even better value when paired with a 3rd party telephoto.
Frank, congrats, the Sony 200-600 is a wonderful lens for wildlife. Cheers, Duade
Nice review. But I'm wondering why you used a Native Camera & Lens for the Canon, and picked an aftermarket lens for the Sony.
Hi Snapper, Tamron sent me the lens and Camera to try so it wasn't really my choice, just using what I had. Cheers, Duade
You really need the Sony 200-600 f 5.6-6.3 for a fair comparison, but the extra 100mm would be an advantage to Sony, so can see where your going ! I would go for the Cannon system over the Sony despite being a Sony user ! Just for the Eye autofocus alone but also you have the native glass as well quicker AF ! Obviously Sony A1 required but in a different league and price range ! Hardly use my A9 II now having the A1 ! Good work Duade as not everyone will be picking up an A1 !
Keep your eyes on the channel as I should be getting to play with the 200-600 very soon. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Ok will do Duade, love to see your views from the other side/end of the world !
Nice video Duade, good to see the R6 doing so well. A9II is a marginal update of the A9 and not worth it. A9 is often heavily discounted and has equal performing AF so making it the value proposition. Main advantage for the A9 is of course the stacked sensor which allows blackout free EVF. Duade note the R6 sort of cheats as it inserts frames to simulate blackout free shooting in the EVF. Also I hate how Canon only allows 20fps in e-shutter, unlike Sony which gives you 20, 10 and 5fps options. Eye AF is a game changer and can't wait until I get my A1 but will be keen to see how the R3 stacks up and we finally get a stacked sensor from Canon and fwiw the R3 looks sensational. I still have most of my Canon glass, which I still use on my Sony's including the 500 f/4L IS II and waiting for feedback from how it performs on the A1 with animal eye-AF. If the R6 was 30MP I probably would have bought one already just to use my Canon 500 and 300. Good news we can't really go wrong as birders nowadays and competition is going to keep improving the breed. Can't wait to see how the Nikon Z9 performs.
Thanks Whayne, totally agree with your comment, ultimately, I didn't find the stacked sensor offered me a huge advantage over the animal eye AF and if I had a choice I would go with the Canon. I agree the fixed 20fps and no audible shutter are very annoying. The blackout free shooting of the Sony is nice but having used the A9ii, A1, R6 and R5 extensively, the difference is minor and not one that I really even notice when shooting in the moment. Whatever Canon have done my brain seems to be able to ignore the blackout now. I can report that the A1 is a sensational camera and works very well. The Eye AF does not pick-up far-off birds as quick as the Canon however when the A1 locks onto the subject you very rarely get soft or out of focus shots. I also hope the R3 is everything we hope it is. Cheers, Duade
Great video! I’m trying to decide whether to get the canon 100-500 or wait for a Tamrom RF
Phillip, I am unsure how long it will take Tamron to release RF lenses, the RF100-500 is a beautiful lens and you won't be disappointed by it. Cheers, Duade
Yet another wonderful video! Thankyou!
Asheesh, thank you, Cheers, Duade
Hi Duade. Thank you for your time and sharing your knowledge with your video! This may sound too harsh, but do you see that Canon's color science washes away the color saturation seen by the human eye in Nature and Wildlife that some other brands seem to capture more accurately, for example in this case comparing Canon with the Sony and in other cases compared with Nikon photographs?
I am a beginner and seriously impressed with the performance of the R5 with its 100-500 lens. And I like that it has 45MP for cropping and large prints. I shoot with a G9 and Leica 100-400 right now and its a little beast for sure, but I am looking to upgrade in the next year or two to an even more powerful beast for photos and videography.
I am no colour expert to be honest and you have a lot of creative control in post to change a lot of these things. As I have always used Canon and only dabbled with other brands I guess I am used to Canon. The R5 and 100-500 is a beautiful combo. I am excited to see if Canon do release and APSC RF mount this year though. Cheers, Duade
Is this when you load it into lightroom? i think this is because lightroom has no good presets for handling canon files. If you use canon's own raw converter you get the proper files looking how you'd expect them to.
Tope shelf content, I really enjoyed it
Glad to hear it, Cheers, Duade
The only thing I wish Canon did differently on the R5 and R6 is give them the 1DX III style joystick.
I would also love the option of an audible shutter as well. Cheers, Duade
I say this as a Canon user--I think the A9 II has less rolling shutter (using the electronic shutter) than the Canon due to its faster readout speed, but it doesn't really bother me because I use mechanical on the R5 and R6. 20 fps is too much to sort through, haha.
Thanks, I too often shoot in mechanical, I do hope in upcoming bodies we can set the FPS in electronic and have the audible shutter. Cheers, Duade
Another great and useful video!
Would be interesting if you did this comparison with the sony a9ii paired with sony 200-600, and the canon R6mkii with the rf100-500.
Currently debating between these two sets ups. The canon set up seems great, however the sony having a stacked sensor and longer reach with its native lens is very attractive.
Very interesting 🧐.. Simultaneously comparing camera and lenses.
Thanks Adam, I am glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
Good content as always. Tough to go wrong with any of the new camera equipment available today. Sony A9ii shooter for the record
Thanks Chris, the A9ii is an excellent camera and I am sure has captured you many wonderful photos. Cheers, Duade
Excellent review 👍
and thank you, Cheers, Duade
Sill don't know why Sony crippled everything from a decade ago when it comes to the rear screen, my 10+ year old A77 had a fully articulating rear screen as does my 2019 A99ii.
If it wasn't for Covid I'd head down south and put an A7R4A and 200-600 in your hands for a test!
Thanks Johan, yeah, I have no idea why they don't do a flip screen either. Thanks for the offer, I should be trying out the 200-600 very soon. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade The 200-600 is a amazing lens for the price and the only fault I have with it is zoom ring can be easy to turn and to get from 600mm to 500mm would be like 2 degrees so im a lot of the im accidentally at 500mm. Im getting a camo lenscoat which ill overlap on zoom ring to add resistance. I think the sharpness is great but I can't compare to anything else so it would be nice to see your thoughts on it :)
@@Duade In hindsight regarding the high ISO shots and Sony files coming out darker. Sony warns in the manual about shooting 3rd party lenses with Electronic First Curtain Shutter using higher shutter speeds as it can darken images. Seen it in the past when using EFCS, the faster the shutter speed the darker the images get, using full mechanical shutter and the problem is usually gone.
You guys can't even drive around in your cars?
Some of these rules are weird.
@@EmoEmu ?
I have been watching your video the 150 600 tamron and sigma ef mounts the eye tracking is not as good as the native mount . The rf 100-500 is the lens I am getting I have the Canon RP will let you know how the lens works . Was going to get the R6 but going to wait for R7?
Yes, I think the RF100-500 on the R7 is the kit to wait for. Good luck, Cheers, Duade
Great work thanks for bringing us this information 2 great cameras.
Thanks Scott, yes, they are very good cameras and we have come a long way over the years. Cheers, Duade
Great comparison sir
Thanks Jerrin, Cheers, Duade
I was so ready to get Sony system .. now I am thinking about Canon system.
Either system will be very good, it all depends on your needs. If it is purely reach at an affordable price the Sony 200-600 lens is unparalleled. However, if weight and size is more important than the RF100-500 is the answer. Good luck with whichever kit you get. Cheers, Duade
Great Video, Very Helpful and Informative, Many thanks for sharin. 🇬🇧
Sharin, my pleasure, Cheers, Duade
Will the Tamron 150-500 for Canon come out before my back ordered 100-500 is delivered by Canon? Anxiously waiting. Great video!
Richard, no I don't think we will see a Tamron lens for the Canon anytime soon, I believe they have to reverse engineer the RF mount first. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Such a shame Canon has locked down their mount, it's urgently needs cheaper third party glass, the 100-500L pricing IMO is absurd. You can currently get the faster, longer FL Sony 200-600G for $2K on discount and easily found for $2600 regularly and it's IQ with the 1.4x TC is excellent. Tamron pricing in Australia is too high and weight is not much lighter than the Sony. I would only pay Canon's pricing if it were a 100-500 f/4-5.6L IS and the TC could be used at all FL lengths. I would buy the Tamron for Canon if it were available however.
@@minusinfinity6974 Whayne, I agree that the RF100-500 is expensive in comparison to the Sony 200-600 and it would be nice to have an affordable 600mm on the RF mount. Cheers, Duade
Oh cool this is the one I've been waiting for 🙂
Colm, great to hear, I hope you enjoyed it. Cheers, Duade
Really loved this comparison. 🙏
Thanks Vinayak, I am glad you enjoyed it, Cheers, Duade
At first I thought this was an odd matchup, but given they share a similar price I suppose it's reasonable to compare the two. To me it looked like the Canon combo took noticeably sharper images, but the Sony had better subject separation/bokeh, my guess is this comes down to that awesome Canon lens.
Thanks Taylor, yes, I didn't have access to the Sony 200-600 so this was what I had available. Cheers, Duade
A really fair and neutral comparison. Well done on this video. I switched from Sony to Canon because of the better user interface and autofocus and I love the RF100-500 for its versatility and great image quality. I would even choose it over a big prime lense because it is so small and nimble.
Thanks Aaron, yes, the size and weight of the Canon system is incredible and makes it easy to travel and walk around. Cheers, Duade
One important difference between the a9ii and the r6: that is not mention in the comparisson in the beginning: stacked sensor
Thank you, yes you are right the stacked sensor is an advantage, I do mention it in the video 1:16 but I didn't go into too much detail. Cheers, Duade
Very useful and impartial review.
Thank you, Cheers, Duade
You should try a native lens with Sony, focusing and image IQ are better than 3rd party lenses and might change your opinion 😉
I use a Sony a6400 with bird eye detection and mainly the 70-350 & 200-600mm and they are super sharp and quick to focus on moving birds. Tried a sigma lens and it just couldn't focus quick enough like the Sony lenses do for a bird thats moving around.
Thanks Adrian, yes, the Sony 200-600 is a wonderful lens and works well on the Sony bodies, be sure to keep an eye on Jans channel as he will be reviewing the Tamron and Sony lenses to compare. Cheers, Duade
A6400 doesn't even have bird eye detection, what are you smoking ?
@@ahmonon4352 haha don't get your knickers in a twist, a6400 has "animal eye detection" which will pick up on birds eyes if you have them large enough in the frame which gets super sharp pictures once that little green box covers the eye. No chance with tracking and eye detection though.
Appreciate the efforts and kudos to your knowledge and Photography quality... I wish you have compared with native lens (200-600) than a 3rd party one.
Munish, yes that would have been ideal however I did not have access to the 200-600 unfortunately. It is a wonderful lens. Cheers, Duade
Another interesting video. Hopefully Tamron and Sigma can figure out the Rf mount in time.
Thanks Lachlan, yes, I hope so too. Cheers, Duade
I couldn't agree with you more on this one, Duade. The dilemma of either shooting with a better value for money R6 over the A9 II (body) vs Tamron 150-600mm over the RF 100-500mm (lens) is no different to the issue I am faced with, namely my R5 over the A1 vs the Sony FE 200-600mm over the RF 100-500mm. And you know how strongly I feel against the RF 100-500mm. LOL. I also agree with you on the silent electronic shutter on the Canon. The only reason why I am not really using it is when it shoots silent I just can't get used to it, it makes me feel like I am detached from the camera whereby I don't feel like it is working. I really hope Canon can fix it with a firmware update. On a different note, I just found out Jan managed to get his hands on an A1/FE 200-600mm combo to test. This is the huge one for me as I've already told him I would be love to get his take on comparing that to the R5/RF 100-500mm combo. This could dictate what I am going to do next with my situation as I am still adapting my Sigma 150-600mm which is far from ideal. But, for you though, I think you did the right thing. You obviously love your R6 and if you are sticking with it long term, there is just no other option but to get the RF 100-500mm. That applies to me too if I so decide to stick with the R5 long term.
Thanks Alex, yes, it is a real dilemma as it sounds like the 200-600 is the perfect birding lens however it is only 100mm extra reach and it comes at the cost of size/weight/MFD but is a lot more affordable. I am hoping to catch up with Jan to try out the 200-600 for myself so hopefully I can give my thoughts on it. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade That would be great to get both of your opinions. What I would like to know from you guys is bottom line, budget aside, would you rather have the A1/FE 200-600mm or the R5/RF 100-500mm. So, it is a bit more than just the lens alone, you will have to weigh up on the difference between the R5 and the A1 as well. I already know you love the R5 when you swapped with Jan, so it will be interesting to see how you feel about the A1.
@@Rascallucci Gday Alex, I suspect if it was my only lens I would go with the Sony for the extra reach, however as I already have a prime the lighter and wider 100-500 makes more sense. Hopefully after some testing I will have a better idea. I believe Jan has tested them a lot more so he should release some good reviews. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade I just checked the prices, the RF 100-500mm has in fact gone up!! Is that even possible? LOL. Over here in HK, it is now more than double of the FE 200-600mm. RF 100-500mm - HK$26,580 = A$4,558. FE 200-600mm - HK$12,850 = A$2,204. Is beyond ridiculous now. LOL.
Ozzie the owl looks like he had a rough weekend.
Lol he sure has, Cheers, Duade
If you trick to a 1 pony system you get that system following, you as a canon shooter had said following, I value and have watched most of your content with admiration as you figured out above, picture this
Nikon now Sony
Sure maybe canon some day
None will let you down
It’s a brilliant pass time
In other words you know Sony & Nikon exist
Thanks Peter, we are very lucky to have so many options and with each camera brand innovating it only benefits us all. Cheers, Duade
Hey Duade, coming back to this video again since it’s the only real R6 a9 comparo on the RUclips and it’s so good haha. Anyways, talking about the EVFs again, and disregarding the blackout free aspect of the a9, are the two EVFs same resolution in actual use ? Reason I ask is I don’t have any experience handling an a9 but do have some with an R6 and a7iii in a local store. And the r6 looked great, smooth and sharp and very life like. The a7iii was rather horrid I thought. Harsh colors and contrast, aliasing, and quite jittery, and also a notable jitter and drop in res when you hit the af on button and it actually starts focusing. Obviously the a9ii should be better than that, but how much better? Haha. I guess same would go for the a7iv you’re using now, which has same res and refresh specs as the a9 ii. Thank you, Duade! I’m just hesitant about the jitters and res drops when focusing on these Sony cameras after seeing what the a7 iii looked like. Thanks!
Good comparison. To be fair, the Sony camera with a Sony lens would be even more expensive than the all-Canon option. Great images in either case.
Thanks Kevin, I hope to try out the Sony 200-600 soon. Cheers, Duade
Can you do a video of the Tamron 150-500 vs. the Sigma 150-600
G'day Joseph, the Tamron 150-500 is the superior lens but is only available for Sony at the moment. It is very sharp and the AF is excellent. The Sigma is also a great lens but the AF is not quite as good. Cheers, Duade
Nice bird images Duade. I just wanna know when wildlife photography became so expensive? I currently use a Nikon D7500 (£1,000 new in UK) & the Sigma 150-600mm C lens + 1.4 TC (£850 new in UK). So for around $2,000 you have a perfectly good wildlife photography set-up (not so good for video though!) and of course the FPS with electronic shutter is very useful in some situations on mirrorless cameras. I also have the Tamron 18-400mm for my Nikon but image quality is only fair and I have to syop down to F8 to get a sharper imae, the V.C is not very effective & sometimes you get that viewfinder judder too! One plus point is that you can focus as close as 45cm throughout the zoom range which has been good for insect photography :-)
Steve, I agree the Canon Mirrorless system is very expensive, I think the R6 is probably the best value for money at the moment but the L series glass is eye watering in price. I suspect Canon is moving towards high margin low sales volume as the low end gear is being overtaken by phones etc. I agree that you can still take wonderful photos on much more affordable gear. I think the big difference is when the light is poor the new gear shines. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade That's what I figured. Keep up the good work :-)
Excellent Video !!
Thank you, Cheers, Duade
One that would be interesting for sure is comparing Canon 400mm f5, 6 to the rf100-500mm. I belive many are interesred to see if the rf is worth to upgrafe from their 400eds
Best regards Jonathan
Jonathan, I will look at doing that review in the future, Cheers, Duade
100th Like ... Love from India 🔥
Thanks Shashank, I appreciate it, Cheers, Duade
Hi Duade, in regards to the EVFs on both these, are they about the same when moving around and/or tracking / panning with a subject? Don't know if you noticed any lag with either when keeping up a subject, like the display itself falls behind real-time. Thank you!
Hi Mitchell, the R62 is the better option I think for its price point, the vehicle tracking and high FPS make it a very nice camera. The A9II is a great camera but at 2k more and 5 years old I do think they will update this camera in 2023 so might be best to wait if you want the Sony. I don't have any issue tracking in the viewfinder when using high FPS. Cheers, Duade
@@Duade Thanks for your response , Duade! Really appreciate your input. In the States here at least, used a9 IIs are now below $3,000, just a hundred or so more than a new R6 II. I like the native lens choices better, their 200-600 is much more appealing and cheaper than a 100-500 for the longer work. A stacked 33 mp A9 III would be insane if it does ever happen (:
you can do super35 on sony to take it as APSC and has a 1.5X zoom range, so it become 750mm. so A7R4 is a better camera for super 35, as it has a higher resolution even after Crop
James, yes, the larger MP cameras do offer an advantage of being able to use a crop mode. I would be interested to see how the noise and AF performs when photographing birds. Cheers, Duade
Thanks for this video, again so interring, would be great to have your impressions on R6 and Sigma 150-600, maybe one day I’ll switch on canon 100-500 when budget will fit.
This is the setup I shoot and I absolutely LOVE it. The lens is definitely the limiting factor, but it is an incredibly capable setup
Christian, I understand the sport is a great lens however I have not tried either Sigma lens on the R6/R5 yet. I found the Tamron 150-600 was good but had some focusing issues. Cheers, Duade
I'm a Canon user, but I have to say that I'm fairly disappointed with how overpriced the RF line-up is. They should take some notes from Sony with the 200-600 which seems much sharper, has slightly better aperture and is a great amount cheaper. I could almost get 2 of them for the price of the Canon lens. Wouldn't expect them to really do anything about this for a while since they just attempted to fill that gap. I suppose somewhat similar could be said about Sony cameras, though.
Yes, the RF lenses are very expensive, and I do think they are overpriced. The Sony 200-600 is incredible value and I wonder why Sony has this so cheap. Keep an eye on Jans channel as he will do a thorough review of the Sony compared to the Canon in the future. Cheers, Duade
Great video !!! I am a Canon user, so i would go for the Canon of course. I am still using my 7d mk ii, but i am waiting a loooot for the R7. Hopefully it will be a great camera for wildlife, with better low light performance than the 7d mk ii.
Bjørn-Einar, I too hope the R7 is everything we all hope, I have no doubt the camera will be a huge jump from the 7D2. Cheers, Duade
Can't believe the RF 100-500 costs almost 3X as much.
Yep, and I think they recently increased the price!!!
@@Duade Recently bought one and it's admittedly far better than I expected it to be, but still, £2979...