Sony fans, welcome to the party! You guys will love it. f2 is simply amazing for this lens. A full stop of light cannot be overstated. I've used the Canon one for years now, and it was a true unicorn. But now I guess there are 2 unicorns. It's hard to use a 24-70 f2.8 after using a 28-70 f2.
Appreciate the effort put into this. I'm a Canon RF 28-70 f/2 owner, so unless this Sony was mind blowingly better than the Canon (it's not), I would never switch systems for it. The fact that Sony felt the need to copy Canon's lens is a testament to how good the RF 28-70 is - imitation really is the sincerest form of flattery.
Yup bout same weight as 24-70mm RF 2.8 , for videowork weight matters especially handheld / on gimbal. Some of my friends already talking to switch just because of their weight , as they already fall in love with how useful 28-70mm F2. Same price , lighter, faster , smaller, modern (linear AF) , also tad sharper. One of the things because of lots of 3rd party lenses option.
I think I like the Canon files better, for two reasons. First, I like the handling of highlights from the Canon lens better, though I can't quite put my finger on why that is -- maybe they have a little bit more bloom, resulting in a more diffuse look? Second, I think the bokeh on the Canon lens is a little bit smoother, noticeable, for example, on the specular highlights in the photos at 7:21. That may just be because the Canon lens is a bit softer overall, or because that highlight bloom helps smooth things out. Both are excellent though. Thanks for the comparison!
The sheer benefit of a much much smaller and lighter version than the Canon is huge, especially the engineering it took to achieve such a feet. (Especially when canon and Nikon were saying Sony would not be able to make specific lenses due to the small e mount.)
@@robbie154 Impossible, that for a just-announced lens (only in the hands of a few select RUclipsrs), there would be already a Lightroom / ACR profile available and deployed in last month's Adobe updates? Therefore I assume, that zero corrections (for vignetting, distortion) took place. The Canon lens is older and has higher chances of having a lens profile for automatic corrections (but even there, the strong vignetting suggests otherwise). Other quality traits like bokeh cleanness (no color fringes there) couldn't be 'corrected' anyway automatically, no lens profile does specify such.
@@tubularificationed thats interesting, when i asked Sony representatives if it was ok to compare this lens to the Canon version they gave me the green light, and nothing like that was mentioned
Was waiting all week to see another photoshoot and video I have to say I love the canon better because of the toning settings sets the mood better can’t wait to see the next video the photos were beautiful
I prefer Canon look. Its more "natural" and pleasing to my eyes at least. Sony's background looks more busy and "disturbing". For example at 7:34 if you look fallen leaves on the ground or tree branches in the background.. Those look smoother in Canon in my opinion. Same thing with those flowers / plants at 8:48. Behind her back. Canon is definitely smoother while Sony has sort of onion ring like "bokeh". Looks disturbing. Sony looks also more flat when Canon has more of that 3D pop which I happen to like. Maybe it is in contrast but that is how I see it.
Extremely well put together comparison. I moved to Sony from Canon years ago and kept my Canon lenses EF-L lenses because Sony’s earlier lenses were not as good as my Canon in my opinion. That all changed when Sony’s new generation of lenses came out. I purchased my first GM lens, the 35mm 1.4 GM and it easily beat my Canon lens in sharpness. The Sony GM 24-70 2.8 II, was breathtaking in its sharpness, bokeh and color. This was far superior to my adapted Canon EF 24-70 2.8 II L lens. I sold all my Canon lenses and switched to Sony. And yes I can tell both the sharpness and color differences between the two systems. While I prefer the warmer colors of Canon lenses, the clarity and sharpness of Sony lenses feels like fine dust has been wiped off the pictures taken with Canon lenses. The Sigma FE lenses for Sony actually have similarly warm colors to Canon. I remember being able to distinguish the difference before I sold it, due to the new Sony GM 24-70 2.8 II Lens purchase. So, I can edit the RAW files to get warmer colors, as a neutral palette is a better starting point. At this moment, I am happy with neutral real world colors.
The green fabric is a giveaway for me…. Canon always has more yellow in greens than usual..Sony’s colors look more real to me but Canon’s is more pleasing.. (r5 user) I am more amazed of how Sony achieved this kind of lens with that mount also making it lighter and smaller is beyond me!! Great vid great comparison very nice photos !!
I can't really see any noticeable differences and I doubt any client would be able to tell (or care) either. The Sony wins for it's smaller and lighter size but people will go for the lens of the system they are invested in.
The Canon RF 28-70 f2 has really been one of my favorite lenses since its release. I’m so happy that Sony made this lens and the image quality between the two look nearly identical!
Yay! I picked the Sony correctly - going by pixel peeping long enough at photos taken with the 50mm f/1.2 GM. I recognized the incredibly contrast and resolution of the finer details in the hair.
I liked some from Sony and some from Canon more. For example the first looked a bit better on Canon and the second definitely from Sony. Just nuances which you do not see when not compared side by side and all of them can be edited to look the same in the end or the way you like it. So no need to switch systems here. Just take which system you are in or take the cheapest/lightest.
I think all sony images are more sharp and more contrasty after processing. I noticed that myself shooting with both canon and sony. For me processing sony images is usually easier and more of them in focus, no blur etc - basically less flaw in sony images then canon. That's why lately I'm shooting practically exclusively with sony.
That's not what I saw at all. I thought the Canon looked a tad sharper until I really looked close (on a 5K monitor) and then the Sony looked maybe a tad sharper. It's so close.
yes, Irene, at 13:24 most people wouldn't know, I do, simply because I shoot MF and LF cameras where this "micro-contrast" exists, and is definable to anyone, esp. the sharpness and detail on hair strands, or other micro details, I look for it, as this is a symptom of high image quality, and the "mf and LF look" which I aspire to. NB: the term I used, Micro-contrast, is the technical name for what is said in this discussion you are having at 13:24; describing in laypersons terms the resolution of details, and colour science; this science of micro contrast, is, in my opinion, the sensors' ability to resolve detail, and for a small pixel to capture data, 45MP+ (150MP in the case of Phase One IQ4), this data is what matters, especially when hundreds of mega pixels are merged (digitally crocheted together) this nuance is preserved, and accentuated, as one pixel is small enough to scale correctly to this detail, aka is in the same magnification, so can record it, and its part of the image, not just a zone 0 or 10 (well outside the dynamic range), which we 'see' as noise, flare, or blank area with no distinguishable details.
At minute 3.37 it looks to me that the focus with the Canon lens is just a bit more towards the tip of the nose. You can see some details showing up, while the Sony lacks that.
What an odd way to say that the Canon missed critical focus of the eyes while the Sony succeeded. Her eyelashes are rendered perfectly in the Sony, while the the eyelashes (because they missed critical focus) are a little "muddy" in the Canon
I realized Canon's apparent front-focusing indirectly, in the scene at 8:22. Canon's hair is much blurrier (further away from the focus) than Sony's. Sony's hair is so sharp that the face might even have been back-focused a little? The faces are similarly sharp, maybe both are still within the acceptable depth of field zone. Canon's luck is, that this additional hair blur makes the overall portrait appear more lovely and dreamy in this example. But this shouldn't be an excuse for front-focusing 🙂
I can see the differences right away. The tonal range is wider, colors are warmer on shots made with Canon. Canon wins with art. Sony is the winner in sharpness. My heart belongs to Canon. I love your artworks ❤
Interesting video. I have to say, that on the whole, I found myself preferring the Sony images. That said, I agree with the pro Canon evaluation of the two that you processed independently. Of course, as you stated, the differences were due to editing and the Canon image was a little brighter in its finished form, which is a definite positive trigger for the human eye. I believe there have been comparative studies which bear this out--take any two identical images and lift one ever so slightly without compromising range or quality, and that will almost always garner the most likes. One other thing I did notice in your comparison images was that the transitional areas between bright and dark seemed slightly better rendered on the Sony files. The Canon seemed almost to blow out highlights in hair for instance whereas those areas were better preserved on the Sony images. This is interesting to me as I do not shoot Sony. I shoot both Canon and Olympus. No matter, all the photos were beautiful examples of what can be achieved with the two high end lenses, good subject matter and talent. Thank you.
I switched to Sony from Canon for the cheaper lens alternatives (Tamron, Sigma), but considering these two lenses are almost the same price, I always loved Canon's warmer, brighter colors, which this 28-70 comparison demonstrates. But for Sony fans, this is a nice addition, which I still can't afford lol
Thank you to make this very good side by side comparison video. I have both Canon 5D III and Sony 7M4 cameras. Personally, I prefer the color, contract and details of Canon photos, but perfer the smaller size and lighter weight of Sony camera. It makes me to choose Sony more frequently than Canon for most of time while traveling. BTW, your editing skill is great! It's like a master chef to make 3 star Michelin meals from raw ingredients. I also wonder whether you'd like to share the steps and tips of how you edit photos.
The differences are there also because of the difference in the two sensors, not just the lenses! Sony A7R5's 61mp sensor renders noticeably different than the Canon R5's sensor!
When enlarged by pixel unit, I think Sony looks a little clearer because of the camera pixels. I think it's hard to tell which lens has better resolution. Then Sony wins in terms of size and weight. I'm also looking forward to the next Canon lens.
I did jump from Canon to the Sony, light weight, small size is so comfortable to work with, different color corection/grading, you need to know how to do it, especially after a few years of work with canon, i can easly match colors that no one can tell which is which
Thanks for the comparison. Very interesting. From the get go, I always think that Sony's color is a bit cooler and more green and Canon a bit more warm. To each his own, they both are great lens.
My takeaway from this is that the Sony is a more clinically perfect lens. It is sharper, better edge to edge performance, etc ...but... The Canon just dominates in overall look/feel. It renders nicer, it has more pleasing colors, more pleasing tones, superior bokeh, better contrast, etc. imo this is the perfect example as to why sharpness and clinical performance isn't important for most photographers.
Miałem lustrzankę Canona, sprzedałem ją i kupiłem A7III, ale z powodu tego o czym piszesz wróciłem do Canona (R8). Jedyne, co mnie boli, to fakt, że Canon nadal nie odblokowuje bagnetu dla obiektywów Sigma innych firm.
They render exactly the same if you don't pixel peep. The differences in color are due to the camera not the lens. Put this Sony lens on adapter on a Nikon body and you'll get beautiful colors. The only real difference in image quality is that Sony has enormous amount if veiling glare, which means shooting against the light will usually look washed out.
I wonder if the color temp differences you're seeing are a function not just of the glass, but of the camera sensors? Sonys have a bit of a rep for going a bit flat and greenish on the skin tones (I say this as a Sony Shooter). I've not shot Canon so I can't say for certain. Would be great if they could be tested on the same sensor, though I know that's currently impossible.
Good job. Thanks for this comparison video. You have earned a new subscriber. 08:14 I prefer the canon for its smooth background blur, which is less distracting. For video, sony bodies have that movie magic
Great review, thank you. In general I find the zoomlens too big and heavy on top of this an f2.0 is mighty expensive. Now as a senior with limited budget, I have purchased Chinese lenses with f0.9 to f1.4 Amazing lenses, back to creativity ❤
the cannon is warmer, but interestingly the Sony deals better with the sun highlight's, making them highlights, not just flare, as in the Cannon shot, it looks too flare like (my taste), and I shoot buildings and cars, etc. so deal frequently with flaring lights, and I use MF, 120 Kodak Gold 200 in hasselblad 6x6, and in LF 6x12 with the same film stock, Always with lens hoods if the sun is close, and even add ND [64 {1.8 stops}] to cut sky exposure, so I can get the shot.
Canon lens capture more light as usual... But if you need something lighter then sony is the way to go... There u are.. Leave a like if that was helpful
This is as much about the cameras and the file editing as it is the lenses. There is no choosing between these two lenses… you buy the one for the system you have unless you are someone who sells off an entire kit (and years of experience with that kit) just to change to a lens that is lighter than its only other equivalent.
For video, you should have adjusted the camera settings to achieve the "look" you wanted for each camera. Using the "same settings" on two different camera bodies with two different sensors with two different lenses is not how one would use these camera in real world-use. All you proved was that the Sony is superior in low light conditions (not factoring the lens flare, of course) compared to the Canon
It would be interesting to see the result of a comparison with auto modes enabled, incl WBauto. I also, for example, abandoned the C1 because of its strange handling of color and the lack of profiles for many cameras. I don’t know how it works there now, but I’m sure that for those who process in Lightroom, the results may be completely different and for them this comparison will not be representative.
I love this video Irene!! I think the conclusion I came to was that Canon is good at the things that their users generally like about Canon (eg. warmth of colours & dreaminess) and Sony is good at what Sony shooters generally like about them (eg. sharpness & compactness) In the end, I'm a big Canon girlie and I'll probably always be biased towards their warm colours🥰
It looks like Canon handles bright and highlight areas much better than Sony. 07:23 - Sony looks not pleasant compared to Canon, but maybe it's just the edit issue?
Excellent comparison! … And Canon is better in each and every picture compared to Sony. Canon's photos look dreamy compared to Sony. But the lens is gigantic!!!
Irene, The Canon lens is heavy because it is designed to correct optical flaws with glass whereas the Sony lens does so with a combination of glass and in camera post processing. This is the reason why the Sony lens is sharper with less weight. The combination of glass and in camera post processing is a sort of initial post processing of the raw image before we apply our personal workflow to the image. The lack of the additional glass in the Sony lens is the reason it has less contrast than the Canon lens that has that extra glass that reduces chromatic aberration and astigmatism. Canon and Sony have slightly different color science options to. You can’t really say that one is better than the other but the Canon is warmer and the Sony emphasizes the Greens a bit more. It’s a subtle difference but recognizable by those of us who shoot both Canon and Sony bodies with adapted Canon EF-L lenses. Hope this helps you better understand what is happening with the two lens designs and how they achieve results that are similar and while different they are both very good and compelling. FYI the application of AI to the Canon raw images will sharpen and bring out similar levels of detail.
@@DoubleTheDom, The lens cannot correct itself for all of the different camera bodies with different sensors. However, the camera can correct the lens deficiencies via firmware that understands the lens design and its deficiencies by adjusting the raw file data just as is done to raw file data in PS or any other raw image processing.
SMH ! OMG ! Sony can’t backlit situations that well, too much ghosting reported , at this high price that’s totally unacceptable Sony ! Canon is still the King of the 28-70 f2 !
Are you sure you didn't mix up the video footage? Just checking. Maybe you should have asked chatgpt to fix the Sony images to look the same as the Canon images and then give the parameters.
It seems to me that the Sony is a little better overall. The combos I will say the Canon is slightly better. No all of us are as good as Irene with the editing, and she even mention that having the Canon MAY have help her to set direction. So If I have to select one I will take the Canon. In reality I shoot Nikon so I will not be shooting either 🤣
Great comparison. Sony is sharper but flatter with less 3D pop. Canon raw colors more pleasing to my eyes. Canon images likely faster to edit, while Sony's will take longer to tweak the colors. But after the editing both images side by side look stunning. weight can be a big deal for event photographers +1 for the Sony. great job 👏
Chat GPT seems like has all the answers! I do totally agree too I didn't realise it was that good. Excellent work love the light you worked with and good processing comparisons. That was a significant weight difference I liked how you showed them on scales. Considering you use Canon you can save money no need to pay for the gym🤣. All you need now is upgrade to the R1 another kilo keep you toned and looking good. Cheers keep up the great work enjoyed..
I think Canon color is a bit too warm for my liking. It has a overprocess look, it will look better to have color temperature down a touch. Sony is ever slightly too cool and neutral.
@@OneTap__ you mean nevermind? And you’d be actually surprised how Canon processes CR3 RAW compared to Sony’s ARW RAW, which I think it might be a little too much for you to comprehend
@@Jekoza My friend, I´m an engineer so... Lets end here. I can read that you are a miles away to have this kind of discussion. 1st learn how RAW is processes then we can talk. Bye miss.
We’re renting equipment for my friends surprise engagement. We were recommended a canon r6 and the 28-70 lens, will this work if we’re hiding shooting from afar?
how far is "afar?" it's an amazing lens but the weight will shock you the first time. My first time using it was for a 4-hour event (as my only lens) and it was brutal. I did shoot for 4 hours straight. My arm wanted to drop off a couple hours later. However, now I don't even really notice it and it is the defacto lens on my camera if I only carry 1 body (when using 2, I have the 85 1.2 on the other one)). And it also is my travel lens.
weird combination as r6 is more about entry or medium level whereas the 28-70f2 is master level, should be at least r5+28-70, but i think with the right data setup for the R6, it would be more than enough for the job. maybe try and take shots at similar condition until you are satisfy before the event.
I wonder why the videos of this new Sony 28-70 lens show weird jerky motions in recordings. Maybe Sony needs a firmware update for their ibis & this lens?
Было бы только что фотографировать, а чем без разницы. Многие по Leica прутся, другие по Haselblad упадают. На что денег хватает то и покупают все. Таких красоточек если фотографировать то без разницы чем, они и так хорошо получаются на фото. Хотя я давно уже заметил что на Canon объём у картинки получается более выразительный чем у остальных. Возможно это от какого то несовершенства оптики, как советские объективы до сих пор ценятся из за именно их несовершенства конструкции, а у Sony оптика какая то уж слишком клинически вывереная, сухая.
Why I went from Canon to Sony and back to Canon... The rendering with Canon is more pleasant(dept), Sony more digital flat. With video it looks like Sony Is faces exposure and canon the hole area exposed.
![40 of the Wildest & Weirdest Cameras/Lenses! [Flint's Fine Photographica Auction Nov 21st 2024]](/img/1.gif)
Sony fans, welcome to the party! You guys will love it. f2 is simply amazing for this lens. A full stop of light cannot be overstated. I've used the Canon one for years now, and it was a true unicorn. But now I guess there are 2 unicorns. It's hard to use a 24-70 f2.8 after using a 28-70 f2.
Appreciate the effort put into this. I'm a Canon RF 28-70 f/2 owner, so unless this Sony was mind blowingly better than the Canon (it's not), I would never switch systems for it. The fact that Sony felt the need to copy Canon's lens is a testament to how good the RF 28-70 is - imitation really is the sincerest form of flattery.
No normal person is going to switch brands because of 1 lense. Some youtubers might but they will keep both set ups lol
Yup bout same weight as 24-70mm RF 2.8 , for videowork weight matters especially handheld / on gimbal.
Some of my friends already talking to switch just because of their weight , as they already fall in love with how useful 28-70mm F2.
Same price , lighter, faster , smaller, modern (linear AF) , also tad sharper.
One of the things because of lots of 3rd party lenses option.
@@gregorybealeA lot of photographers that really wanted the Canon lens for the past 6 years made the switch
I think I like the Canon files better, for two reasons. First, I like the handling of highlights from the Canon lens better, though I can't quite put my finger on why that is -- maybe they have a little bit more bloom, resulting in a more diffuse look? Second, I think the bokeh on the Canon lens is a little bit smoother, noticeable, for example, on the specular highlights in the photos at 7:21. That may just be because the Canon lens is a bit softer overall, or because that highlight bloom helps smooth things out. Both are excellent though. Thanks for the comparison!
It was the most successful comparison I've ever watched. I love how you go into detail and leave no question marks.
The sheer benefit of a much much smaller and lighter version than the Canon is huge, especially the engineering it took to achieve such a feet. (Especially when canon and Nikon were saying Sony would not be able to make specific lenses due to the small e mount.)
That's because the sony is digitally corrected. You need profile corrections for the sony to look normal.
@ I can’t say I’ve ever seen such a drastic difference to my image once I apply corrections in post.
@@robbie154 Impossible, that for a just-announced lens (only in the hands of a few select RUclipsrs), there would be already a Lightroom / ACR profile available and deployed in last month's Adobe updates?
Therefore I assume, that zero corrections (for vignetting, distortion) took place. The Canon lens is older and has higher chances of having a lens profile for automatic corrections (but even there, the strong vignetting suggests otherwise).
Other quality traits like bokeh cleanness (no color fringes there) couldn't be 'corrected' anyway automatically, no lens profile does specify such.
I agree! The fact that Sony is so light and small is pretty crazy!
@@tubularificationed thats interesting, when i asked Sony representatives if it was ok to compare this lens to the Canon version they gave me the green light, and nothing like that was mentioned
Was waiting all week to see another photoshoot and video I have to say I love the canon better because of the toning settings sets the mood better can’t wait to see the next video the photos were beautiful
I prefer Canon look. Its more "natural" and pleasing to my eyes at least. Sony's background looks more busy and "disturbing". For example at 7:34 if you look fallen leaves on the ground or tree branches in the background.. Those look smoother in Canon in my opinion. Same thing with those flowers / plants at 8:48. Behind her back. Canon is definitely smoother while Sony has sort of onion ring like "bokeh". Looks disturbing.
Sony looks also more flat when Canon has more of that 3D pop which I happen to like. Maybe it is in contrast but that is how I see it.
Extremely well put together comparison.
I moved to Sony from Canon years ago and kept my Canon lenses EF-L lenses because Sony’s earlier lenses were not as good as my Canon in my opinion.
That all changed when Sony’s new generation of lenses came out. I purchased my first GM lens, the 35mm 1.4 GM and it easily beat my Canon lens in sharpness.
The Sony GM 24-70 2.8 II, was breathtaking in its sharpness, bokeh and color. This was far superior to my adapted Canon EF 24-70 2.8 II L lens.
I sold all my Canon lenses and switched to Sony.
And yes I can tell both the sharpness and color differences between the two systems. While I prefer the warmer colors of Canon lenses, the clarity and sharpness of Sony lenses feels like fine dust has been wiped off the pictures taken with Canon lenses.
The Sigma FE lenses for Sony actually have similarly warm colors to Canon. I remember being able to distinguish the difference before I sold it, due to the new Sony GM 24-70 2.8 II Lens purchase.
So, I can edit the RAW files to get warmer colors, as a neutral palette is a better starting point.
At this moment, I am happy with neutral real world colors.
The green fabric is a giveaway for me….
Canon always has more yellow in greens than usual..Sony’s colors look more real to me but Canon’s is more pleasing.. (r5 user) I am more amazed of how Sony achieved this kind of lens with that mount also making it lighter and smaller is beyond me!! Great vid great comparison very nice photos !!
I can't really see any noticeable differences and I doubt any client would be able to tell (or care) either. The Sony wins for it's smaller and lighter size but people will go for the lens of the system they are invested in.
Totally agree!
Canon is obviously better
I think the Canon lens is better, because I have a Canon R5 lol
😂
The Canon RF 28-70 f2 has really been one of my favorite lenses since its release. I’m so happy that Sony made this lens and the image quality between the two look nearly identical!
Yay! I picked the Sony correctly - going by pixel peeping long enough at photos taken with the 50mm f/1.2 GM. I recognized the incredibly contrast and resolution of the finer details in the hair.
The best lens is the one that fits the camera you have.
I liked some from Sony and some from Canon more. For example the first looked a bit better on Canon and the second definitely from Sony. Just nuances which you do not see when not compared side by side and all of them can be edited to look the same in the end or the way you like it. So no need to switch systems here. Just take which system you are in or take the cheapest/lightest.
Totally agree!
For me, sharpness is more important and then come the color tones that can be fixed in Photoshop or Lightroom, so I prefer the new Sony lens...📸👍🙋🏻👋🏻🤗
The only review of Sony's new lens I care to watch.
I’m a the worst gear reviewer haha ! But I’m trying
I like the Canon colors and contrast. Sony maybe sharper but less contrast
I think all sony images are more sharp and more contrasty after processing. I noticed that myself shooting with both canon and sony. For me processing sony images is usually easier and more of them in focus, no blur etc - basically less flaw in sony images then canon. That's why lately I'm shooting practically exclusively with sony.
Absolutely love your videos! Nice to see you so busy on your channel ♥️
Thanks for watching!
that first sharpness comparison the sony looked a lot sharper, not a tad but unlikely to matter for portraits a much
It’s definitely sharper when you pixel peep! I just meant that overall it’s not that noticeable, unless you really zoom in and look for it
But portrait photography pays more attention to atmosphere and emotion, and sharpness is not very important. canon has better atmosphere
That's not what I saw at all. I thought the Canon looked a tad sharper until I really looked close (on a 5K monitor) and then the Sony looked maybe a tad sharper. It's so close.
yes, Irene, at 13:24 most people wouldn't know, I do, simply because I shoot MF and LF cameras where this "micro-contrast" exists, and is definable to anyone, esp. the sharpness and detail on hair strands, or other micro details, I look for it, as this is a symptom of high image quality, and the "mf and LF look" which I aspire to.
NB: the term I used, Micro-contrast, is the technical name for what is said in this discussion you are having at 13:24; describing in laypersons terms the resolution of details, and colour science; this science of micro contrast, is, in my opinion, the sensors' ability to resolve detail, and for a small pixel to capture data, 45MP+ (150MP in the case of Phase One IQ4), this data is what matters, especially when hundreds of mega pixels are merged (digitally crocheted together) this nuance is preserved, and accentuated, as one pixel is small enough to scale correctly to this detail, aka is in the same magnification, so can record it, and its part of the image, not just a zone 0 or 10 (well outside the dynamic range), which we 'see' as noise, flare, or blank area with no distinguishable details.
Sony is more better than canon... 🎉🎉🎉
Sony lens sharpness image quality....
Nice video👌👌👌
On your hands everything gets good looking !
🙏🙏🙏
At minute 3.37 it looks to me that the focus with the Canon lens is just a bit more towards the tip of the nose. You can see some details showing up, while the Sony lacks that.
What an odd way to say that the Canon missed critical focus of the eyes while the Sony succeeded. Her eyelashes are rendered perfectly in the Sony, while the the eyelashes (because they missed critical focus) are a little "muddy" in the Canon
I realized Canon's apparent front-focusing indirectly, in the scene at 8:22. Canon's hair is much blurrier (further away from the focus) than Sony's. Sony's hair is so sharp that the face might even have been back-focused a little?
The faces are similarly sharp, maybe both are still within the acceptable depth of field zone.
Canon's luck is, that this additional hair blur makes the overall portrait appear more lovely and dreamy in this example. But this shouldn't be an excuse for front-focusing 🙂
Sometimes the Canon can slightly miss the focus, Sony is definitely sharper and more accurate focus
I can see the differences right away. The tonal range is wider, colors are warmer on shots made with Canon. Canon wins with art. Sony is the winner in sharpness. My heart belongs to Canon.
I love your artworks ❤
I’m watching this on my phone so everything looks great 😂.
Haha kind of proves the point! The differences are so minimal. It doesn’t really matter both are great
Exactly 😂 90% of vewers will see content via smartphone. Its all about photographer preferences, my vote for small weight/size
Interesting video. I have to say, that on the whole, I found myself preferring the Sony images. That said, I agree with the pro Canon evaluation of the two that you processed independently. Of course, as you stated, the differences were due to editing and the Canon image was a little brighter in its finished form, which is a definite positive trigger for the human eye. I believe there have been comparative studies which bear this out--take any two identical images and lift one ever so slightly without compromising range or quality, and that will almost always garner the most likes. One other thing I did notice in your comparison images was that the transitional areas between bright and dark seemed slightly better rendered on the Sony files. The Canon seemed almost to blow out highlights in hair for instance whereas those areas were better preserved on the Sony images. This is interesting to me as I do not shoot Sony. I shoot both Canon and Olympus. No matter, all the photos were beautiful examples of what can be achieved with the two high end lenses, good subject matter and talent. Thank you.
Great comparison Irene... so helpful and interesting. Would love to see you compare the A1ii with the Canon R5ii
I constantly notice I prefer Canon images over Sony. I notice this in food photography, especially. ...but it holds true here as well.
I switched to Sony from Canon for the cheaper lens alternatives (Tamron, Sigma), but considering these two lenses are almost the same price, I always loved Canon's warmer, brighter colors, which this 28-70 comparison demonstrates. But for Sony fans, this is a nice addition, which I still can't afford lol
Thank you to make this very good side by side comparison video. I have both Canon 5D III and Sony 7M4 cameras. Personally, I prefer the color, contract and details of Canon photos, but perfer the smaller size and lighter weight of Sony camera. It makes me to choose Sony more frequently than Canon for most of time while traveling.
BTW, your editing skill is great! It's like a master chef to make 3 star Michelin meals from raw ingredients. I also wonder whether you'd like to share the steps and tips of how you edit photos.
I like the warmer feel of Canon. Probably Canon better contrast and handle lens flare better.
The differences are there also because of the difference in the two sensors, not just the lenses! Sony A7R5's 61mp sensor renders noticeably different than the Canon R5's sensor!
I shoot with neither brand, but I like Canon for the photos. Video is a non-factor for for me.
When enlarged by pixel unit, I think Sony looks a little clearer because of the camera pixels.
I think it's hard to tell which lens has better resolution.
Then Sony wins in terms of size and weight.
I'm also looking forward to the next Canon lens.
I did jump from Canon to the Sony, light weight, small size is so comfortable to work with, different color corection/grading, you need to know how to do it, especially after a few years of work with canon, i can easly match colors that no one can tell which is which
Thanks for the comparison. Very interesting. From the get go, I always think that Sony's color is a bit cooler and more green and Canon a bit more warm. To each his own, they both are great lens.
Totally agree!
Simple : better for Canon users and better for Sony users... IMO Canon is the clear leader for the bodies... (since 1989 and the first EOS 1)
Thank you for comparing to show these lens performance.
Hi Irene. Beautiful video and cameras! If you do not mind me asking, at what time were those photos taken? Sunset?
Thanks!
Sunset :)
@@IreneRudnyk Thank you!
I love the Canon lens is over 6 years old and still holds up. Good job Sony and Canon
My takeaway from this is that the Sony is a more clinically perfect lens. It is sharper, better edge to edge performance, etc
...but...
The Canon just dominates in overall look/feel. It renders nicer, it has more pleasing colors, more pleasing tones, superior bokeh, better contrast, etc.
imo this is the perfect example as to why sharpness and clinical performance isn't important for most photographers.
Miałem lustrzankę Canona, sprzedałem ją i kupiłem A7III, ale z powodu tego o czym piszesz wróciłem do Canona (R8). Jedyne, co mnie boli, to fakt, że Canon nadal nie odblokowuje bagnetu dla obiektywów Sigma innych firm.
They render exactly the same if you don't pixel peep. The differences in color are due to the camera not the lens. Put this Sony lens on adapter on a Nikon body and you'll get beautiful colors. The only real difference in image quality is that Sony has enormous amount if veiling glare, which means shooting against the light will usually look washed out.
Canon has a better atmosphere!☺
Very cool I wonder what Canon mark two of this lens will look like for 2025
It'll look like 4 thousand dollars.
@ that’s ok. Makes me money.
I like the Canon photos a lot better. They just seem more alive.
indeed the character and color so good.. a photo u can feel it..
Not at half a kilo more
I wonder if the color temp differences you're seeing are a function not just of the glass, but of the camera sensors? Sonys have a bit of a rep for going a bit flat and greenish on the skin tones (I say this as a Sony Shooter). I've not shot Canon so I can't say for certain. Would be great if they could be tested on the same sensor, though I know that's currently impossible.
Canon is far better in all areas and auto focus
I slightly prefer the Canon images but it is pretty close for sure.
I prefer Canon's raw files but Sony's edited files. Maybe it's because you spend more time editing sony raw files?👍👍👍👍👍👍
As always Canon images look better but less accurate. So yep Canon vibe gives more pleasing look
Good job. Thanks for this comparison video. You have earned a new subscriber. 08:14 I prefer the canon for its smooth background blur, which is less distracting. For video, sony bodies have that movie magic
Great review, thank you. In general I find the zoomlens too big and heavy on top of this an f2.0 is mighty expensive. Now as a senior with limited budget, I have purchased Chinese lenses with f0.9 to f1.4 Amazing lenses, back to creativity ❤
the cannon is warmer, but interestingly the Sony deals better with the sun highlight's, making them highlights, not just flare, as in the Cannon shot, it looks too flare like (my taste), and I shoot buildings and cars, etc. so deal frequently with flaring lights, and I use MF, 120 Kodak Gold 200 in hasselblad 6x6, and in LF 6x12 with the same film stock, Always with lens hoods if the sun is close, and even add ND [64 {1.8 stops}] to cut sky exposure, so I can get the shot.
So, does this show that the Sony has a smaller f/2 aperture than the Canon? Would be interesting to see T numbers.
Canon ❤
Canon is more pleasant to look at... and its brighter
Canon lens capture more light as usual... But if you need something lighter then sony is the way to go... There u are.. Leave a like if that was helpful
Too bad i prefer quality haha
Canon for the win, although it's very close.
Photos - Canon always.
Videos - Sony stole the show.
This is as much about the cameras and the file editing as it is the lenses. There is no choosing between these two lenses… you buy the one for the system you have unless you are someone who sells off an entire kit (and years of experience with that kit) just to change to a lens that is lighter than its only other equivalent.
For video, you should have adjusted the camera settings to achieve the "look" you wanted for each camera. Using the "same settings" on two different camera bodies with two different sensors with two different lenses is not how one would use these camera in real world-use. All you proved was that the Sony is superior in low light conditions (not factoring the lens flare, of course) compared to the Canon
Definitely prefer the Sony files and end result.
It would be interesting to see the result of a comparison with auto modes enabled, incl WBauto. I also, for example, abandoned the C1 because of its strange handling of color and the lack of profiles for many cameras. I don’t know how it works there now, but I’m sure that for those who process in Lightroom, the results may be completely different and for them this comparison will not be representative.
I love this video Irene!! I think the conclusion I came to was that Canon is good at the things that their users generally like about Canon (eg. warmth of colours & dreaminess) and Sony is good at what Sony shooters generally like about them (eg. sharpness & compactness)
In the end, I'm a big Canon girlie and I'll probably always be biased towards their warm colours🥰
2:13 It was very obvious (but ! i have the 28-70 F2 and the R5 since 3 years now, and i know how it look 😄)
It looks like Canon handles bright and highlight areas much better than Sony. 07:23 - Sony looks not pleasant compared to Canon, but maybe it's just the edit issue?
10:12 OMFG Sony just destroyed canon in video !!!
Чтобы не терять контраст, стоит пользоваться блендой. Для этого её и придумали😊
sony 100%
I guessed canon correctly with no doubts 😁😁
Doubt that.
Excellent comparison! … And Canon is better in each and every picture compared to Sony. Canon's photos look dreamy compared to Sony. But the lens is gigantic!!!
Irene,
The Canon lens is heavy because it is designed to correct optical flaws with glass whereas the Sony lens does so with a combination of glass and in camera post processing. This is the reason why the Sony lens is sharper with less weight. The combination of glass and in camera post processing is a sort of initial post processing of the raw image before we apply our personal workflow to the image. The lack of the additional glass in the Sony lens is the reason it has less contrast than the Canon lens that has that extra glass that reduces chromatic aberration and astigmatism. Canon and Sony have slightly different color science options to. You can’t really say that one is better than the other but the Canon is warmer and the Sony emphasizes the Greens a bit more. It’s a subtle difference but recognizable by those of us who shoot both Canon and Sony bodies with adapted Canon EF-L lenses. Hope this helps you better understand what is happening with the two lens designs and how they achieve results that are similar and while different they are both very good and compelling. FYI the application of AI to the Canon raw images will sharpen and bring out similar levels of detail.
They have said the Sony is corrected in the lens
@@DoubleTheDom,
The lens cannot correct itself for all of the different camera bodies with different sensors. However, the camera can correct the lens deficiencies via firmware that understands the lens design and its deficiencies by adjusting the raw file data just as is done to raw file data in PS or any other raw image processing.
SMH ! OMG ! Sony can’t backlit situations that well, too much ghosting reported , at this high price that’s totally unacceptable Sony ! Canon is still the King of the 28-70 f2 !
Are you sure you didn't mix up the video footage? Just checking. Maybe you should have asked chatgpt to fix the Sony images to look the same as the Canon images and then give the parameters.
It seems to me that the Sony is a little better overall. The combos I will say the Canon is slightly better. No all of us are as good as Irene with the editing, and she even mention that having the Canon MAY have help her to set direction. So If I have to select one I will take the Canon. In reality I shoot Nikon so I will not be shooting either 🤣
Great comparison. Sony is sharper but flatter with less 3D pop. Canon raw colors more pleasing to my eyes. Canon images likely faster to edit, while Sony's will take longer to tweak the colors. But after the editing both images side by side look stunning. weight can be a big deal for event photographers +1 for the Sony. great job 👏
Agree. Sony photos always fall flat for me. I will always go with Canon for that reason.
@@chorthao1986Haha, what camera do you have?
not just with your comparison, but for many years, it seems to me like Sony
Raws are almost always darker. but both systems showed themselves well.
Chat GPT seems like has all the answers! I do totally agree too I didn't realise it was that good. Excellent work love the light you worked with and good processing comparisons.
That was a significant weight difference I liked how you showed them on scales. Considering you use Canon you can save money no need to pay for the gym🤣. All you need now is upgrade to the R1 another kilo keep you toned and looking good. Cheers keep up the great work enjoyed..
I was quite surprised by how good it was at analyzing the pictures.
The only critique are your own eyes. Your clients won't know or complain because you used a particular brand, year, mark 1 mark 2 etc.
I think Canon color is a bit too warm for my liking. It has a overprocess look, it will look better to have color temperature down a touch. Sony is ever slightly too cool and neutral.
Wow despite having similar lens, Canon Colours are just a little bit more better
jpg colors you mean... lol
@@OneTap__ She literally said in the video the RAW are different too
@@Jekoza neverminded its way above your knowledge..
@@OneTap__ you mean nevermind? And you’d be actually surprised how Canon processes CR3 RAW compared to Sony’s ARW RAW, which I think it might be a little too much for you to comprehend
@@Jekoza My friend, I´m an engineer so... Lets end here. I can read that you are a miles away to have this kind of discussion. 1st learn how RAW is processes then we can talk. Bye miss.
We’re renting equipment for my friends surprise engagement. We were recommended a canon r6 and the 28-70
lens, will this work if we’re hiding shooting from afar?
how far is "afar?" it's an amazing lens but the weight will shock you the first time. My first time using it was for a 4-hour event (as my only lens) and it was brutal. I did shoot for 4 hours straight. My arm wanted to drop off a couple hours later. However, now I don't even really notice it and it is the defacto lens on my camera if I only carry 1 body (when using 2, I have the 85 1.2 on the other one)). And it also is my travel lens.
weird combination as r6 is more about entry or medium level whereas the 28-70f2 is master level, should be at least r5+28-70, but i think with the right data setup for the R6, it would be more than enough for the job. maybe try and take shots at similar condition until you are satisfy before the event.
Awesome video! any chance you have a comparable video with 24-70? thanks
Definitely will make that comparison soon!
still canon ❤results matter..
感谢分享，正想看这两只镜头的对比
I wonder why the videos of this new Sony 28-70 lens show weird jerky motions in recordings. Maybe Sony needs a firmware update for their ibis & this lens?
Sony continues to amaze me. Wow.
I’m amazed they were able to make it this small and light!
Big kiss to Irene from Luxembourg (Europe)!
Есть слухи что кенон работает над второй версией 28-70 2.0 которая будет легче
If you get A1II pls can you do same color comparison with R5II pls
Hi dear, Irene, great comparison and good information, very nice
can someone explain why sony motion looks much more natural than canon in the video clips? is it higher framerate or something else?
Было бы только что фотографировать, а чем без разницы. Многие по Leica прутся, другие по Haselblad упадают. На что денег хватает то и покупают все. Таких красоточек если фотографировать то без разницы чем, они и так хорошо получаются на фото. Хотя я давно уже заметил что на Canon объём у картинки получается более выразительный чем у остальных. Возможно это от какого то несовершенства оптики, как советские объективы до сих пор ценятся из за именно их несовершенства конструкции, а у Sony оптика какая то уж слишком клинически вывереная, сухая.
Sony video was better
Canon photos were better
We are just splitting hairs...
Please review vcm 50 1.4 if possible a comparison video as well
Thank for the video. Great effort ❤
Why I went from Canon to Sony and back to Canon... The rendering with Canon is more pleasant(dept), Sony more digital flat. With video it looks like Sony Is faces exposure and canon the hole area exposed.
Canon Gang 👍🏼
Sony & Canon -- competition in ridiculousness is heating up. Who's next? -- Nikon, Tamron, or Sigma?