OKAY I hateeeee how different colors look while youre editing in Premiere VS the export.... this is not at all what the colours looked like in Premiere but hey itll have to do for now 😂
That's what he says but obviously brand does matter to him. He uses canon, and is trying to convince himself that a broken camera is better for him... because it is canon. Did you see video when he received the Sony? He claimed he never used one before and had his friend test it for him.
I agree 👍 People get so blinded by brand loyalty that they don't look at the reality of difference in equipment. Matti does a great job at looking at equipment with a realistic point of view.
@@brianbassett5468 Blinded is off target, it is that you get invested in a system, he has CanonC200 and a bunch of canon lenses, color grading with different brands in the same video can look bad.
Canyon? Sanon? Cony? Sanyon? not sure what their mashup name would be, but that's definitely the one that I would expect never to happen. Panasonic probably also wouldn't split because they make a solid video shooter and panasonic makes other stuff just like sony and canon. Black magic maybe since they don't make much other than cameras, so would probably sell if someone offered a ton of money. And nikon, pentax, fuji, etc. They just don't seem to be in the game much anymore so not sure how they are staying afloat.
@@DiegoBoquer you def should! I have the R5 and it's incredible, I've been shooting 4K 24 with no overheating issues. The AF is insane and the tech is obviously the best so far. Since the R6 is the younger brother with 1DXMiii sensor, it's a no brainer get that if you can! Also if you want to print large, 20 mp is really good. My retired 80D has 24mp and I was able to print 17x22" prints with no noise and excellent quality.
Interesting... Sometimes A7Siii looks better, sometimes R5, but i agree that A7Siii looks more like a cinema camera, closer to FX9 with their cinetone. I prefer Sony to be honest
Why didnt you do a side by side standard and log WITHOUT any coloring to see it in its sooc'est of forms?...this test isn't very helpful to me. Just changing contrast and saturation is not a fair comparison as different color spaces have different values when placed in a rec 709 premiere space.
Needs are subjective and he didn't make the video specifically for Your needs. As he mentioned in the beginning of the video, he made this more so for himself just to test the quality.
Sam.i.am the literal title is “...which camera looks better?” how is that not tailored to his viewers to make a decision about which $4,000 camera they want to buy?
Comparing log footage wouldn't be useful either as the low contrast would make it difficult to gauge color differences. Best would be the log footage plus the manufacturer's rec709 lut.
When it comes to the color science, I believe it depends on the white balance. If you leave the camera in auto white balance, they may correct the image more on the green side (sony) or more on the magenta side (canon) but if you set the white balance, you'll be able to see the true color science instead of the white balance. Gerald undone and many others have shown that the sony colors are pretty accurate and canon colors tend to lean towards magenta to flatter skin tones. But in reality, its a simple adjustment of the white balance slider to dial things in to your taste. Unless you're always using the straight out of camera footage and leaving it in auto white balance, I don't think color science is a problem at this point.
8K 12 bit raw vs 4K 10 bit (h.265 unless he recorded externally) is not a fair test. One is compressed and the other is not. 4K internal vs 4K internal would have been better.
E L E V A T I agree that you wouldn’t be able to see the resolution difference but you would be able to see color differences when one is raw and the other isn’t.
I assumed this was a “best possible” comparison, but yeah, would be nice to see 4K v 4K. But maybe not... I’ve already decided, and maybe I don’t need any more reasons to question my choice 😁
Matti - Did you hear that the R5 can record 4k30HQ externally for 4 hours if you remove the cards from the internal card slots? Gerald Undone is hoping some more R5 owners will confirm this. Some channel did a video about it, and it really did appear to record for 4 hours before finally overheating. If this "hack" is real, it could be a game changer for R5 owners will heavier video needs. The RUclips channel with the video is called "No Life", and the video title is "Canon R5 Overheating Saga Pt. 1 - Over 4 Hours External Recording Ninja V".
I think No Life (channel who did the video) said they have another video coming out where they use the LP6H battery instead of the dummy battery used on the 1st test. God I would love for that to work too with the Ninja V
@@jaegerschtulmann Yes, but the hack (if confirmed) could suddenly make the R6 a viable (and cheaper) option for hybrid shooters. I don't need a 48MP sensor for my stills work, so $2,500+$700 for a ninja (only if I have heating problems) may be the ideal compromise.
he did part two follow up video and yes he also confirmed that the recording time even with the battery inserted can last all the way til the battery dies
The Sony looks more like a cinema camera than the R5 IMO. Both look great but those outdoor shots on the Sony look incredible. Did you match the shots with a grey card though? The canon looks a bit cooler with a harsher highlight roll off IMO but I’m also watching on a phone. The dynamic range difference is apparent
One thing to consider, Sony S-Gamut color space is a little wider than DCI-P3, so definitely not rec709. If you want accurate representation of colors use the appropriate lut to bring it to rec709. Also for best dynamic range use S-log3 because now you have 10bit 4:2:2 so it's actually usable.
It’s not a dumb comparison for say. Wasn’t really fair for matti to say that the canon is sharper. Which it is in every way cuz it has more megapixels and a higher resolution. Again it’s a hybrid mirrorless camera vs a compact cinema camera.
the sony "Active" stabilisation is actually just the camera cropping more in so the sensor has more room to move. Its not digital stabilisation, but you can use the gyroscope data to stabilize the footage later
Matti Haapoja not really Matti, electronic stabilization offered by Fuji, Canon and the Sony ZV-1(confusingly called active too) is digital image stabilization which can work but can also make things looks a bit warpy occasionally. It does tend to make things look smoother most of the time though, less mechanical. The A7S III active mode does indeed crop into the sensor 1.1x to give the IBIS more play. One of the biggest issues with the Sony IBIS is their smaller lens mount limits how much the sensor can shift. Canon, Fuji and Panasonic is mostly better due to having more of the sensor to shift. It remains entirely mechanical. It’s isn’t electronic or digital. So this new active mode is better for this simple reason. Then with the gyro data you can add really impressive post stabilization using that info in catalyst browse. I covered this in depth in my review 😊
I like the look of Matti's skin tone with the Sony better... The quality of the image seems similar, I feel like the colors are just better looking in the Sony now. Which I never thought I would say that because of have always been a huge fan of Canon color.🙃🙂
I was surprised, I thought the sony looked better and I actually thought it was the Canon before he told us. I'm a sony user and I just assumed the better footage was the canon.
Sonys new venice like color is now more cinematic and "less technically accurate".. Sony color was always technical where canons was more blue skies and better skin tones. Also w slog3 u can get whatever you want. You didn't mention there is no clog3 in R5 and it's bc its not high enough with its DR. Like sonys old 8 bit and slog3 was pointless. But now its literally a cine camera. 15 stops of DR tested. Thx gerald undone. No overheating in 4k standard. Thx matti. For video.. its no comparison.. if you shoot only photos than sure 45mp is higher than 12mp. But sony had 42mp camera 5 yrs ago. A7riii is still great camera w no overheating issues at all.. and A7riv does medium format quality. Look at armandos R5 shoot. He's a canon guy and speaks to it overheating badly. I'd wait til 2nd iteration if I owned Ef glass. Get 1dxiii if u do Events.. i don't think its reliable enough for pro environments.
@@andreasdk I personally feel that the Canon in this application is giving a more accurate image of Matti's skin tone maybe a little more pink than real life but that slightly green tint (sony) seems to look really nice to me but when it comes to color science it's all completely a matter of opinion. They both look great and I completely agree with Matti that the Canon color seems to be more true to life. I'm just really liking the dynamic range and color of the Sony more.
I think whoever is choosing between these two cameras needs to remember that the Sony A7Siii is a video camera first and the Canon R5 is a photo camera first with video capabilities.
oooh, I'll bet you're right and that it is a dynamic range issue. Hopefully the R5 will get a clog 3 update, which should help a lot on that front ("Sony looking more cinematic" point)
I like when I move all over the place in front of my EOS R it LOCKS into focus but when I sit down for a talking head shot..it sometimes misfires on the AF lol. wtc
Matthew yeah I don’t understand this. You can get SLOG 3 footage to look like whatever you want especially with the dynamic range that is coming out of the Sony.
Interesting because I feel the opposite. The R5 leans heavily on the magenta side and makes skin look red. But I agree with Matti that this is a preference issue.
@@sstteevveenn77 it also may have to do with all of our individual monitors. I have two "identical" monitors, yet even with the same settings they have slightly different color reproduction. Neither are particularly fancy, but I'll give it a look on my laptop, which has a much more accurate display.
77dris might wanna go look at Gerald undone on that one, because it isn’t true. Dynamic range will be that of an a7iii, it still won’t match the a7siii. I’m not caught up in specs, I’m caught up in results, which for video heavily favored towards a7siii.
I am a canon shooter all my life, I like Canon and yet, i think Sony looks more cinematic (any Sony really)... In the movies that we all love the colors are not always true to anything. This is what makes it so dreamy so we call it "cinematic" ... The dynamic range is a more important component and Sony has plenty of it! So Sony users, just be happy and go shoot!
Yeah I seen that too, but it could just be the Sony over sharpening the jpg in camera. I guess it would be easier to see on a big screen and not an iPhone screen though!
Lower resolution images will appear sharper when displayed on a 4K timeline like this. This is due to the lower resolution image having a bit of roughness that will come across as artificial sharpening in 4K and be unnoticeable to the human eye. 45MP image is scaled down the pixels scale with it and become much finer which creates the illusion of the lower resolution being softer when in fact it would be certainly sharper at 100% or printed.
Chase the Summit it would have been nice if he zoomed in 100% into the eye on that shot! I think you would have seen instantly what the difference was between the two cameras.
Matti : Has a Mac, tells how the As7iii and Eos R footage looks juggy while editing. Me, trying to edit a minute of random shots taken on phone to a BRoll, takes 2 hours to render. 🗿📉 Haven't been this early though fam. ✌️😂
Thanks for doing this! I have been looking for this side-by-side for a while. My only hesitancy for getting a a7iv was canon's supposed advantage in color science. But, after seeing this, I prefer the Sony. Would you say the a7iv has about the same color as this a7siii?
I love that even though you're normally a canon guy, you're still able to give credit where credit is due. I think a lot of other channels are such fanboys of certain brands that they always lean in favor of "their" brand. It reminds me that its all about what camera works best for me, not which one I WANT to work best. Thanks Matti!
Never thought I would choose Sony just a month ago. Was so hyped with the R5 and Komodo. Haven’t used a Sony in a decade. Komodo still has full 16 bit RAW and higher dynamic range, but the A7SIII is really high quality and feature rich, especially AF and 4K120.
How well and how automatically does the wireless file transfer works on these cameras? Can they transmit photos & videos automatically after shooting, or do you have to press buttons or wade into menus & manually select files? Is the camera still usable while it's sending the files, or do you have to wait until the file transfer is done before you can shoot again?
On RUclips? Remember you can grade the Sony any way you want. Go have a look at Gerald Undone. He comes to the opposite conclusion. The Sony has the more accurate colours while the Canon is all over the place. Plus if you shoot in SLog3 or Canon log you’re going to be grading anyway.
well you can just tint it to the blue like canon does .. dont see any deal with that. If you buy 4000$ cam you dont shoot in jpgs with it .. if you do then good luck to you. :)
Right I agree I was little upset of skin color I was really hoping to get rid of Canon but confirming Sony still the same I am keeping Canon. I understand it’s now 10bit but it’s not so easy to control skin color science by hand perfectly as Canon does automatically
Canon's IBIS makes it look like it's on a gimbal, Sony's IBIS makes it look like it doesn't have IBIS! The good news is that both cameras colours should be easy to match in post!
Sony has an Active mode for when the camera is moving. The standard stabilized mode should not have been used when the camera was moving. When he did show movement with Active on, it cleaned-up quite a bit.
Matti, what happened to your EOS R screen? In the car one day it fell against the seat and stopped working, did Canon repair it or did it just need turning off and on again?
Have to give it to the Sony for both color science and dynamic range. Canon skin tones had a more magenta look to it in your comparisons. Canon has it for the IBIS, but Sony Active Stab seems good enough for me.
Hey Matti if I’ve already bought these presets for premiere Pro but I’m now currently using Final Cut Pro X would you be able to make an exception to downloading the final cut Pro X version instead of having to purchase it again? That would be awesome if you could do that!
What was the bit rate on the canon? I think Sony’s AF was better but the canon lens seemed to be better. It didn’t focus breathe. Canon colour also looks nice. 4K vs 4K or 1080 vs1080 on the canon vs Sony the Sony would be much better.
Seeing you back on the EOS R shooting 1080p again and still looking great for online content work... really reminds me that 4k/8k/HQ/Raw isn't that necessary yet for typical YT vlogs :P
Very true. Many people don't even watch RUclips on 4k displays. 4k/8k do come in handy if you want to stabilize or crop after the fact, though. The freedom to control your framing in post and not lose any resolution on export is pretty sweet.
Something important worth noting is that a talented photographer can pick up anything and produce amazing photos and video. These videos definitely help to figure out what camera suits someone best. You could flip a coin and be good with both for at least a decade.
Most folks do not realistically have this option because they are invested either in one system or the other. If you are really OK with both, it means you have glass for both system, and if that's the case, why not keep both for a while until you develop clear feelings for one camera over another?
Sony and their damn yellow skin tones. 6:18 is a particularly egregious example. People who say they can't tell the difference between Sony and Canon color science, it truly boggles the mind.
Yeah that's definitely a deal breaker, can't stand spending 3 seconds correcting white balance, but I'll spend 2 hours with color correction, but not if the white balance is a bit yellow from camera that sucks Canon is the only choice
@@andrescarrasco1248 This couldnt be accurate. Sony cameras do not shoot that warm. You can put a sony a panasonic and canon next to eachother and fire em off, they shoot warmer tones than the sony. There is no way that one shot had the guy outside that orange and the canon was pale clear in comparison. That's almost laughable. User error not camera
Probably messed up the white balance in camera and didnt correct it in post. On the other hand, Canon's skin tones are too pink. If you want perfect skin tones, buy an Alexa lol
Hey question! At around 6:50 in the video... The wall color on that building to the right is really different. To me, one is green-ish, the other is blue-ish... What is the deal there? Can you say which camera is more accurate? To me, that is a big difference!
The "green-yellow" tint generally looks more pleasing to the eye, than the "blue-magenta" tint, from what is see, Sony wins. It is not always the reality that we perceive as pleasant, but what we imagine the reality to be ☺️
I just purchased the audio presets, and tried them out with different volumes and mics and I must say they are so awesome. Thank you so much. Such a lifesaver
I really love the Sony´s skin tones, the dynamic (tho it´s marginal), the Eye AF and AF as general, and of course the low light is better but that we know already. I mean, if somebody´s seeing this and isn´t in any of these systems I think the Sony´s a better option for video, and you can buy a A7III for 1400 euros and have a photo camera with all the lenses and the Canon idk, it doesn´t seem so interesting at this point, it´s a super inovative camera, but for me, the Sony´s have been the best for years (and i even prefer the Z6 over de R believe me), so Canon doesn´t seem the "better" option here.
In your autofocus test, if you look into the out of focus background, the a7sIII has these incremental sudden shifting motions that makes it distracting whereas the R5 is fully smooth throughout. So in that regard, the R5 is better. But addressing this issue with Sony could help in updating the firmware to correct it. Could also be a particular lens issue.
My thoughts: I do think Sony is the over all best filmmaking camera, the cinematic look is perfect and much more dynamic range than the Canon as well and no limits on filming. For color: Personally the canon may look more real I’m not sure, but it also does make the skin look much less flattering I think personally. At 6:48 in the video and look at the sky. The sky in the canon is completely blown out to me while you can see nice details in the sky on the Sony and the whites on the canon are too over exposed over all making the image much less pleasant to look at I think and the Sony looks to me like it keeps much more detail. Detail: As said before, I think the Sony looks more detailed, especially in slow motion and as Gerald Undone also showed, the Sony 4K is more detailed than the Canon 4K especially if you zoom in and look closely. 8k of course is different. If I had to make a choice, I would chose the Canon, mostly because I am photographer first. If I had to recommend something for Matti, I would say the Sony because Matti is a videographer first. I viewed this on a 4K Dell UltraSharp with factory calibration (an avg. delta E < 2) Of course RUclips compression is also a thing but these are my opinions!
I have the impression that the two skies were shot a different times. The structure of the clouds is completely different. And the Canon was not completely blown out, there is still some blue in the sky whereas it is all white in Sonys image. If it was shot at the same time, then Canon holds the sky even better I think.
Brainpope Really? To me on my monitor the sky on the cannon was completely white and bright and you couldn’t see where one cloud started and the other cloud ended. My monitor is HDR certified too. In my opinion if they were taken in the same conditions the Sony would win even more because it has way better HDR. Anyhow, it’s interesting to hear how you saw it though and we see the videos after export and compression so it may skew the quality as well
What lenses were you using on both cameras for the comparisons? RF glass is some of the best quality glass out there and everyone shooting Sony usually uses tameron and G master and could make a difference
Thank you for mentioning that the Sony records sound in 120p. I will be shooting an event in 120p next year, and I DO NOT want to sync sound with an outside setup, while recording. Fun Fact: The Sony FDR x3000 also records sound, in 120p mode. ...I have not tested its 720p/240p mode.
Cinematic look is the perception that we built up in our memory of all those images filmed during the non digital era. People`s faces looked smoothier than today`s digital haarsh details. So, in today`s digital era, saying that a given image looks more cinematic is the same as saying that that image is less detailed. Using a poorer quality lens on any camera and yield a cinematic look. However, it must be added to this concept of cinematic look the fact that a good quality lens is not only restricted to its capability to produce sharp images. Take, for instances, any Cooke brand lens. It will produce the famous "Cooke Look", meaning a more 3D sense of ambience space while being very detailed yet not harsh. The final result of a recorded image will be always, as it has been since the creation of photography, a combination of the mutual inter-relation between thce glass and the sensor (digital or film negative). In this respect, the size of the sensor nor the amount of digital pixels will be the sole aspect to be considered behind the production of a good qualitiy image. Today`s extremely expensive Arri and Panavision cine cameras use, mostly, smaller sensors than the Sony A7S III and the Canon R5. With regard to comparing thsese two cameras, 4K X 8K, I concur with the author`s viewpoint to show us what each camera has to offer at its best. Furthermore, in the case of the Canon R5, should it be compared 4K X 4K against Sony`s, the R5 would still look more detailed since its 4K option would be oversampled from its rooted 8K capability. A 4K image, oversampled from 8K will look even better since its rooted pixels will be compressed into 4K.
@Brian Taylor Cool, Brian, but, at least I expressed my subjective perception to define cinematic (without quotes). You did not. Whoever`s view to explain what cinematic is it will be always subjective since it is a question of human perception. Come out and try to give me your own perception of what cinematic is and I might agree with it or not. The first time ever when someone used the word cinematic he or she was comparing a given footage to another that did not resemble the same visual appearance that cine films had been impressing to that date and, I bet you, Brian, he-she was comparing it to digital. One may say that digital is cold and film is warm. Another may say that digital is harsh and film is soft, and so on. Some may prefer digital to cine and vice-versa. So, defining cinematic does not use a mathematical formula. Perhaps one day will come that the term cinematic will be by and large connected to the looks of a digital footage and the original old pictures be defined by some other neology. I will always respect your own definition of cinematic since I have no clues (nobody has) to fully understand what Brian Taylor sees when he opens his eyes. The other day I went to visit the school where I attended when I was a little boy. Everything looked so different to what my memory always told me how that school looked like. In fact, although the buidings remained the same Ricardo had grown up, his optical nerves had worn out, his perception of the world around him was not the same. To my sight today, lttle Ricardo`s perception of his school was less cinematic. Ricardo`s eyes today sees the world with old lenses.
@Brian Taylor Cool, Brian, but, at least I expressed my subjective perception to define cinematic (without quotes). You did not. Whoever`s view to explain what cinematic is it will be always subjective since it is a question of human perception. Come out and try to give me your own perception of what cinematic is and I might agree with it or not. The first time ever when someone used the word cinematic he or she was comparing a given footage to another that did not resemble the same visual appearance that cine films had been impressing to that date and, I bet you, Brian, he-she was comparing it to digital. One may say that digital is cold and film is warm. Another may say that digital is harsh and film is soft, and so on. Some may prefer digital to cine and vice-versa. So, defining cinematic does not use a mathematical formula. Perhaps one day will come that the term cinematic will be by and large connected to the looks of a digital footage and the original old pictures be defined by some other neology. I will always respect your own definition of cinematic since I have no clues (nobody has) to fully understand what Brian Taylor sees when he opens his eyes. The other day I went to visit the school where I attended when I was a little boy. Everything looked so different to what my memory always told me how that school looked like. In fact, although the buidings remained the same Ricardo had grown up, his optical nerves had worn out, his perception of the world around him was not the same. To my sight today, lttle Ricardo`s perception of his school was less cinematic. Ricardo`s eyes today sees the world with old lenses.
It's crazy how much more cinematic the A7S3 is, and how much more cinematic the FX9 is to the A7S3, and how much better the Arri is to that! I think the FX9 is C series is similar and very subjective, but yeah... I guess I'm going to be exposing for the highlights, and bringing up the shadows in post, as it seems that the R5 has more difficulty recovering highlights than shadows!!
If I were starting from scratch, I’d go Sony , coz you can’t forget you need lenses and having amazing options from tamron and sigma. Like the tamron 35-150mm pretty much covers 95% of what you’d need for video and photo. I was already invested in micro 4/3 so that’s what I stuck with but I have a canon R5 and I’ll start using more since the new firmware update has made it a viable camera.
I feel that the Sony is clearly a better video camera, but I LOVE the R, so what do I know 🤷🏻♂️ I’m so glad to see you enjoying Final Cut- it’s such a great app.
The Sony looks like an Arri low key - my eyes go to the Sony and “rest” there every time. Also viewing this on an iPhone at 1080p, the Sony looks sharper which had me SUPER confused in the beginning.
Oh and you should download the ios14 beta if you want to experience RUclips it all it’s 4k hdr goodness on your iPhone, assuming you have an oled model!
Well Matti explained once that there’s a difference between detail and resolution. A GoPro in 4K will have less detail than a DSLR or mirrorless in 1080. But still, you’re right, it wasn’t an apples to apples comparison with the different resolutions.
from other tests canon's 4k 30p HQ has been consistently showing more details than a7siii 4k 30p videos. At the same time, a7siii 60p and 120p has been consistently than the canon r5 on 60p and 120p.
Hey Matti, were the cameras both set to the same white balance for this test? Just curious whether the difference in color is only due to the color science or if the Sony footage looks a little more greenish/warmer because of the white balance it was set to compared to the R5? The outside Sony footage definitely looks warmer to me...
The Sony image loos sharper, but that could be because the guy was a little out of focus... The R5 should be sharper... Edit: or is the R5 less sharp due to the AA filter...
@@MartinVit Yes it should be sharper and it normally it is, but on the photo (jpegs) of Matti`s friend the A7S3 looks sharper. I dont´t know why... Then maybe it was a little out of focus. I looked at the 4k version of the clip.
@@77dris Lol an aa filter decreases resolution not increases - it makes everything slightly softer to avoid moire, why would you think softer (e.g. very slightly out of focus) means more resolution???
Rocky Cola When looking at image quality, you are correct. But, when it comes to usability, the Sony is ahead for people who need dependability. Of course I am talking about overheating, but also the dual card slots. A duplicate video can be recorded to the 2nd card slot on the Sony but not on the Canon. That is a big deal for some people, along with limited record times in the higher quality modes on the Canon.
Dan Donovan sony is the only camera to ever not be dependable and corrupt cards. I have used both for the last 8 years and repeatable from time to time the sony fucks up a card. Best part is they are both using Sony cards.
schumif1champ Sorry to hear that! I switched to Sony from Nikon almost 2 years ago. I started with the a9 and a7RIII and now shoot with the a9II and a7RIV. Luckily no card failures. But, card failures are usually a card issue and not a camera problem. I use Lexar and SanDisk, but have not tried Sony cards yet. I thought the Sony tough cards would be next, but I will look into those before buying!
@@dandonovan1 I asked many Nikon DSLR photographers what they thought about Nikon Z6/Z7 & they all brought up the issue of single card slot, yes I agree with you, dual slots are a big deal if you are making a living with these cameras
Question can you post the files so we can see how the video files work on our computers I downloaded some Sony footage and it worked fine so maybe his footage was compressed
@@derekv6479 The only people who writes such nonsense ARE fanboys. FYI: I dont own any FF camera but are tempted with the R5. But nevertheless: if scaled down for insta etc, the 12MP just looks sharper because of better contrast. Its a matter of fact
Itz Si yeah not gonna lie i felt the sony kind of overdid the skintone warmth. Still looks way better than before. Unless matti and his friend sunless tan their faces.....
OKAY I hateeeee how different colors look while youre editing in Premiere VS the export.... this is not at all what the colours looked like in Premiere but hey itll have to do for now 😂
I've been waiting for this :D
First here
Matti! You’re the coolest, man. Thanks for being you 🙌🏼
@@Jamesfrancosdog yea
I never thought you saying Sony wins over the canon would ever happen. I guess 2020 is really a weird year hahaha!
As someone who can’t afford either the R5 or a7sIII I still find this very informative and entertaining 😂
Bruh! I feel you !😞
So true.. 😂 Sadely 😐
Am dead laughing 😂😂😂🤣🤣
You took it right out of my mouth 😂😂😂😂
😂 so far I’ve saved $800 still far ahead 😂
I appreciate how you're just a camera guy and just want the best camera for you, and not caring about the brand so much.
Both are incredible cameras!
That's what he says but obviously brand does matter to him. He uses canon, and is trying to convince himself that a broken camera is better for him... because it is canon. Did you see video when he received the Sony? He claimed he never used one before and had his friend test it for him.
He's a canon ambassador 😂😭 he's gonna choose the r5
I agree 👍 People get so blinded by brand loyalty that they don't look at the reality of difference in equipment. Matti does a great job at looking at equipment with a realistic point of view.
@@brianbassett5468 Blinded is off target, it is that you get invested in a system, he has CanonC200 and a bunch of canon lenses, color grading with different brands in the same video can look bad.
Lol matti is notoriously biased towards Canon
Can we just blend the cameras together? The R5Siii
The RSiii ii
haha then everyone would be happy
Canyon? Sanon? Cony? Sanyon? not sure what their mashup name would be, but that's definitely the one that I would expect never to happen. Panasonic probably also wouldn't split because they make a solid video shooter and panasonic makes other stuff just like sony and canon. Black magic maybe since they don't make much other than cameras, so would probably sell if someone offered a ton of money. And nikon, pentax, fuji, etc. They just don't seem to be in the game much anymore so not sure how they are staying afloat.
Bro honestly I’d donate my left leg for that
And the company would be called Canny
I wish you had shown fast moving objects for the 120 rather than a stationary subject.
Fruedian slip at 15:53. “I don’t want to use the R5 anymore!” 😂 he meant to say “R”.
I just noticed that!
yup
maybe he said the truth! he doesn't want to use the R5!
@@mixeddrinks8100 that's what freudian slip means =P
That’s the verdict. A7siii it is
I don't like how the Sony has so much green in the skin tones, making skin look jaundiced.
sony sucks...case closed hahahaha...the engineer in sony probably all colour blind nerds...play playstation too much i guess
@@mbismbismb haters
@@Ionutble there is a reason to hate though... ugly colours 😎 so? Do u want to force to like it? Eew
Question is, which hurt more when you gave them back? lol
obviously canon
@@dannyjonze sonaayyy
Dude Premiere exports correct color you have to put the Gamma LUT Adobe provides on your output.
"This poor little EOS R"
*sighs*
I was going to get the R, but probably getting the R6
right? :)
And here I am sporting the M50🤪
@@DiegoBoquer you def should! I have the R5 and it's incredible, I've been shooting 4K 24 with no overheating issues. The AF is insane and the tech is obviously the best so far. Since the R6 is the younger brother with 1DXMiii sensor, it's a no brainer get that if you can! Also if you want to print large, 20 mp is really good. My retired 80D has 24mp and I was able to print 17x22" prints with no noise and excellent quality.
Fred thanks dude. Where did you get the R5 from? R6 is only preorder
Matti: *complaining his EOS R does not look good anymore*
Me *watching my old 70D*: "I mean, at least I have autofocus"
Me having 1300D and it doesn't have autofocus too 🤧
i have the 70D and 6D (no AF). its time for an upgrade
Me witha 1500D at least I have a camera.
I have the t3i, it doesn't have autofocus but at least it doesn't overheat.
70D here 😂
Damn the SONY looks amazing.
Interesting... Sometimes A7Siii looks better, sometimes R5, but i agree that A7Siii looks more like a cinema camera, closer to FX9 with their cinetone.
I prefer Sony to be honest
I do prefer Sony and their glass is pretty great but that Canon RF glass is freaking incredible
@@Lil_Lobo yes, i agree, canon rf glasses is amazing! But Sony's G Masters is also top level
Sony is the best !!!!!
AGREE 100
@@MagnetiqLabs + 24-70 and 15-35 RF glasses have IS which GM sony not.
Why didnt you do a side by side standard and log WITHOUT any coloring to see it in its sooc'est of forms?...this test isn't very helpful to me. Just changing contrast and saturation is not a fair comparison as different color spaces have different values when placed in a rec 709 premiere space.
Needs are subjective and he didn't make the video specifically for Your needs. As he mentioned in the beginning of the video, he made this more so for himself just to test the quality.
Sam.i.am the literal title is “...which camera looks better?” how is that not tailored to his viewers to make a decision about which $4,000 camera they want to buy?
Totally agree
Comparing log footage wouldn't be useful either as the low contrast would make it difficult to gauge color differences. Best would be the log footage plus the manufacturer's rec709 lut.
When it comes to the color science, I believe it depends on the white balance. If you leave the camera in auto white balance, they may correct the image more on the green side (sony) or more on the magenta side (canon) but if you set the white balance, you'll be able to see the true color science instead of the white balance. Gerald undone and many others have shown that the sony colors are pretty accurate and canon colors tend to lean towards magenta to flatter skin tones. But in reality, its a simple adjustment of the white balance slider to dial things in to your taste. Unless you're always using the straight out of camera footage and leaving it in auto white balance, I don't think color science is a problem at this point.
4K vs 8K wasn’t the best option for testing.
Agreed... totally destroys the purported 'neutrality/objectivity' of the test
Not that you can tell the difference on a smartphone... or even a 4k monitor. (In terms of resolution)
8K 12 bit raw vs 4K 10 bit (h.265 unless he recorded externally) is not a fair test. One is compressed and the other is not. 4K internal vs 4K internal would have been better.
E L E V A T I agree that you wouldn’t be able to see the resolution difference but you would be able to see color differences when one is raw and the other isn’t.
I assumed this was a “best possible” comparison, but yeah, would be nice to see 4K v 4K. But maybe not... I’ve already decided, and maybe I don’t need any more reasons to question my choice 😁
Matti - Did you hear that the R5 can record 4k30HQ externally for 4 hours if you remove the cards from the internal card slots? Gerald Undone is hoping some more R5 owners will confirm this. Some channel did a video about it, and it really did appear to record for 4 hours before finally overheating. If this "hack" is real, it could be a game changer for R5 owners will heavier video needs. The RUclips channel with the video is called "No Life", and the video title is "Canon R5 Overheating Saga Pt. 1 - Over 4 Hours External Recording Ninja V".
I think No Life (channel who did the video) said they have another video coming out where they use the LP6H battery instead of the dummy battery used on the 1st test.
God I would love for that to work too with the Ninja V
@@jaegerschtulmann Yes, but the hack (if confirmed) could suddenly make the R6 a viable (and cheaper) option for hybrid shooters. I don't need a 48MP sensor for my stills work, so $2,500+$700 for a ninja (only if I have heating problems) may be the ideal compromise.
It will also be a game changer for Atomos Ninja V, cus most R5 video shooter would have to get one.
@@jaegerschtulmann plus the added payload/rig size
he did part two follow up video and yes he also confirmed that the recording time even with the battery inserted can last all the way til the battery dies
EOS R is like, 'HOW DARE YOU FILM THIS VIDEO WITH ME"
😂😂😂
It feels like Sony caught up with Canon and now the color science is great for both. At this point it's really just personal preference
Or wether you have more gear on any setup
it's always been personal preference
Says who they caught up? It still has the green tint - much less but it's STILL there
@@plisskenetic just shoot raw lo who cares
@@plisskenetic you realize color grading “fixes” that
The Sony looks more like a cinema camera than the R5 IMO. Both look great but those outdoor shots on the Sony look incredible.
Did you match the shots with a grey card though? The canon looks a bit cooler with a harsher highlight roll off IMO but I’m also watching on a phone.
The dynamic range difference is apparent
One thing to consider, Sony S-Gamut color space is a little wider than DCI-P3, so definitely not rec709. If you want accurate representation of colors use the appropriate lut to bring it to rec709. Also for best dynamic range use S-log3 because now you have 10bit 4:2:2 so it's actually usable.
4K vs 8k. “It looks sharper on the canon” no, really? I can’t think why :/
Seriously 😂 What a dumb comparison
It’s not a dumb comparison for say. Wasn’t really fair for matti to say that the canon is sharper. Which it is in every way cuz it has more megapixels and a higher resolution. Again it’s a hybrid mirrorless camera vs a compact cinema camera.
He had to give Canon two free wins (this and the photo category) or it would have been a slaughter.
Shouldve tested 8K outside , see if it would even work
@@davemunoz9742 Doesnt make a difference. As other tests showed, enviroment heat doesnt influence the internal heat of the R5.
15:53 “I don’t want to use the Eos R* anymore” is what he meant, I think.
😂😂😂😂
Or maybe his subconscious gave him the answer?
I was wondering the same thing
Maybe it just over heated
Sony looked better in color and detail IMO.
Hm, to me, Canon looks better at @7:36
Canon colors are great
🤣😂🤣😂
Yep, I agreed! But it $3000?! I hope that cost is joke😂
the sony "Active" stabilisation is actually just the camera cropping more in so the sensor has more room to move. Its not digital stabilisation, but you can use the gyroscope data to stabilize the footage later
Kinda the same thing but yes
Matti Haapoja not really Matti, electronic stabilization offered by Fuji, Canon and the Sony ZV-1(confusingly called active too) is digital image stabilization which can work but can also make things looks a bit warpy occasionally. It does tend to make things look smoother most of the time though, less mechanical. The A7S III active mode does indeed crop into the sensor 1.1x to give the IBIS more play. One of the biggest issues with the Sony IBIS is their smaller lens mount limits how much the sensor can shift. Canon, Fuji and Panasonic is mostly better due to having more of the sensor to shift. It remains entirely mechanical. It’s isn’t electronic or digital. So this new active mode is better for this simple reason. Then with the gyro data you can add really impressive post stabilization using that info in catalyst browse. I covered this in depth in my review 😊
I like the look of Matti's skin tone with the Sony better... The quality of the image seems similar, I feel like the colors are just better looking in the Sony now. Which I never thought I would say that because of have always been a huge fan of Canon color.🙃🙂
I was surprised, I thought the sony looked better and I actually thought it was the Canon before he told us. I'm a sony user and I just assumed the better footage was the canon.
Really? I was completely canon here. Sony looks flat out green.
Sonys new venice like color is now more cinematic and "less technically accurate".. Sony color was always technical where canons was more blue skies and better skin tones. Also w slog3 u can get whatever you want. You didn't mention there is no clog3 in R5 and it's bc its not high enough with its DR. Like sonys old 8 bit and slog3 was pointless. But now its literally a cine camera. 15 stops of DR tested. Thx gerald undone. No overheating in 4k standard. Thx matti. For video.. its no comparison.. if you shoot only photos than sure 45mp is higher than 12mp. But sony had 42mp camera 5 yrs ago. A7riii is still great camera w no overheating issues at all.. and A7riv does medium format quality. Look at armandos R5 shoot. He's a canon guy and speaks to it overheating badly. I'd wait til 2nd iteration if I owned Ef glass. Get 1dxiii if u do Events.. i don't think its reliable enough for pro environments.
@@andreasdk I personally feel that the Canon in this application is giving a more accurate image of Matti's skin tone maybe a little more pink than real life but that slightly green tint (sony) seems to look really nice to me but when it comes to color science it's all completely a matter of opinion. They both look great and I completely agree with Matti that the Canon color seems to be more true to life. I'm just really liking the dynamic range and color of the Sony more.
@@explorer.dream.discover I agree 👍 I mean both are excellent! Just really liking the look from the Sony
I think whoever is choosing between these two cameras needs to remember that the Sony A7Siii is a video camera first and the Canon R5 is a photo camera first with video capabilities.
You are right sir
and i cant wait to see a7siii vs an R3
9:18 ummm, the A7S III looks way sharper here, and has more detail. The dynamic range is also a lot better of course. Did you miss focus with the R5?
Yea bro. He missed it. A7Siii’s still image looked awesome to me, way better than R5!
I noticed it too. Sony sharper on the eye
Yeah, I thought that too. The A7S III looks a lot better, i wonder if he mixed up the images.
a7S III has more artifacting in its image. JPEG may have sharpened it more as well
Way sharper with the Sony. Must be a mistake. R5 should be sharper
oooh, I'll bet you're right and that it is a dynamic range issue. Hopefully the R5 will get a clog 3 update, which should help a lot on that front ("Sony looking more cinematic" point)
No it’s helps not even a stop (Gerald Undone did a test)
Sony is boss
sony has a bit more for sure. all up to what look you like better
I like when I move all over the place in front of my EOS R it LOCKS into focus but when I sit down for a talking head shot..it sometimes misfires on the AF lol. wtc
To me, the Canon looks better image/color wise for the vast majority of the examples.
It all depends on how you color the footage.
Matthew yeah I don’t understand this. You can get SLOG 3 footage to look like whatever you want especially with the dynamic range that is coming out of the Sony.
Interesting because I feel the opposite. The R5 leans heavily on the magenta side and makes skin look red. But I agree with Matti that this is a preference issue.
@@sstteevveenn77 it also may have to do with all of our individual monitors. I have two "identical" monitors, yet even with the same settings they have slightly different color reproduction. Neither are particularly fancy, but I'll give it a look on my laptop, which has a much more accurate display.
77dris might wanna go look at Gerald undone on that one, because it isn’t true. Dynamic range will be that of an a7iii, it still won’t match the a7siii. I’m not caught up in specs, I’m caught up in results, which for video heavily favored towards a7siii.
Question; if I shoot (lemon squeezing or water or fire) at 120 on Canon R5 and edited it to 240 will I get the same effect as shooting 240 on Sony?
What a great year for cameras, who know 2020 would give us so many cameras.
Yeah we have to document the impending apocalypse
true, so many mirrorless releases in the last 2 years from various brands = more choice for us 😁
I am a canon shooter all my life, I like Canon and yet, i think Sony looks more cinematic (any Sony really)... In the movies that we all love the colors are not always true to anything. This is what makes it so dreamy so we call it "cinematic" ... The dynamic range is a more important component and Sony has plenty of it! So Sony users, just be happy and go shoot!
good analysis. colour grading is part of the creation process. the canon here looked really accurate, but it's what someone might do with it .
Matti did you accidentally swap the images in the photo test? Because the Sony a7siii looks sharper to me somehow haha
Same
Yeah I seen that too, but it could just be the Sony over sharpening the jpg in camera. I guess it would be easier to see on a big screen and not an iPhone screen though!
Oh I'm glad it's not just me, thought I just had Sony on the brain and assume Sony always looks better🤷🏼
Lower resolution images will appear sharper when displayed on a 4K timeline like this. This is due to the lower resolution image having a bit of roughness that will come across as artificial sharpening in 4K and be unnoticeable to the human eye. 45MP image is scaled down the pixels scale with it and become much finer which creates the illusion of the lower resolution being softer when in fact it would be certainly sharper at 100% or printed.
Chase the Summit it would have been nice if he zoomed in 100% into the eye on that shot! I think you would have seen instantly what the difference was between the two cameras.
Matti : Has a Mac, tells how the As7iii and Eos R footage looks juggy while editing.
Me, trying to edit a minute of random shots taken on phone to a BRoll, takes 2 hours to render. 🗿📉
Haven't been this early though fam. ✌️😂
I feel u bruh 😂
Damn bruh
Thanks for doing this! I have been looking for this side-by-side for a while. My only hesitancy for getting a a7iv was canon's supposed advantage in color science. But, after seeing this, I prefer the Sony. Would you say the a7iv has about the same color as this a7siii?
I love that even though you're normally a canon guy, you're still able to give credit where credit is due. I think a lot of other channels are such fanboys of certain brands that they always lean in favor of "their" brand. It reminds me that its all about what camera works best for me, not which one I WANT to work best. Thanks Matti!
Never thought I would choose Sony just a month ago. Was so hyped with the R5 and Komodo. Haven’t used a Sony in a decade. Komodo still has full 16 bit RAW and higher dynamic range, but the A7SIII is really high quality and feature rich, especially AF and 4K120.
Don't lose the wood!! It's a great color and texture and feeling in the studio and as a background. Great comparison video! Thank you so much!
I found the RAW from the R5 has crazy dynamic range with CLOG 2. It takes forever to make proxies and export the final project though haha
@@TackJorrance The RAW is CLOG 2 in premiere and resolve on the R5 and 1DX III
I think if you shoot raw you can choose clog2 afterwards.
I really hope they will give us clog2 and clog3 in future firmware updates
Is Sony A7S III or Canon R5 good enough to capture lightnings in slow motion?
I liked the footage of Sony😍 More cinematic and dynamic range
How well and how automatically does the wireless file transfer works on these cameras? Can they transmit photos & videos automatically after shooting, or do you have to press buttons or wade into menus & manually select files? Is the camera still usable while it's sending the files, or do you have to wait until the file transfer is done before you can shoot again?
Meanwhile me: *staring at my t7i* ...
Sigh
I'm doing the same.
same
Also using a t7i
This is great CAMERA! Both video and photo are GOOD!
Me looking at my T3 trembling in the bag...... just need to save up a little more for that full frame.
My question is which one has the best lenses and most lense selection.
Sony a7siii still has that green tint to it..I’m looking at it from a 65” OLED 4k....and the crop is pretty big, it’s like going from a 20mm to 24mm
20mm to 22mm. It’s 1.1x
On RUclips? Remember you can grade the Sony any way you want. Go have a look at Gerald Undone. He comes to the opposite conclusion. The Sony has the more accurate colours while the Canon is all over the place. Plus if you shoot in SLog3 or Canon log you’re going to be grading anyway.
well you can just tint it to the blue like canon does .. dont see any deal with that. If you buy 4000$ cam you dont shoot in jpgs with it .. if you do then good luck to you. :)
To me the Sony still looks way to green and overall terrible. Even the red on the bricks just looks not as good.
Right I agree I was little upset of skin color I was really hoping to get rid of Canon but confirming Sony still the same I am keeping Canon. I understand it’s now 10bit but it’s not so easy to control skin color science by hand perfectly as Canon does automatically
So would it be a good time to pick up a A7s or A7sII?
Canon's IBIS makes it look like it's on a gimbal, Sony's IBIS makes it look like it doesn't have IBIS! The good news is that both cameras colours should be easy to match in post!
Tbh, I'd rather less smooth than having warp stabilizer like artifacts baked into the footage. 7:20
Sony has an Active mode for when the camera is moving. The standard stabilized mode should not have been used when the camera was moving. When he did show movement with Active on, it cleaned-up quite a bit.
Matti, what happened to your EOS R screen? In the car one day it fell against the seat and stopped working, did Canon repair it or did it just need turning off and on again?
Have to give it to the Sony for both color science and dynamic range. Canon skin tones had a more magenta look to it in your comparisons. Canon has it for the IBIS, but Sony Active Stab seems good enough for me.
Is the 4k vs 8k on screen a typo? I cant figure out why you are comparing those two outside of it being a typo..
Hey Matti if I’ve already bought these presets for premiere Pro but I’m now currently using Final Cut Pro X would you be able to make an exception to downloading the final cut Pro X version instead of having to purchase it again?
That would be awesome if you could do that!
What was the bit rate on the canon?
I think Sony’s AF was better but the canon lens seemed to be better. It didn’t focus breathe. Canon colour also looks nice. 4K vs 4K or 1080 vs1080 on the canon vs Sony the Sony would be much better.
Seeing you back on the EOS R shooting 1080p again and still looking great for online content work...
really reminds me that 4k/8k/HQ/Raw isn't that necessary yet for typical YT vlogs :P
True that
For some people, it will make big difference, but 1080p still definitely good enough if people aren't consciously peeping resolutions
Very true. Many people don't even watch RUclips on 4k displays. 4k/8k do come in handy if you want to stabilize or crop after the fact, though. The freedom to control your framing in post and not lose any resolution on export is pretty sweet.
Photos look more detailed on the A7S... did you shoot in a show shutter speed on the R5?
3:27 - when you leave the select character option on a video game for too long & they’re start doing small movements 😂
please suggest me i want commerical film making which camera better Sony A7siii or Sony Alpha 1 or Canon R5 ?
Overall I would say that Sony also wins with more budget friendly high quality glass for video!
aka the new "cheap" 6k$ lens Sony FE C 16-35mm T3.1 G Cinema (SELC1635G)
Something important worth noting is that a talented photographer can pick up anything and produce amazing photos and video.
These videos definitely help to figure out what camera suits someone best. You could flip a coin and be good with both for at least a decade.
Meanwhile I just got the A7 iii lol
Still a sick camera though 👌
it’s a different camera doesn’t compare to these, and still considered new, one of the best in the market too so nothing to feel bad about
Me too 😁👍
Best hybrid out
K9OUSSAY lol me too. I was going to get the R6 then I was like nah.
Most folks do not realistically have this option because they are invested either in one system or the other. If you are really OK with both, it means you have glass for both system, and if that's the case, why not keep both for a while until you develop clear feelings for one camera over another?
Sony and their damn yellow skin tones. 6:18 is a particularly egregious example. People who say they can't tell the difference between Sony and Canon color science, it truly boggles the mind.
Yeah that's definitely a deal breaker, can't stand spending 3 seconds correcting white balance, but I'll spend 2 hours with color correction, but not if the white balance is a bit yellow from camera that sucks Canon is the only choice
@@andrescarrasco1248 This couldnt be accurate. Sony cameras do not shoot that warm. You can put a sony a panasonic and canon next to eachother and fire em off, they shoot warmer tones than the sony. There is no way that one shot had the guy outside that orange and the canon was pale clear in comparison. That's almost laughable. User error not camera
Probably messed up the white balance in camera and didnt correct it in post. On the other hand, Canon's skin tones are too pink. If you want perfect skin tones, buy an Alexa lol
Nothing that can't can be changed in post. Still prefer the sony here. Looks like a the white balance wasn't set a bit warmer for the sony here.
The concrete looks yellower too. So the white balance is not the same here.
Hey question! At around 6:50 in the video... The wall color on that building to the right is really different. To me, one is green-ish, the other is blue-ish... What is the deal there? Can you say which camera is more accurate? To me, that is a big difference!
The "green-yellow" tint generally looks more pleasing to the eye, than the "blue-magenta" tint, from what is see, Sony wins. It is not always the reality that we perceive as pleasant, but what we imagine the reality to be ☺️
I agree.
Sony has crop? If you applied that same crop to R5 would the wobble be more comparable?
it's more like personal preference then that one camera is better.
I just purchased the audio presets, and tried them out with different volumes and mics and I must say they are so awesome. Thank you so much. Such a lifesaver
JEFFmcontent I’m debating, wish i got to hear the female option 😂! Might just have to try it out
Jessica Dudas I would recommend making that investment. There is a lot of effects to use.
JEFFmcontent awesome thank you! Think I will 😊
I really love the Sony´s skin tones, the dynamic (tho it´s marginal), the Eye AF and AF as general, and of course the low light is better but that we know already. I mean, if somebody´s seeing this and isn´t in any of these systems I think the Sony´s a better option for video, and you can buy a A7III for 1400 euros and have a photo camera with all the lenses and the Canon idk, it doesn´t seem so interesting at this point, it´s a super inovative camera, but for me, the Sony´s have been the best for years (and i even prefer the Z6 over de R believe me), so Canon doesn´t seem the "better" option here.
In your autofocus test, if you look into the out of focus background, the a7sIII has these incremental sudden shifting motions that makes it distracting whereas the R5 is fully smooth throughout. So in that regard, the R5 is better. But addressing this issue with Sony could help in updating the firmware to correct it. Could also be a particular lens issue.
My thoughts:
I do think Sony is the over all best filmmaking camera, the cinematic look is perfect and much more dynamic range than the Canon as well and no limits on filming.
For color: Personally the canon may look more real I’m not sure, but it also does make the skin look much less flattering I think personally.
At 6:48 in the video and look at the sky. The sky in the canon is completely blown out to me while you can see nice details in the sky on the Sony and the whites on the canon are too over exposed over all making the image much less pleasant to look at I think and the Sony looks to me like it keeps much more detail.
Detail: As said before, I think the Sony looks more detailed, especially in slow motion and as Gerald Undone also showed, the Sony 4K is more detailed than the Canon 4K especially if you zoom in and look closely. 8k of course is different.
If I had to make a choice, I would chose the Canon, mostly because I am photographer first.
If I had to recommend something for Matti, I would say the Sony because Matti is a videographer first.
I viewed this on a 4K Dell UltraSharp with factory calibration (an avg. delta E < 2)
Of course RUclips compression is also a thing but these are my opinions!
I have the impression that the two skies were shot a different times. The structure of the clouds is completely different. And the Canon was not completely blown out, there is still some blue in the sky whereas it is all white in Sonys image. If it was shot at the same time, then Canon holds the sky even better I think.
Brainpope Really? To me on my monitor the sky on the cannon was completely white and bright and you couldn’t see where one cloud started and the other cloud ended. My monitor is HDR certified too. In my opinion if they were taken in the same conditions the Sony would win even more because it has way better HDR. Anyhow, it’s interesting to hear how you saw it though and we see the videos after export and compression so it may skew the quality as well
What lenses were you using on both cameras for the comparisons?
RF glass is some of the best quality glass out there and everyone shooting Sony usually uses tameron and G master and could make a difference
With the Sony your subjects don’t need a tan, the Sony gives you a free tan. 😂
Thank you for mentioning that the Sony records sound in 120p. I will be shooting an event in 120p next year, and I DO NOT want to sync sound with an outside setup, while recording.
Fun Fact: The Sony FDR x3000 also records sound, in 120p mode. ...I have not tested its 720p/240p mode.
You should do a video comparison between Premiere - Final Cut - DaVinci, a lot of people are moving away from Premiere it seems
Anyone ever think the color diff is because the 2 companies use a different coating on their sensors and maybe glass... @ me
This is a bad comparison by far. The most jaw dropping ofc was “the a7s iii colors are more cinematic”!! Do you actually know what means cinematic?
Cinematic look is the perception that we built up in our memory of all those images filmed during the non digital era. People`s faces looked smoothier than today`s digital haarsh details. So, in today`s digital era, saying that a given image looks more cinematic is the same as saying that that image is less detailed. Using a poorer quality lens on any camera and yield a cinematic look. However, it must be added to this concept of cinematic look the fact that a good quality lens is not only restricted to its capability to produce sharp images. Take, for instances, any Cooke brand lens. It will produce the famous "Cooke Look", meaning a more 3D sense of ambience space while being very detailed yet not harsh. The final result of a recorded image will be always, as it has been since the creation of photography, a combination of the mutual inter-relation between thce glass and the sensor (digital or film negative). In this respect, the size of the sensor nor the amount of digital pixels will be the sole aspect to be considered behind the production of a good qualitiy image. Today`s extremely expensive Arri and Panavision cine cameras use, mostly, smaller sensors than the Sony A7S III and the Canon R5. With regard to comparing thsese two cameras, 4K X 8K, I concur with the author`s viewpoint to show us what each camera has to offer at its best. Furthermore, in the case of the Canon R5, should it be compared 4K X 4K against Sony`s, the R5 would still look more detailed since its 4K option would be oversampled from its rooted 8K capability. A 4K image, oversampled from 8K will look even better since its rooted pixels will be compressed into 4K.
@Brian Taylor Cool, Brian, but, at least I expressed my subjective perception to define cinematic (without quotes). You did not. Whoever`s view to explain what cinematic is it will be always subjective since it is a question of human perception. Come out and try to give me your own perception of what cinematic is and I might agree with it or not. The first time ever when someone used the word cinematic he or she was comparing a given footage to another that did not resemble the same visual appearance that cine films had been impressing to that date and, I bet you, Brian, he-she was comparing it to digital. One may say that digital is cold and film is warm. Another may say that digital is harsh and film is soft, and so on. Some may prefer digital to cine and vice-versa. So, defining cinematic does not use a mathematical formula. Perhaps one day will come that the term cinematic will be by and large connected to the looks of a digital footage and the original old pictures be defined by some other neology. I will always respect your own definition of cinematic since I have no clues (nobody has) to fully understand what Brian Taylor sees when he opens his eyes. The other day I went to visit the school where I attended when I was a little boy. Everything looked so different to what my memory always told me how that school looked like. In fact, although the buidings remained the same Ricardo had grown up, his optical nerves had worn out, his perception of the world around him was not the same. To my sight today, lttle Ricardo`s perception of his school was less cinematic. Ricardo`s eyes today sees the world with old lenses.
@Brian Taylor Cool, Brian, but, at least I expressed my subjective perception to define cinematic (without quotes). You did not. Whoever`s view to explain what cinematic is it will be always subjective since it is a question of human perception. Come out and try to give me your own perception of what cinematic is and I might agree with it or not. The first time ever when someone used the word cinematic he or she was comparing a given footage to another that did not resemble the same visual appearance that cine films had been impressing to that date and, I bet you, Brian, he-she was comparing it to digital. One may say that digital is cold and film is warm. Another may say that digital is harsh and film is soft, and so on. Some may prefer digital to cine and vice-versa. So, defining cinematic does not use a mathematical formula. Perhaps one day will come that the term cinematic will be by and large connected to the looks of a digital footage and the original old pictures be defined by some other neology. I will always respect your own definition of cinematic since I have no clues (nobody has) to fully understand what Brian Taylor sees when he opens his eyes. The other day I went to visit the school where I attended when I was a little boy. Everything looked so different to what my memory always told me how that school looked like. In fact, although the buidings remained the same Ricardo had grown up, his optical nerves had worn out, his perception of the world around him was not the same. To my sight today, lttle Ricardo`s perception of his school was less cinematic. Ricardo`s eyes today sees the world with old lenses.
Old lenses sending light rays to a lesser pixels sensor.
But you know that you can achieve the cinematic look by applying some profile on it? But what if you want more natural colors from sony a7iii?
Dynamic Range wins allways!
Dynamic range over resolution 100%
It's crazy how much more cinematic the A7S3 is, and how much more cinematic the FX9 is to the A7S3, and how much better the Arri is to that! I think the FX9 is C series is similar and very subjective, but yeah... I guess I'm going to be exposing for the highlights, and bringing up the shadows in post, as it seems that the R5 has more difficulty recovering highlights than shadows!!
Well damn, this feels like a harder decision to make then moving to another country lmao
EosR5 looks sharper? It should look sharper if it’s shot at twice the resolution right? 8k
The RF glass is the deciding factor for me - R5 all the way!
You mean the lack of lenses? Sorry with Sony you get gmaster lenses, g lenses, Tamron, sigma, Zeiss, voitglander and the list if brands go on.
Great test. The one thing that is truly missing is comparison of low-light performance.
I feel like we’re stepping into the golden era of Matti’s content and I’m here for it
If I were starting from scratch, I’d go Sony , coz you can’t forget you need lenses and having amazing options from tamron and sigma. Like the tamron 35-150mm pretty much covers 95% of what you’d need for video and photo. I was already invested in micro 4/3 so that’s what I stuck with but I have a canon R5 and I’ll start using more since the new firmware update has made it a viable camera.
No comparison. That canon footage is epic. 😃
I feel that the Sony is clearly a better video camera, but I LOVE the R, so what do I know 🤷🏻♂️
I’m so glad to see you enjoying Final Cut- it’s such a great app.
The Sony looks like an Arri low key - my eyes go to the Sony and “rest” there every time. Also viewing this on an iPhone at 1080p, the Sony looks sharper which had me SUPER confused in the beginning.
I agree, I’d take the Sony for filmmaking too, but id take the canon for stills.
Oh and you should download the ios14 beta if you want to experience RUclips it all it’s 4k hdr goodness on your iPhone, assuming you have an oled model!
I am learning Premier Pro now from FCP and it is so much harder lol any tips?
Compares 8k vs 4k saying the 8k has more detail... DUHH lol
Well Matti explained once that there’s a difference between detail and resolution. A GoPro in 4K will have less detail than a DSLR or mirrorless in 1080. But still, you’re right, it wasn’t an apples to apples comparison with the different resolutions.
from other tests canon's 4k 30p HQ has been consistently showing more details than a7siii 4k 30p videos. At the same time, a7siii 60p and 120p has been consistently than the canon r5 on 60p and 120p.
@@stevenkralovec I just found what he said and was doing funny... I respect his opinions.
@@vipersrt30 that's good to know, bet 4k60 is a popular choice
Hey Matti, were the cameras both set to the same white balance for this test? Just curious whether the difference in color is only due to the color science or if the Sony footage looks a little more greenish/warmer because of the white balance it was set to compared to the R5? The outside Sony footage definitely looks warmer to me...
The Sony image loos sharper, but that could be because the guy was a little out of focus... The R5 should be sharper... Edit: or is the R5 less sharp due to the AA filter...
R5 is sharper because of the 8k oversampling.
@@MartinVit Yes it should be sharper and it normally it is, but on the photo (jpegs) of Matti`s friend the A7S3 looks sharper. I dont´t know why... Then maybe it was a little out of focus. I looked at the 4k version of the clip.
@@77dris Lol an aa filter decreases resolution not increases - it makes everything slightly softer to avoid moire, why would you think softer (e.g. very slightly out of focus) means more resolution???
@@77dris ??
You can change whitebalance in the camera and put more magenta into it so it will be corrected?🤷🏼♂️
We are all splitting hairs at this point. They are both great.
Rocky Cola When looking at image quality, you are correct. But, when it comes to usability, the Sony is ahead for people who need dependability. Of course I am talking about overheating, but also the dual card slots. A duplicate video can be recorded to the 2nd card slot on the Sony but not on the Canon. That is a big deal for some people, along with limited record times in the higher quality modes on the Canon.
Dan Donovan sony is the only camera to ever not be dependable and corrupt cards. I have used both for the last 8 years and repeatable from time to time the sony fucks up a card. Best part is they are both using Sony cards.
schumif1champ Sorry to hear that! I switched to Sony from Nikon almost 2 years ago. I started with the a9 and a7RIII and now shoot with the a9II and a7RIV. Luckily no card failures. But, card failures are usually a card issue and not a camera problem. I use Lexar and SanDisk, but have not tried Sony cards yet. I thought the Sony tough cards would be next, but I will look into those before buying!
@@dandonovan1 I asked many Nikon DSLR photographers what they thought about Nikon Z6/Z7 & they all brought up the issue of single card slot, yes I agree with you, dual slots are a big deal if you are making a living with these cameras
Question can you post the files so we can see how the video files work on our computers I downloaded some Sony footage and it worked fine so maybe his footage was compressed
"The R5 is the better photo camera": in the frame the A7S3 looks way sharper.
I thought the same thing.
12 MP is the best! Sony fans. Haha
@@derekv6479 The only people who writes such nonsense ARE fanboys. FYI: I dont own any FF camera but are tempted with the R5. But nevertheless: if scaled down for insta etc, the 12MP just looks sharper because of better contrast. Its a matter of fact
@@matthiasb7853 Defending 12MP for stills and I'm the fanboy. L O L
Can we get an A7siii vs bmpcc4k/6k comparison? does the picture quality even compare?
Canon colours are flawless 👌🏼
Itz Si yeah not gonna lie i felt the sony kind of overdid the skintone warmth. Still looks way better than before. Unless matti and his friend sunless tan their faces.....
is the R5 still usable after it overheats? how long after you can use it?
You can use it in regular 4k mode, even after overheating
Long recovery times when in higher quality modes. Check out Gerald Undone’s review