The growing disparity between Canon and Sony

[Jon Ruyle]

<span>
<div>


Rather than hijack the thread this came from, I thought I'd start a new one.

When it comes to sensors, the disparity between Canon and Sony has grown so large that it's embarrassing. Unless Canon is about to come out with a huge leap forward, they really should just close down their entire sensor development operation and start buying Sony sensors like everyone else (Nikon). The Sony models from several years ago are still several orders of magnitude better then Canon's newest.

Wow. I guess it's back into the trash with the 5DII. []Are you talking about read noise, Daniel? I know Sony sensors have much higher dynamic range (I thought because read noise is lower) and better super-high ISO performance (again, due to read noise). I would have thought sensitivity was close (within a stop rather than "several orders of magnitude", which I interpret to mean several stops.)


Can you elaborate? Again, I knew Sony was ahead in some ways, but I'm surprised by the force of this statement.


When I bought the 5DII, I was convinced that the alpha had far worse sensitivity than the 5DII, and maybe that was true then (or maybe I was mistaken). Amazing that things can change so fast.



</div>

[Daniel Browning]

Wow. I guess it's back into the trash with the 5DII. [img]/emoticons/emotion-5.gif[/img]

Good idea. My 5D2 kept working faithfully no matter the condition, whether rain, snow, or poor lighting. But nothing kills a camera faster than when the competition comes out with a better model.Sometimes just the announcement of a new camera is enough to make your old prints seem soft and make wall-mounted photos dull and drab. Don't listen to those anarchists who claim that cameras continue to work as good as they always did.


[]

Are you talking about read noise, Daniel?

Yes. Low-iso FPN, especially.

Can you elaborate?

The D7000 sensor is just fantastic for its low read noise and the absence of temporal FPN, allowing the use of over 10 times more dynamic range than the 5D2.

When I bought the 5DII, I was convinced that the alpha had far worse sensitivity than the 5DII, and maybe that was true then (or maybe I was mistaken). Amazing that things can change so fast.

No, you were right. The A900 was way ahead in low-ISO read noise and FPN, but it wasn't as good in sensitivity.

Again, I knew Sony was ahead in some ways, but I'm surprised by the force of this statement.

The difference really is that stark. Canon's high ISO performance has improved by leaps and bounds in the last 8 years, while their low-ISO stuff has stayed about the same.

[Jon Ruyle]

Good idea. My 5D2 kept working faithfully no matter the condition, whether rain, snow, or poor lighting. But nothing kills a camera faster than when the competition comes out with a better model.

Yeah, and Nikon has come out with several since the 5DII. (Mine still works great, too, but that's hardly the point [])


<span>

Unless Canon is about to come out with a huge leap forward, they really should just close down their entire sensor development operation and start buying Sony sensors like everyone else (Nikon).

<span>I doubt they'll do either. As I wait patiently for canon's next sub $5K full frame camera (not that I need a new one), the bar just keeps getting higher.

[clemmb]

nothing kills a camera faster than when the competition comes out with a better model.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

I still love my 2005 vintage 5D and 1DmkII[]


Mark