Blindfolded, I know, based on all past experience, that the Sony A7V will be inferior in every imaginable way. Except on paper. So if you like the camera to be good on paper, go for it.
I don't think it would cover it in RAW. Your fastest UHS-II cards top out at 300 MB/s theoretical maximum.
I’m glad I remembered I’m on a photography forum because that sounds like something you’d hear at a crime scene.
The other big advantage is just how much faster it is to load the pictures onto a computer. Despite the R5II having larger files than the R6II, importing the pictures is far less annoying (well I do miss being able to use my laptop's built in card reader)
I probably will do so. I've been tossing up for a while as to which new body I get, and my EOS R is looking nervous as we speak ...
I have a camera from another brand that gives you all the individual shots, and I totally agree. It is so easy to extract the shots in-camera and then delete the entire burst file.. Usually there may only be one or two keepers - and often you'll get none. Delete the burst rather than deleting 50 or 60 or 80 individual images. I think most people don't like the current method because they either don't know you can do it in-camera...or they just haven't figured out how to do it in-camera.
I rather like the cfexpress on my R3. It lets me crank out raw photos and jpgs on separate cards at 30fps for long strings without crapping out the buffer. I doubt I could do that with 2 SD cards at the same volume for the same amount of time.
speed vs convenience... I prefer to offload my R5 images via the SD card to my macbook pro just so I don't need to get out my CFe card reader and cable. If I have high bitrate video that can only be recorded to the CFe card then I would offload it via CFe but that is rare for me.
It’s such a big difference between the SD from my R8 and the CFe from my R5II, it’s about 8 times faster, 2gbyte/s vs 250mbyte/s. And thanks to pre-capture adding 15 pictures to each shot, it needs that speed advantage
I held a few Sony cameras before, and I ditched the idea of jumping ship as it was uncomfortable to hold for a long time... unlike Canon and Nikon....
I had the R and sold it for a refurb R5. It's surely a great camera for landscape - but with mediocre AF tracking and worse-than-Sony skintones. Even with color profiles like Color Fidelity skintones still looked off. And I don't have the time to use a color checker for each shooting just to get the skintones right. Too bad because the autofocus was good enough for model shootings.
www.dpreview.com
I own an EOS R for almost six years now (I used to have two, now just one) and I've almost never had a problem with skin tones. In fact, the difference between the R and the R5 is minimal to none for me.I had the R and sold it for a refurb R5. It's surely a great camera for landscape - but with mediocre AF tracking and worse-than-Sony skintones. Even with color profiles like Color Fidelity skintones still looked off. And I don't have the time to use a color checker for each shooting just to get the skintones right. Too bad because the autofocus was good enough for model shootings.
Skintone comparison here:
Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
I know people debate about the skintones and color science of differnt brands and say that A is better than B. But I checked the dpreview site and found that even within Sony, there is a large variation of what skin tones are on differnet models. Check out the differnces on these 4 Sony cameras. a7R IV, a7S, a7R V, and the a7 III. https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/im...=1&x=0.8621086612740415&y=-0.1728428400173742I had the R and sold it for a refurb R5. It's surely a great camera for landscape - but with mediocre AF tracking and worse-than-Sony skintones. Even with color profiles like Color Fidelity skintones still looked off. And I don't have the time to use a color checker for each shooting just to get the skintones right. Too bad because the autofocus was good enough for model shootings.
Skintone comparison here:
Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
There can certainly be variations from one camera model to another, but the DPR comparison tool sometimes shows substantial exposure differences, which makes it not particularly useful for actual comparisons.
CF Express cards are generally cheaper then fast V90 SD UHS-ii cards and the card readers are cheap too
