As a Nature and wildlife photographer there was a “holy grail” camera that I had been looking for. High resolution, great tracking autofocus, and high number of frames per second for that tracking. I had waited a long time for some company to come out with this camera and the first to kind of get there was the A7RIII and the subsequent A7RIV which I did buy to replace my A7RII. A year (and likely a bit more) later Canon finally came out with the R5 which I also promptly purchased to replace the 5DS.
It seemed to take forever to get all the things I wanted in one camera and amazingly I now have 2 cameras that meet pretty much all my needs. Now, after using both for quite a long time, it is time to compare them a little side by side for how I use them.
I tend to carry a pretty simple combination of lenses with me. I have a wide angle zoom (16-35 F/4) for both Canon and Sony, a mid range zoom ( 24-70 f/2.8 Tamron for the canon system and a Sony G 24-105 f/4). I nearly always carry a 100-400 telephoto zoom for both systems and I have a very long lens for both systems (500 F/4 prime for Canon and the Sony 200-600 zoom). Along with a couple of teleconverters I pretty much cover 16-1000mm and 16-840 for Canon and Sony respectively.
There are a number of reasons that I use both Canon and Sony, but that really doesn’t matter now. Since I have both systems I find I use them both pretty much equally but take one out rather that the other often for different reasons.
I often take both cameras on any given shoot. If I think I need both a long zoom and a wide angle I will take the Sony 200-600 and put the 16-35 or 24-70 on the R5. If I think I will need to use the 500mm I will often also take the Sony either with the long zoom for those cases when a bird or animal gets too close for the 500 or I will put a wider angle on the Sony for more environmental shots.
When it comes to wide angle shots (anything less than 100mm to me is wide angle :) ) I have really found very little difference between the two cameras. At the long end the differences are really about the lenses. The Canon 500mm F/4 IS II is the sharpest lens I have ever owned and is the main reason that I bought the EOS R5 as I didn’t really want to sell that lens and try to get the much more expensive Sony 600mm.
Of course with that amazing sharpness and detail available using that lens you pay the price of carrying a very heavy lens out on long hikes to find the animals and birds I shoot. This is where the Sony 200-600 comes into its element. It is a slightly heavier lens that the 100-400 but the extra reach is something that I always need and with the A7RIV the autofocus is really amazing….even with the 1.4 teleconverter. This combination gets me to 840 mm with a 60 MPixel image which is really close to the maximum range I can get with the Canon’s 45 MPixels and 1000mm if I use the 2x teleconverter but weighs significantly less.
When it comes to the cameras themselves there are some great things about both and a few things that annoy me as well.
I’ve had the A7RIV the longest and am very used to the way the Sony full frame cameras work. Each A7 camera has evolved and improved over the last few years to become a very useful machine. With all the buttons on the camera I am able to assign pretty much everything I regularly change to one. This along with the quick menu means I really only go into the main menu very rarely…and usually anything I need in the menu more than once I have put in the custom menu portion.
For birds and animals I regularly use two main autofocus modes. Wide tracking is where I usually leave things and for the most part the camera will pick out the subject and hold onto it. Again this has evolved to a point now that I don’t very often have to worry about complex backgrounds or how small the subject is. However, I do still really need to consider my depth of field to ensure that I will have the whole subject in focus since this camera really doesn’t have useful animal or bird eye autofocus. Most of the time this is not an issue but this is one place the Canon is just better at this time.
When wide focus doesn’t grab the subject or when I need to pick out a subject in the bushes or in a crowd I use the button on the long lenses to switch to single point or small group tracking. Then I can get the subject to track and recompose the shot quickly or move the point with the joystick for quicker subject grabs. The ability to have subject tracking in any autofocus mode and starting with any (or all) focus points is really useful and something that the R5 cannot yet do (either all points or center point to start tracking).
The high plus mode on the A7RIV allows for 10 frames per second shooting and when I have the long lenses on the camera I pretty much leave it in this mode. In this mode you get 12 bit images, but for the most part I’m ok with that for action shots. From a resolution point of view using the 200-600 the images are good and sharp and with the 1.4 teleconverter the loss of detail is minimal for the gain in reach. The big thing that you are giving up is the amount of light as this combo is f/6.3 at 600 and f/9 and 840. If you can get the subject fully in the frame the images look good even at relatively high ISO (up to about 6400). However, if the subject is still small in the frame and you need to crop afterwards the combination of high ISO and cropping will quickly reduce the ability to get a useful final image. This is the main compromise for carrying a much lighter lens on longer hikes and most of the time it is worth it.
It has taken a number of years for Sony to get to the point that their system is where it is now (As I finish writing this the A7RV is now out and looks to have improved pretty significantly in both photo and video). I find it highly reliable and predictable which is very important to me. I know that I am likely to get the shot and I have good muscle memory for all the settings. This took a long time since I learned photography on Canon but now I can use both systems quickly and easily.
The Canon EOS R5 is the first full frame canon mirrorless camera that I have used. I have been using Canon digital cameras since the original rebel. We have had rebels, everything from the 20D up to the 50D, the 1D IV and the 5D series I, II,III, and DS. I loved using Canon DSLRs but also new that mirrorless technology was going to improve many things so bought into Sony as well while Canon sat on the fence for years with mirrorless.
The R5 was actually quite a surprise after the R and RP. Canon finally put everything (they had tech wise) into a camera again….something they had not done since the 5DII. This camera promised a great deal and so far it has delivered amazingly well from a photo perspective. This camera matches the speed of the A7RIV with a sensor that is almost the same resolution as the 5DS and an autofocus system that for the most part matches the Sony and even beats it in a few cases. Being able to use EF lenses without much in the way of limits is fantastic. There is one issue with that for me. The EF to RF adapter from Canon has been out of stock everywhere since I bought the camera. This means that I have had to pick up a third party Commlite adapter to be able to use my current batch of EF lenses. Most of the time this works well. The problem is that I do often get error messages where the camera shuts down. It is mostly unpredictable and as such it means that I don’t take this system out when I absolutely have to get the shot. UPDATE: I did get the canon adapter and still had the error messages, these issues have been reduced but not eliminated in the latest firmware for the camera.
The good thing is that I either just have to turn off the camera or remove the battery and I can shoot again. I have though missed shots of birds taking off or landing because of this. Sometimes I can go hundreds of shots without the error happening other times it happens over and over again and can become quite frustrating. For the next few years I will be relying on these adapters as I don’t expect to re-purchase RF version of the big whites any time soon. In fact, with the price increases in many RF lenses I may not be replacing many of the EF lenses at all. So far the only lens that I have bought is the 14-35 F/4 which gives me a little more wide angle than I have other than the 8-16 fisheye. The recent news that Canon is discouraging 3rd party lenses on the RF side is another reason I’m not getting many new lenses for Canon.
When the R5 is stable the shooting experience is really quite fantastic. The best part for me is the animal autofocus. Canon has really come from behind to have the best animal eye focus tracking out there. I have found it to get a birds eye even with the subject quite small in the frame. Tracking feels nearly perfect, and you can easily switch subjects when multiple are in the frame. The only complaint that I have is that unlike the Sony tracking is not available in anything but the wide area mode (or center point). If you could use movable single point, or small group to pick out your subject but have it track throughout the frame like the Sony can then I think it would have everything I need.
For someone currently looking at both systems and thinking of starting to spend money on one or the other here are some comparisons between the two and my very biased opinion (it has to be biased, it is mine).
View finder
Sony A7RIV - 5.76M dot, 1.3 cm, .78x reproduction
Canon R5 - also 5.76M dot, .76x reproduction
Both are very clear and easy to use. Tracking in the viewfinder is really amazing and just so much better than previous mirrorless cameras that I have owned. Out in the field I regularly use the viewfinder to review pictures since the rear screens are often useless in the sun.
For people who use glasses the Canon viewfinder is almost unusable if there is light coming at you from the behind and to the right. I have to put my hand around my glasses and try to hit the shutter with my baby finger under those conditions. I’m not sure why this is, I have used Canon cameras since the early 2000s and have never had this issue with any before. I would imagine there are some third party eye cups that could alleviate this issue but I haven’t looked into it yet.
A big issue with the A7RIV is the light sensor with sunlight behind me. This sensor seems way too sensitive and will for some reason trigger the back screen and will not go back to viewfinder when I put it to my eye. Often times I have to turn off and on the camera to get it to switch properly. This has actually cost me shots as I put my eye to the viewfinder to find a blank screen just as the action starts to happen. Much like the Canon situation above I have not seen this issue with any other Sony camera I have used ( I have the A7III and tried to replicate the issue unsuccessfully in the same light).
Blackout - Both cameras in the 10 fps mode act very similarly in terms of viewfinder blackout. It exists, but is very usable for tracking. I really don’t find either any different than using a DSLR where the mirror goes up and down. Compared to the A7RII or A7R that I had previously both cameras are totally usable and I can get good results tracking even fast birds . I have not yet used a A9 or A1 to experience the differences that technology brings to make a comparison with the latest technology.
Rear Screen
Sony A7RIV - 3 inch, 1.44M dots, touch screen (not for everything)
Canon R5 - 3.15 inch, 2.1M dots, touch screen.
Personally I like both the tilting screen of the Sony and the fully articulating screen on the Canon. They both have the range of motion that I normally need when doing landscape or astro photography. Even for video they both are great since I really have never used one of these cameras to see myself. I think the one limitation for the Sony is not being able to tilt while vertical for low angle shooting. The Sony screen doesn’t seem as clear as the Canon however I have noticed a few issues with the Canon screen becoming hard to see in very cold conditions (below -30 Celsius).
Canon’s touch screen has many more capabilities than the Sony, including the ability to use it for menu selection. For the most part unless I am doing video I find the touch screen to be more of a pain than useful so I don’t use either very often. I really prefer using the buttons and wheels which both work very well and very quickly on the Canon and Sony cameras.
Batteries
Sony A7RIV - NP-FZ100 2280mAh
Canon R5 - LP-E6NH 2950mAh
The newer Sony batteries have been amazing for anyone who used the original A7 batteries. I usually have one extra batteries with me but rarely need it on a full day of shooting. I have a vertical grip for the A7III but found that I would rather just carry the extra battery instead of making the camera bigger so have not bothered getting the grip for the A7RIV.
Canon gave a newer higher capacity battery with the R5. I have found that the battery life is significantly shorter than the Sony under similar conditions. I have other older batteries for Canon but they don’t last very long especially driving long lenses along with the camera. I usually carry 2 extra batteries on a day out and regularly go through at least half of the second. This is not a huge issue for me, but it is good to know that you need to be aware of your battery situation before going out each day, unlike the older DSLRs where I could regularly go out for a couple of days on the same battery. I will likely purchase a couple more of the new Canon battery since the high fps shooting seems to require a battery that is more than half full to shoot a the highest frame rate.
Adapters
Sony A7RIV - metabones (many others available for different legacy mounts)
Canon R5 - commlite and canon.
I have a Metabones adapter for Canon lenses (one of the older versions) that will work when necessary but I have the main lenses I use regularly in native FE so I don’t use the adapter much anymore. When used the autofocus works reasonably well even for tracking but can hunt under some conditions. It is a useful tool to have around for some special cases like using some wide primes for astrophotography.
For Canon I started using the Commlite adapter almost all the time (I only had the 35 f/1.8 RF native lens at the time). This adapter worked well for tracking with both the 100-400 II and the 500 f/4 IS II that I use most of the time along with both the 1.4 and 2x teleconverters. There are glitches and errors that happen semi-regularly which usually require me to cycle the power and once in a while to remove the battery. Compared to using the Sony adapter, the Commlite does not seem to limit the capabilities of the camera and lens combination. I was hoping the Canon adapter would reduce the error messages and possibility of missing shots but that turned out not to be the case and I still have issues that lock up the camera while shooting fairly often even with the new firmware updates (there is one new one at the time of writing this but it doesn’t claim to fix any of these issues).
Autofocus
Sony A7RIV - 567 phase detection points plus 425 contrast detection points
Canon R5 - Dual Pixel CMOS AF II (1053 Available AF areas when automatically selected)
Both of these cameras have autofocus capabilities that are so much better than anything I have used in the past. With the addition of 10 fps and good tracking it has changed the game for me since I also like having a high resolution camera.
Sony was the leader for tracking objects and eye autofocus up until the Canon R5 and R6 came out and is still really amazing. The interface is really great, you can enable object tracking in any of the modes (wide, single point, small group). I tend to use two modes most often. Wide area for most situations allows the camera to pick up the subject and follow through the scene. Often times the bird I want to shoot is being tracked before I get my eye to the viewfinder and most of the time it will not lose the subject. When there is either a lot of branches between myself and the subject or when there are multiple subjects to choose from I tend to use the single point and either focus and recompose once the subject is tracking or move the point to where the subject is in anticipation of a bird taking off or the action starting or use single point with object tracking to get the initial focus.
For landscape I will use many of the different modes along with manual focus and peaking to help me get a better feel for my actual depth of field in front and behind the focal point. This gives me a good idea if I need to do focus bracketing without having to look up charts.
The R5 has improved on the Sony capabilities in one major way for me. The animal eye autofocus is not just usable, it is really quite amazing. Up close, far away, in motion or in flight it just seems to work. The only issue I have is that it only works in the wide mode (you can start with center point to acquire the subject or let the camera decide but you can’t use other modes like small group of points). Most of the time this is not an issue since when there are a number of subjects you can switch eyes and subjects to focus on the animal you want, but you are kind of limited when trying to acquire a subject that is back behind a bunch of branches. In these cases I have to go back to single point but you lose object tracking and eye autofocus. It will still work in terms of tracking what is under that focal point so I fall back to that when necessary.
I don’t do as much video as I do stills but from what I have tried both cameras seem to track moving birds and animals well in the simple conditions I have tried.
Although I know that the latest Sony A9 and A1 cameras are better and faster both the A7RIV and the R5 meet my needs and beat my expectations. These cameras are just so much better than the DSLRs that I have used for so many years….going back to either my 5DS or the 1DIV seems like ancient technology after you have used these for a while.
Ergonomics
This section is highly subjective and relates to my person use cases. Since I very often have very large lenses on the camera, the size of the camera has little effect for balance so I tend to prefer a small and light camera to help keep the overall weight down. Both of these cameras are much lighter than the DSLRs that I used to carry around but both retain and even surpass those cameras in terms of usability. With joysticks, multiple wheels for changing shutter speed, aperture, exposure compensation and ISO I have everything I need in most cases for changing the general exposure settings while having my eye to the viewfinder. Changing ISO is a little easier on the Sony since I have the button on the right side of the wheel set for it and can press and turn with my thumb quickly. The Canon requires a different button to be set up for ISO unless you have the extra function ring on the adapters or lenses.
I usually shoot nature in Manual mode with Auto ISO enabled (so not really manual). With this setup I can change aperture and shutter speed to match the situation and allow the camera to ensure the exposure is correct faster than I can for the changing light conditions I find myself in, with birds in flight or animals moving in and out of the forest edge. I use exposure compensation to adjust when the cameras exposure calculations get messed up by overall dark or light scenes. I have found that the Sony cameras exposures are most often better (the subject I am interested in is well exposed) than the Canon but since they are both pretty consistent in how they expose for a scene it is easy to adjust. This is another benefit of the mirrorless cameras in that I can see the exposure as I’m shooting and adjust on the fly rather than having to chimp after a set of shots and adjust exposure based on pictures I’ve already taken.
In the end both cameras feel good in my hands and I don’t have much trouble using them interchangeably since I have them set up similarly. I don’t tend to need to use the menus in the field often and have most of the options I do change either on programmable buttons, the quick menus or the custom menus.
Images
If detailed images are something you find you need, or you need to crop because you can never get a long enough lens then these two cameras will not disappoint. Due to the higher number of pixels and the lack of an AA filter the Sony detail is slightly better depending on the lens you put in front of the camera. If you can fill the sensor with your subject to the level that you do not need to crop the detail level are amazing in both even up to 6400 ISO. When cropping on higher ISO images I have found the fall off to be quicker on the Sony in terms of loss of detail but I can heavily crop images at ISO 1600 and keep good detail for printing with a little noise reduction applied in Lightroom. Neither camera stands out as being much better than the other in these cases and both are amazing compared to the Canon 5DS that I was using before in these situations.
In reality, these cameras are so good it is difficult to find a significant difference in terms of quality of image. I still find it amazing that I can have the high quality, high resolution images at 10fps with full tracking and a good buffer in any camera let alone having two cameras that can do so.
Lenses
For the lenses I currently use the most both systems have excellent options. I usually carry a 16-35 (or close equivalent) F/4, a 24-105 F/4 or 24-70 f/2.8, and a telephoto zoom (usually a 100-400 or 200-600). I had invested heavily into a Canon 500 F/4 which for the price is something I will likely keep for a long time and do not have the cash to purchase long white lenses regularly so it is unlikely I will add another big white or get an equivalent on the Sony side unless I can get some sort of great deal in exchange for the 500.
Sony FE mount currently has what I consider to be the best selection of lenses on the market with excellent Sony native glass, high quality 3rd party selections and many different lenses for video as well as photography from many companies. There are also adapters to many older mounts if you need or want to play with them.
Canon RF mount currently has a modest selection of lenses available. Many of these lenses are excellent but they are expensive (often even more so than Sony native glass). Adapting EF lenses works very well even with Sigma and Tamron EF glass. There are very few 3rd party lenses for RF mount itself and Canon has not been overly eager to allow more. This may change in the future but currently is very much an issue for those people who might not be able to afford what Canon currently has out there or may want a lens that Canon doesn’t offer.
Conclusions
Based on my comparisons (and the fact that I still use both cameras on a daily basis my conclusion for those looking for a camera to by currently would be:
If you currently are invested in Sony, the A7RIV is a fantastic camera for both wildlife and landscapes. It is not going to be as good as the A1, and if you have the money I would get the A7RV that has just come out. I will not likely upgrade to the A7RV as the improvement are useful but not enough to make me want to shell out the money. If I currently was to upgrade I would go for the A1 as the stacked sensor is next level in changing the game.
If you are currently invested in Canon DSLR, and don’t care about brands then it is a crap shoot for which to purchase. Both cases you can use your EF lenses until you decide to get native ones. Sony has the benefit of many 3rd party lenses that are nearly as good as native.
If you are currently invested in Canon mirrorless (RF) then the R5 is in my opinion the best camera they currently have and well worth upgrading.
If you are outside of the Canon and Sony world currently, I think I would tend to point people to Sony not necessarily because one camera is better than the other but because there are so few real differences the lenses are what I would make the decision based on. Currently FE has the most lenses available from inexpensive to amazing pro glass and you have Sigma, Tamron, and a host of other 3rd parties that produce fantastic options.