Відео

I've never seen a comparison that demonstrates what you're saying about star color, but I'm willing to believe you given what I have seen with Canon color science in my other tests. But I think your conclusion lacks nuance. I've used the new mirrorless Canon cameras on this channel as well as the EOS 6D that so many rave about, and there is absolutely no way I'm going to prefer one of those over the a7S III for shooting a Milky Way timelapse. For whatever pinpoint stars it may flicker in and out of existence, it more than makes up for in foreground dynamic range and fidelity. Nothing comes close. So it really just depends on what we're talking about. It may very well be the case that if we're not shooting night landscapes but instead anything connected to a telescope lens, some Canon models may have an advantage. In my eagle nebula test shoot video from last year, you can see for yourself that the Canon EOS R6 is clearly outperformed by the Sony a7R V. Which Canon model do you recommend for that type of comparison? If you let me know, I will make it a focus to try to obtain one and test it.

@@DesmondButler I've seen many astrophotographers started using the R after switching from the 6D, however the R6 should also be pretty good. In that comparison the A7rV wins in detail because of the 60mpx but I really don't see much difference in SNR between the two.

@@v0ldy54 It's not just the detail that photographers would be looking for, but also the light capture. It's a little harder to decipher in that nebula comparison I did, but in the Milky Way shootout I did that same summer, you can see that the Sony a7R V reproduces way more light in the exact same situations than the Canon R6. To be getting more detail AND more light when its already split between a lot more pixels is pretty crazy. I've heard that the R6 Mark II is quite a step up from the Mark I in terms of low light performance, so maybe I need to hunt one down for testing.

It's such a good hybrid shooter that I find myself frequently recommending it to photographers looking to upgrade.

It would be possible to capture some stars, but it would be way too dark and way too noisy to meaningfully make out the details of the dust clouds and nebulae. In that respect, the a7S really does stand alone.

I've never owned a wide angle lens with an aperture under f2.0, but it's on my wish list. I am currently working on getting my hands on the a6700 to do some comparisons. Thanks for the suggestions!

Read the provided definition on screen

This is a comparison a lot of viewers seem interested in. Perhaps a full head to head between the two models would be in order if I ever get my hands on the a7 III. Thanks for your input.

You have just made perfectly clear to every other viewer that you did not watch the video, nor do you seem to comprehend the specific use case here. "Base" ISO, more ubiquitously referred to as native ISO, is a concept explained in depth in this video (something you would know had you actually watched the video). Furthermore, to have set each individual camera to their respective second native ISO values, which I specifically outlined, would in no way assist potential buyers. Conversely, by showing the performance of these cameras at multiple ISO values well above those native levels, a photographer interested in low light landscape image capture will come to understand the differences between these sensors, helping them to choose the right camera for their purposes. Astrophotographers understand this intrinsically. Those interested in a comparison of low light video capture between these models can watch my previous video, which demonstrates the advantage of the second native ISO for dealing with low light video noise: ua-cam.com/video/HdPAfAMPnls/v-deo.htmlsi=jishhtEdOKQTkaPO

Glad I could help!

@@DesmondButler one more question, what do you think about lens samyang 14mm 2,8 for night shots?

@@0palev Great question! That is the exact lens I used in my five camera comparison last summer (mine is branded "Rokinon", but they are the exact same fabricator). For the price, I don't think you can beat it for full frame lenses. It doesn't even stretch the stars at the edges as badly as you might expect from an inexpensive lens. Though, you will have to be patient with manually focusing every shot. If you want to see some sample images, you can check out that video here: ua-cam.com/video/4OvRnfRykwI/v-deo.html

Scarcity probably. I'd really like to compare with a Panasonic model. Which one do you think would fair the best?

@@DesmondButler An S series camera.

Good eye. It's somewhat common to catch shooting stars in Milky Way landscape photos because they're so much wider, so that is pretty cool that the R6 spotted a tiny one.

Thank you, good sir.

The a7 IV will definitely produce noticeably less noise on low light high ISO exposures than the a7R V, but the blue pixels does sound odd. I've had that camera produce some magenta vignetting when the scene is extremely dark, but that's true of most cameras. You might want to reach out to other Sony shooters to see if anyone else has had the issue.

Most of my viewers are more interested in a multipurpose camera that can capture night shots proficiently. You're absolutely right if we were only talking about deep sky imaging, but it would be pretty silly to shoot Milky Way landscapes with a ZWO camera.

It sounds like you and I have come to a lot of the same conclusions. I hear you on color science, people do have legitimate reason to prefer Canon, but I would still call this a personal preference rather than an objective standard, and I imagine you'd agree with that. With only one exception, the comparison videos I've done are all for untracked, uncomposited, authentic single exposure Milky Way images, and for that reason my videos have primarily focused on noise. Perhaps I should do a test using a tripod tracker with the main cameras I've featured. At that point, we would be comparing other aspects than noise, as you rightly pointed out. My main comparison video from last summer featured the a7R V and the EOS 6D, and I have to tell you that while the 6D is really good, the Sony appeared to produce far less noise. Check it out sometime if you're at all curious: ua-cam.com/video/4OvRnfRykwI/v-deo.html Thanks for the comment! It's always cool to hear experience from photographers who are trying similar things to what I do here.

Thanks for the suggestion. Nikon has been on the to-do list for too long.

Yes, I actually mentioned in my latest video that the ZV-E1 is the same sensor. There are some drawbacks, but for everything I did in this video, the differences would not matter. The ZV-E1 should perform exactly the same for low light video and photos as the a7S III at normal recording settings. I think there are a lot of good reasons for amateur photographers to go with the more stripped down model, and price is definitely one of them. Thanks for asking this question!

@@DesmondButler thanks for the incite... sony really makes it hard to choose since they have such a wide range of sensor/body combinations. I will head over to watch that video!

Those who listened to the video heard it clearly stated that that ISO value would be ridiculous to use and that those test images are strictly for demonstrating the differences between sensors. The point is to prove beyond any argument which cameras perform best against low light noise. This was already accomplished at the lower ISO value, but some viewers are difficult to persuade.

Thanks! I agree, it is important for amateur photographers to understand that they can still capture something they can be proud of on a budget. Furthermore, you can see from some of my earlier comparison videos that Sony APS-C cameras really stand out for low light performance.

@@DesmondButler I don't have the A6500, but the A6000 and I struggle to get clean photos (even after denoising) of the northern lights, but your videos give me hope that the newer models are indeed good enough and I won't have to upgrade to A7. I don't even have a good lens for night sky photography, but maybe I'll get the Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f2 soon and step up my game.

@@Meg_A_Byte I have absolutely loved that APS-C lens. Well worth the price, my friend. Hope you get to capture some great shots soon!

@@DesmondButler Thank you! I hope that you're doing well and getting some good light!

@@Meg_A_Byte Could be worthwhile to have a closer look at the Sony 11mm f/1.8, Meike 10mm f/2, or Viltrox 13mm f/1.4 instead - each being a better lens than the Samyang/Rokinon.. Also, seems like the A6400/6600 are even a little bit better in low light than the A6500. But all arae definitely way ahead of the A6000..

Awesome! Let me know how it goes!

Thanks for saying that. That's really what I hoped this video would do for potential buyers. Wish I could have warned you earlier 😅 I think I agree with how you described the a6500. That being said, I still love mine. Its still the only camera I take on vacation 😅

Thanks for watching!

Thanks! You can count on it 👍

I can't say I've noticed that, but I would say that canon does seem to have a slightly different color science, and some do prefer what that produces. For me, it depends on the scene. I actually really like Sony color for night shots. As far as the stars looking green, maybe someone else here knows.

@@DesmondButler thanks for getting back to me, I have been looking at the A7 IV as Alyn Wallace used this model as he did Astrophotography but sadly passed away not to long back also he lived here in Wales a few miles from me, you might have seen him on UA-cam... Have you tried the Canon R6ii for astro? as I was also looking at this one.

@@darkshaman7087 I have heard important upgrades were brought to the R6 Mark II, but so far I've only gotten my hands on the Mark I. I will definitely have to test it out in the future. I had not heard about Alyn. That is terrible news. I'm just now reading the articles about his passing. He will certainly be missed here. What an absolute tragedy.

@@DesmondButler the r6ii seems a good camera also I have heard the mk 3 is coming out soon so the price might drop on the mk2, but it's a hard choice between the Sony and the Canon I will have to do some more research into them... I found out Alyn was suffering from an underlying condition also in some of his videos he seems weak, it's a pity as he was so young and such a big loss, he moved from here in Wales and lived in Turkey and that is sadly passed away... If you type in on google about Alyn it will mention about his passing.

Glad you asked. Here you go: ua-cam.com/video/655z9GGS4yI/v-deo.htmlsi=UckU_jDQ4ZfK6ELr

Haha, thanks man!

+ he has only 946 sub wtf

My problem is that I can't seem to get the right balance between noice reduction and sharpening, do you have any guides or recommendations?

I personally haven't experimented with altering the camera's sharpness settings. The built in long exposure noise reduction is pretty good, but in recent years I find myself using the denoise process in Adobe Camera Raw more often. The next video I'll be putting out this summer will go over the process, but it's pretty straight forward, just two clicks. For me, the balance with sharpening and noise reduction is easier to find in post with tools from Adobe.

For Milky Way photography, you're absolutely right. The major difference is the 8k video, which is far superior to 4k for planetary imaging using the "lucky imaging" technique. If you don't care about capturing planets, then the a7R IV is essentially the same product but less expensive. One additional caveat might be high speed wildlife photography, where the AI model on the a7R V is said to be better, but I'd venture to guess its marginal in practice.

Thanks!

Thank you!

I hear the same is true for our friends in the UK. Hang in there, my friend. The clear nights have to show up eventually 🤞

I'm flattered by these compliments 🙏 Thank you!

That does sound like a great night lens 👌

Yeah, I'd say that's a pretty logical conclusion.

FX3 + A7RV 🔥

@@FahadAJT Sounds like you have your bases covered 👍

It boasts some pretty impressive stats. Looking forward to testing one out someday.

Thanks for sharing that info! I've been told that the Canon R6 Mark II has low noise, but I've seen charts that say that the Mark I has lower noise than the Sony a7R V, and that is verifiably false from some of my other comparison videos. I need to test the Mark II though. It seems safe to assume that the a7C II would be a great choice, both economically and for noise.

Thanks for watching!

Here is a tutorial for how I create timelapses: ua-cam.com/video/655z9GGS4yI/v-deo.html I recorded this video last year before I had the a7S III, but the process is almost exactly the same. Hope it helps!

@@DesmondButler awesome thanks!

I've heard this about the a7 III. I would at the very least be interested in testing the Mark III against the Mark IV to see how much difference there is. Either way, you're right that I do need to test the Mark III.

Yeah, I was surprized to see A7 III produces more than a stop less noise than A7R M1 and having noise level very close to A7S despite twice megapixel count. In terms of noise level it's a very capable camera. There may or may be not some nuances in astrophotography in comparison to typical use, but I feel it might be one of the best suited camera for that purpose.

This is why I continue to shoot Astro with my A7lll. Plus, I don’t care for the A7lV flippy screen in landscape orientation.

Its not just okay, its a really great camera. It is super fast, and has a fantastic auto-focus in normal lighting. In low light, its still better than most cameras I've tested. Really the only major drawback is file management. The 61MP images do fill up your hard drive quickly 😅

I'm very curious, what part of this video did you think was AI? 😆

That would be a really good idea. I'm going to try to make that test happen.