Did someone check the orirginal white balance on each photo? Serge the photos are diferent because a simple thing, in one photo you have a white balance of 7100k and the other is 5250k, that a big diference. Thats the reason you have one photo with "more saturation". You need to have the same white balance in both photos to have a correct comparation.
Serge, sorry, man, but I have to knock down your comparison. You compared two cameras with TWO DIFERENT LENSES and tried to draw conclusions on the SENSORS. It can't be done that way. You should have used THE SAME LENS on both cameras to draw any kind of conclusion about saturation, image stabilization, sharpness and so on. Everybody knows that the 24-240mm is not a great lens, while the new 24-105mm seems to be much better lens. Any doubt that the A7r3 would be better than the A7r2? Not at all - a few years and a lot of "water technology" under the bridge and any new camera will be much better in some ways than their old siblings. BUT, HOW much better is it? As far as your video, we can't say anything because of that flawed methodology. I do like your videos, though. :) This one is not one of them...
Yes, lenses can drastically affect color, contrast, sharpness among other things. To be 100% neutral, you have to use the same lens. I still think there was some good info in here.
PKmode, I agree that there are good info in the video despite the methodological mistake, but I really think Serge should either complement the video with a disclaimer about the issue or either take it down entirely in order not to mislead his followers which might not be so inside lenses and their intricancies. Anyway, the observation is important.
Yep, Serge, they can. And also they can influence in your handheld capabilities (due to better in-lens stabilization that would work better with the sensor stabilization). That's why I think you should either insert a disclaimer in your video or take it down. This video may mislead your viewers . IMHO
Yes the lens could change a bit the colors. But check your WB, with the R2 you were at "5250 +8" and with the R3 you were at "7100 +15", that is a lot of a difference.
Exactly .. for me this is a dislike for the video.. a professional should know that if you want to compare something there must be just one single variable! Not a different camera on a different lense.
The sensor in the a7r III is the same sensor as found in the a7r ii. What has changed is the supporting technology *around* it and the algorithmic image processing. However, I think we'd get an even better idea of how the images from each camera compare if we start with images that have the same WB and exposure. It's true that first image had the same shutter speed and ISO, but the exposures were different. This could have been due to a shift in light at that moment or the fact that the lenses were different. At any rate, it didn't appear to be the same, to me. And if the starting point is different after applying presets, the results will also be. They a7r iii image was also in better focus.
We all like zooms , the 12-24,-24 105 & 100-400 GM is a very nice kit, but just make sure on the 12-24 & 24-105, that your lenses come centered.. Its a issue many have had to get 2 & 3 copies to get centered lenses. Now lets move onto Prime Kit 15 lowa 21 loxia 35 loxia 50 1.4 sony and 85 & 135 batis .. It will take your micro contrast to a whole new level
I wonder how much of the difference was the lens. No offense, but I tried the 24-240 and while good, it really is not in the same class with the better Sony lenses. I would check your pixel shift night photo example. There should have been noticeable movement of the people in the frame if you were really using pixel shift. I wonder if you only had a single frame ?? As always, thanks for your great videos.
The sensor is the same in the 2 cameras according to Sony. The color difference could be the lens or it could be Lightroom. Try turning off any profile corrections and see if that makes a difference.
I have not seen Sony confirm anywhere they are the same sensor. While many initially said that due the the same MP count, I've seen many now claiming it is in fact a different part. I guess I'm curious one way or the other. Not that it matters but I'd like to know.
There have been complaints on the web regarding the vignetting on the 24-105 at 24mm. From your images you have the same issue with your 24-105 and the 24-240 at 24mm. I looked back at my catalog of photos taken with my 24-240 at 24mm and I'm not having the same issues. I shot them all on a A7ii. Could that be the difference or did I have a better copy?
From what I've heard the 24-105 is actually wider then 24 and the camera crops to get rid of it. I just bought the 24-105 and for some reason I had like 1 or 2 pictures that had the vignetting. I took at least 50 pictures at 24 and all of them were at f8.
So unhappy Sony doesn’t offer Smooth Reflection in the iii series cameras. I’m using an A7ii and want to upgrade, but the lack of Smooth Reflection is a big deal to me because I use it a lot.
Premièrement, the lens is not the same and it surely influences the colour. You would have to test with the same lens. Ensuite ;) a question... For the comparison of the pixel shift function I suppose you used the Sony software as the Lightroom doesn't have the function. Was it time consuming, easy, etc.? Many thanks for a video :) always watch with pleasure :) Cordialement
Pixel shift with moving water? Everybody writes it is not suited for that.. Other than that, too many variables, different lens, WB, then instead of adjusting WB you throw a preset on it. "I am sure that they changed the sensor" - Jesus!!! The lens on the a7rII (24-240) is much worse...
Hmmm....I've got the 24-105 f/4 ordered from B&H but they haven't sent it to me yet (backordered). Maybe they gave you mine. Give it back! ;-) (just kidding...hoping mine arrives soon)
... this shows clearly how green the R2 was. Anyways... if I had the money to switch systems (esp. to Sony) I d get the R III, but It might be better for me to consider the D850.
Its also always better to use the thicker legs of the tripod in stead of the most flimsy ones for better stability. At least when you haven't completely raised your tripods as seen in the video.
really really bad video. it seems you have no clue about technology. with this test setting you could also compare a sony a7riii with a rx100. and please... in a camera comparison there is no room for your presets. I mean do you have one video without advertising your presets? just unsubscribed.
The so called half second ibis test ?? one taked with both hands at waist level..at a lower angle pulling in more light.. the other at head hight pointing down..pulling in less light..Pixel shift test ?? pixel shift is designed mainly for none moving subjects.. not waves and shifting light etc.. And guess what..the sensors are exactly the same.. Why make vids on something you just haven't researched and do comparisons that are not like for like.. all you do is make yourself look foolish and mislead people..
Thank you again Surge but please, please do away with the back ground music. It is very distracting when I only wish to here every word you say. I am not a Sony fan but it looks a very impressive camera .
Did someone check the orirginal white balance on each photo? Serge the photos are diferent because a simple thing, in one photo you have a white balance of 7100k and the other is 5250k, that a big diference. Thats the reason you have one photo with "more saturation". You need to have the same white balance in both photos to have a correct comparation.
Serge, sorry, man, but I have to knock down your comparison. You compared two cameras with TWO DIFERENT LENSES and tried to draw conclusions on the SENSORS. It can't be done that way. You should have used THE SAME LENS on both cameras to draw any kind of conclusion about saturation, image stabilization, sharpness and so on. Everybody knows that the 24-240mm is not a great lens, while the new 24-105mm seems to be much better lens.
Any doubt that the A7r3 would be better than the A7r2? Not at all - a few years and a lot of "water technology" under the bridge and any new camera will be much better in some ways than their old siblings. BUT, HOW much better is it? As far as your video, we can't say anything because of that flawed methodology.
I do like your videos, though. :) This one is not one of them...
You are right, but I had no idea a lens could change the color so much !
Yes, lenses can drastically affect color, contrast, sharpness among other things. To be 100% neutral, you have to use the same lens. I still think there was some good info in here.
PKmode, I agree that there are good info in the video despite the methodological mistake, but I really think Serge should either complement the video with a disclaimer about the issue or either take it down entirely in order not to mislead his followers which might not be so inside lenses and their intricancies. Anyway, the observation is important.
Yep, Serge, they can. And also they can influence in your handheld capabilities (due to better in-lens stabilization that would work better with the sensor stabilization). That's why I think you should either insert a disclaimer in your video or take it down. This video may mislead your viewers . IMHO
Yes the lens could change a bit the colors. But check your WB, with the R2 you were at "5250 +8" and with the R3 you were at "7100 +15", that is a lot of a difference.
You’re comparing different lenses. Isn’t the The 24-105 a better lens?
Exactly .. for me this is a dislike for the video.. a professional should know that if you want to compare something there must be just one single variable! Not a different camera on a different lense.
The sensor in the a7r III is the same sensor as found in the a7r ii. What has changed is the supporting technology *around* it and the algorithmic image processing. However, I think we'd get an even better idea of how the images from each camera compare if we start with images that have the same WB and exposure. It's true that first image had the same shutter speed and ISO, but the exposures were different. This could have been due to a shift in light at that moment or the fact that the lenses were different. At any rate, it didn't appear to be the same, to me. And if the starting point is different after applying presets, the results will also be. They a7r iii image was also in better focus.
We all like zooms , the 12-24,-24 105 & 100-400 GM is a very nice kit, but just make sure on the 12-24 & 24-105, that your lenses come centered.. Its a issue many have had to get 2 & 3 copies to get centered lenses. Now lets move onto Prime Kit 15 lowa 21 loxia 35 loxia 50 1.4 sony and 85 & 135 batis .. It will take your micro contrast to a whole new level
I wonder how much of the difference was the lens. No offense, but I tried the 24-240 and while good, it really is not in the same class with the better Sony lenses. I would check your pixel shift night photo example. There should have been noticeable movement of the people in the frame if you were really using pixel shift. I wonder if you only had a single frame ?? As always, thanks for your great videos.
The sensor is the same in the 2 cameras according to Sony. The color difference could be the lens or it could be Lightroom. Try turning off any profile corrections and see if that makes a difference.
I have not seen Sony confirm anywhere they are the same sensor. While many initially said that due the the same MP count, I've seen many now claiming it is in fact a different part. I guess I'm curious one way or the other. Not that it matters but I'd like to know.
the preset look so fake, is that what photography is all about now?
There have been complaints on the web regarding the vignetting on the 24-105 at 24mm. From your images you have the same issue with your 24-105 and the 24-240 at 24mm. I looked back at my catalog of photos taken with my 24-240 at 24mm and I'm not having the same issues. I shot them all on a A7ii. Could that be the difference or did I have a better copy?
From what I've heard the 24-105 is actually wider then 24 and the camera crops to get rid of it. I just bought the 24-105 and for some reason I had like 1 or 2 pictures that had the vignetting. I took at least 50 pictures at 24 and all of them were at f8.
At f/7.1 or f/8 where he took these images, there shouldn't be any vignetting to speak of, even on the wide end.
So unhappy Sony doesn’t offer Smooth Reflection in the iii series cameras. I’m using an A7ii and want to upgrade, but the lack of Smooth Reflection is a big deal to me because I use it a lot.
Merci! You have with your video just convinced me to go with the newer model 👍 a7riii
Nice! I should really be sponsored by Sony ;-) haha
Premièrement, the lens is not the same and it surely influences the colour. You would have to test with the same lens. Ensuite ;) a question... For the comparison of the pixel shift function I suppose you used the Sony software as the Lightroom doesn't have the function. Was it time consuming, easy, etc.?
Many thanks for a video :) always watch with pleasure :) Cordialement
how to get your free presets? i clicked the link above but i didn't get yet.
Pixel shift with moving water? Everybody writes it is not suited for that.. Other than that, too many variables, different lens, WB, then instead of adjusting WB you throw a preset on it.
"I am sure that they changed the sensor" - Jesus!!! The lens on the a7rII (24-240) is much worse...
which lightroom version u use?
Hmmm....I've got the 24-105 f/4 ordered from B&H but they haven't sent it to me yet (backordered). Maybe they gave you mine. Give it back! ;-) (just kidding...hoping mine arrives soon)
great video! The 3 looks sharper too!
Nice comparison :) I just got the a7r3 but i moved over from nikon.
Disappointed, not a comparison the cameras, rather than a comparison of the lenses
Excellent review
... this shows clearly how green the R2 was. Anyways... if I had the money to switch systems (esp. to Sony) I d get the R III, but It might be better for me to consider the D850.
The consensus of the people is use the same lens and do it again Serge!
La musique trop forte c'est pour camoufler l'accent ? ^^
are they 3 legged thing tripods?
Sumit Aggarwal
Yes
Its also always better to use the thicker legs of the tripod in stead of the most flimsy ones for better stability. At least when you haven't completely raised your tripods as seen in the video.
It's unfathomable that Sony does not have a timelapse feature in its flagship camera.
no entiendo
really really bad video. it seems you have no clue about technology. with this test setting you could also compare a sony a7riii with a rx100. and please... in a camera comparison there is no room for your presets. I mean do you have one video without advertising your presets? just unsubscribed.
The so called half second ibis test ?? one taked with both hands at waist level..at a lower angle pulling in more light.. the other at head hight pointing down..pulling in less light..Pixel shift test ?? pixel shift is designed mainly for none moving subjects.. not waves and shifting light etc.. And guess what..the sensors are exactly the same.. Why make vids on something you just haven't researched and do comparisons that are not like for like.. all you do is make yourself look foolish and mislead people..
what a crap. this is a lens comparison
1.20 Serge doubles down on his French stereotype
Thanks Serge, I totally agree with you regarding the Sony A7R3 lack of Sony Apps! Sony please listen to Serge. He is a professional photographer.
this makes no sense at all, and is also not really objective
Thank you again Surge but please, please do away with the back ground music. It is very distracting when I only wish to here every word you say.
I am not a Sony fan but it looks a very impressive camera .
📸📸📸✨✨🇮🇳🇮🇳
this video is not informative at all.
Sony pays good for that bullshit?
What a waste of time seriously...
Serge going crazy again! :)