Canon vs Sony ecosystem

[Bamboopictures]

Over the year, Canon has tried to stay relevant to the prosumer video market by introducing their new mirrorless R and RP.
But bad habits die hard and Canon cannot get away from crippling the video functions of these releases to protect their cinema line cameras.
Sony has not sat idly by and instead upgraded their video hybrid AF technology to a level that now confidently surpasses Canon's Dual Pixel Autofocus.
Canon's advantage of native glass collection has been wiped clean with the introduction of a new RF mount.
Today, there are clearly more E-mount lenses then there are RF lenses and EF-M lenses combined.
As a filmmaker, I find that is more worthwhile to invest into E-mount lenses as they are compatible across APS-C and full frame bodies.
I routinely shoot with APS-C E-mount lenses on my A7 III because of the lightweight construction compared to full-frame lenses. There are no penalties at all apart from the crop and may be 1 stop loss in lowlight performance. This is a non-issue given sony's best-in-class low light performance. It is this high sensitivity that makes slow kit lenses very gratifying to use on Sony cameras.
Canon, on the hand, discourages the use of EF-S lenses on their R and RP bodies by limiting the frame rate to 25p in APS-C mode. Low-light sensitivity and high ISO noise also limits the use of cheap kit lenses for video.

In the area of IBIS, Sony cameras like the A7 III and the A6500 allows shooters to calibrate the IBIS manually when using manual focus lenses. On Canon EOS M cameras, e-IBIS is disabled for all non-canon lenses.

For audio, practically all Sony camera with a MIS hotshoe can use Sony's professional audio products and XLR adapters. All sony cameras with 3.5mm mic inputs, including their new RX100 VII has true stereo tracks that allows for the use of external mixers to record two separate tracks of audio,
Canon on the other hand, cripples the mic input on their entire new EOS-M line up so that there is no way to record separate tracks of audio; 50% of the signal on one track will always be sent to the other track. There is no way to monitor audio on EOS-M cameras via HDMI unlike Sony cameras with no headphone port.

As for on screen audio levels indicator, Sony cameras will display the levels on screen even when the camera is recording. Canon EOS-M cameras however require shooters to use an app in order to see the audio levels indicator during filming.

In terms of dynamic range and bit rate, the Canon EOS R does 8-bit C-log which is excellent for grading. But the RP and M series are sadly missing this feature. And although Sony's S log 2 and 3 are inferior to C log, the HLG picture profile on the A6400 and A7 III can stand toe to toe with C-log.

On the one-inch sensor front, Canon has it's own dual pixel AF enabled 1' sensor that they put into their XF400/405 and XA50/55. However, instead of putting their own chip into their new Powershot G7 III and G5II, Canon chosed to use Sony's old contrast detect sensor from the RX100 mark 4.
Again, this is likely done to protect their camcorder line. Sony on the other hand, puts a better sensor in their RX100 mark 7 even before releasing a RX10 mark 5.

 

[DXNMedia]

Good write up & summary.... Also to add, Canon have been very inconsistent with their internal video recording codecs. From their 5Dmk2/3/4, C100, C300, back to their C200, and even with their XC10/15 that is promoted as B-cams to the C-line, none of them have a video codec that is common. Different bitrate, different compression, different file structure & extensions.

 

[Bamboopictures]

I'm sure there is a team of evil genius at work in Canon that comes up with the most creative ways to differentiate every canon camera so that no two will cannibalise each other!

 

[Octarine]

Their focus is on glass, it seems. But it would be really beneficial to streamline, align and reduce the camera models and their features. With the M series out, the entire xxxD series seems obsolete to me.

 

[Bamboopictures]

If Canon persist in their crippling habit, they may find themselves having to rely more and more on licensing out their EF mount to other manufacturers.

 

[DXNMedia]

Not that many cameras in the film/video industry uses the native EF mount if you think of it.... Panasonic so far only EVA1 has it, and the others have mostly been BMD and perhaps Z-Cam. Those who use EF glasses for video applications are mainly using thru Metabones, speedboosters or other adaptors, but that may set to change once other manufacturers decide to open up their control algorithm to the third party developers.

I think Nikkors have been too late in that game and look at where they are now... limited adaptability and no one seems to even want to use Nikon glasses for video work... not even for me especially when I used to be using lots of Nikons for stills. Canon going into mirrorless and coming out with new mount are kind of killing their own EF line i think. If there's always a need to use adaptors, then it becomes pointless.

Sony users have got native Emount options, and EF compatibility thru adaptors is only for those who are transiting from Canon systems.
Any new users going into Sony for video work, they'd most likely be going straight for native Emount first before exploring other options.

2 cents worth.....Everything is just going to keep changing, so just use whatever suits our current workflow and don't think too much.

 

[Bamboopictures]

I like Nikon lenses for video because of their full "mechanizability" if there is such a word. That is, the iris on F-mount lenses can be controlled either by a physical aperture ring or a mechanical throttle via adapters. Just a little more peace of mind compared to electronic aperture control on modern EF lenses.
But for integrated, native autofocus system, I biased towards Sony for now. Love their performance, but durability sucks. One drop and game over.
Canon glass are generally more robust in that respect.

 

[DXNMedia]

i used to think I can work with Nikkors...but after trying for a few jobs, and having been so used to broadcast & cine zoom lenses, you'll find Nikkor zooms with opposite zoom turning direction a pain, and more problematic is the lack of par-focal capability. I guess I am just too old-school with the habit of zoom in max, focus, and reframe.... I just couldn't get used to these little fine problems...

Sony lenses are good for AF operation, but I hate some of their fly-by-wire servo controlled lenses for manual focusing (ie. 18-105 PZ). Totally no precision & repeatability in pulling focus.
Some of their G Master lenses are good though... And for video, my main lens is the 18-110mm F4 PZ, and sort of the 28-135mm F4 PZ as my backup.
For EF lenses, at least they have the 'right' cine-styled zoom direction, and at least they have a good manual focusing feel.

 

[Bamboopictures]

The improvement that Sony has made this year to their autofocus functionality for video has broken Canon's DPAF monopoly. I look forward to more lensmakers jumping into the fray with native E-mount AF lenses. Hopefully, a smaller Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 minus the MC11 adapter. The FS series is ripe for a serious revamp to incorporate Sony's latest AF feature especially intelligent touch tracking. Once that happens, we will likely see a beefing up of APS-C lens line up from Sony. Already, there is rumbling of a new Sony super35mm video camera ready for launch in the next few weeks. The best is yet to come!