- All 4K footage is not created equal
and even though it can look pretty darn good,
there's actually a really big difference
between 4K footage that's filmed
on like your phone or a small action camera
versus a full-size, full-frame camera,
maybe like a mirrorless or a DSLR.
This video was filmed and uploaded in 4K
so for the sake of the comparison,
I recommend that you set your player
at the highest resolution possible.
So it's probably no secret that I've been using
and loving the Canon EOS R which is what I'm filming this
right now in beautiful crisp super high bit rate 4K.
And the 4K capabilities of the EOS R
are a little bit controversial.
There are a lot of pros and a lot of cons
and I really wanted to see what this camera could do
but I don't wanna just test it out on its own,
I wanna put it up against another really popular 4K camera.
So even as a Canon fan, it's kind of hard for me
to ignore the Sony A7 III which came out in 2018
and I don't know of another camera in the past few years
that has been more well-received
and more positively reviewed than the A7 III.
So for about $2,000 you get one heck of a camera,
this thing has great image quality,
great autofocus, 120 frames per second at 1080,
it's got full-frame 4K where you can use the full sensor,
two SD card slots, in-body image stabilization,
and it's just one heck of a great camera.
If you know me, you know the things
I don't like about this camera
are the battery life, it's terrible
and the stupid Sony flip-out screen
which is just a terrible design that I cannot stand.
One day Sony will make a camera
that has an actual tilty-flippy screen
and then they will be hard to top.
But until then, the EOS R is roughly the same price,
it has a lot of the same features,
it does not have in-body image stabilization,
it does not have two SD card slots,
it does not have 120 frames per second at 1080
but it does have Canon's dual pixel autofocus,
it does have 4K, it's cropped 4K,
but it is a much higher bit rate 4K.
So what we're really getting into
when we're talking about the 4K capabilities
between these two cameras,
do you have any idea how hard it is to say 4K capabilities?
It took me like four times to get that right.
The big difference is that the Sony A7 III
films its 4K at 100 megabits per second
whereas the EOS R films its 4K at 480 megabits per second.
That is more than four times the data
that is in the 4K files on this camera.
Even Sony's new A7R Mark IV
still films at 100 megabits per second.
So even though the EOS R does use cropped 4K,
that higher bit rate is kind of crazy.
That puts the EOS R in this weird space
above most DSLRs and mirrorless cameras
and like right below dedicated cinema cameras
like the Canon C Series
or even some of the more advanced cameras,
which means that it's a really good choice
for a lot of people if they getting it as a second camera
in addition to one of the bigger cinema series cameras.
And I'm actually pretty new
to even paying attention to bit rates myself
because in this day and age all cameras look pretty amazing
but if you really do wanna focus on those finer points,
then that sort of things like bit rate
become really important
because that can actually be the deciding factor
if you're trying to figure out
which camera's image quality has an edge on the other.
Bit rate can determine overall image quality,
it can determine how easy or flexible
the image is to color grade, it can affect dynamic range.
It basically is just putting a whole bunch more information
into those files which then can benefit you
when you get into the editing process after filming.
So now it's time for the direct 4K comparison.
In addition to bit rates and all that fancy stuff,
the lens on your camera probably has
the most massive impact on your image quality
so it would not be fair to use the Sony
with a cheap old lens and the Canon with a super nice lens,
'cause that probably wouldn't be
actually an accurate representation.
So in addition to being able to borrow the A7 III,
I was able to borrow a couple of nice lenses.
The Canon 70 to 200 2.8 IS Version II
and the Sony G Master 70 to 200 2.8.
But these lenses are way too long to use indoors
especially with the EOS R's 4K crop
so I'm gonna have to go outside
where I can get a little more distance
between me and a subject.
Okay, what I didn't plan on even though it's the desert
and it's summertime is that it would be
insanely hot right now, I'm dripping with sweat.
But here they are both cameras.
Right now they're set up to get the exact same shot at 4K
but because of that crop factor,
the EOS R is actually at 70 millimeters,
the widest that the lens goes,
and the A7 III is at 135 millimeters
since it's wider using the full-frame sensor.
We're just getting shots of this mountain over here
with these towers and these clouds.
Sweat is just dripping.
(upbeat music)
Each camera is at the exact same settings,
since it's super bright out here
and I don't have two ND filters that are the same,
they're at f/11 which isn't super ideal
with a shutter speed of 160
and an ISO of 100 to expose the shots.
And I'm filming all of this on the Sony RX100 Mark V in 4K
so that way this whole video is native 4K.
This is an interesting camera
because it's a small point and shoot camera
but it still shoots at 100 megabits per second
just like the A7 III up here does,
but it's obviously got a much smaller sensor
and a different lens.
The first like 50 videos on this channel
were made pretty much entirely just with this camera.
And now for the crop comparison,
each camera is gonna be at the same position
with the lens at its widest focal length
which is 70 millimeters on the same subject.
And then I will zoom that in to 200 millimeters
And so you can really start to see
where that 1.7 times crop makes a difference on the EOS R.
Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing
is entirely up to you and your workflow.
One last thing to note
is that all of that data leads to huge file sizes.
Even though both cameras
filmed the exact same amount of footage today,
the A7 III produced 6.3 gigabytes of files
while the EOS R at 480 megabits per second
produced 24.2 gigabytes of files.
I specifically left out my opinion on the image quality
between these two cameras because I wanted to be able
to put the image directly in front of you
and let you use your judgment and your opinion
to decide which is best.
They're both really good, that's what I will say.
So it ultimately comes down
to a lot of the more specific details
and personal preferences based on your needs,
you specific situation which is probably gonna determine
which camera is best.
I've really been enjoying using the EOS R
so if you missed it, I did put together a full review video
and then on top of that, I also made a video
about what I think are five underrated features
for the EOS R.
So check out one of those videos
and I will see you over there.