X-T3 vs A7III vs EOS R vs Z7 vs Pocket 4K - Video Quality Compared!

[Mako Sports]

Great video that Max just posted, make sure to watch on a nice large screen.

 

[webrunner5]

Boy the Canon is just terrible in that test on every aspect. Crazy.

[Mako Sports]

45 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Boy the Canon is just terrible in that test on every aspect. Crazy.

quite embarrassing to be honest

[webrunner5]

Just now, Mako Sports said:

quite embarrassing to be honest

I have no clue how they think they can keep pulling this same crap. If they are really that far behind tech wise they are a dead duck down the road., like them or not. Tech is jumping faster and faster every day. You can't go from the stone age to iron age in a week. There are too many reviews now to hide crap results from the public. They seem somewhat clueless on this video part.

[Mako Sports]

Just now, webrunner5 said:

I have no clue how they think they can keep pulling this same crap. If they are really that far behind tech wise they are a dead duck down the road., like them or not. Tech is jumping faster and faster every day. You can't go from the stone age to iron age in a week. There are too many reviews now to hide crap results from the public. They seem somewhat clueless on this video part.

I think Canon shooters care most about ease of use/ergonomics (Flip screen and barebones menu) and good glass options? Also Canon color. 

I think if image quality is the most important to you, your avoiding canon stuff at this point.

[webrunner5]

Just now, Mako Sports said:

I think Canon shooters care most about ease of use/ergonomics (Flip screen and barebones menu) and good glass options? Also Canon color. 

I think if image quality is the most important to you, your avoiding canon stuff at this point.

True. But man soft footage is a bitch to over come. Hard to get back what was Never there.

[Mako Sports]

Also they can keep playing games all they want. Its because of the name "Canon" it sells it self. Doesn't matter how terrible the product is, people are going to buy it cause its Canon. 

Canon is the ONLY brand that could release a camera like the 6Dmkii in 2018.

Imagine the backlash if Sony, Fuji, or Panasonic released a camera with the 6dmk2 specs at $2,000. 

If Canon shooters want better specs then stop buying their current gen cameras.

[IronFilm]

57 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Boy the Canon is just terrible in that test on every aspect. Crazy.

At least Canon is consistent!
 

[DBounce]

Fujifilm X-T3 wins it! A very special little camera. Great at both stills and video... frankly it's a bargain. 

[Mako Sports]

1 minute ago, DBounce said:

Fujifilm X-T3 wins it! A very special little camera. Great a both stills and video... frankly it's a bargain. 

XT3 truly is something. It is what the "video oriented" XH1 should have been.

[wolf33d]

This is the video I wanted @Andrew Reid to make. I have to say the Z7 is quite disappointing. I am also disappointed by XT3 120p cause it does not look really better than the Sony. 

The Canon I fully expected that. But man, what a disaster! This is so embarrassing for Canon. This company should go bankrupt. No one should pay that much for getting such disgusting results. And thanks god he did not do rolling shutter tests! 2.5K for worst rolling shutter, worst 4K, worst 1080p, worst slowmo, and insane crop? Thanks, but no thanks. This company is a joke. 

[Mako Sports]

5 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

The Canon I fully expected that. But man, what a disaster! This is so embarrassing for Canon. This company should go bankrupt. No one should pay that much for getting such disgusting results. And thanks god he did not do rolling shutter tests! 2.5K for worst rolling shutter, worst 4K, worst 1080p, worst slowmo, and insane crop? Thanks, but no thanks. This company is a joke. 

knowing Max he will eventually do all the other test, Lowlight, dynamic range, video autofocus, and rolling shutter. 

[Robert Collins]

1 hour ago, wolf33d said:

This is the video I wanted @Andrew Reid to make. I have to say the Z7 is quite disappointing. I am also disappointed by XT3 120p cause it does not look really better than the Sony. 

 

Personally I feel Nikon deserves a free pass. For a start the Z7 might not be the best comparison with the A7iii. Second it seems a bit much to expect a first generation product to match a 3rd generation product. I think most of the criticisms can be put down to unrealistic high expectations. Look at how far Fuji has come in a couple of generation - matching and even surpassing Sony in certain cases.

[tellure]

Great test, Max's stuff is awesome.  Did anyone else see the color moire on the Pocket 4K video though?  I kept expecting him to call that out but he never mentioned it.  Seemed pretty obvious on those 400% crops on wires and such.  Didn't notice it at all without the crop though (watching on a 4K monitor fullscreen).

[Mattias Burling]

Average Joe definitely looks to Canikon since they are so familiar names. But I also think for many of us brand has very little to do with it. All of these cameras where available when my EOS-R arrived and I still bought it, and so did others. Before that me and many with me choose the 6Dmkii well aware about the A7iii, GH5, etc. And I'm sure I'm not alone in being mostly a Panasonic and Sony shooter. So it was not because of the brand.

Nor was it for the side by side image quality. I was shooting both 2.5K and 4K Raw before 4K even took off. I've had most popular 4K hybrids to date as well as the BMD4K and RED 1MX with 4.5K Raw. In other words, none of the above is really blowing my mind. And still I went for the EOS-R. It wasn't in some naive believe that the Canon will have the most detailed video at 400% in some weird multi cam production.

All I know is that right in front of me on my desk sits a Panasonic G85, a Fuji X-H1 and an EOS-R. I have native and adapted glass plus speedboosters for the two crop cameras. Only adapted EF glass for the EOS-R. I have only a few hours of experience with the Canon but have shot several gigs with the other two.

On today's agenda is a video shoot. No stills, video only. Docu style with lots of handheld. There will be some interviews both "sitting down" and with a lav in action. A lot of fast action and rather large locations. The finished video will be shown at an award show on the big screen in front of a couple of hundred people and of course online.

I'm bringing the Canon. No question about it. Because believe it or not, it actually offers things that the others don't.
And it does it so well that I don't care about the risk of someone hacking the event and showing a similar video shot with a RED Epic side by side and then zooming in 400%  

(The X-H1 tags a long as backup and in case I feel the need for some 100fps instead of just 50.)
 

[noone]

From all the hype lately I was expecting all the newcomers to shit all over the Sony but it seems to me to still be the winner though the Fuji is very close and I can see why some would call it the winner.

There are some very big surprises there (and disappointments).

 

Very interesting test.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:

I'm bringing the Canon. No question about it. Because believe it or not, it actually offers things that the others don't.

Don't leave us hanging! Tell us what and why that is in your eyes.

[PabloB]

1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:

Average Joe definitely looks to Canikon since they are so familiar names. But I also think for many of us brand has very little to do with it. All of these cameras where available when my EOS-R arrived and I still bought it, and so did others. Before that me and many with me choose the 6Dmkii well aware about the A7iii, GH5, etc. And I'm sure I'm not alone in being mostly a Panasonic and Sony shooter. So it was not because of the brand.

Nor was it for the side by side image quality. I was shooting both 2.5K and 4K Raw before 4K even took off. I've had most popular 4K hybrids to date as well as the BMD4K and RED 1MX with 4.5K Raw. In other words, none of the above is really blowing my mind. And still I went for the EOS-R. It wasn't in some naive believe that the Canon will have the most detailed video at 400% in some weird multi cam production.

All I know is that right in front of me on my desk sits a Panasonic G85, a Fuji X-H1 and an EOS-R. I have native and adapted glass plus speedboosters for the two crop cameras. Only adapted EF glass for the EOS-R. I have only a few hours of experience with the Canon but have shot several gigs with the other two.

On today's agenda is a video shoot. No stills, video only. Docu style with lots of handheld. There will be some interviews both "sitting down" and with a lav in action. A lot of fast action and rather large locations. The finished video will be shown at an award show on the big screen in front of a couple of hundred people and of course online.

I'm bringing the Canon. No question about it. Because believe it or not, it actually offers things that the others don't.
And it does it so well that I don't care about the risk of someone hacking the event and showing a similar video shot with a RED Epic side by side and then zooming in 400%  

(The X-H1 tags a long as backup and in case I feel the need for some 100fps instead of just 50.)
 

Mattias, I get you just like the Canon image, but I feel it’s because of people like you that Canon get away with the absurdity they do. In this day and age with the technological advancements made in the field, Canon should be doing more but deliberately choose not to. We could/should have a much richer and detailed image full frame 4K (downsampled 6k) WITH the choice to to turn down sharpening for a less detailed image at the very least! 

Canon with all their money and R&D should be able to acquire the best chips and sensors to fit the purpose. With their large market share and projected sales should be able to negotiate all this at better cost than some of their rivals. They choose to do none of this but screw us and sell us outdated tech for even more money increasing their margins all the while. 

Yes I too like the canon image because it was easy to get good colour but today that advantage is minimal to non existent. Canon really needs to be forced to step up and deliver. I feel they are now feeling the pressure but as we can clearly see with the Eos R, they are still trying to resist. There’s so much wrong with that camera that colour science just can’t cover up but when people like you keep spewing that mantra, or ‘soft is actually better’ nonsense, there is no progression. 

I love magic lantern and what they did for the community and us canon faithful, but I can’t help feel that if it had never happened Canon would have been forced to deliver much earlier. 

[frontfocus]

2 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Because believe it or not, it actually offers things that the others don't.

that's possible, but what are those things? 

[TurboRat]

1 hour ago, noone said:

From all the hype lately I was expecting all the newcomers to shit all over the Sony but it seems to me to still be the winner though the Fuji is very close and I can see why some would call it the winner.

There are some very big surprises there (and disappointments).

 

Very interesting test.

Yeah also saw this on Max's comment asking where the GH5 will stand - 

"Don't currently own one(GH5), but based on my previous tests against the A7iii and X-T2 in 4K The GH5 would be worst than A7III and X-T3 but better than Pocket 4K, Z7, and EOS R (in that order). In 1080P 24 It would be similar to X-T3, better than black magic, a7iii, and others. For 120FPS it would be X-T3. A7iii second, GH5 third, Blackmagic 4th, Z7, and last EOS R." 

So his opinion based on his tests, A7iii & X-T3 wins. Was really hoping P4K will be a bit higher