Camera Gear Comparisons

The EOS 6D Mark II is the smallest, lightest and least expensive latest-model Canon full frame DSLR and the EOS RP enters the market as the smallest, lightest and least expensive Canon full frame mirrorless interchangeable lens camera (MILC). With the EOS RP using a slightly-modified EOS 6D Mark II sensor, these two cameras produce nearly identical image quality. However, the difference between DSLRs and MILCs is rather big with the difference between electronic viewfinders and optical viewfinders being a primary difference. That page discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each design and I'll forgo most additional discussion in that regard in this comparison. Let's dive into the advantages of each camera model:

Canon EOS RP Advantages

• DIGIC 8 vs. 7
• More AF points (via viewfinder): 4,779 vs. 45
• Eye AF vs. no
• 100% viewfinder coverage vs. 98%
• Lower light AF working range: EV -5 vs. EV -3
• Lower light exposure metering: EV -3 vs. EV 1
• .CR3 RAW file type with C-RAW vs .CR2 with M-RAW, S-RAW
• 4k video
• Headphone jack vs. no
• Supports SD/SDHC/SDXC UHS-II vs. UHS-I
• Smaller size: 5.22 x 3.35 x 2.76" vs. 5.67 x 4.35 x 2.94"
  (132.5 x 85.0 x 70.0mm vs. 144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8mm)
• Lighter weight: 17.1 oz vs. 26.98 oz (485 vs. 765g)
• Lower price
• Can utilize RF lenses

Canon EOS 6D Mark II Advantages

• Cross-type AF points vs. single-line-sensitive
• Has greater auto exposure compensation range: +/-5 EV vs. +/-3 EV
• Faster continuous shooting rate: 6.5 fps vs. 5 fps (4 fps with Servo AF)
• Shorter viewfinder blackout during continuous shooting
• Has built-in GPS vs. optional accessory
• Has much longer battery life: Approx. 1200 vs. 250
• Uses N3 type remote controls vs. E3
• Has top LCD and more buttons

Summary

With these two cameras having the same heart, the imaging sensor, producing similar image quality, it is especially interesting to compare these two models. If photographing action is on your to-do list, the 6D Mark II is probably better-suited for your needs and some of the other 6D II advantages are important for certain uses. The travel-friendly smaller size and lighter weight along with the wallet-friendly lower cost are going to win the RP a lot of hearts as will some of its other features including the larger, full-coverage viewfinder and 4k video. The purchase of either of these models over the other can be justified, but I expect the RP to quickly become the more popular option.

More Information: Canon EOS RP | Canon EOS 6D Mark II

Specifications: Canon EOS RP compared to the Canon EOS 6D Mark II

 
Get your EOS RP or 6D Mark II Here:

Canon EOS RP: B&H | Amazon | Adorama | WEX

Canon EOS 6D Mark II: B&H | Amazon | Adorama | WEX

As the long-awaited Canon full frame mirrorless camera line is beginning to fill out, the first two models are worth comparing. The Canon EOS R vs. Canon EOS RP comparison using the site's specifications tool shows most of the differences between these cameras. Those and a handful of others are included below.

EOS R Advantages

• Higher resolution: 30.4 MP vs. 26.2 (6720 x 4480 vs. 6240 x 4160 px)
• Dual Pixel RAW file format vs. no
• More dynamic range
• More AF points: 5,655 vs. 4,779
• Lower AF working range: EV -6 vs. EV -5
• Faster shutter speed available: 1/8000 vs. 1/4000
• Faster X-Sync shutter speed: 1/200 vs. 1/180
• Larger, higher resolution EVF: 0.5" (1.27cm) OLED color EVF, 3.69M dots (with more nose relief) vs. 0.39" (1.0cm) OLED color EVF, 2.36M dots
• Larger, higher resolution LCD: 3.15" (8.01cm), approx. 2.10M dots vs. 2.95" (7.50cm) approx. 1.04 million dots
• Better LCD Coatings: Anti-reflection and anti-smudge vs. anti-smudge only
• Faster continuous frame rate: 8 fps vs. 5 fps, with AF tracking: 5 fps vs. 4 fps
• Has a programmable Multi-Function Bar vs. no
• Has a top LCD vs. dedicated mode dial
• Better video capabilities including higher frame rate video and more compression options: Up to 10-bit Canon Log vs. 8-bit no log
• USB 3.0 vs. 2.0
• Longer battery life rating: approx. 370 shots vs. 250
• Higher shutter durability rating: 200,000 vs. 100,000
• Closes shutter on power-off vs. no
• Has access to a PC Terminal via Battery Grip BG-E22 vs. no
• Has a battery grip available vs. extension grip

EOS RP Advantages

• Significantly lower price
• Smaller size: 5.22 x 3.35 x 2.76" vs. 5.35 x 3.87 x 3.32" (132.5 x 85.0 x 70.0mm vs. 135.8 x 98.3 x 84.4mm)
• Lighter weight: 17.1 vs. 23.3 oz (485 vs. 660g)
• Has focus bracketing vs. no
• Has Eye-tracking Servo AF vs. not until later in 2019
• More Diopter Correction: -4 to +2 m-1 vs. -4 to +1 m-1

Summary

The EOS R is a higher-end model and that shows very strongly in its list of advantages. However, the first three RP advantages are very significant ones. Those on a tight budget are going to be favoring the RP. While the EOS R is itself a relatively small and light camera, the RP easily bests it in these categories and those traveling, hiking, etc. may be willing to forgo the R's benefits to also give up some size and weight.

More Information: Canon EOS R | Canon EOS RP

Get Your EOS R or RP Here:

Canon EOS R: B&H | Amazon | Adorama | WEX

Canon EOS RP: B&H | Amazon | Adorama | WEX

Those photographers looking for a versatile full frame camera but not needing the blazing speed afforded by a pro sports body (and who are not interested in a mirrorless option) will likely be considering either the Canon 5D Mark IV or Nikon D850 DSLR camera. Both DSLRs are the mature, durable, refined culminations of their respective camera lines. But which is right for your particular needs? Read on to find out.

Shared Primary Features

• Full-frame sensor
• Exposure Compensation: +/-5 EV
• Shutter Speed: 30-1/8000 sec., Bulb
• Viewfinder Coverage: approx. 100%
• 3.2" size-class touchscreen LCD
• No pop-up flash
• Continuous Shooting Speed: 7 fps (Nikon D850 can achieve 9 fps with optional battery grip)
• 4K recording up to 30 fps
• Built-in Wi-Fi
• SuperSpeed USB 3.0, 3.5mm headphone & microphone jacks, HDMI Type-C
• Dual memory card slots
• Weather sealing
• Similar size & weight

Advantages of the Canon 5D Mark IV

• More Selectable AF Points: 61 vs. 55
• More Selectable Cross-type AF Points: 41 vs. 35
• More AF Points Supporting f/8 (total/selectable): 21/21 vs. 15/9
• Live View Focusing: Dual Pixel CMOS AF vs. contrast detection
• NFC vs. N/A
• Built-in GPS vs. optional accessory

Advantages of the Nikon D850

• Higher Resolution: 45.7 MP vs. 30.4
• More AF Points: 153 vs. 61
• More Cross-type AF Points: 99 vs. 41
• Larger AF Working Range: EV-4 to EV 20 vs. EV-3 to EV 20
• Larger Metering Range: EV -3 – 20 vs. EV 0 – 20
• Lower Selectable ISO (native/expanded): 64/32 vs. 100/50
• Better dynamic range
• More Registered Custom White Balance Settings: 6 vs. 1
• Higher Resolution LCD: 2,359K dots vs. 1,620K
• Tilting LCD vs. fixed
• Faster Flash Sync Speed: 1/250 sec. vs. 1/200
• Full Sensor Width 4K Recording vs. 1.74x crop
• Bluetooth vs. N/A
• Battery Life: 1,840 shots vs. 900
• Shutter Durability: 200,000 shots vs. 150,000
• Automated AF Fine Tune vs. manual Autofocus Microadjustment
• 8K in-camera time-lapse vs. FHD 1080p time-lapse
• Negative Digitizer Mode vs. N/A
• Backlit buttons vs. N/A
• Focus Shift mode vs. N/A
• More Auto Exposure Bracketing Images: 9 vs. 7
• Limited Focus Peaking vs. N/A

Other Differences: 5D Mark IV vs. Nikon D850

• CompactFlash, SDXC vs. XQD, SDXC
• 4K DCI 4096 X 2160 vs. 4K UHD 3840 X 2160

Who should opt for the Canon 5D Mark IV?

While the advantages of the D850 listed above may seem pretty long, if you're already heavily invested in the Canon system, you have to ask yourself whether or not those benefits are worth the high cost of selling used items to fund alternate gear and the time investment required to acclimate to the new system. For some, the advantages may be worth the tradeoffs. For others, the 5D Mark IV's feature set makes it a more than worthwhile addition to their kits.

If you are a videographer who plans to use autofocus tracking while filming, the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV will be the best option by far. Canon's Dual Pixel CMOS AF technology is significantly better at locking onto subjects compared to the contrast detection sensor AF utilized by the Nikon D850.

While many will not like the 5D Mark IV's heavy crop with 4K recording, some videographers (especially those shooting wildlife) may find the crop beneficial for more tightly framing distant and/or smaller subjects.

Want to shoot with the widest aperture lenses possible? F/1.2 aperture primes with autofocus are a reality for Canon DSLR and mirrorless customers; Nikon users will have to invest in a Z 7 / Z 6 and wait for the release of the manual focus-only Z 58mm f/0.95 S Noct to use an aperture wider than f/1.4.

Who should opt for the Nikon D850?

Those with Nikon-based kits who do not need the benefits of Canon's Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor have little (if any) reason to switch brands; the Nikon D850 is one of the most feature-packed and versatile cameras available today.

Summary

While the advantages listed in the Nikon D850 column seem strong, both of these cameras are highly capable of tackling a wide range of situations with nearly equal proficiency. As I said in the introduction, these cameras represent the culmination of generations of camera design. The technological innovations, durability and user interface refinements that come with that time and attention to detail are apparent the first day you use the cameras. Those heavily invested in either system will likely want to stay with their familiar respective brands, but those with fewer ties will likely opt for the Nikon D850 for primarily stills use while those prioritizing filmmaking and want the benefits of solid AF performance will likely opt for the 5D Mark IV.

Relevant Info

• Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review
• Nikon D850 Review
• Canon EOS 5D Mark IV vs. Nikon D850 Specs Comparison

For those looking to add a Speedlite flash to their photography kits and don't need the highest-end option available, the Canon 430EX III-RT and 470EX-AI are budget-priced, feature-filled mid-grade options worthy of consideration. With that in mind, we'll compare/contrast the features of the 430EX III-RT and 470EX-AI flashes to see which one might be best for your needs.

Canon Speedlite 430EX III-RT and Speedlite 470EX-AI Shared Primary Features

• Angle of Flash Coverage: 24-105mm, 14mm with diffuser
• Infrared AF-assist beaming
• E-TTL II/E-TTL, Manual modes
• High Speed Sync
• Flash Exposure Lock (FEL)
• Flash Exposure Bracketing (FEB) in Slave Mode
• Flash Exposure Compensation
• Second Curtain Flash Sync
• Modeling Flash
• Color Temperature Info Communication
• Supports Flash Settings by Camera Menu
• Custom Functions: 10

Primary Advantages of the Canon Speedlite 430EX III-RT Flash

• Radio/optical transmitter and receiver vs. optical receiver only
• Remote shutter release capable vs. N/A
• Battery Life: 180-1200 flashes vs. 140–966
• Recycling Time (Alkaline): 0.1 to 3.5 sec vs. 0.1 - 5.5 sec
• Size: 2.8 x 4.5 x 3.9" (70.5 x 113.8 x 98.2mm) vs. 2.94 x 5.13 x 4.14" (74.6 x 130.4 x 105.1mm)
• Weight: 10.4 oz (295g) vs. 13.6 oz (385g)
• Lower price

Primary Advantages of the Canon Speedlite 470EX-AI Flash

• Flash head automatic bounce angle determination
• Guide Number @ 105mm: 47m (154') vs. 43m (141')
• AF Assist Beam Points: up to 16 (at 28mm) vs. 1
• Flash Head Movement Range Up: 0-120° vs. 45, 60, 75 and 90°
• Flash Head Movement Range Left: 0-180° vs. 60, 75, 90, 120, and 150°
• Flash Head Movement Range Right: 0-180° vs. 60, 75, 90, 120, 150 and 180°

Who should opt for the Canon Speedlite 430EX III-RT?

If you endeavor to use (and control) multiple light setups, and want to avoid the limitations of optical (line-of-sight) triggering, the Canon 430EX III-RT will be the best choice for your needs. While the Canon 470EX-AI can act as a slave in optically-triggered setups, the Canon 430EX III-RT can act as a master or slave in radio or optically-triggered setups. The flexibility that the 430EX III-RT's wireless features afford is immense, greatly increasing the usefulness of the flash. Also, those wanting a smaller/lighter flash atop their cameras, photographers who prioritize battery life and/or recycling time or persons with a limited budget will find the 430EX III-RT to be a better flash for their needs.

Who should opt for the Canon Speedlite 470EX-AI Flash?

Those photographers who appreciate the convenience of a flash that automatically calculates the optimal bounce direction will find the Canon Speedlite 470EX-AI Flash's auto-rotating head to be the deciding factor. Wedding / event photographers and those new to Speedlite flash use will especially appreciate the 470EX-AI's unique auto-bounce capability, allowing for flattering subject lighting with little effort or experience required. If optical triggering is sufficient for your multiple flash setup needs, the 470EX-AI can easily be incorporated as a slave unit. Few will find the 470EX-AI's slightly higher guide number to be a deciding factor, but the flash's extra power could prove beneficial in certain situations.

Authorized Retailers

Canon Speedlite 430EX III-RT – B&H | Adorama | Amazon US | Canon USA / Refurb.
Canon Speedlite 470EX-AI – B&H | Adorama | Amazon US | Canon USA

Those wanting an entry-level, yet feature rich DSLR will likely be considering the Canon EOS 77D and Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D. And while the two bodies appear (and, in fact, are) very similar, there are a few differences that may tip the decision-making scales in one direction or the other. So, let's take a closer look at these DSLRs to see how they stack up against one another, beginning with their similarities.

Canon EOS 77D and EOS Rebel T7i / 800D Shared Primary Features

• Sensor: 24.2 MP Dual Pixel CMOS AF 1.6x (crop) APS-C
• Processor: DIGIC 7
• Autofocus System: 45 cross-type AF points, 27 f/8 points
• AF Working Range: EV -3 - 18
• Metering Sensor: 7560-pixel RGB+IR, 63 segments
• Metering Range: EV 1 – 20
• Exposure Compensation: +/-5 EV in 1/3 or 1/2 stop increment
• Auto Exposure Bracketing: 2, 3, 5 or 7 Shots +/-3 EV 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments
• ISO: Auto (100 - 25600), 100 - 25600 (H1: 51200)
• Shutter Speed: 30 - 1/4000 sec
• Continuous Shooting: max. 6 fps for 27 RAW
• Video: up to FHD 1920 x 1080 at 60p
• Identical White Balance Settings
• Viewfinder: Pentamirror, 95% coverage, 0.82x magnification
• LCD: Vari-angle touchscreen 7.7 cm (3.0") 3:2 Clear View II TFT, approx. 1040 K sRGB dots
• Built-in Flash: 13.1m guide number, up to 17mm
• X-Sync: 1/200 sec
• Identical Shooting Modes
• Identical Picture Styles
• Built-in Wi-Fi, NFC and Low-Energy Bluetooth
• USB 2.0, HDMI micro, 3.5mm external microphone port
• Single Secure Digital (SD, UHS-I) Memory Card Slot
• Battery Life: 820 shots via an LP-E17 battery
• Body Materials: aluminum alloy and polycarbonate resin with glass fiber
• Size: 5.16 x 3.93 x 3.00" (131.0 x 99.9 x 76.2mm)

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS 77D

• Top LCD Data Panel
• Multi-function Lock Switch
• Auto Display-Off Sensor by the viewfinder
• AF On button
• Rear Control Dial vs. Cross Keys

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D

• Lower cost

Who should opt for the Canon EOS 77D?

Few camera comparisons are as simple as this one. If the features listed in the Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS 77D section are worth its incremental cost over the Canon EOS Rebel T7i, then the decision is easy – get the 77D. The top LCD panel and AF On button (enabling back-button focus) specifically are features that many photographers will find especially beneficial, making the incremental investment over the Rebel T7i a worthwhile one.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T7i?

If the EOS 77D's advantages listed above are of little value to you, or your budget is limited, then the Canon EOS Rebel T7i has gives you 95% of features of the 77D but at a lower cost. Like all top-end Rebels before it, you get a lot of value for your money.

Relevant Info

• Canon EOS 77D Review
• Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D Review

The EOS R represents Canon's initial foray into the mirrorless camera market and many may be wondering how it stacks up against Sony's feature-packed, budget-priced a7 III. If you fall into that group, read on as we compare these two cameras.

Sony a7 III & Canon EOS R Shared Primary Features

• Mirrorless camera technologies
• Metering Range: EV -3 to EV 20
• Shutter Speed Range: 30-1/8000, Bulb
• 4K Video Recording: 4K (16:9) 3840 x 2160 at 30p
• USB 3.0, HDMI mini out (Sony: Type D, Canon: Type C) , External Microphone In / Line In (Stereo mini jack), Headphone socket (Stereo mini jack)
• Operating Environment: 32–104°F / 0–40°C

Primary Advantages of the Sony a7 III:

• Compatible with more native-mount lenses
• Sensor Stabilization: 5-axis Optical In-Body Image Stabilization vs. 5-Axis Movie Digital IS Image Stabilization
• Tracks eye in Single-Shot and Continuous AF vs. One Shot only *
• More Metering Zones: 1200-zone vs. 384-zone
• Higher ISO Setting: 204800 vs. 102400
• Better Dynamic Range
• Wider Exposure Compensation: +/- 5 EV vs. +/- 3 EV
• Faster x-sync: 1/250 sec vs. 1/200
• Faster Burst Shooting: 10 fps vs. 8 (One Shot mode), 5 with AF Tracking
• No crop-factor in 4K vs. 1.75x crop
• Better Slow Motion Video: 1920 x 1080 at 120 fps with sound/AF tracking vs. 720p at 60 fps with no sound/AF tracking
• Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and NFC vs. Wi-Fi and Bluetooth only
• Dual Memory Cards: Memory Stick/SD (UHS-I) + SD (UHS-II) vs. SD (UHS-II) only
• Higher Battery Life: 610 shots vs. 370
• Slightly Smaller: 5.0 x 3.9 x 3.0" (126.9 x 95.6 x 73.7mm) vs. 5.35 x 3.87 x 3.32" (135.8 x 98.3 x 84.4mm)
• Lower cost

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS R:

• Higher Resolution: 30.4 MP vs. 24.2
• More AF Points: 5,655 points vs. 693
• More Sensitive AF: EV -6 to +18 vs. EV -3 to +20
• Faster AF in One Shot mode
• Wider Auto ISO Range: ISO 100-40000 vs. 100-12800
• Higher Resolution Viewfinder: 0.5" (1.27cm) OLED EVF, 3.69m-dots vs. 0.5" (1.3cm) OLED Tru-Finder EVF, 2.36m-dots
• Larger, Higher Resolution LCD: 3.15" Touch Screen (8.01cm) Clear View LCD II, 2.1m-dots vs. 2.95" (7.49cm) Touch Screen TFT, 921.6K dots
• Vari-angle LCD vs. tilt only
• Top LCD vs. none
• Higher Bit-Rate 4K Video: 480 Mbps (ALL-I) vs. 100 Mbps
• Larger RAW Buffer: 47 RAW images vs. 40
• Manual focus guide/focus peaking vs. focus peaking only
• Better performance with adapted lenses
• Better/more intuitive menu system
• Better grip

Who should opt for the Sony a7 III?

If you're looking to upgrade to a full frame camera and don't already have a large collection of Canon lenses, or otherwise want to get more serious about photography and prefer to skip on an APS-C sensor body, the Sony a7 III has a lot to offer, including a very reasonable price tag. Sony's IBIS (In-Body Image Stabilization) technology enables up to 5-stops of camera shake compensation with any lens that's mounted to the camera and represents huge advantage for the a7 III. Those shooting static subjects in low-light situations or when using a narrow aperture to obtain a desired depth of field, especially when a non-stabilized lens is mounted to the camera, will greatly appreciate the a7 III's sensor stabilization.

Are you a wedding photographer? The a7 III's dual memory card slots can protect once-in-a-lifetime images from being lost due to a corrupted memory card, and the camera's higher dynamic range could come in handy for events needing great exposure latitude. Another a7 III features that wedding/event/festival photographers will surely appreciate include is its significantly longer battery life compared to the EOS R.

Fast action shooters will be able to capture a higher percentage of peak-action shots with the a7 III's 10 fps burst rate with AF tracking compared to the EOS R's 5 fps under the same circumstances, while the camera's eye tracking AF will ensure that the subject remains properly focused. Note: The a7 III's continuous burst rate drops to 8 fps with viewfinder Live View (for easier subject tracking) in use.

Videographers who want to shoot slow motion video can utilize the a7 III's 120 fps Full HD frame rate to capture smooth, slow motion video with sound and AF tracking. The EOS R's resolution at 120 fps tops out at 720p and sound recording/AF tracking is not supported. Want to get the most out of your high quality, wide angle lenses when shooting in 4K? The a7 III samples the entire width of the full frame sensor when shooting in 4K, meaning your wide angle lenses produce an uncropped field of view, perfect for capturing expansive views. Recording in 4K on the EOS R, on the other hand, results in a 1.75x crop factor for your lenses. That means that a 16-35mm lens mounted to the EOS R produces a full frame equivalent field of view of 28-61.25mm in 4K mode.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS R?

If you're highly invested in the Canon EOS system but want to give mirrorless a try, getting the Canon EOS R will allow you to gradually build up a mirrorless kit, taking full advantage of the new RF lenses coming down the pipeline, while being able to fully utilize your existing DSLR lenses in the meantime.

Speaking of lenses, at this time, Sony has 43 FE lenses that can natively fit on the Sony a7 III. Of those, 25 cover the entire full-frame sensor. Other lenses (such as Canon EF) can be used on Sony cameras via adapters, but adapted lenses don't perform nearly as well as their native counterparts on Sony alpha-series cameras. However, while the currently announced pool of Canon RF lenses is small by comparison, Canon's EF-EOS R adapters allow nearly full functionality with EF/EF-S/TS-E and MP-E lenses (EF-S lens use results in a cropped recorded image). With Canon EF-series lenses performing similarly to RF lenses on the EOS R, the pool of lenses available for EOS R customers considerably increases. In fact, if you add up all the different EF/EF-S/TS-E and MP-E lenses which have been produced since the EF mount was introduced and add the announced RF lenses, you'd have more than 175 lenses to choose from, 149 of which cover the entire full frame sensor.

From an ergonomics perspective, the EOS R features a deeper grip and raised buttons that are easier to find without having to look at the body. The new Multi-Function Bar may take some getting used to (some may not like it), but many photographers will find the Control Ring found on the new RF lenses helpful for changing a preferred setting. For those used to glancing at a top LCD to check camera settings, the EOS R has you covered.

Landscape photographers can enjoy the benefits of the Canon Drop-in Filter Mount Adapter EF-EOS R with their EOS R to enable a circular polarizer or variable ND filter to be used with any of their EF-series lenses. With most ultra-wide angle lenses being incompatible with front filters, the Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter will prove to be a vital component of many landscape shooters' kits.

If you're a portrait shooter, you'll likely prefer the EOS R's faster AF performance in One-Shot mode compared to the Sony a7 III which defocuses/refocuses with every shot even if your subject hasn't moved. Those shooting portraits will also enjoy the bokeh-accentuating, shallow DOF (Depth of Field) capabilities that Canon's RF and EF mounts offer, including lenses featuring extremely wide f/1.2 apertures.

Vloggers and those shooting self-portraits will find the EOS R's vari-angle LCD much better for self-framing compared to the a7 III's tilt-screen.

* Canon claims a future firmware update will enable Eye AF with AI Servo mode.

Summary

The Canon EOS R and Sony a7 III are both incredible cameras at good-value prices and either can be a great option for most needs.

Relevant Info

• Sony a7 III Review
• First Look at the Canon EOS R System

Landscapes, weddings, architecture, real estate, photojournalism – all are great reasons to have a wide angle zoom in your kit. Now the big question becomes, "Which one?" For Sony shooters, the FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM and FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS will likely be at the top of the wide angle zoom considerations list.

Before we dig deeper into this comparison, regular site visitors may notice that text below sounds a lot like our Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM vs. Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens comparison. Well, there's a good reason for that – the 16-35mm lenses listed above share many of the same benefits and drawbacks as their 24-70mm counterparts when compared against one another. Therefore, much of the content of the 24-70mm comparison applies equally to the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM and Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS lenses.

So, without further ado, let's take a look at these two 16-35mm lenses to see which one proves to be the best investment for your needs.

Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM and Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS Shared Primary Features

• Mount: Sony E (full frame)
• Focal Length Range: 16-35mm
• Minimum Aperture: f/22
• Max Magnification: 0.19x
• Dust and moisture resistant construction

Primary Advantages of the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM Lens

• Wider Max Aperture: f/2.8 vs. f/4
• More Aperture Blades: 11 vs. 7
• AF/MF Switch vs. N/A
• AF Hold Button vs. N/A

Primary Advantages of the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens

• Built-in Optical SteadyShot Stabilization vs. N/A
• Smaller: 3.07 x 3.88” (78 x 98.5mm) vs. 3.48 x 4.79” (88.5 x 121.6mm)
• Lighter: 18.3 oz (518g) vs. 24 oz (680g)
• Costs significantly less

Other Differences: Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM vs. Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS

• Elements/Groups: 16/13 vs. 12/10
• AF Motor: Dual Direct Drive SSM vs. Linear
• Front Filter Size: 82mm vs. 72

Image Quality Differences: Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM vs. Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS

The FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM lens is slightly sharper in the center at 16mm and 20mm f/4 and the FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS lens is slightly sharper in the corners. The f/2.8 lens center of the frame advantage grows slightly at 24mm and more than slightly at 28mm. At 35mm f/4, the f/2.8 lens turns in a far better performance. These differences are minimalized at f/5.6, but the f/2.8 remains a much better choice at 35mm.

As one would expect, the f/2.8 lens shows less vignetting at f/4. By f/8, the differences are minor. The f/2.8 lens has more barrel distortion at 16mm, but less pincushion distortion in some of the mid focal length comparisons.

Who should opt for the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM?

There are many drawbacks to an f/2.8 constant max aperture lens compared to an f/4 constant max aperture lens, including increased size, weight and cost. However, the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM's twice-as-wide max aperture will allow you to freeze motion in half as much light at the same ISO setting compared to the FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS. If you're a wedding/event photographer, or prefer not to pack a tripod for nighttime cityscape/street photography adventures, the increased size/weight/cost associated with the f/2.8 lens will prove more than worthwhile.

Who should opt for the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS?

If you don't often need to capture moving subjects in low-light situations, and can tolerate higher ISO use when the need arises, then the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS offers many of the benefits of the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM at less than half the price. For static subjects, when combined with Sony alpha-series cameras' IBIS (In-Body Image Stabilization), the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA's Optical SteadyShot should provide even more effective stabilization compared to a lens without built-in IS.

As you can see by the product pictures and specs listed above, the size and weight differences between these lenses are not insignificant. Photographers who will benefit from the FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS's smaller size/lighter weight include anyone carrying their gear for long periods of time (for backpacking, vacations, long events, etc.) and those wanting to pack more gear in a similar amount of space.

Summary

With many full frame Sony a-series cameras having built-in sensor stabilization, one of the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens's major benefits – optical stabilization – is diminished. However, it does have a few advantages remaining over the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM that will make it desirable for many photographers – smaller size, lighter weight and a much lower cost. In addition to the 1-stop wider max aperture, most photographers will prefer the FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM's image quality over the f/4 lens. For those photographing moving subjects and/or utilizing the entire focal length range on a regular basis, such as wedding/event photographers, will find the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM to be a worthy investment. Otherwise, the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS is available for significantly less.

Relevant Info

• Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM Lens Review
• Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens Tests

A general purpose lens is the most important and most-used lens in most photographers' kits. With a highly useful focal length range and a wide to moderately wide aperture, 24-70mm lenses can cover everyday needs, portraits, landscapes, cityscapes, food/travel and much more. Sony has two high-performing, 24-70mm constant max aperture zooms in its lineup – the FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM and FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS – and we're going to take a closer look at them to see which may be better suited to fill your general purpose needs.

Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM and Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Shared Primary Features

• Mount: Sony E (full frame)
• Focal Length Range: 24-70mm
• Minimum Aperture: f/22
• Dust and moisture resistant construction

Primary Advantages of the Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Lens

• Wider Max Aperture: f/2.8 vs. f/4
• More Aperture Blades: 9 vs. 7
• Higher Max Magnification: 0.24x vs. 0.20x
• AF/MF Switch vs. N/A
• Zoom Ring Lock Switch vs. N/A
• AF Hold Button vs. N/A

Primary Advantages of the Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens

• Built-in Optical SteadyShot Stabilization vs. N/A
• Smaller: 2.87 x 3.72” (73 x 94.5mm) vs. 3.45 x 5.35” (87.6 x 136mm)
• Lighter: 15.2 oz (430g) vs. 31.3 oz (886g)
• Costs significantly less

Other Differences: Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM vs. Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS

• Elements/Groups: 18/13 vs. 12/10
• AF Motor: Direct Drive Super Sonic Wave vs. Linear
• Front Filter Size: 82mm vs. 67

Image Quality Differences: Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM vs. Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS

From a sharpness perspective, the "sharpest lens" title will depend on the specific aperture/focal length being compared. There isn't really a clear winner when the entire range of tests is taken into consideration. The FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM shows slightly less vignetting at 24 & 70mm (vignetting is similar at the middle focal lengths) when the lenses are compared at their widest apertures.

When compared at f/4, the f/2.8 lens shows significantly less vignetting. The f/2.8 lens has less severe distortion over the zoom range (the difference is most noticeable at the lenses' widest and longest focal lengths), but most will prefer the f/4 lens' flare performance.

Who should opt for the Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM?

There are many drawbacks to an f/2.8 constant max aperture lens compared to an f/4 constant max aperture lens, including increased size, weight and cost. However, the Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM's twice-as-wide max aperture will allow you to freeze motion in half as much light at the same ISO setting compared to the FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS. If you're a wedding/event photographer, or prefer not to pack a tripod for nighttime cityscape/street photography adventures, the increased size/weight/cost associated with the f/2.8 lens will prove more than worthwhile. Portrait photographers will also appreciate the better subject-to-background separation provided by the 1-stop wider aperture and the smoother bokeh/better starbursts created by its 9 bladed aperture (vs. 7).

Who should opt for the Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS?

If you don't often need to capture moving subjects in low-light situations, and can tolerate higher ISO use when the need arises, then the Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS offers many of the benefits of the Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM at less than half the price. For static subjects, when combined with Sony alpha-series cameras' IBIS (In-Body Image Stabilization), the Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA's Optical SteadyShot should provide even more effective stabilization compared to a lens without built-in IS.

As you can see by the product pictures and specs listed above, the size and weight differences between these two lenses are substantial. Photographers who will benefit from the FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS's smaller size/lighter weight include anyone carrying their gear for long periods of time (for backpacking, vacations, long events, etc.) and those wanting to pack more gear in a similar amount of space.

Summary

With many full frame Sony a-series cameras having built-in sensor stabilization, one of the Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens's major benefits – optical stabilization – is diminished. However, it does have a few advantages remaining over the Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM that aid in boosting the f/4 lens' popularity – smaller size, lighter weight and a much lower cost. If any of those features is a priority for you, then the Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS is the lens to get. Otherwise, a 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom has been a must-have lens for a wide variety of professional photographers over the years, and for those choosing Sony gear, the FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM is one of the first lenses they'll be adding to their kits.

Relevant Info

• Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Lens Review
• Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Lens Tests

With the announcement of the EOS R, many may be wondering if diving into Canon's mirrorless system is the right step forward in regards to their next camera upgrade or if the Canon EOS 6D Mark II will fill their needs just fine. Therefore, we're going to take a closer look at these two cameras to see which might be the better choice for your needs.

Canon EOS R & Canon EOS 6D Mark II Shared Primary Features

• ISO Range: Auto 100-40000 (in 1/3-stop or whole stop increments), L:50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400
• White Balance Settings, including Ambience priority/White priority
• 5-axis Digital IS during movie recording
• Single memory card slot
• Operating Environment: 32–104°F / 0–40°C

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS R

• RF Mount: Compatible with RF and EF/TS-E/MP-E/EF-S lenses via adapter
• Higher Resolution: 30.4 MP vs. 26.2
• Newer Processor: DIGIC 8 vs. DIGIC 7
• More AF Points: 5,655 point AF system vs. 45
• More Sensitive AF: EV -6 – 18 vs. EV -3 - 18
• Eye Detect AF vs. N/A
• Built in LED AF assist beam
• Higher Burst Rate without AF Tracking: 8 fps vs. 6.5
• Larger RAW Buffer: 47 vs. 21
• Fv (Flexible priority) AE vs. N/A
• Wider Metering Range: EV -3 – 20 vs. EV 1 - 20
• Larger Shutter Speed Range: 30 - 1/8000 sec. vs. 30 - 1/4000
• Faster x-Sync: 1/200 sec. vs. 1/180
• Truely Silent Shooting: Absolutely no sound vs. quieter-than-normal "silent" shutter
• Higher Resolution LCD: Vari-angle touch screen 3.15" (8.01cm) Clear View LCD II, approx. 2.10 million dots, 60p vs. Vari-angle touch screen 3.0" (7.7cm) Clear View II TFT, approx. 1040K dots, 30p
• Higher Resolution Video: Up to 4K at 30p / FHD 1080p at 60p vs. FHD 1080p at 60p
• RAW, C-RAW and Dual Pixel RAW vs. RAW, M-RAW, S-RAW
• Compatibility with Faster Memory Cards: UHS-II vs. UHS-I
• Lighter Weight: 23.3 oz (660g) vs. 26.98 oz (765g)
• Smaller Size: 5.35 x 3.87 x 3.32" (135.8 x 98.3 x 84.4mm) vs. 5.67 x 4.35 x 2.94" (144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8mm)

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS 6D Mark II

• EF Mount: Compatible with significantly more native-mount lenses
• Higher Burst Rate with AF tracking: 6.5 fps vs. 5
• Longer Battery Life: 1200 vs .370
• Lower Cost

Other Differences Between the Canon EOS R and Canon EOS 5D Mark IV

• Electronic viewfinder vs. optical
• 384-zone metering vs. 63 zone, 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor

Who should opt for the Canon EOS R?

If you read our Canon EOS R vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark IV comparison, you'll recognize a lot of the benefits listed below. The reason is simple – many of the EOS R's benefits are unique to Canon's new mirrorless system, especially in regards to the R's use with adapted lenses, and those benefits remain the same when the camera is stacked up against any Canon DSLR.

The EOS R features an RF mount. Upon the camera's release, the selection of RF lenses will be relatively small (only four have been announced). While that may seem limiting, the truth is that the EOS R with its RF mount will be even more versatile than the EF-mount 6D mark II if adapted lenses are taken into consideration. With the Canon Mount Adapter EF-EOS R, Control Ring Mount Adapter and Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter, the EOS R is compatible with EF/TS-E/MP-E and – in a first for Canon full-frame cameras – EF-S lenses as well. So while the selection of RF lenses may be limited for the time being, the unique capabilities afforded by Canon's mount adapters will make the EOS R very attractive for several types of photographers.

Which photographers, precisely? Landscape photographers, portrait photographers and videographers will especially appreciate the benefits of the Drop-In Mount Adapter. How often do landscape photographers want to use CPOLs (circular polarizers) or ND (neutral density) filters with wide angle or ultra-wide angle lenses that are incompatible with front filters? Up until now, using filters with such lenses required the use of cumbersome 3rd-party front filter adapters. With the EOS R, those photographing the great outdoors can enjoy the benefits of a lighter camera body as well as a universal CPOL/vari-ND filter solution for their existing lens collection when traveling to their favorite sunrise location. Landscape photographers often want to stack a circular polarizer with an ND filter on a wide angle lens featuring front filter threads, but the resulting mechanical vignetting (and the increased likelihood of stuck filters) makes using the combo impractical. The Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter with Variable ND filter –with 1.5 - 9 stops of density – can easily be paired with a front-mounted circular polarizer like the B+W XS-Pro CPOL. A B+W XS-Pro CPOL will allow landscape photographers to cut through glare to capture dark blue skies and saturated foliage yet is thin enough not to cause mechanical vignetting on most wide angle lenses. And with a rear-mounted variable ND, a photographer can simultaneously reap the benefits of a long shutter speed to capture the movement of flowing water, clouds, rustling trees, etc.

The EOS R will be the better option to capture recitals, dance and theater performances with its absolutely silent shooting mode.

Those shooting portraiture will certainly appreciate the EOS R's Eye Detection AF, especially when a wide aperture prime lens is being used either natively or with an adapter. The EOS R's AF system is able to lock focus on and track subjects over a significantly larger portion of the frame compared to the 6D II's 45-point phase-detect AF system, allowing for greater flexibility in subject framing without having to focus and recompose. And because the EOS R utilizes the sensor for focusing, calibration issues associated with traditional phase-detect AF systems can be avoided altogether, better ensuring focus accuracy.

If a photographer's off-camera flashes are not capable of high-speed sync, the Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter with Variable ND can enable use of a shutter speed below the camera's x-sync speed (for the R, 1/200 sec.) while using flash and a wide aperture for great subject/background separation.

The EOS R can record video at 4K resolution while the 6D Mark II tops out at 1080p. Videographers can either use the extra resoltion to create highly detailed movies or otherwise create stabilized 1080p video and/or create panning movements within the 4K frame. Videographers can also make use of the Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter, especially when used with the variable ND to record video at optimal shutter speeds (typically, 2x the frame rate). With filters attached to the back of lenses, lens changes can occur more quickly (no need to unscrew/mount a separate ND filter) and the variable ND could easily replace numerous traditional ND filters in a filmmaker's kit.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS 6D Mark II?

There are benefits and drawbacks to Electronic Viewfinders (EVFs) and Optical Viewfinders (OVFs); neither will be best for/preferred by everyone. The 6D Mark II's viewfinder blackout time is actually shorter than the EOS R's viewfinder stutter during capture, making tracking laterally moving or erratic subjects easier with the OVF. If an optical viewfinder is preferred for any reason, the 6D II is, of course, the obvious choice. Other than that, the primary reasons to get a 6D Mark II are battery performance, preference for unadapted lenses and price. The EOS 6D Mark II's is rated for significantly more shots per battery charge compared to the EOS R. If you're often forgetting to charge and/or pack extra batteries, the 6D II may be the better camera for you. Those who simply don't like using adapters will also be better served by the 6D II. And finally, those whose budgets do not extend to the EOS R, especially when the cost of adapters are considered, may take advantage of the 6D II's slightly lower price tag (instant rebates may augment that difference from time to time).

Summary

The EOS R's ability to use adapted lenses, and the unique capabilities provided by the adapters, makes Canon's full-frame mirrorless introduction a camera you can effectively use now and well into the future, taking full advantage of all the new RF lenses headed down the pipeline. If compared to DSLRs, the EOS R's features position it somewhere between the 5D Mark IV and 6D Mark II, but certainly closer to the former than the latter. Without instant rebates in place, the price difference between the EOS R and 6D Mark II isn't all that much, even with a Mount Adapter EF-EOS R thrown into the mix. Therefore, most will find the EOS R's benefits to be well worth its incremental cost over the 6D Mark II's MSRP.

Relevant Info

• First Look at the Canon EOS R System
• Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review

With the announcement of the EOS R, many may be wondering if diving into Canon's new mirrorless system is the right step forward in regards to their next camera upgrade or if the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV is the better choice. Therefore, we're going to take a closer look at these two cameras to see which might be the better choice for your needs.

Canon EOS R & Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Shared Primary Features

• Sensor Resolution: 30.4 MP Dual Pixel CMOS AF full-frame sensor
• Shutter Speed: 30-1/8000 sec
• Auto Exposure Bracketing: +/-3 stops in 1/3- or 1/2-stop increments
• Lowest and Highest ISO: L:50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400
• White Balance Settings (including Ambience/White Priority AWB)
• Flash x-Sync: 1/200sec
• No built-in flash
• Hot Shoe/PC Terminal: Yes / Yes (although EOS R PC terminal only available via BG-E22 accessory)
• 4K video recording up to 30p with Movie Servo AF
• 4K screen grab
• USB 3.0, mic/headphone jacks, HDMI out
• Built-in Wi-Fi
• Operating Environment: 32 – 104 °F (0 – 40 °C), 85% or less humidity

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS R

• RF Mount: Compatible with significantly more lenses via adapter
• DIGIC 8 processor
• More AF Points: 5,655 point AF system vs. 61
• More Sensitive AF: EV -6 – 18 vs. EV -3 – 18
• Eye Detect AF vs. N/A
• Built in LED AF assist beam
• Higher Burst Rate: 8 fps vs. 7
• Larger RAW Buffer: 47 vs. 21
• Flexible priority AE vs. N/A
• Wider Metering Range: EV -3 – 20 vs. EV 0 – 20
• Larger Auto ISO Range: 100 - 40000 ISO vs. 100 - 32000
• 5-axis Digital IS vs. N/A
• Truly Silent Shooting: Absolutely no sound vs. quieter-than-normal "silent" shutter
• Higher Shutter Durability Rating: 200,000 shots vs. 150,000
• More Flexible/Higher Resolution LCD: Vari-angle touch screen 3.15" (8.01cm), approx. 2.1 million dots, 60p vs. Touch screen 3.2" (8.10cm), approx. 1620K dots, 30p
• Built-in Bluetooth vs. N/A
• Smaller Size: 5.35 x 3.87 x 3.32" (135.8 x 98.3 x 84.4mm) vs. 5.93 x 4.58 x 2.99" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm)
• Lighter Weight: 23.3 oz (660g) vs. 31.4 oz (890g)
• Costs less

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV

• EF Mount: Compatible with significantly more native-mount lenses
• Wider Exposure Compensation: +/-5 EV in 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments vs. +/-3 EV
• Higher Burst Rate with AF tracking: Max. approx. 7 fps. vs. 5
• Larger JPEG Buffer: Unlimited vs. 100
• Built-in NFC vs. N/A
• Built-in GPS vs. optional via GP-E2 GPS accessory
• Dual Memory Card Slots: CF/SD (UHI-I) vs. SD (UHI-II) only
• Water & Dust Resistant
• Higher Battery Life: 900 shots vs. 370

Other Differences Between the Canon EOS R and Canon EOS 5D Mark IV

• Electronic viewfinder vs. optical
• 384-zone metering vs. 252-zone, 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor (315-zone in Live View)
• RAW, C-RAW and Dual Pixel RAW vs. RAW, M-RAW, S-RAW and Dual Pixel RAW
• MP4 4K (16:9) 3840 x 2160 vs. MOV 4K (17:9) 4096 x 2160 (Motion JPEG)

Who should opt for the Canon EOS R?

The EOS R is the first Canon camera to feature an RF [mirrorless] mount. And upon the camera's release, the selection of RF lenses will be relatively small (four, to be exact). While that may seem limiting, the truth is that the EOS R with its RF mount will be even more versatile than the 5D Mark IV with the tried-and-true EF mount if adapted lenses are taken into consideration. With the Canon Mount Adapter EF-EOS R, Control Ring Mount Adapter and Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter, the EOS R is compatible with EF/TS-E/MP-E and – in a first for Canon full-frame cameras – EF-S lenses as well. So while the selection of RF lenses may be limited for the time being, the unique capabilities afforded by Canon's mount adapters will make the EOS R very attractive for a lot of photographers.

Which photographers, precisely? Landscape photographers, portrait photographers and videographers will especially appreciate the benefits of the Drop-In Mount Adapter. How often do landscape photographers want to use CPOLs (circular polarizers) or ND (neutral density) filters with wide angle or ultra-wide angle lenses that are incompatible with front filters? Up until now, using filters with such lenses required the use of cumbersome 3rd-party front filter adapters. With the EOS R, those photographing the great outdoors can enjoy the benefits of a lighter camera body as well as a universal CPOL/vari-ND filter solution for their existing lens collection when traveling to their favorite sunrise location. Landscape photographers often want to stack a circular polarizer with an ND filter on a wide angle lens featuring front filter threads, but the resulting mechanical vignetting (and the increased likelihood of stuck filters) makes using the combo impractical. The Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter with Variable ND filter –with 1.5 - 9 stops of density – can easily be paired with a front-mounted circular polarizer like the B+W XS-Pro CPOL. A B+W XS-Pro CPOL will allow landscape photographers to cut through glare to capture dark blue skies and saturated foliage yet is thin enough not to cause mechanical vignetting on most wide angle lenses. And with a rear-mounted variable ND, a photographer can simultaneously reap the benefits of a long shutter speed to capture the movement of flowing water, clouds, rustling trees, etc.

The EOS R will be the better option to capture recitals, dance and theater performances with its absolutely silent shooting mode.

Those shooting portraiture will certainly appreciate the EOS R's Eye Detection AF, especially when a wide aperture prime lens is being used either natively or with an adapter. Note that because the EOS R utilizes the sensor for focusing, calibration issues associated with traditional phase-detect AF systems can be avoided, better ensuring focus accuracy. Also, if a photographer's off-camera flashes are not capable of high-speed sync, the Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter with Variable ND can enable use of a shutter speed below the camera's x-sync speed (for the R, 1/200 sec.) while using flash and a wide aperture for great subject/background separation.

Videographers will likely make use of the Drop-In Filter Mount Adapter, especially when used with the variable ND to record video at optimal shutter speeds (typically, 2x the frame rate). With filters attached to the back of lenses, lens changes can occur more quickly (no need to unscrew/mount a separate ND filter) and the variable ND could easily replace numerous traditional ND filters in a filmmaker's kit. Both the EOS R and 5D Mark IV sample the center of the sensor for 4K recording which results in a crop factor of 1.75x. However, the EOS R is compatible with EF-S lenses (the 5D Mark IV is not), meaning wide-angle framing does not have to be sacrificed.

For those on a limited budget, an EOS R costs significantly less than an EOS 5D Mark IV, even if you add the cost of an EF-EOS R adapter.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV?

The EOS 5D Mark IV has at least one very significant benefit over the EOS R – dual memory card slots. While the EOS R and RF 50mm f/1.2L and RF 28-70mm f/2L USM would seem to be an extremely good kit for wedding coverage, the R's single memory card slot means that a card failure could prove absolutely disastrous. For that reason alone, the 5D Mark IV will be a better option for recording once-in-a-lifetime moments.

Sports photographers will certainly appreciate the 5D IV's faster continuous burst rate with autofocus tracking for capturing the peak of action, although the R does have a significant edge in the RAW buffer department allowing for longer shooting at its rated speed.

There are benefits and drawbacks to Electronic Viewfinders (EVFs) and Optical Viewfinders (OVFs); neither will be best for/preferred by everyone. If an optical viewfinder is preferred, the EOS 5D Mark IV is, of course, the obvious choice.

While the EOS R's battery life is proving to be better in real-world shooting than its official specification would indicate, those shooting long events or in situations where battery changes aren't practical (such as heavy rain) may prefer the 5D Mark IV's higher expected battery life. Some photographers will appreciate the 5D Mark IV's built-in NFC and GPS features while others won't blink an eye at the EOS R's lack of them. Those using super telephoto lenses may also prefer the 5D Mark IV's larger size and increased weight to better balance out the camera/lens combination.

The 5D Mark IV also benefits from the refinements and reliability found in a mature product line, resulting in a very user-friendly, familiar interface that can be depended upon to work in even challenging conditions. Being Canon's first professional-grade full-frame mirrorless camera, with never before seen features (like the Mult-Function Bar), may take some getting used to and will ultimately have to prove its worthiness of the "refined camera" label.

Summary

The Canon EOS R and EOS 5D Mark IV were designed to be jack-of-all-trades and can be used effectively to capture... just about anything. The EOS R's ability to use adapted lenses, and the unique capabilities provided by the adapters, makes Canon's full-frame mirrorless introduction a camera you can effectively use now and well into the future, taking full advantage of all the new RF lenses headed down the pipeline. However, its lack of dual memory card slots (along with a few other differences) mean that the EOS 5D Mark IV will remain the better option for a sizeable number of photography professionals.

Relevant Info

• First Look at the Canon EOS R System
• Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review

A 70-200mm telephoto zoom lens is an extremely versatile tool. So veratile, in fact, it's often a pro photographer's most-used lens (or maybe just behind their general purpose zoom). Engagements, weddings, parties, events, theater, stage performances, high school senior, fashion, documentary, lifestyle, zoo, product and landscape photography are all great uses for this focal length range.

If you're looking to add a 70-200(ish) mm zoom lens to your kit, and don't need an f/2.8 max aperture and/or don't want the size/weight/cost penalties tied to the wider aperture, then the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM and Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC USD Lens are likely at the top of your considerations list. Both lenses feature an f/4 max aperture that can be stopped down to f/32, nine rounded aperture blades and built-in stabilization. Where the two lenses differ, of course, will determine which one is the better candidate for your kit.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM and Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC USD Shared Features

• 70-200mm-class focal length range
• Constant f/4 max aperture; can be stopped down to f/32
• 9 rounded aperture blades
• Built-in stabilization
• High grade build quality with weather sealing
• Optional tripod ring

Primary Advantages of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM Lens

• Better image stabilization: 5-stops vs. 4
• Slightly lighter weight: 28.2 oz (800g) vs. 30.3 oz (859g)
• Autofocus range limiter vs. none
• Better AF performance, especially when using the outer AF points
• Better balance: rearward positioned zoom ring vs. forward positioned

Primary Advantages of the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC USD Lens

• Slightly smaller size: 2.99 x 6.9” (76 x 175.3mm) vs. 3.15 x 6.93” (80 x 176mm)
• Higher maximum magnification: 0.32x vs. 0.27
• Focus calibration can be adjusted by focal length range and subject distance in the lens via optional TAP-in Console accessory vs. adjusted by focal length range only in camera via camera bodies with Autofocus Microadjustment feature
• Extra 10mm of focal length range on the long end
• Lower cost

Other things to consider:

• Filter size: 72mm (Canon) vs. 67mm (Tamron)
• Large magnification change while zooming (Tamron)
• Rings rotate in the Nikon-standard direction (Tamron)
• The Canon is noticeably sharper at f/4 (especially at 200mm) and shows less flare
• The Tamron shows less vignetting and geometric distortion

Who should opt for the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM Lens?

From an image quality perspective, most photographers will appreciate the sharpness of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM's images compared to the better distortion and vignetting performance of the Tamron. If you're shooting in situations where you can't afford to miss focus, the Canon's better autofocus performance (both in accuracy and consistency) will more than offset the lens' higher acquisition cost, especially in low light situations. And in regards to low light situations, the Canon's 1-stop higher rated stabilization system will help you get sharper images of non-moving subjects under the same shooting conditions. For those that will typically utilize the lens at its longest focal length, the Canon's better image quality at 200mm will certainly be appreciated. If intending on having your 70-200mm lens mounted for long periods of time, the Canon's rearward positioned zoom ring will certainly be more comfortable to use. And finally, if you currently only have Canon-made zoom lenses in your kit, acclimating to Tamron's reversed rotating zoom and focus rings can be maddening, especially when a fleeting shot opportunity requires a fast reaction speed.

Who should opt for the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC USD Lens?

If your budget does not extend to the Canon equivalent, the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC USD Lens offers many of the same benefits at at less than two-thirds the cost (without rebates). For those who plan on using their medium telephoto zoom primarily for static portraiture, especially when a focus-and-recompose technique can be employed while using the enter AF point, the Tamron's AF performance should be more than sufficient for the task. Do you own an EOS Rebel-series camera body without the ability to fine-tune AF parameters via Autofocus Microadjustment? The Tamron may prove to be the safest choice as you can compensate for autofocus miscalibration issues via the optional TAP-in Console; if you experienced a similar issue with the Canon lens, you'd need to send your camera and lens to Canon's Service Department for calibration, a much less convenient solution to the problem.

Note about focal length range difference: The extra 10mm of focal length range provided by the Tamron will not be terribly significant from a practical standpoint. For instance, the difference in framing the an identical target at 200mm with the Canon and 210mm with the Tamron amounted to slightly more than 1' (305mm), meaning you could get the same basic framing with the Canon lens by leaning forward.

Summary

As you can see, from a specifications standpoint, these lenses are very similar. If your budget extends to the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM, and you'll be using it with a body that features Autofocus Microadjustment, we highly recommend adding the L-series lens to your kit because of its sharpness, IS/AF and balance advantages over the Tamron. However, if your budget is more limited, the Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC USD is an excellent value when its versatility and overall performance are considered.

Relevant Info

• Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS II USM Lens Review
• Tamron 70-210mm f/4 Di VC USD Lens Review

Considering the significant price gap between them, it's reasonable for anyone interested in Sony's mirrorless camera system to wonder, "Should I get the a7R III or the a7 III?" With that mind, we're going to take a closer look at these two camera bodies to see which might be the best choice for your needs.

Sony a7R III & Sony a7 III Shared Features

• E-mount, compatible with full-frame and APS-C lenses
• BIONZ X image processor
• 5-axis Stabilization
• Contrast Detection AF Points: 425
• AF Working Range: EV-3 – EV 20
• Metering System: 1200-zone evaluative, -3 – EV 20
• Exposure Compensation: +/- 5.0EV in 1/3 EV steps
• Auto Exposure Bracketing: Up to 9 shots
• Max Shutter Speed: 1/8000 sec.
• Viewfinder Size: 1.3 cm (0.5-type) OLED
• LCD Size: 2.95 inch (3.0-type) tilting touchscreen
• Flash x-Sync: 1/250 sec.
• Continuous Shooting Speed: max approx. 10 fps
• Video Recording: Up to 4K 3840 x 2160 30p / FHD 1920 x 1080 120p
• Storage: Dual memory card slots (Memory Stick PRO Duo/PRO HG-Duo/Micro M2, SD/SDHC/SDXC)
• Wireless Features: Built-in Wi-Fi, NFC & Bluetooth
• Physical Connections: HDMI Type-D, USB 3.0 Type-C, USB 2.0 Micro-B, Microphone 3.5mm, Headphone 3.5mm
• Operating Range: 32–104°F / 0–40°C
• Size & Weight: 5.0 x 3.9 x 3.0" (126.9 x 95.6 x 73.7mm), approx. 23 oz (650g)
• Compatible Battery Grip: VG-C3EM

Primary Advantages of the Sony a7R III

• Higher Sensor Resolution: 42.4 MP vs. 24.2 MP
• Higher Viewfinder Resolution: 3,686K dots vs. 2,359K
• Higher LCD Resolution: 1,440K vs. 921K
• PC terminal vs. none
• Includes a battery charger vs. optional accessory

Primary Advantages of the Sony a7 III

• More Phase-Detect AF Points: 693 vs. 399
• Larger ISO Range: ISO 100-51200, exp. to ISO 50 and 204800 vs. ISO 100-32000, exp. to ISO 50-102400
• Larger Continuous Buffer (RAW, Uncompressed): 40 vs 28
• Longer Battery Life: 610 shots vs. 530 shots
• Lower price

Who should opt for the Sony a7R III?

With such a huge list of shared features between the two cameras, the a7R III advantages list is unsurprsingly short. While many will appreciate the a7R III's higher resolution viewfinder and LCD panel, undoubtedly the most important difference between the two cameras is sensor resolution. The difference between 42.4 and 24.2 MP is substantial. If you're shooting subjects where resolving small details is a primary concern, or otherwise want the ability to heavily crop photos for better framing (or to extend the reach of a not-long-enough telephoto lens), then Sony a7R III's higher resolution sensor will be worth the incremental investment over the a7 III.

Who should opt for the Sony a7 III?

If you've been on the fence about investing in a Sony mirrorless camera and you don't need the massive resolution of the a7R III or the blazingly fast frame rate of the a9, then the Sony a7 III has your name on it. It may be positioned in the lineup as Sony's entry-level full-frame camera, but the only indication of the a7 III's entry-level status is its price tag. The a7 III's comprehensive assortment of advanced features will make it right at home in many pro, advanced hobbyist or weekend warror kits as a primary or backup camera. For what you get, the Sony a7 III is a bargain.

Relevant Info

• Sony a7R III Review
• Sony a7 III Review

For those shopping for their first non-smartphone camera, a backup camera for a current kit or simply upgrading from a lower level/previous generation Rebel-series camera, the Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D and EOS M50 are likely to be considered. Today, we're going to look closely at these two cameras to see which might be the better option for addition to your kit.

Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D and EOS M50 Shared Primary Features:

• Resolution: 24 MP / 6000 x 4000 pixels
• Crop Ratio: 1.6x
• Dual Pixel CMOS AF, up to 1080p 59.94 fps
• Shutter Speed: 30 - 1/4000 sec.
• Auto White Balance with Ambience priority / White priority
• Wi-Fi, NFC & Bluetooth
• 3" (7.7/7.5cm) Vari-angle Touchscreen LCD, 1040K dots
• Flash X-sync: 1/200 sec.
• SD, SDHC, SDXC (UHS-I compatible)
• Similar Price (at US authorized retailers, excluding rebates)

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D:

• Native compatibility with EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E lenses
• More Sensitive AF: down to EV -3 vs. EV -2
• Larger Buffer: Up to 27 RAW/unlimited JPEG vs. 10/33
• Wider Exposure Compensation Range: +/-5 EV vs. +/-3 EV
• Large Auto ISO Range: 100 - 25600 vs. 100 - 6400
• Higher Power Flash: 13.1 GN vs. 5
• Optical Viewfinder
• Longer Battery Life: 820 shots vs. 235 (370 in Eco Mode)
• Compatible with E3-type remotes, smartphones/tablets and BR-E1 (Bluetooth) vs. BR-E1 and smartphones/tablets only

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M50:

• Native compatibility with EF-M lenses, compatible with EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E lenses via adapter
• Newer Processor: DIGIC 8 vs. DIGIC 7
• More AF Points: 143 vs. 45
• Faster Burst Rate: Approx 10.0 fps RAW (7.4 with Servo AF) vs. 6
• Better Face Detection: Eye AF vs. Face AF
• Wider Metering Range: EV 0 – 20 vs. EV 1 – 20
• Higher Resolution Video: 4K UHD vs. FHD 1080p
• Electronic Viewfinder
• Smaller: 4.6 x 3.5 x 2.3" (116.3 x 88.1 x 58.7mm) vs. 5.16 x 3.93 x 3.00" (131.0 x 99.9 x 76.2mm)
• Lighter: 13.7 oz (387g) vs. 18.77 oz (532g)

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D?

If you are a current Rebel-series owner but want the benefits of a Dual Pixel CMOS sensor, and the size and weight of your current kit is a non-issue, then the EOS Rebel T7i/800D will offer a seamless transition with no adapters required to use your current set of lenses and a familiar button/control layout that feels right at home in your hands. With no adapter required for use with EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E lenses, there's one less vital piece of gear to be forgotten or malfunction. Just remember your fully charged battery and a memory card, throw your lenses in a bag and you're good to go (although we do recommend packing other items as well).

Note that the T7i has an optical viewfinder (OVF) while the EOS M5 has an electronic viewfinder (EVF), and both show up as advantages for their respective cameras. Depending on what you're shooting and what your preferences are, either one may be more beneficial than the other. Check out our OVF vs. EVF comparison here.

If you're interested in exploring off-camera lighting, the Rebel T7i offers an integrated Speedlite transmitter that will allow you to control off-camera Canon Speedlites remotely. To get the same functionality with the EOS M50, you would need a master flash (600EX II-RT / 430EX III-RT) or ST-E3-RT / ST-E2 transmitter, reducing the mirrorless camera's size/weight benefits.

The Rebel T7i's more sensitive AF system is able to lock on in lower light, and its battery will keep you shooting long after the EOS M50's battery has been exhausted.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M50?

The EOS M50 represents a huge step up in image quality for those coming directly from a smartphone, and its size and weight will provide an easier transition into ILC (Interchangeable Lens Camera) photography compared to a traditional DSLR body. The EOS M50 will also be a great choice for current Canon DSLR owners who want a compact option that can also serve as a backup camera in a pinch (with the adapter) or otherwise want a reduced load for vacations, hiking or business trips, especially when one of Canon's EF-M series lenses will fit the bill perfectly.

Want to capture 4K video? The M50 has you covered (albeit without the benefits of Dual Pixel CMOS AF). If 1080p output is your goal, you can easily downsample 4K video (with very slight cropping on the right and left sides), crop the frame to provide a tighter angle of view, or even pan your FHD video within the confines of the 4K captured frame. You can also mimic zooming in and out of a scene to add even more production value to your 1080p movies. When not utilizing 4K capture, the M50 offers similar benefits as the Rebel T7i, including DPAF subject tracking.

On top of the size and weight advantages of an M-series kit, the M50's faster burst rate in single shot mode can help you capture the peak action as long as AF tracking is not needed for the specific situation. And if you prefer the benefits of an EVF (Electronic Viewfinder), then the M5 becomes the easy choice.

Summary

While the EOS M50 is a moderately capable camera with the size and weight benefits a mirrorless system brings, Canon's current [limited] EF-M lens selection may not provide all the flexibility desired in an ILC kit. And while Canon's complete EF/EF-S/TS-E/MP-E lenses can be used with an adapter, using lenses designed for DSLRs on a mirrorless camera negates much of its most alluring quality, its reduced size and weight.

On the other hand, the EOS Rebel T7i/800D, with its native ability to mount Canon's full range of EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E lenses, along with its higher battery life and built-in Speedlite transmitter, represents a simpler and more versatile platform on which to build a photography kit.

For those general purpose photography situations where a single, variable aperture zoom lens will suffice, the EOS M50 paired with an EF-M zoom lens can be a very convient option that will not be a burden to carry throughout the day. Note that as Canon releases more EF-M lenses, the versatility of an M-series kit increases along with the M50's appeal.

More Information:

• Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D Review
• Canon EOS M50 Review

For those shopping for their first non-smartphone camera, a backup camera for a current kit or simply upgrading from a lower level/previous generation Rebel-series camera, the Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D and EOS M5 are likely to be considered. Today, we're going to look closely at these two cameras to see which might be the better option for acquisition.

Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D and EOS M5 Shared Primary Features:

• Resolution: 24.2 MP / 6000 x 4000 pixels
• Dual Pixel CMOS AF, up to 1080p 59.94 fps
• HDMI out & external mic jack
• Crop Ratio: 1.6x
• Processor: DIGIC 7
• Metering Range: EV 1 – 20
• Auto ISO Range: 100 - 25600
• Shutter Speed: 30 - 1/4000 sec
• Built-in Wi-Fi, NFC and Low-Energy Bluetooth
• Flash hot shoe

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D:

• Natively compatible with EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E lenses
• AF Working Range: EV -3 - 18 vs. EV -1 - 18
• Exposure Compensation: +/-5 EV vs. +/-3 EV
• Higher Max ISO: 51200 vs. 25600
• Vari-angle LCD screen vs. tilt only
• Ambience priority, white priority AWB vs. ambience only
• More Powerful Pop-up Flash: 13.1 GN (m) vs. 5
• Integrated Speedlite Transmitter vs. N/A
• Longer Battery Life: 820 shots vs. 295 (420 with Eco Mode On)
• Larger, more comfortable grip size
• Optical viewfinder
• Lower cost

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M5:

• Native EF-M lenses are smaller/lighter than similar EF-S/EF lenses
• Compatible with EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E lenses via adapter
• More AF points: 49 vs. 45
• Focus peaking vs. N/A
• Faster Continuous Shooting: approx. 9 fps (7fps with AF) vs. 6
• Electronic viewfinder
• Better Viewfinder Coverage: 100% vs. 95%
• Larger / Higher Resolution LCD: 8.0 cm (3.2”), 1,620 K dots vs. 7.7 cm (3.0"), 1040 K dots
• Smaller Size: 4.6 x 3.5 x 2.4" vs. 5.16 x 3.93 x 3.00" (115.6 x 89.2 x 60.6mm vs. 131.0 x 99.9 x 76.2mm)
• Lighter Weight: 15.1 oz. vs. 18.77 oz (427g vs. 532g)

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D?

If you are a current Rebel-series owner but simply long for the benefits of a Dual Pixel CMOS sensor, and the size and weight of your current kit is a non-issue, then the EOS Rebel T7i/800D will offer a seamless transition with no adapters required to use your current set of lenses and a familiar button/control layout that feels right at home in your hands. With no adapter required, there's one less vital piece of gear to be forgotten or malfunction. Just remember your fully charged battery and a memory card, throw your lenses in a bag and you're good to go (although we do recommend packing other items as well).

Note that the T7i has an optical viewfinder (OVF) while the EOS M5 has an electronic viewfinder (EVF), and both show up as advantages for their respective cameras. Depending on what you're shooting and what your preferences are, either one may be more beneficial than the other. Check out our OVF vs. EVF comparison here.

If you're interested in exploring off-camera lighting, the Rebel T7i offers an integrated Speedlite transmitter that will allow you to control off-camera Canon Speedlites remotely. The Rebel T7i's more sensitive AF system is able to lock on in lower light, and its battery will keep you shooting long after the EOS M5's battery has been exhausted. And if you're on a tight budget, the Rebel T7's lower price tag will make it an even more attractive option.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M5?

The EOS M5 represents a huge step up in image quality for those coming directly from a smartphone, and its size and weight will provide an easier transition into ILC (Interchangeable Lens Camera) photography compared to a traditional DSLR body. The EOS M5 will also be a great choice for current Canon DSLR owners who want a compact option that can also serve as a backup camera in a pinch (with the adapter) or otherwise want a reduced load for vacations, hiking or business trips, especially when one of Canon's EF-M series lenses will fit the bill perfectly..

On top of the size and weight advantages of an M-series kit, the M5's faster burst rate in single shot mode can help you capture the peak action as long as AF tracking is not needed for the specific situation. And if you prefer the benefits of an EVF (Electronic Viewfinder), then the M5 becomes the easy choice.

Summary

While the EOS M5 is a very capable camera with the size and weight benefits a mirrorless system brings, Canon's current [limited] EF-M lens selection may not provide all the flexibility desired in an ILC kit. And while Canon's complete EF/EF-S/TS-E/MP-E lenses can be used with an adapter, using lenses designed for DSLRs on a mirrorless camera negates much of its most alluring quality, its reduced size and weight.

On the other hand, the EOS Rebel T7i/800D, with its native ability to mount Canon's full range of EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E lenses, along with its higher battery life and built-in Speedlite transmitter, represents a simpler and more versatile platform on which to build a photography kit.

For those general purpose photography situations where a single, variable aperture zoom lens will suffice, the EOS M5 paired with an EF-M zoom lens can be a very convient option that will not be a burden to carry throughout the day. Note that as Canon releases more EF-M lenses, the versatility of an M-series kit increases along with the M5's appeal.

More Information:

• Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D Review
• Canon EOS M5 Review

Want great image quality but don't want to carry around a full-sized DSLR? Canon's EOS M50 and EOS Rebel SL2/200D are two options you may have been considering. If so, let's take a look at these two cameras to see how they compare.

Canon EOS M50 and EOS Rebel SL2/200D Shared Primary Features:

• Resolution: 6000 x 4000 pixels (24 MP)
• Auto Exposure Bracketing: 3 shots, +/- 2 EV, 1/3-stop increment
• Shutter Speed: 1/4000 sec. to 30 sec.

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M50:

• DIGIC 8 processor vs. DIGIC 7
• Up to 143 AF points vs. 9
• EV -2 – 18 AF working range vs. EV -0.5 -18
• Up to 10 fps burst shooting for 10 frames RAW vs. 5 fps for 6 frames RAW
• 384 zone metering sensor vs. 63
• EV 0 – 20 metering range vs. EV 1 – 20
• Up to 4K video recording vs. Full HD 1080p
• 100% viewfinder coverage vs. 95%
• 15mm built-in flash coverage vs. 18mm
• Smaller/lighter: 4.6 x 3.5 x 2.3" (116.3 x 88.1 x 58.7mm), 13.7 oz (387g) vs. 4.82 x 3.65 x 2.75" (122.4 x 92.6 x 69.8mm), 15.98 oz (453g)
• .CR3 RAW files with C-RAW support vs. .CR2 with no C-RAW support
• Native compatibility with EF-M lenses, compatible with EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E with adapter

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D:

• +/-5 EV Exposure Compensation vs. +/-3 EV
• 100-25600 Auto ISO range vs. 100-6400
• White balance bracketing vs. N/A
• 9.8m built-in flash GN vs. 5
• 650 battery life vs. 235 (370 in Eco Mode)
• Compatible with Remote Controller BR-E1 & E3 remotes vs. Remote Controller BR-E1 only
• Native compatibility with EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E lenses
• Lower price

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M50?

Those wanting the smallest and lightest camera option, especially for backpacking or family vacations, Canon's mirrorless cameras pack DSLR-level image quality in a take-anywhere size. That the EOS M50 is compatible with Canon's similarly-small EF-M series lenses further bolsters this advantage. And while the M50 is technically more versatile from a lens options standpoint when the EF-EOS M Adapter is factored into the equation, use of the adapter with designed-for-DSLR lenses negates much of the small size and light weight benefits of an M50-based kit.

If you need a camera that shoots 4K, then the choice is easy – the EOS M50 shoots 4k, the EOS Rebel SL2/200D does not. Although you don't get the benefits of Dual Pixel CMOS Movie Servo AF in 4K mode, the ability to shoot 4K combined with the M50's vari-angle LCD and small size/weight will make it an extremely useful tool for filmmaking, especially for vloggers or one-man crews. If you appreciate the benefits of an EVF (Electronic Viewfinder), then the EOS M50 becomes the de facto option. However, note that I didn't list an EVF as a benefit for the EOS M50 nor did I list the OVF (Optical Viewfinder) as a benefit for the Rebel SL2/200D. Your own personal preferences and specific needs will dictate which viewfinder is most advantageous. Check out our article "Comparing Electronic Viewfinders to Optical Viewfinders" for more information. The EOS M50 also features a better/more sensitive AF system, more sensitive metering system, a faster continuous shooting burst rate and a larger buffer.

These features along with the camera's new .CR3 RAW file format (with space saving C-RAW support) result in an overall more versatile camera compared to the EOS Rebel SL2/200D.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel SL2/200D?

For those who tend to occasionally forget to pack important items in their gear bag, an advantage of the SL2/200D is its native compatibility with all of Canon's EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E lenses (no adapter required). Those needing to control larger lenses on their camera and those actively using the camera for substantial time periods will appreciate the SL2/200D's more substantial grip and longer battery life. The Rebel SL2/200D's larger exposure compensation range can certainly come in handy under extreme exposure conditions.

The Rebel SL2 has one particular advantage that nearly every photographer can appreciate – a lower price tag compared to the M50.

More Information:

• Canon EOS M50 Review
• Canon EOS Rebel SL2 Review

The Canon EOS M50 and EOS M100 cameras represent the budget options in Canon's mirrorless lineup, but the "budget" label is a relative one because – as Canon's naming conventions suggest – these cameras are not on the same level. Typically speaking, Canon camera models with more numerical digits in their name are positioned lower in the camera lineup than cameras with fewer digits. In this case, the naming convention holds true. The EOS M50 has several features not included in the M100, the most notable of which is an EVF (Electronic Viewfinder). The big question becomes, are the M50's features worth spending more for?

Let's take a look at how the EOS M50 and EOS M100 compare to find out which camera might be the best for your specific needs.

Canon EOS M50 and M100 Shared Primary Features:

• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor*
• Resolution: 6000 x 4000 pixels (24 MP)
• Crop Factor: 1.6x (APS-C sensor)
• Native EF-M Lens Support (compatible with EF/EF-S/TS-E/MP-E with EF-EOS M Adapter)
• Exposure Compensation: +/-3 EV in 1/3 stop increments
• Shutter Speed Range: 30-1/4000 sec in 1/3 stop increments
• LCD: 7.5 cm (3.0”) Touchscreen (TFT). 3:2 aspect ratio. Approx. 1,040,000 dots
• Built-in Flash GN: 5
• Flash x-Sync: 1/200 sec.
• Built-in Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and NFC
• My Menu (customizable menu) vs. none
• Operating Environment: 32–104°F / 0–40°C

* Dual Pixel CMOS sensor AF benefits unavailable during 4K recording (M50).

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M50:

• Electronic Viewfinder + LCD vs. LCD only
• DIGIC 8 processor vs. DIGIC 7
• 143 AF points vs. 49
• EV -2 – 18 AF working range vs. EV -1 – 18
• EV 0 – 20 metering range vs. EV 1 – 20
• Auto exposure bracketing vs. none
• Ambience/white priority AWB vs. ambience only
• Vari-angle LCD vs. tiltable 180 degrees up
• Flash recycling time: 3 sec. vs. 5
• Flash hot shoe vs. none
• Adobe RGB and sRGB color spaces vs. sRGB only
• 10 fps One Shot/7.4 fps Servo AF continuous shooting vs. 6.1 / 4
• .CR3 File Format with C-RAW vs. .CR2 (no C-RAW support)
• Up to 4K UHD video recording vs. Full HD 1080p
• Compatible with Bluetooth BR-E1 / mobile device remote control vs. mobile device only
• 9 customizable buttons vs. 2

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M100:

• 100-25600 Auto ISO range vs. 100 - 6400
• 21 shot RAW buffer in One Shot Mode vs. 10
• Approx. 295 shots (410 shots in Eco Mode) battery life vs. 235 (370)
• Smaller/Lighter: 4.26 x 2.64 x 1.38" (108.2 x 67.1 x 35.1mm), 11.29oz (320g) vs. 4.6 x 3.5 x 2.3" (116.3 x 88.1 x 58.7mm), 13.7 oz (387g)
• Lower cost

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M50?

If you need a versatile, mirrorless camera and would like to shoot 4K, then the choice is easy – get an EOS M50. It's the only Canon mirrorless option (at the moment) that can record 4K video. Although you don't get the benefits of Dual Pixel CMOS Movie Servo AF in 4K mode, the ability to shoot 4K combined with the M50's vari-angle LCD and small size/weight will make it an extremely useful tool for filmmaking, especially for vloggers or one-man crews. For those who prefer viewfinder shooting, once again, the choice is easy. The M50's OLED EVF is well designed and makes it much easier to use when shooting in bright sunlight. The EOS M50 also features a flash hot shoe, better/more sensitive AF system, more sensitive metering system, a faster continuous shooting burst rate, exposure bracketing and more AWB options. These features along with the camera's new .CR3 RAW file format (with space saving C-RAW support) result in a camera that is simply more capable of capturing compelling imagery compared to the EOS M100.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M100?

Of the limited number of advantages the EOS M100 has over the M50, the two which will likely prove most compelling for most will be its lower cost and smaller size/lighter weight. If your budget does not extend to the M50, you need the absolute smallest and lightest Canon mirrorless option available or you don't anticipate utilizing the M50's extra features, the M100 is there for you.

Relevant Information

• Canon EOS M50 Review
• Canon EOS M100 Review

In February 2017, Canon announced the EOS M6. One year later, Canon announced the M50, a similar camera with a feature many M6 customers craved – 4K video recording. Even though the M50 is positioned lower than the M6 in Canon's M-series lineup, you might be surprised to see just how close these cameras are to one another.

Let's look at these two mirrorless camera offerings from Canon to see which might represent the best camera for your kit.

Canon EOS M6 and M50 Shared Primary Features:

• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor*
• Resolution: 6000 x 4000 pixels (24 MP)
• Crop Factor: 1.6x (APS-C sensor)
• Exposure Compensation: +/-3 EV in 1/3 stop increments
• Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB): 3 shots, +/- 2 EV, 1/3-stop increments
• Shutter Speed Range: 30 - 1/4000 sec (1/3 stop increments)
• 7.5 cm (3.0”) touchscreen LCD (TFT), approx. 1,040,000 dots.
• Flash x-sync: 1/200 sec
• Pop-up Flash: GN 5, 15mm coverage
• Memory Card Support: SD, SDHC, SDXC (UHS-I compatible)
• Built-in Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and NFC

* Dual Pixel CMOS sensor AF benefits unavailable during 4K recording (M50).

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M6:

• Larger Auto ISO Range: 100 - 25600 vs. 100 - 6400
• Larger RAW Buffer: 17 vs. 10
• More Customization Options: 13 customizable buttons/dials vs. 9
• Rear control dial vs. cross keys
• Longer Battery Life: approx. 295 shots (425 shots with Eco Mode On) vs. Approx. 235 shots (370 shots with Eco Mode On)
• Smaller Size: 4.4 x 2.7 x 1.8" (112.0 x 68.0 x 44.5mm) vs. 4.6 x 3.5 x 2.3" (116.3 x 88.1 x 58.7mm)
• Compatible with E3, infrared and Bluetooth remotes vs. Bluetooth only

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M50:

• New Image Processor: DIGIC 8 vs. DIGIC 7
• More AF Points: max 143 vs. 49
• More Sensitive AF: EV -2 – 18 vs. EV -1 – 18
• Built-in Electronic Viewfinder, 0.39-type OLED electronic viewfinder, approx. 2,360,000 dots vs. optional EVF (EVF-DC1 / EVF-DC2)
• Expanded AF Area: max 88% x 100% (W x H) sensor coverage vs. 80% x 80%
• Better Face Tracking AF: eye detection vs. standard face tracking
• Larger Metering Range: EV 0 – 20 vs. EV 1 – 20
• Higher Resolution Video: 3840 x 2160 (4K UHD, 23.98 fps) / 1920 x 1080 (Full HD, 59.94 fps) vs. 1920 x 1080 (Full HD, 59.94 fps) only
• More White Balance Options: ambience/white priority vs. ambience only
• Faster Continuous Shooting: 10 fps (7.4 fps with Servo AF) vs. 9 (7 with Servo AF)
• Vari-angle LCD vs. tilting only
• Lower cost

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M6?

Like the EOS M5 vs. M50 Comparison, the feature gap between the EOS M6 and the EOS M50 is quite narrow, relatively speaking.

If you're a seasoned photographer who appreciates having a myriad of easily accessible controls, then the M6's Exposure Compensation, Quick Control and Rear Control Dials could tip the balance in its favor. To see what I mean, flip between the two cameras in our Camera Top View Comparison. The two most prominent M6 features you'll likely notice are the Exposure Compensation and Quick Control dials, both of which are missing on the M50. Also absent on the M50 are the M6's custom shooting modes, located on the Mode Dial.

Every photographer will benefit from the M6's longer battery life. Many will also appreciate the M6's larger RAW buffer and plentiful remote options.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M50?

If you prefer shooting with a viewfinder as opposed to framing your scene via the camera's LCD screen (or purchasing an optional viewfinder accessory which renders the camera's hot shoe unusable), then the EOS M50 is your camera. The M50's feature set will make it especially handy for vacations, social gatherings and general purpose photography and videography. With its advanced and more sensitive AF system, capturing in-focus images of human subjects – even in low light – will be easier. Although you don't get the benefits of Dual Pixel CMOS Movie Servo AF in 4K mode, the ability to shoot 4K combined with the M50's vari-angle LCD and small size/weight will make it an extremely useful tool for filmmaking, especially for vloggers or one-man crews. If outputting to 1080p video, set a tripod-mounted M50 to record 4K video and then pan around the frame in post for high quality b-roll, or otherwise reap the benefits of automatic and smooth Dual Pixel Movie Servo AF when recording 1080p video (the latter benefit is identical to the M6).

Summary

As we mentioned in the beginning of this comparison, these cameras are very similar. While their names may suggest a clear hierarchy, the cameras' feature sets belie simplistic categorization. Both cameras will likely serve most interested consumers very well, with the handful of differences above – and the benefits they bring to select shooting conditions – will ultimately determine which camera fits one's needs best.

Relevant Information

• Canon EOS M6 Review
• Canon EOS M50 Review

If you're ready to step up from smartphone photography to one of Canon's entry-level DSLRs, you may be asking yourself "Which might be a better option for me? The Canon EOS Rebel T7i or the Rebel T7?"

If so, you're in luck. Today we're going to take a close look at these two Canon Rebel cameras to see which might be the better fit for your needs. First, let's take a look at what they have in common.

Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D and Rebel T7/2000D Shared Primary Features:

• Resolution: 6000 x 4000 pixels (24 MP)
• Crop Factor: 1.6x (APS-C sensor)
• Metering Range: EV 1 – 20
• Exposure Compensation: +/-5 EV in 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments
• Shutter Speed: 30-1/4000 sec
• Flash x-sync: 1/200 sec
• Viewfinder: pentamirror, 95% coverage
• Built-in Wi-Fi and NFC

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D:

• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor vs. traditional CMOS sensor
• Better Image Processor: DIGIC 7 vs. DIGIC 4+
• Better AF System: 45 cross-type AF points (45 f/5.6 cross-type AF points, 27 f/8 points [9 cross-type], center point is f/2.8 and f/5.6 dual cross-type) vs. 9 AF points (f/5.6 cross type at center)
• Focuses in Lower Light: EV -3 - 18 (at 23 °C & ISO 100) vs. EV 0 -18 (center point), EV 1 -18 (outer points)
• Better Metering: 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, metering with the area divided into 63 segments (9 × 7) [Evaluative, Partial, Center-weighted and Spot] vs. TTL full aperture metering with 63-zone SPC [Evaluative, Partial and Center-weighted]
• More Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB) Options: 2, 3, 5 or 7 Shots +/-3 EV 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments vs. 3 shots +/- 2 EV, 1/2 or 1/3-stop increments
• Greater ISO Range: ISO AUTO (100 - 25600), 100 - 25600 (H1: 51200) in 1 stop increments vs. AUTO (100-6400), 100-6400 (H: 12800) in 1-stop increments
• Custom, Color Temperature White Balance Setting vs. none
• Higher Pop-up Flash Guide Number: 13.1 (ISO 100, meters) vs. 9.2
• Peripheral illumination, chromatic aberration, distortion and diffraction correction vs. peripheral illumination correction only
• Higher Burst Rage with Larger Buffer: max. approx. 6 fps for 27 RAW images vs. 3 fps for 11 RAW
• Higher Framerate Full HD Video: 1080p video at 60 fps vs. 1080p video at 30 fps
• Low-energy Bluetooth vs. none
• More Custom Functions: 15 custom functions with 44 settings vs. 11 custom functions with 33 settings
• External 3.5mm microphone port vs. none
• Compatible with Faster Memory Cards: supports SDXC (UHS-I) vs. SDXC
• Better Battery Life: approx. 820 shots vs. 500
• Compatible with More Remotes: E3 (corded), infrared (RC-series) & Bluetooth vs. E3 only

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS Rebel T7/2000D

• Smaller Size: 5.08 x 3.99 x 3.06" (129.0 x 101.3 x 77.6mm) vs. 5.16 x 3.93 x 3.00" (131.0 x 99.9 x 76.2mm)
• Lighter Weight: 16.75 oz (475g) vs. 18.77 oz (532g)
• Lower cost

If you glance at the specifications comparison found on this site, you'll likely notice that the Rebel T7 features a faster pop-up flash recycling time compared to the Rebel T7i (2 sec vs. 3 sec), which would seem to indicate an advantage. However, the T7 has a faster recycling time because it has a lower power flash. When fired at the T7's full power level, the T7i's recycling time will likely be similar.

Who Should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D?

When describing the customers who may be best served by the cameras in one of our comparisons, we typically start with the higher-end option as its versatility will make it an overall better option for most consumers. In this case, the feature difference between the cameras is so substantial and the advantages so one-sided that there is really only one reason to choose the Canon EOS Rebel T7 over the Rebel T7i – a lower price tag.

The Rebel T7i's Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor, more advanced/sensitive AF system, higher burst rate/larger buffer and longer battery life could all be considered justification for the camera's higher price tag when considered individually. Put all those features together and the value you receive for the T7i's incremental price over the T7 is monumental.

Who Should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T7/2000D?

As previously mentioned, the primary reason to opt for the EOS Rebel T7/2000D is for its lower cost. The Rebel T7 will be more than adequate for capturing high quality imagery under normal / not-so-challenging conditions, and those stepping up from smartphone photography will certainly appreciate the benefits of a significantly larger sensor and the ability to change lenses. And speaking of lenses, for the price of a Rebel T7i + EF-S 18-55 IS STM kit, you could get a Rebel T7 + EF-S 18-55 IS II, EF 50mm f/1.8 STM and EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM lens.

Beginner/novice photographers aren't the only groups that will appreciate the Rebel T7's lower price tag. Advanced photographers wanting to capture images in high-risk-of-damage situations can more easily justify the sacrificial cost of a Rebel T7. Such photographers can mount the T7 to a car, motorcycle, bicycle, boat, etc. to capture dynamic imagery without risking damage to their primary camera(s).

Summary

Few camera comparisons are a clear-cut as this one. The Canon EOS Rebel T7i's superset of features will make it a more versatile imaging platform for those who can afford its price difference over the Rebel T7. But for those whose budgets don't extend that far, especially beginner/novice photographers, the Rebel T7 offers a solid step-up for those currently shooting with smartphones and/or point-and-shoot cameras who want to experience the benefits of interchangeable lens camera photography first-hand.

Relevant Info

• Canon EOS Rebel T7i/800D Review
• Canon EOS Rebel T7/2000D Review

The Canon USA Store is the exclusive North American retailer of the Canon EOS Rebel T7 (so far). The Canon EOS Rebel T7i can be found at B&H | Adorama | Amazon (for more retail links, see the bottom of the T7i Review).

In September 2016, Canon announced its flagship M-series camera, the M5. Almost 18 months later, Canon announced the M50, a more-similar-than-different camera with a feature many M5 customers craved – 4K video recording. Even though the M50 is positioned lower than the M5 in Canon's M-series lineup, I think you'll be surprised to see just how close these cameras are to one another. Instead of siblings divided by years, they're more like fraternal twins.

Let's look at these two mirrorless camera offerings from Canon to see which might represent the best camera for your kit.

Canon EOS M5 and M50 Shared Primary Features:

• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor*
• Resolution: 6000 x 4000 pixels (24 MP)
• Crop Factor: 1.6x (APS-C sensor)
• Exposure Compensation: +/-3 EV in 1/3 stop increments
• Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB): 3 shots, +/- 2 EV, 1/3-stop increments
• Shutter Speed Range: 30 - 1/4000 sec (1/3 stop increments)
• Viewfinder: 0.39-type OLED electronic viewfinder, approx. 2,360,000 dots
• Flash x-sync: 1/200 sec
• Pop-up Flash: GN 5, 15mm coverage
• Memory Card Support: SD, SDHC, SDXC (UHS-I compatible)
• Built-in Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and NFC

* Dual Pixel CMOS sensor AF benefits unavailable during 4K recording (M50).

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M5:

• Larger Auto ISO Range: 100 - 25600 vs. 100 - 6400
• Larger RAW Buffer: 17 vs. 10
• Larger / Higher Resolution LCD Screen: 8.0 cm (3.2”) ClearView II touchscreen LCD (TFT), approx. 1,620,000 dots. vs. 7.5 cm (3.0”) touchscreen LCD (TFT), approx. 1,040,000 dots.
• More Customization Options: 12 customizable buttons/ dials vs. 9
• Longer Battery Life: approx. 295 shots (420 shots with Eco Mode On) vs. Approx. 235 shots (370 shots with Eco Mode On)
• Wider Operating Environment: 14 – 104 °F (-10 – 40 °C) vs. 32 – 104 °F (0 – 40°C)
• Compatible with E3, infrared and Bluetooth remotes vs. Bluetooth only

Primary Advantages of the Canon EOS M50:

• New Image Processor: DIGIC 8 vs. DIGIC 7
• More AF Points: max 143 vs. 49
• More Sensitive AF: EV -2 – 18 vs. EV -1 – 18
• Expanded AF Area: max 88% x 100% (W x H) sensor coverage vs. 80% x 80%
• Better Face Tracking AF: eye detection vs. standard face tracking
• Larger Metering Range: EV 0 – 20 vs. EV 1 – 20
• Higher Resolution Video: 3840 x 2160 (4K UHD, 23.98 fps) / 1920 x 1080 (Full HD, 59.94 fps) vs. 1920 x 1080 (Full HD, 59.94 fps) only
• More White Balance Options: ambience/white priority vs. ambience only
• Faster Continuous Shooting: 10 fps (7.4 fps with Servo AF) vs. 9 (7 with Servo AF)
• Vari-angle LCD vs. tilting only
• Lower cost

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M5?

Unlike many of our comparisons, the feature gap between the EOS M5 and the EOS M50 is quite narrow, relatively speaking. However, there are a few differences between the two cameras that may prove pivotal in one's decision making process.

If you're a seasoned photographer who appreciates having a myriad of easily accessible controls, then you'll really appreciate the M5's user interface. To see what I mean, flip between the two cameras in our Camera Top View Comparison. The two most prominent M5 features you'll likely notice are the Exposure Compensation and Quick Control dials, both of which are missing on the M50. Also absent on the M50 are the M5's custom shooting modes, located on the Mode Dial.

Those shooting in cold conditions will certainly benefit from the M5's wider environmental operating range and longer battery life. Many will appreciate the M5's higher resolution LCD, larger RAW buffer and plentiful remote options.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS M50?

In short – everyone else. The M50's feature set will make it especially handy for vacations, social gatherings and general purpose photography and videography. With its advanced and more sensitive AF system, capturing in-focus images of human subjects – even in low light – will be easier than ever so you can focus less on photography and more on the time spent with family and friends. Although you don't get the benefits of Dual Pixel CMOS Movie Servo AF in 4K mode, the ability to shoot 4K combined with the M50's vari-angle LCD and small size/weight will make it an extremely useful tool for filmmaking, especially for vloggers or one-man crews. If outputting to 1080p video, set a tripod-mounted M50 to record 4K video and then pan around the frame in post for high quality b-roll, or otherwise reap the benefits of automatic and smooth Dual Pixel Movie Servo AF when recording 1080p video (the latter benefit is identical to the M5).

Summary

As we mentioned in the beginning of this comparison, these cameras are very similar. While their names may suggest a clear hierarchy, the cameras' feature sets belie simplistic categorization. Both cameras will likely serve most interested consumers very well, with the handful of differences above – and the benefits they bring to select shooting conditions – will ultimately determine which camera fits one's needs best.

Relevant Information

• Canon EOS M5 Review
• Canon EOS M50 Review

With the introduction of three L-series tilt-shift lenses in August 2017, Canon can now has the largest and most varied selection of tilt-shift lenses available in the full-frame camera market. But with so many lenses to choose from, it may be difficult to narrow one's decision own to the right choice. Therefore, we're going to explore what differentiates these lenses and what each will be good for to aid in your decision-making process. For the purpose of this comparison, we're excluding the older Canon TS-E 45mm f/2.8 and TS-E 90mm f/2.8 lenses as we're uncertain how much longer they will be available.

If you're unfamiliar with tilt-shift lenses, first check out are article, "What is a Tilt-Shift Lens?"

What These Lenses Have In Common

Aside from an L-series build quality and extremely high image quality, the standout feature of these lenses is the ability to tilt and/or shift the optics in relation to the imaging sensor. These abilities allow for a photographer to correct perspective distortion in-camera (through shift) or change the plane of sharp focus (through tilt). Note: All tilt-shift lenses are manual focus only and none feature weather sealing.

The Biggest Differentiating Factor – Focal Length

Canon's L-series tilt-shift lenses – denoted by a TS-E prefix – range in focal lengths from an ultra-wide 17mm to a moderately short telephoto 135mm. Like most lens decisions, it's important to understand which focal length will suit your specific needs best.

Possibly Important Differentiator – Macro Ability

Canon's newest tilt-shift introductions, including the TS-E 50mm f/2.8L, TS-E 90mm f/2.8L and TS-E 135mm f/4L feature an Maximum Magnification rating of 0.50x, making them very useful for a wide range of macro subjects.

Least Important Differentiators – Max Aperture and Price

Even though prime lenses typically feature notably wider max apertures than zoom lenses covering the same focal length, the max aperture for these tilt-shift lenses ranges from f/2.8 - f/4. As tilt-shift lenses are typically used in conjunction with a tripod, the up-to-1-stop difference in max aperture will likely mean little to most consumers. And while there are modest differences in prices, the difference between any two lenses is unlikely to prove sufficient to sway one's purchasing decision compared to other notable differences.

A Look at Canon's TS-E Tilt-Shift Lenses

Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L
Featuring the widest focal length found in a tilt-shift lens from any manufacturer, the Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L is ideally suited from capturing interior and exterior architecture, keeping perspective distortion at bay with the shift feature. This lens can also be useful for landscape purposes, with tilt enabling both foreground and background subjects to remain in sharp focus. Note that this lens does not natively allow for the use of front filters, so that will be a drawback for some landscape photographers. Special accessories can be purchased to enable certain filters to be used.

Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
With a modestly longer (and ultra popular) focal length, the Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II can be used for the same subjects as that the TS-E 17mm lens is useful for, with the main differences being a moderately narrower angle of view and the ability to accept front filters. These attributes shift (pun intended) the TS-E 24's ideal uses away from interior, small room architecture to outdoor architecture and landscape photography where the use of circular polarizering and neutral density filters are often desired.

Canon TS-E 50mm f/2.8L Macro
As we continue to climb up the focal length ladder, the next Canon tilt-shift offering is the TS-E 50mm f/2.8L Macro. While it can be very useful for outdoor architecture and landscapes (the lens accepts front filters), the TS-E 50L really shines in the product photography realm, especially for medium-sized products such as clothing, home furnishings and three-dimensional art. With a 0.50x Maximum Magnification rating, small subjects can be projected half-size on the camera's imaging sensor, increasing the overall versatility of the lens. The 50mm focal length can also work well for loosely-framed portraiture, with this lens' tilt feature allowing for endless creativity in capturing selectively sharp imagery.

Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8L Macro
The Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8L Macro's focal length makes it very well suited for product photography, primarily for medium and small-sized products such as plates of food, model cars, bottles, etc. Floral photography is another great use of the 90mm focal length, especially when combined with the unique blurring effects that tilting the lens enables. Like the TS-E 50L, the TS-E 90L can be useful for landscapes and macro subjects, too.

Canon TS-E 135mm f/4L Macro
Featuring the longest focal length found in a tilt-shift lens designed for SLR (Single Lens Reflex) photography, the Canon TS-E 135mm f/4L Macro is likely the most specialized lens in Canon's lineup. Its medium telephoto focal length combined with tilt can help you capture very creative portraiture, assuming that manual focus is appropriate for your portrait application. Like the TS-E 90 and 50mm lenses, the TS-E 135L will often find its home in a product photographer's kit as it excels at capturing small-to-medium sized subjects all the way down to macro-sized subjects. With vast working distances available, this lens can create compelling compositions of even very large subjects.

Summary

With five L-series models in its arsenal, there's a good chance that you could find a multitude of uses for one (or several) of Canon's tilt-shift lenses. As I mentioned, the biggest differentiating factor for most will be focal length. Determine which focal length will be optimal for your intended subjects, get the appropriate model and enjoy the endless fun and creativity engendered by tilt-shift photography.

B&H carries Canon's tilt-shift lenses.

With the release of the Sony a7R III, many may be wondering how Sony's latest high-resolution full-frame mirrorless camera stacks up against Canon's latest 5-series camera, the EOS 5D Mark IV, and which camera might suit their needs best. So, let's dig into the details and find out.

First, let's take a look at some differentiating specifications between the two cameras.

Size, Weight and Battery Life

As indicated by the table above, the Sony a7R III is smaller and lighter than the Canon 5D Mark IV, traits that many will appreciate. But, there are drawbacks to the a7R III's smaller size and lighter weight.

The first drawback is that the smaller design leads to a smaller battery, which in turn results in a shorter battery life. The second drawback is that the smaller design can also lead to an uncomfortable grip for those with medium-sized hands (or larger) when using the a7R III with many pro-grade lenses.

The Sony a7R III's smaller size and lighter weight will surely be appreciated by those who must hike significant distances to their desired photo locations. And for those shooting landscapes with a tripod, the comfort of a camera's grip may be a low priority. But for those shooting weddings, festivals or events – situations requiring that the camera be handheld for long periods of time – may appreciate the 5D Mark IV's more comfortable grip as well as its roughly 50% longer battery life.

Viewfinders

Viewfinder implementations differ significantly between the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV and the Sony a7R III, where the Canon body offers a traditional optical viewfinder (with customizable overlays) and the Sony body features an electronic viewfinder. Each type of viewfinder has benefits and drawbacks compared to the other (such as an EVF's elimination of viewfinder blackout times), and Bryan shared his thoughts on the advantages/disadvantages of electronic/optical viewfinders in his article, "Comparing Electronic Viewfinders to Optical Viewfinders". Be sure to check out the preceding information to determine which of these systems you may prefer.

Durability & Reliability

The time span between Canon's first 5-series camera to its latest iteration, the Mark IV, was 11 years (2005 - 2016). The time span between Sony's first a7R and the introduction of the a7R III was 4 years (2013 - 2017).

Canon rates the 5D Mark IV's shutter at 150,000 actuations; Sony claims the a7R III can withstand 500,000 actuations. If both companies are using similar procedures for determining shutter reliability, then Sony's significantly higher shutter rating will be comforting.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV and the Sony a7R III are solidly built and both are billed as "weather resistant" cameras. However, Canon has had significantly more time to refine their camera design for optimal protection from water and dust. We didn't test the thoroughly test the cameras' weather resistance, but we'd personally feel more confident shooting with the 5D Mark IV in adverse conditions.

Autofocus Performance

Sony's mirrorless cameras' AF performance has dramatically improved over the last couple of years, resulting in the gap between mirrorless and traditional DSLR AF performance quickly diminishing. But while the Sony a7R III focuses faster in one shot mode compared to its predecessor, it still isn't as fast as the 5D Mark IV. That's because the a7R III must defocus in order to obtain focus, causing a noticeable delay even when little has changed in the scene between shutter clicks.

In AF tracking mode, both cameras perform similarly well (either in viewfinder mode or LCD/Live View focusing).

Menu System

Having used Canon cameras for a number of years, we've grown acclimated to Canon's logical, easy to use menu system. Unfortunately, the Sony a7R III menu system seems needlessly complicated with 45 subtabs under the 5 main tabs. That Sony has included a customizable "My Menu" option has helped, allowing for quick access to your most-used menu items. Even so, we still greatly prefer the Canon menu system.

Video

While both cameras allow for 4K recording at 30p, there are some distinct differences between the cameras' video features. First, the 5D Mark IV records 4K video in .MOV (Motion JPEG) format with a crop factor of 1.74x; the a7R III in XAVC S:MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 using the full senor width (no crop). This difference alone may be the deciding factor between the two cameras if wide angle, 4K video is a top priority for you. The Sony camera is also capable of recording Full HD (1080p) video at 120 fps, while the Canon DSLR tops out at 60 fps.

Video shooters will also love the Sony a7R III's built-in 5-axis stabilization, allowing for smoother video recording regardless of the lens that's attached, as well as its tilting LCD screen for odd-angle shooting. The a7R III also features S-LOG 3 and HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) Picture Profiles, while Canon Log is only available as an add-on (more expensive) upgrade for the 5D mark IV.

Customer Support

Canon is widely recognized as having an excellent support system, including (not not limited to) Canon Professional Services, the division which specifically caters to those who make a living with their imaging gear. The support we have received from Canon USA and Canon Professional Services has over the years has been very good. Canon USA's Customer Service Technicians have been eager to help and knowledgeable when we have needed phone support, and our experience with Canon's repair department (in the few times we've needed a repair) has been equally satisfying.

On the other hand, Sony is still in the building process when it comes to customer support for their E-mount camera system. As such, they don't necessarily have a reputation for exemplary customer service [yet, though things seem to be getting better].

Price

At the time of this comparison, the Sony a7R III's retail price is roughly $300.00 less expensive than the EOS 5D Mark IV, not counting instant rebates which can make the cameras much closer in price. But when considering the cost of the camera, it's also wise to think about the cost of the whole camera kit you may be considering.

Therefore, let's take a look at two comparable kits based on the two cameras.

Sony a7R III
Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM
Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM
Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS
Total MSRP: $10,192.00

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Total MSRP: $9,696.00 ($8,996.00 with current rebates)

Of course, MSRP values and the availability (and values) of instant rebates can change over time (possibly changing the advantage), but the above represents a current advantage of the Canon kit. Interesting is that the difference in weight between these two kits is only 9.6 oz (272 g), with the Canon kit being slightly heavier.

Wrap Up

There's no doubt that you can use either of these cameras in a professional setting to create high quality images or video. If you primarily shoot video, though, the Sony a7R III's advanced video features will likely make it the best overall choice for your needs. And, if you aren't heavily invested in the Canon ecosystem already, choosing the a7R III may make a lot of sense.

However, if you already have a decent Canon camera kit and you're not primarily a video shooter, I'm not convinced that the Sony a7R III offers enough advantages over the 5D IV to justify the cost, time and energy of completely switching brands. In which case, the Canon 5D Mark IV would most likely be the better option.

Note: Because of the performance limitations experienced when using Canon lenses on Sony cameras (via adapters), we don't consider that to be a viable solution (yet) for most serious photographers.

So what are the differentiators that keep you from switching from one of these cameras to the other? Let us know in the comments.

With the recent release of the Sony a7R III, many may be wondering, "Should I get the a7R III or get the less expensive a7R II instead?" That's a very fair question, and that's why we're going to be looking at how these two MILCs (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras) stack up against one another.

Sony a7R III and Sony a7R II Shared Primary Features

• 42.4 MP full frame sensor
• Wi-FI & NFC
• 399 phase-detection AF
• EV -3 – EV 20 metering range
• 30 - 1/8000 sec shutter speed
• 0.78x viewfinder magnification
• Up to 4K: 3840 x 2160 30p/100 Mbps video recording

Primary Advantages of the Sony a7R III over the Sony a7R II

• Faster, more accurate AF system with multi-selector joystick for much easier focus point changes
• 425 contrast AF points vs. 25
• Up to 10 fps, 28 RAW (Uncompressed) buffer vs. 5 fps, 22 RAW (Uncompressed)
• ISO 100 - 32,000 (Exp: ISO 50 – 102400) vs. ISO 100 - 25,600 (Exp: ISO 50 – 102400)
• 3.69m-Dot Quad-VGA Tru-Finder OLED EVF vs. 0.5" 2.36M-Dot XGA OLED Tru-Finder EVF (the III has 1.5x resolution, approx. 2x luminance, 120 fps, 30% faster startup, high quality mode)
• 3.0" 1.44m-Dot Tilting Touchscreen (limited) LCD vs. 3.0" 1,228.8k-Dot Tilting LCD Monitor
• Approx. 650 frame battery life (stills, LCD monitor) vs. 340
• 5.5 stop IBIS vs. 4.5 stops
• Higher quality full-frame 4K high-sensitivity movies, improved movie AF, Hybrid Log-Gamma, S-Log3, Slow&Quick motion, Photo Capture, Proxy Recording
• Dual SD memory card slots vs. single SD (III supports high write speeds)
• Full HD 1080p video at 120 fps vs. 60 fps
• S-LOG 3 and HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) Picture Profiles vs. N/A
• Pixel Shift Multi Shooting vs. N/A
• USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-C port vs. USB 2.0
• Anti-flicker shutter timing vs. N/A
• Built-in Bluetooth, Wi-Fi (w/ftp) & NFC vs. Wi-Fi & NFC only
• Customizable My Menu
• Improved peaking, Focus magnification with AF support, Rating, Display continuous shooting group

Primary Advantages of the Sony a7R II over the Sony a7R III

• Lower cost
• Slightly smaller size, lighter weight: 5.0 x 3.8 x 2.4" (126.9 × 95.7 x 60.3mm), 22.0 oz (625g) vs. 5.0 x 3.88 x 3.0" (126.9 x 95.6 x 73.7mm), 23.2 oz (657g)

Who should opt for the Sony a7R III?

Those who wish to capture high resolution sports imagery will immediately appreciate the Sony a7R III's twice-as-fast burst rate (10 fps vs. 5), image grouping display, upgraded AF system and [possibly] the new anti-flicker shutter timing (it may work better under some conditions than it worked in our tests). Those using the a7R III for professional filmmaking will likely benefit from the ability to record 1080p video at 120 fps, the upgraded AF, improved peaking and the S-LOG 3 and HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) Picture Profiles.

Wedding photographers will enjoy the added security of the a7R III's dual memory card slots, and sharing images immediately on social media will be made easier with built-in Bluetooth.

Regardless of one's specialty, the upgraded IBIS system providing an extra stop of assistance to help keep images sharp will surely be appreciated by almost all photographers. The same sentiment holds true for the a7R III's increased battery life.

Who should opt for the Sony a7R II?

As is typical of successor vs. predecessor camera comparisons, the primary reason to recommend the purchase of a camera's predecessor – in this case, the Sony a7R II – is the older camera's lower cost. And in this case, the trend continues, with the a7R II weighing in with a 25% discount (with instant rebates) compared to the a7R III.

Landscape, architecture/real estate and studio photographers, in particular, who don't necessarily need a better AF system or a faster burst rate, will have fewer reasons to invest in the a7R III's upgraded features as the a7R II's sensor provides similar, high image quality. That said, the brighter viewfinder and longer battery life of the a7R III will be welcomed even by these groups.

Relevant Review

• Sony a7R III Review

B&H carries the Sony a7R III and Sony a7R II mirrorless full frame cameras.

If you are a professional, semi-pro or a serious enthusiast photographer who is in the market for a reliable, robust, full-frame Canon camera, the two bodies most likely to be considered are the EOS-1D X Mark II and EOS 5D Mark IV. In this installment of "Which Should I Get?," we'll take a look at these two camera bodies to see which might be the better keystone for your kit.

First of all, let's look at a few of the primary specifications that these bodies have in common:

Canon EOS-1D X Mark II and EOS 5D Mark IV Shared Primary Features

• Full-frame, Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor
• AF system: 61 Point / 41 cross-type AF point including 5 dual cross type at f/2.8 and 61 points / 21 cross-type AF points at f/8
• AF Working Range: EV -3 - 18
• Metering Range: EV 0 – 20
• Ambience & White Priority Auto White Balance
• 100% viewfinder coverage
• 3.2" (8.10cm) Clear View LCD II, approx. 1620K dots
• Up to 4K (Motion JPEG) video recording with 4K frame grab
• Built-in GPS

Primary advantages of the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II over the EOS 5D Mark IV:

• Dual DIGIC 6+ processors vs. single DIGIC 6+
• ISO 100-51200, L 50, H1 102400, H2 204800, H3 409600 vs. ISO 100-32000, L 50, H1 51200, H2 102400
• Approx. 14fps with full AF / AE tracking, speed maintained for up to unlimited number of JPEGs or 170 RAW images (with CFast 2.0 card) vs. approx. 7fps with full AF / AE tracking, speed maintained for up to unlimited number of JPEGs or 21 RAW images
• Approx. 360,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 216-zone metering vs. 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 252-zone metering
• AF point-linked spot metering vs. center-point only spot metering
• 1/250 sec. max flash x-sync vs. 1/200 sec.
• 5 Custom White Balance settings can be registered vs. 1 setting
• 4K video recording max frame rate 59.94 fps vs. 4K video max 29.97 fps
• Interchangeable focusing screens vs. N/A
• 34 custom functions vs. 17
• Sound memos vs. N/A
• RJ-45 (gigabit Ethernet) port vs. N/A
• Approx. 1210 frame battery life vs. 900
• 400,000 shutter durability rating vs. 150,000
• Better weather sealing

Primary advantages of the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV over the EOS-1D X Mark II:

• 30.4 MP vs. 20.2
• Smaller & Lighter: 5.93 x 4.58 x 2.99" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm), 31.4 oz (890g) vs. 6.22 x 6.6 x 3.25" (158.0 x 167.6 x 82.6mm), 53.97 oz (1530g)
• Full touch-screen LCD interface vs. limited touch-screen
• Built-in Wi-Fi & NFC vs. N/A (Wi-Fi requires Wireless File Transmitter WFT-E6A, WFT-E8A accessory)
• Lower price

Who should opt for the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II?

If you are a photographer primarily interested in capturing fast-action sports, the EOS-1D X Mark II's blazingly fast 14 fps burst rate and huge 170 frames RAW buffer (in our tests, the buffer was actually only limited to the CFast memory card's capacity) will help you capture the optimal moment(s) when the action is at its peak. And if your sporting event is held in inclement weather, the 1D X II's extra weather sealing will certainly be appreciated.

If you're primarily a studio photographer who doesn't need more than roughly 20 MP of resolution, the 1D X II's gigabit Ethernet port is a great asset for tethered shooting.

Those using their DSLR to capture video will appreciate the 1D X II's 4K recording at 60 fps, although the larger body may prove cumbersome in some setups. A benefit for some filmmakers (and a drawback for others) is the 1D X II's approximate 1.3x focal length crop factor utilized in 4K video recording allowing for wider angles of view to be captured at the same focal length compared to the 5D Mark IV featuring a 1.74x crop factor.

Nearly every photographer can benefit from the 1D X II's higher resolution metering sensor, and AF point-linked Spot metering feature (very helpful) is only available on 1-series bodies. The ability to change focus screens is another benefit of the 1D X II that could prove important for some photographers.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV?

If you need more resolution than the EOS-1D X Mark II offers, require built-in Wi-Fi/NFC, prefer a smaller and lighter camera body and/or your budget simply does not extend to the level of a 1-series body, the EOS 5D Mark IV will likely prove to be a great choice.

Sharing many important primary features with the EOS-1D X Mark II (with reasonable compromises on others), the EOS 5D Mark IV is the second-most versatile camera Canon has ever produced (the 1D X II being the most versatile). Considering that the 5D Mark IV costs over 40% less than the 1D X II (USA MSRP), those compromises will seem very reasonable for a great number of pro, semi-pro, enthusiast and hobbyist photographers alike.

Related Information

• Canon EOS 1D X Mark II DSLR Camera Review
• Canon EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR Camera Review

With two optically stabilized 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses hitting the market this year, many are likely wondering how the third-party lenses stack up against Canon's venerable – though unstabilized – EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM. Let's take a good look at the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art & Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 to find out which might make the best choice for own general purpose needs.

First, it's important to consider that these lenses are very similar from a primary features perspective, with built-in stabilization being the most notable differentiator. With that in mind, let's take a look at the shared set of features for these lenses:

Canon 24-70L II, Sigma 24-70 OS Art & Tamron 24-70mm VC G2 Shared Features

• Focal length range: 24-70mm
• Maximum aperture: f/2.8
• Filter size: 82mm
• Some degree of weather sealing

Now, let's see how these 24-70mm lenses differ from a design perspective:

Canon 24-70L II, Sigma 24-70 OS Art & Tamron 24-70mm VC G2 Differences

Sharpness Comparison

When it comes to sharpness, it's difficult to adequately describe which lens is the cream of the crop. The reason is simple – the "sharpest lens" title changes depending on the focal length and aperture chosen along with the specific area of the frame being considered.

After pouring over the results for quite some time, I decided to compile my own subjective findings. You can find them below. However, I encourage you to compare the lenses for yourself at the focal lengths and apertures you will likely use most to determine which lens may be sharpest for your specific intended uses.

For the results below, I ranked the three lenses at each specified focal length / aperture. If there was little or no discernible difference between two lenses, then I marked the comparison a tie.

Vignetting Comparison

Vignetting performance is not a significant differentiating factor for this group of 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses. There are minor differences, but... none that would likely motivate you to pick one over the other solely based on corner darkening. If precise vignetting performance is a priority for you, check out the links below.

Vignetting: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art
Vignetting: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2
Vignetting: Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

Flare Performance

When evaluating flare performance, I typically compare lenses at f/16 at their widest and longest focal lengths. These comparisons usually give me a good idea of what to expect from the lens in near worst-case scenarios. Keep in mind that one's preference for tolerable types of flare is very subjective. Personally, I'd rather have an overall lose of contrast as opposed to clearly defined rings, circles and lines which are difficult to remove in post-processing and may block important details in the frame.

In this comparison, the Canon 24-70L II trails the Sigma and Tamron lenses at 24mm and f/16, at least as far as my personal preference is concerned.

Flare: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art
Flare: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

Between the Sigma Art and Tamron G2, the pattern of flare artifacts is very similar, although the Sigma may show a little more contrast.

Flare: Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

At 70mm, the Canon still shows more clearly defined flare artifacts while the other two lenses show less overall contrast. It's difficult to pick a winner between the Sigma and Tamron lenses, but if pressed to pick one, I think I would prefer the Sigma's results.

Distortion

Zoom lenses typically exhibit barrel distortion at the wide end which transitions to pincushion distortion at the long end, and all of these lenses show these quintessential characteristics to varying degrees. As with vignetting, I don't think there is enough difference among the lenses to regard distortion as a major differentiating factor. However, if minimal distortion is a priority for you, compare the lenses at your most-used focal length to see which one will work best for your needs.

Distortion: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art
Distortion: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2
Distortion: Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

With image quality sufficiently covered, let's dive into other aspects of the lenses to illuminate even more (likely more significant) differences.

Stabilization

Unlike most of the image quality comparisons above, this comparison is very straightforward – the Canon 24-70L II doesn't have built-in stabilization, while the Sigma and the Tamron lenses do. Between the two, the Sigma 24-70 Art seemed to provide slightly more handheld assistance in our tests.

Before we move on, I should point out that stabilization can have a huge impact on image quality, as a lens can only achieve its highest image quality when camera shake is neutralized (either by the use of a fast shutter speed or by lens/camera stabilization). Of course, stabilization does not help if your subject is moving, but... it can help a great deal when photographing stationary subjects.

Autofocus Performance

Generally speaking, you'll get the best AF performance – especially in regards to accuracy and consistency – when using Canon lenses with Canon cameras. In the case of the Canon 24-70L II, Sigma 24-70 OS Art and Tamron 24-70 VC G2, while the third party lens manufacturers have certainly closed the performance gap over the past few years, the general rule still applies.

The good news is that all of the lenses perform quite well when using the center AF point, assuming a proper autofocus microadjustment (AFMA) calibration. Unfortunately, AF performance degrades noticeably while utilizing the outer AF points with both the Sigma Art and Tamron G2 lenses. Our testing indicates that the Sigma is a little more consistent than the Tamron with outer AF point use.

Those who don't mind employing a focus-and-recompose technique or otherwise can utilize Live View focusing for image capture, can maximize their in-focus take home percentage when using third-party lenses.

One area where the third-party lenses are advantaged is autofocus calibration through the use of Sigma's USB Dock and Tamron's TAP-in Console. While many high-end Canon DSLRs have the ability to fine tune AF using AFMA, most consumer-to-mid-level Canon DSLRs do not have this feature. And even if your camera does feature AFMA, the USB Dock and TAP-in Console allow for finer control of adjustment options (including separate adjustments for varying focus distances). Another benefit of dock-adjusted AF is that a lens can be calibrated once for use on several bodies (assuming the same adjustment is necessary throughout the set) instead of having to enter the same adjustment value in-camera on several bodies.

Price

Price is one lens aspect that is quite easy and straightforward to compare. The Canon 24-70L II is the most expensive lens of the bunch, with the Sigma's price being about 30% lower than the Canon's (current MSRP in North America, no rebates). The Tamron is priced slightly less than the Sigma.

One thing to keep in mind when choosing to invest in a lens is the brand's typical resale value. Of the three manufacturers, Canon lenses tend to hold their value better than the third-party options.

Summary

By not including image stabilization in the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens, Canon left the door wide open for third-party manufacturers to produce an even more versatile and/or enticing general purpose lens. Both Sigma and Tamron saw the crack in Canon's armor, and the introduction of the 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art and 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 lenses represent the culmination of those manufacturers' efforts to unseat Canon in the professional general purpose lens market by taking advantage of Canon's biggest shortcoming.

Has either brand succeeded? In some ways the answer is "yes," and in other ways, "no." None of the lenses in this comparison blew away the competition, with the "best lens" being different based on one's own personal preferences and requirements. For those that cannot afford to miss a shot and prefer using viewfinder AF along with outer AF points (think, wedding photographers), the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM will likely be best. For the ultimate in versatility, however – thanks in large part to in-lens stabilization – the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art and Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 both offer compelling performance at a more budget friendly price. Ultimately, the choice between the Sigma and Tamron will likely hinge on one's preference for more accurate AF (Sigma) or increased potential sharpness (Tamron).

Want to know more about these lenses? Check out our full reviews linked below.

• Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens Review
• Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art Lens Review
• Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 Lens Review

Authorized Retailers:

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens
B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Canon USA Store | BuyDig | Wex Photographic | Henry's

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art Lens
B&H | Amazon | Adorama | BuyDig | Wex Photographic | Henry's

Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 Lens
B&H | Amazon | Adorama | BuyDig | Wex Photographic | Henry's

The Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM lens has been a staple in the manufacturer's lineup for more than 20 years. With the announcement of Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art lens in early 2017, consumers finally had a comparably spec'd alternative to Canon's popular 135mm wide-aperture prime. If you have been considering the addition of a wide-aperture telephoto prime lens to your Canon-based kit, you may be torn between the two options.

To help the decision making process along, we're going to see how these two designed-for-portraiture lenses stack up against one another to see which one might be the better choice for your needs.

Advantages of the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM over the Sigma 135mm f/2 DG HSM Art:

• Smaller & lighter: 3.27 x 4.41” (83 x 112mm), 26.5 oz (750g) vs. 3.6 x 4.52” (91.4 x 114.9mm), 39.9 oz (1130g)
• More consistent AF system
• Compatible with 1.4x & 2x Extenders
• Lower price

Advantages of the Sigma 135mm f/2 DG HSM Art over the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM:

• Wider max aperture (1/3-stop advantage): f/1.8 vs. f/2
• More aperture blades: 9 vs. 8
• More precise manual focusing: 147° of focus ring rotation vs. 120°
• Slightly larger maximum magnification: 0.20x vs. 0.19x
• AF fine tuning via USB dock

Who should opt for the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM?

The EF 135mm f/2 USM has been a favorite among portrait photographers since its introduction. Its telephoto focal length combined with an f/2 max aperture makes backgrounds melt away giving more emphasis to your subject. In those ways, it's almost identical to the Sigma offering. However, from an AF perspective, Canon DSLRs tend to work optimally with Canon-designed lenses. While the Sigma 135 Art proved adequate (but not stellar) at consistently nailing focus in our tests, those shooting once-in-a-lifetime moments (weddings, editorial/documentary, etc.) will likely prefer the Canon option.

For those wanting to extend the lens's reach, the 135L is compatible with Canon's 1.4x and 2x Extenders with full AF being retained regardless of the body being used. The Sigma is not compatible with teleconverters.

If reduced size and weight are high priorities, the Canon's dimensions and weight will make it the preferred choice. Also, those with a limited budget will appreciate the Canon's significantly lower price tag.

Who should opt for the Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art?

With a 1/3-stop wider max aperture, a design that's 20 years newer and better wide-open image quality, there's very little not to like about Sigma's longest focal length Art lens (to date). As I mentioned above, AF consistency is not quite as good as the Canon alternative, but it will likely be sufficient for most photographers' needs.

Those shooting with a DSLR that does not feature Autofocus Microadjustment (like the Rebel-series and 77D) will certainly enjoy the Sigma 135 Art's ability to calibrate focus parameters via the Sigma USB dock, as they would need to send both their camera and lens to a Canon Service Center in order to similarly adjust a miscalibrated Canon lens.

Summary

While these lenses are more similar than they are different, the differences will be enough to tip the scales in one direction or the other based on a photographer's preferences, priorities and budget. Although a bit long in the tooth, the Canon 135 f/2L USM is still highly regarded by portrait specialists (and for good reason). However, the Sigma 135mm Art raised the bar in regards to wide-open image quality, and those wanting to add the latest and greatest to their kits will certainly benefit from Sigma's commitment to one-upping the competition with its Art-series releases.

More Information

• Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM Lens Review
• Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art Lens Review

With the announcement of the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM, many of those previously considering purchase of the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM may be now wondering which of Canon's L-series 85s is right for them. As such, we are going to take a look at how these lenses differ to hopefully make the decision making process a little easier.

Advantages of the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM over the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

• Better manual focusing experience: traditional MF vs. focus-by-wire
• More aperture blades: 9 vs. 8
• Image stabilization: 4-stops vs. none
• Weather sealed vs. not weather sealed
• Slightly higher max magnification: 0.12x vs. 0.11x
• Lighter: 33.5 oz vs. 36.2
• Slightly smaller diameter: 3.49" (88.6mm) vs. 3.6" (91.4mm)
• More common filter size: 77mm vs. 72
• Internal focusing vs. extends during focusing
• Lower cost

Advantages of the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM over the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM:

• Wider max aperture: f/1.2 vs. f/1.4
• Shorter length: 3.31” (84.1mm) vs. 4.15" (105.4mm)

Who should opt for the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

If you need the absolute widest aperture in your 85mm lens, either for action-stopping purposes or for maximizing separation between your subject and your background, then the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM will ultimately be the best choice.

Who should opt for the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM

In two words – "everyone else."

The benefits of the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM over the 85 f/1.2L II are both numerous and substantial. First and foremost, the lens' 4-stop IS system will enable you to shoot static subjects in significantly lower light while maintaining tolerable ISO levels. This is a huge benefit that should not be underestimated.

Next, the traditional manual focusing design will be welcomed by nearly every photographer who ever handled the 85mm f/1.2L II USM (or the EF 50mm f/1.2L USM, for that matter). The traditional design promises to be a much more responsive, akin to what we've come to expect from most L-series lenses.

The 85 f/1.4L IS's weather sealing further increases its versatility over the f/1.2 model. While we always advise taking precautions when inclement weather is expected, the 85L IS's weather sealing enables you to keep shooting without interruption in moderately wet or dusty conditions.

The EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM's lower cost will certainly be a universally-appreciated feature, as will the benefits of an extra aperture blade in creating a smooth background blur.

Summary

Unless you absolutely need or want an f/1.2 maximum aperture, the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM will likely prove the best investment for most photographers because of its overall greater versatility and lower price.

More Information

• Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM Lens Expectations
• Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Review

If interested in purchasing a Canon Rebel-series camera, you may be wondering if the additional features of the Rebel T7i / 800D are worth the additional size and weight compared to the Rebel SL2 / 200D. If so, it's important to know how the two cameras stack up against one another.

Below are some of the primary similarities and differences between the Rebel T7i and Rebel SL2.

Canon EOS Rebel T7i and Rebel SL2 Shared Primary Features:

• 24.2 MP Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor
• DIGIC 7 processor
• ISO 100 - 25600 (H1: 51200)
• 30 - 1/4000 sec shutter speed (1/2 or 1/3 stop increments)
• 1/200 sec (flash) x-sync
• Ambience priority, White priority Auto White Balance (AWB)
• Pentamirror viewfinder with 95% coverage
• Vari-angle touchscreen LCD, 7.7 cm (3.0") 3:2 Clear View II TFT, approx. 1040 K dots
• Up to 1920 x 1080 (59.954, 29.97, 25, 23.98 fps) video recording
• Video output (PAL/ NTSC) (integrated with USB terminal), HDMI micro out, external microphone (3.5mm Stereo mini jack)
• Built-in Wi-Fi, NFC & Bluetooth

Advantages of the EOS Rebel T7i over the EOS Rebel SL2:

• More advanced AF: 45 cross-type AF points (27 f/8 points [9 cross-type], center point f/2.8 and f/5.6 dual cross-type) vs. 9 AF points (f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8)
• Wider AF working range (better in low light): EV -3 - 18 vs. EV -0.5 -1
• Better metering: 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, metering with the area divided into 63 segments (9 × 7) vs. 63 zone dual-layer metering sensor
• More autoexposure bracketing (AEB) options: 2, 3, 5 or 7 Shots +/-3 EV vs. 3 shots +/- 2 EV
• Intelligent viewfinder vs. fixed
• Single axis electronic level vs. N/A
• More powerful pop-up flash: 13.1 GN vs. 9.8
• Pop-up flash can act as master vs. N/A
• Faster continuous shooting and larger buffer: 6 fps, 27 RAW vs. 5 fps, 6 RAW
• Longer battery life: 820 shots vs. 650

Advantages of the EOS Rebel SL2 over the EOS Rebel T7i

• Higher viewfinder magnification: 0.87x vs. 0.82x
• Smaller size/weight: 4.82 x 3.65 x 2.75" (122.4 x 92.6 x 69.8mm), 15.98 oz (453g) vs. 5.16 x 3.93 x 3.00" (131.0 x 99.9 x 76.2mm), 18.77 oz (532g)
• Lower cost

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D?

If minimal size/weight are not top priorities, and the Rebel T7i's higher price tag is not a barrier to investment, the T7i's higher-end features will make it a more versatile choice for most photographers. In fact, its more advanced, more sensitive in low light AF system alone is likely worth the T7i's price over the SL2.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / 200D?

If you want the most lightweight, compact DSLR, or if your budget does not extend to the Rebel T7i's price tag, the Rebel SL2 will be a solid investment. The SL2 provides a solid feature set at a very reasonable price, and anyone carrying their camera kit for long periods of time (those hiking, for example) will surely appreciate the camera's smaller size and weight. Other groups who will gravitate to the SL2 include those with smaller hands and those intending to use the camera in a high-risk remote setup. Because of its small size and simple user interface, the SL2 may be the perfect DSLR to buy for a young photographer-in-training.

Summary

Built around an identical sensor and sharing many noteworthy features, the Rebel T7i and SL2 are more similar than they are different. Both deliver very good image quality, feature excellent subject tracking in video mode and offer an intuitive user interface that makes the cameras very easy to use, especially for those with minimal photography experience or otherwise transitioning from a compact camera or a smartphone.

Arguably the Rebel T7i's biggest drawback – its higher price tag – results from the inlcusion of noteworthy features not found in the SL2 (primarily, a much better AF system). For most photographers, the Rebel T7i will fulfill their needs better because of those additional features. But for those who don't need those features, are budget limited or who otherwise value reduced size and weight, the Rebel SL2 remains a viable option.

More Information

• Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D Review
• Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / 200D Review

See our full list of Camera Gear Comparisons to aid in other purchasing decisions.

The Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / 200D and Rebel T6 / 1300D represent the brand's budget level DSLR offerings, and while high level features are certainly compromised, thankfully, image quality – at least from an APS-C/crop sensor perspective – is not. To aid in your decision making between the two cameras, let's dive into their differences to see which may be the best fit for your needs.

Let's first take a look at the Rebel SL2's advantages in this comparison.

Advantages of the EOS Rebel SL2 over the EOS Rebel T6:

• More resolution: 24.2 MP vs. 18
• DIGIC 7 processor vs. DIGIC 4+
• Evaluative, partial, center-weighted & spot metering vs. evaluative, center-weighted & partial
• Larger ISO range: 100-25600, H:51200 vs. 100-6400, H: 12800
• Larger viewfinder magnification: 0.87x vs. 0.80x
• Vari-angle touchscreen 7.7 cm (3.0"), approx. 1040k dots vs. non-vari-angle, non-touchscreen 7.5cm (3.0") TFT, approx. 920k dots
• Slightly more powerful pop-up flash: 9.8 GN vs. 9.2
• Fine Detail Picture Style vs. N/A
• Continuous shooting (2-10 shots) after 10-second timer vs. N/A
• Faster burst rate: 5 fps vs. 3
• 1080p 60fps vs. 1080p 30fps
• Better Live View focus: Dual Pixel CMOS AF vs. contrast AF
• Timelapse movie recording vs. N/A
• Wi-Fi, NFC & Bluetooth vs. Wi-Fi & NFC
• 3.5mm microphone terminal vs. N/A
• Better battery life: approx. 650 shots vs. 500
• Smaller and lighter: 4.82 x 3.65 x 2.75" (122.4 x 92.6 x 69.8mm), 15.98 oz (453g) vs. 5.08 x 3.99 x 3.06" (129.0 x 101.3 x 77.6mm), 17.1 oz (485g)

And now let's look at the Rebel T6's advantages.

Advantages of the EOS Rebel T6 over the EOS Rebel SL2:

• Faster pop-up flash recycling time: approx 2 sec. vs. 3
• Lower cost

Another difference between the two cameras is that the Rebel SL2 records video in .MP4 format for normal recording (.MOV for timelapses) while the Rebel T6 records in .MOV format. Either format may be a Pro/Con depending on one's desired recording preference.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel SL2

With the Rebel SL2's numerous feature benefits over the Rebel T6, anyone whose budget extends to the SL2 and can shoot with the body comfortably (not necessarily everyone can), the choice is easy – get the Rebel SL2.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T6

Considering the Rebel SL2's strong list of advantages over the T6, there are still groups of photographers who may be inclined to purchase Rebel T6 over the SL2, including:

• Those whose budget is a primary limiting factor.
• Those with larger hands who will prefer the T6's larger body.
• Those who will be using the camera in risky situations, such as remote setups or a gifting to a youth photographer-in-training.

Summary

Few camera comparisons are as clear-cut as this one. Almost any of the Rebel SL2's benefits listed above could easily justify its higher, but still-very-reasonable price tag over the Rebel T6, with the sum of those benefits providing an excellent overall value for consumers. However, while the Rebel T6's larger body may be appreciated by select photographers, its very low price tag will likely prove to be the ultimate deciding factor for the majority who add it to their kits, or more likely, begin their photography kits with.

More Information

• Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / 200D Review
• Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review

See our full list of Camera Gear Comparisons to aid in other purchasing decisions.

If you are currently in the process of upgrading DSLRs, or otherwise looking to add a second camera to your kit, the Canon EOS 6D Mark II and EOS 80D could be prime candidates for consideration.

Many people may be surprised to know just how similar the full-frame 6D Mark II and APS-C sensor 80D really are. Here's a quick rundown of the features these cameras share:

EOS 6D Mark II and 80D Shared Primary Features

• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor
• Compatible with EF, TS-E and MP-E lenses
• AF System: 45 cross-type AF points (27 f/8 points [9 cross-type], center point is f/2.8 and f/5.6 dual cross-type)
• AF Working Range: EV -3 - 18 (at 23 °C & ISO 100)
• Flicker detection and anti-flicker shutter timing
• Autofocus microadjustment
• Up to 1920 x 1080 60fps movie recording
• Movie Servo AF tracking speed and sensitivity adjustment
• Single SD, SDHC or SDXC (UHS-I) memory card slot
• Built-in Wi-Fi and NFC

Now let's take a look at some of the EOS 6D Mark II's advantages in this comparison.

Advantages of the EOS 6D Mark II over the EOS 80D:

• Full-frame sensor
• Higher resolution: 26.2 MP vs. 24.2
• DIGIC 7 processor vs. DIGIC 6
• Spot AF
• Less noise, especially at higher ISOs
• Dual-axis electronic level vs. single-axis
• 4K time-lapse video recording
• Built-in GPS and Bluetooth
• Better battery life: Approx. 1200 vs. 960

And below are the primary advantages the EOS 80D has over its full-frame counterpart.

Advantages of the EOS 80D over the 6D Mark II:

• Compatible with EF-S lenses
• Slightly higher dynamic range
• Slightly faster burst rate / larger buffer: Approx. 7fps, up to 25 images RAW vs. 6.5fps, up to 21 images RAW
• Pop-up flash featuring master functionality
• Faster max shutter speed: 1/8000 sec. vs. 1/4000
• Faster max flash sync speed (x-sync): 1/250 sec vs. 1/180
• Headphone terminal
• Slightly smaller size / weight: 5.47 x 4.14 x 3.09" (139.0 x 105.2 x 78.5mm), 25.75 oz (730g) vs. 5.67 x 4.35 x 2.94" (144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8mm), 26.98 oz (765g)
• Lower cost

Who should opt for the EOS 6D Mark II?

If shooting in low light and using relatively high ISOs, the EOS 6D II will give you noticeably cleaner (less noisy) images at the same ISO setting. The full frame sensor will also create a stronger background blur with the same subject framing and aperture in use.

For those interested in movie shooting, the 6D II offers the benefit of in-camera 4K time-lapse recording, although it does not feature a true Tv/Av mode during video recording like most higher-end models (instead, the camera defaults to P mode where both the shutter and aperture are adjusted to maintain exposure) and a headphone socket for audio monitoring is unavailable.

If built-in GPS and Bluetooth are high on your priority list, the 6D II has those features while the 80D does not.

Who should opt for the EOS 80D?

If you are upgrading from an APS-C (crop) sensor camera and currently have several APS-C lenses in your kit, the EOS 80D offers a seamless transition without the need to upgrade your EF-S lenses to full-frame compatible EF lenses, a transition that could prove significantly more costly than a simple camera body upgrade. And the benefits of EF-S lenses include [typically] lower cost and smaller size/weight compared to their full-frame counterparts.

Those shooting fast action may not notice an appreciable difference in the burst rate between the two cameras; however, the larger buffer of the 80D could prove to be a differentiating factor in some situations. The 80D's higher pixel density offering more reach to those requiring longer focal lengths will be especially welcomed by photographers covering long field sports.

The AF point spread of the 80D covers a higher percentage of the viewfinder for optimal framing using traditional phase detect AF, although the use of Live View AF can mitigate the difference between the two bodies.

If you are interested in shooting using off-camera lighting, the 80D's pop-up flash with master functionality means that you may not need a costly accessory to control your off-camera flashes, with the reduced size and weight of your sans-accessory camera being another benefit.

If in-camera 4K time-lapse video is not important to you (you can always create 4K time-lapses in post), the 80D features the same video recording capabilities as the 6D II yet also features a headphone terminal for audio monitoring. Unless filming in low light using high ISOs is necessary for a bulk of your filmmaking, the 80D should work just as well for most with video production aspirations.

Summary

These cameras are actually more similar than they are different, with the sensor size probably being the most significant differentiating factor between the two cameras. If you're eager to enjoy the image quality benefits provided by a full-frame sensor, the 80D's benefits over the 6D Mark II won't likely tip the scales in the smaller sensor camera's direction.

However, if your budget is limited and/or you enjoy the benefits of EF-S lenses, or you otherwise want a body which offers a more versatile sports or video capture platform, the 80D's benefits may make it the logical choice for adding to your kit.

More Information

• Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review
• Canon EOS 80D Review

See our full list of Camera Gear Comparisons to aid in other purchasing decisions.

If you want to reduce the size and weight of your camera, but do not want to give up great image quality, then the Canon EOS Rebel SL2 and EOS M5 will likely be considered prime candidates for incorporating into your camera kit.

First, let's look at some of the primary features these cameras have in common:

• 24.2 MP APS-C Dual Pixel CMOS sensor
• DIGIC 7 processor
• Pop-up flash (no master functionality)
• Native ISO range: 100-25600
• Images/movies stored to SDHC/SDXC (UHS-I) memory card
• 1/4000 max shutter speed
• 1/200 flash sync speed
• Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and NFC
• USB 2.0, HDMI (micro) & 3.5mm stereo mini jack

Advantages of the EOS Rebel SL2:

• Natively compatible with EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E lenses
• Ambience / White Priority AWB vs. Ambience only
• Vari-angle touchscreen LCD vs. Tilt-type touchscreen LCD
• Higher built-in flash guide number: 9.8m vs. 5m
• Wider exposure compensation range: +/- 5 stops vs. +/- 3 stops
• Selectable IPB standard / IPB light encoding vs. single in-camera default
• Longer battery life: 650 vs. 395 (420 with Eco Mode On)
• Working humidity: 90% vs. 85%
• Lower price

Advantages of the EOS M5:

• Native EF-M lenses are smaller/lighter than similar EF-S/EF lenses
• More AF Points: 49 vs. 9
• 1/3-stop ISO adjustments vs. full stops
• 100% viewfinder coverage vs. 95%
• Larger LCD screen: 3.2" vs. 3.0"
• Higher burst rate/larger buffer: max 9 fps, up to 17 RAW vs. 5 fps, up to 6 RAW
• Slightly smaller/lighter: 4.6 x 3.5 x 2.4" (115.6 x 89.2 x 60.6mm), 15.1 oz. (427g) vs. 4.82 x 3.65 x 2.75" (122.4 x 92.6 x 69.8mm), 15.98 oz (453g)
• Wider operating range: 14-104°F / -10-40°C vs. 32-104°F / 0-40°C

Who should opt for the EOS Rebel SL2?

If you want a compact camera with a traditional optical viewfinder, there's only one choice in this comparison – get the Rebel SL2. Note, of course, that I didn't list the optical viewfinder (OVF) or the electronic viewfinder (EVF) as an advantage for the respective cameras above; both have advantages and disadvantages compared to the other, so your needs and shooting preferences will ultimately determine which type of viewfinder is right for you.

While those photographing fast action may appreciate some of the M5 advantages over the SL2, the SL2's OVF implementation is better-suited for tracking action while capturing a burst of images.

If you want to create videos with your new camera, both feature Movie Servo AF via Canon's Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor technology, but only the SL2 offers selectable IBP standard and IBP light encoding as well as a vari-angle LCD screen.

Those creating HDRs through manual exposure bracketing will appreciate the SL2's wider exposure compensation range (although the auto exposure bracketing (AEB) spec is the same for both cameras – 3 shots up to +/- 2 stops).

For those who tend to occasionally forget to pack important items in their gear bag, an advantage of the SL2 is its native compatibility with all of Canon's EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E lenses (no adapter required). Those needing to control larger lenses on their camera and those actively using the camera for substantial time periods will appreciate the SL2's more substantial grip.

The Rebel SL2 has one particular advantage that nearly every photographer can appreciate – a significantly lower price compared to the M5.

Who should opt for the EOS M5?

Traveling? The M5 might be the better option for you. Two primary advantages of a mirrorless system are reduced size and weight. While the size and weight differences between these two models are likely not as significant as you might expect, the EOS M5 delivers on both counts. It is the lightest and most compact in this comparison.

EF-M lenses are generally smaller and lighter than their DSLR-compatible counterparts, and the size and weight savings becomes more significant as your kit grows. However, the relatively small number of EF-M lenses (especially those with wide apertures) may prove limiting for some types of photography and if more flexibility is required, the EOS M5 is compatible with all EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E lenses when paired with a Canon EF-M Lens Adapter.

Anyone valuing more AF points, a larger AF point spread, faster burst rate, larger buffer and wider operating range will be attracted to the EOS M5.

Summary

When it comes down to it, both of these cameras are smaller and lighter than traditional APS-C DSLR cameras, yet offer the same great image quality you've come to expect from such cameras. With an advanced AF system and the ability to use a wide range of lenses (with an adapter), the M5 will prove to be a compelling choice for many. However, adapting lenses made for DSLRs arguably negates much of the "reduced size and weight" advantage of owning a mirrorless camera and the SL2, with its more substantial grip, permits better, more comfortable control over the camera. Of course, if (or more likely, when) Canon fills out its EF-M lineup offering lenses similar to its EF/EF-S offerings, the size and weight advantages of its mirrorless range will likely be much more significant.

For those that prefer a traditional optical viewfinder, desire a vari-angle LCD or simply want a more compact (and affordable) DSLR, the Rebel SL2 checks all those boxes with a native-mount lens lineup that is sure to meet your needs without the need for an adapter.

More Information:

• Canon EOS Rebel SL2 Review
• Canon EOS M5 Review

See our full list of Camera Gear Comparisons.

When an updated camera model is introduced, it's fair to wonder if your needs will be best served by the new model or whether the older model will serve your intended purposes sufficiently with cost savings being the primary benefit.

With the Canon EOS 6D Mark II's announcement, I'm sure many people are considering either a camera upgrade or the addition of a second camera to their kit. And since the original 6D is still available (at least for now), it makes sense to look closely at these two cameras to see if the 6D II's updated features are worth its higher price for your specific needs.

As the 6D doesn't really have any signifcant advantages over the 6D Mark II aside from a lower price, so we'll simply take a look at the upgraded features of the 6D II to put the current cost differential into context.

Advantages of the EOS 6D Mark II over the 6D:

• 26.2 MP CMOS sensor with Dual Pixel CMOS AF vs. 20.2 MP (no DPAF)
• 45-point AF system (all cross-type) vs. 11 points (f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8)
• Up to 21 active AF points with f/8 max aperture vs. no active AF points at f/8
• 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor affecting 63 segments vs. 63 zone Dual Layer SPC
• 6.5 fps. (up to 21 images in RAW) vs. 4.5fps. (up to 17 images in RAW)
• DIGIC 7 vs. DIGIC 5+
• Customizable, Intelligent Viewfinder with transparent LCD overlay vs. standard viewfinder
• AWB (Ambience priority/White priority) vs. AWB (Ambience priority only)
• Vari-angle touchscreen LCD (1.04 million dots) vs. fixed
• Flicker Light Detection and Shutter Timing vs. none
• Full HD 1080p 60 fps movies with 5 axis electronic image stabilization vs. 1080p 30 fps (no electronic stabilization)
• WiFi, NFC, Bluetooth & GPS vs. WiFi and GPS
• Intervalometer with 4K Timelapse Movie Mode featuring 3840px UHD resolution vs. no intervalometer or in-camera timelapse

Who should opt for the EOS 6D Mark II?

If you are a wildlife photographer, the 6D II's significantly better AF system and the ability to utilize lens + extender combinations with an f/8 maximum aperture ultimately make it a much better choice compared to the 6D and its 11-point AF system. Those needing to capture wildlife at the peak of action will also benefit from the 6D II's faster burst rate. If sports photography is on your to-do list, then these same features along with Light Flicker Detection and Shutter Timing will be prove quite advantageous to you as well.

Event photographers will especially appreciate the 6D II's upgraded AF system and [almost certain] great image quality at higher ISOs, as both will be very beneficial for documentary style photography in light-starved venues.

Do you plan on photographing your child/children as they play? The 6D II's advanced AF system will ensure you get more in-focus shots compared to its predecessor.

Filmmakers will especially appreciate the 6D II's Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor with its ability to track action in movie mode. Other features that filmmakers will enjoy include the vari-angle LCD (with touch-focus), the ability to capture video at 60 fps and in-camera 4K timelapses (though many may still prefer to compile their timelapses in post-processing). Even if not utilizing the in-camera timelapse movie feature, the built-in intervalometer negates the need for an additional accessory to capture timelapses.

Even if you're not a serious filmmaker, the 6D II's Movie Servo AF can help you to capture high quality home movies that your family will enjoy for years to come.

The customizable Intelligent Viewfinder is a convenient feature that nearly every photographer can appreciate, with the ability to display a single axis level indicator, gridlines or other relevant information. For those who enjoy sharing their images quickly and easily, the 6D II's NFC & low-energy Bluetooth connections may also prove to be a differentiating factor.

Who should opt for the EOS 6D?

If you don't believe the sum of the value of the benefits listed above justify the incrementally higher cost of the 6D Mark II, then the original 6D may be the perfect camera to add to your kit (or otherwise build your kit around). It features excellent full frame image quality and is great for landscapes, cityscapes, architecture/real estate, vacations, family gatherings, studio portraiture and macros.

Summary

The Canon EOS 6D Mark II included a lot of feature updates that 6D owners had been asking for, including (but not limited to) a more advanced AF system and a Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor. The 6D II is intended to be the full frame camera for the budget-conscious consumer, just as the 6D was at its introduction. However, this time around, that same consumer group will be getting a much more versatile camera for their very reasonable investment.

If your budget doesn't extend to the 6D II's introductory price, the 6D is the lowest-priced full frame Canon DSLR on the market right now, and it's well worth the price. However, for a little more, the 6D II is an even better value considering its overall feature set.

Check out our Camera Specifications Tool to fully compare these cameras:

• Canon EOS 6D Mark II compared to the Canon EOS 6D

If you are considering the purchase of a Canon EOS 6D Mark II, you may also be considering the EOS 5D Mark III as they are similarly priced with an also-attractive, mid level feature set within the confines of today's camera market.

Make no mistake, these bodies are similarly versatile and capable cameras, but depending on the intended use and/or photographic challenges being pursued, either one may be a better choice compared to the other. With that said, let's look at how these full frame contenders differ.

Advantages of the EOS 6D Mark II over the 5D Mark III:

• Dual Pixel AF sensor with Movie Servo AF vs. contrast-detect AF in Live View with no Movie Servo AF
• More resolution (26.2 vs. 22.3)
• DIGIC 7 vs. DIGIC 5+
• More sensitive AF (EV -3 – 18 vs. EV -2 – 18)
• More AF points active at f/8 (27 points vs. center AF point with 4 assist points)
• 7560-pixel RGB+IR 63 zone metering sensor vs. iFCL 63-zone Dual-layer sensor
• Faster max burst rate / larger RAW buffer (6.5 fps. (150 images in JPEG, 21 images in RAW) vs. 6 fps. (16,270 images in JPEG, 18 images in RAW))
• Vari-angle LCD vs. fixed
• Flicker detection and corrective shutter release timing
• Ambience priority/white priority AWB vs. ambience priority only
• In-camera 4K UHD time-lapses vs. none
• GPS, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth & NFC vs. none
• Longer battery life (Approx. 1200 (at 23°C, AE 50%, FE 50%) vs. 950)
• Smaller & lighter (5.67 x 4.35 x 2.94" (144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8mm), 26.98 oz (765g) vs. 6.0 x 4.6 x 3.0" (152 x 116.4 x 76.4mm), 33.5 oz (950g))

Advantages of the EOS 5D Mark III over the 6D Mark II:

• More AF points / more dual cross type points at f/2.8 (61 Point / 41 f/4 cross-type AF points including 5 dual cross type at f/2.8 vs. 45 cross-type AF points including center point dual cross type at f/2.8)
• Joystick multi-controller vs. none
• Larger viewfinder coverage (100% vs. 98%)
• Faster max shutter speed (1/8000 sec vs. 1/4000 sec)
• Dual memory card slots (CF + SDXC/SDHC vs. SDXC/SDHC only)
• HDMI mini, headphone & microphone mini jacks vs. microphone mini jack only

As is evident above, the 6D Mark II has more advantage bullet points compared to the 5D Mark III. However, the importance of some of the 5D III bullet points could easily sway one's decision in favor of the older, economical 5-series body.

Who should opt for the EOS 6D Mark II?

First of all, anyone wanting to quickly create high quality videos with their DSLR will likely prefer the 6D's Movie Servo AF – thanks to its Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor – as well as its vari-angle LCD. Another nice feature that DSLR filmmakers are likely to appreciate is the 6D II's ability to create 4K UHD time-lapses in-camera, though many filmmakers will prefer to compile their time-lapses in post-processing for more control over the final video (essentially making this feature a less compelling advantage compared to the 5D III).

From a video perspective, one drawback could be the 6D II's .MP4 recording format if someone instead preferred using the .MOV format featured in the 5D III. Another drawback is the 6D II's lack of a headphone jack.

Even though it features fewer overall points, those shooting wildlife will likely prefer the 6D II's slightly faster burst rate and AF system capable of up-to 27 active phase-detect AF points when using lens+extender combinations resulting in an f/8 effective maximum aperture. And on top of that, Live View with subject tracking can be utilized with lens+extender combinations through f/11.

In comparison, only the center AF point (with 4 assist points) is enabled on the 5D III with f/8 maximum apertures and subject tracking is unavailable in Live View. For wildlife photographers who never plan on using lens+extender combinations, the 5D III may be the better choice thanks to its 61 point AF system. But considering how often wildlife photographers utilize extenders, they will likely accept the 6D II's 45 point AF system to gain significantly more AF functionality at f/8.

Those carrying their cameras long distances and/or for long periods of time will of course appreciate the 6D II's smaller design and lighter weight, including (but not limited to) those who are hiking to remote locations or traveling on domestic/international flights.

All photographers will appreciate 6D II's higher resolution and longer battery life, and many will enjoy using its GPS, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and NFC features which are all absent on the 5D III. Any photographers photographing under stadium lights will be thankful for the 6D II's Flicker Detection and corrective shutter timing for avoiding color balancing problems.

Who should opt for the EOS 5D Mark III?

Even though the 5D III seems to have few benefits over the 6D II, the value of some of those benefits can be huge. For instance, anyone photographing once-in-a-lifetime events such as weddings should likely choose the 5D Mark III for its dual memory card feature alone. While card corruption is relatively rare, dual memory card slots provide a vital layer of protection to keep your (or your client's) images safe. Having images backed up in-camera can help you avoid tarnishing your reputation due to a faulty memory card.

Many photographers will appreciate the 5D III's viewfinder with 100% coverage and faster maximum shutter speed.

If you already own a 7D Mark II, you will likely appreciate the very similar controls featured in the 5D III, including (but not limited to) the multi-controller joystick. If keeping the 7D II as a secondary camera, you should be able to switch between bodies without missing a beat.

Summary

Released in 2012, the 5D Mark III still remains relevant in today's camera landscape, although its target market has surely shifted from those needing cutting-edge technology (without stepping up to a 1-series camera) to an enthusiast group wanting full-frame image quality and a more-than-reasonable feature set at an attractive price. And, coincidentally enough, that's a good description of the 6D Mark II as well, although its overall feature set is certainly more contemporary.

As illustrated above, each of these cameras will serve specific photographers' needs better than the other. If you or your business can't afford the ill-effects of a memory card failure, or if the 5D III's controls make it a better fit for your photography, the 6D II's advantages will mean little when adding the 5D III to your shopping cart.

However, with its higher resolution, Dual Pixal CMOS AF sensor, more than sufficient AF system, GPS/wireless features and smaller design/lighter weight, the 6D II will likely be the preferred choice for a large number of photographers.

More Information

• Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review
• Canon EOS 5D Mark III Review

With the introduction of the Canon EOS 6D Mark II, you may be wondering whether it's an adequate camera for your needs or if the higher end EOS 5D Mark IV is a better fit. Compared to the original 6D, the 6D II goes a long way in closing the feature gap with its 5-series full frame brethren.

Before we analyze the differences between the two bodies, let's first take a look at some of the primary features they have in common:

• Full frame 1.0x 35mm field of view with EF lenses
• Likely excellent high-ISO image quality
• AF working range: EV -3 - 18
• Autofocus Microadjustment
• AEB: 2, 3, 5 or 7 Shots +/-3 EV 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments
• Viewfinder: Pentaprism, approx. 0.71x magnification
• Exposure compensation: +/- 5EV in 1/2 or 1/3 increments
• Auto exposure bracketing (AEB): +/- 3EV in 1/2 or 1/3 increments
• Top LCD Panel: Yes
• Wi-Fi, NFC & GPS: Built-in
• Intervalometer
• Light flicker detection and shutter timing
• Water and dust resistant construction

Now let's take a look at how these DSLR bodies differ.

6D Mark II Advantages over the 5D Mark IV:

• DIGIC 7 processor vs. DIGIC 6+
• Vari-angle LCD (3" 1.04m-Dot vari-angle touchscreen LCD vs. Fixed touch screen 3.2" approx. 1.62m dots)
• Bluetooth vs. none
• 4K time-lapse movies vs. 1080p only time-lapse movies
• Smaller, lighter (5.67 x 4.35 x 2.94" (144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8mm), 26.98 oz (765g) vs. 5.93 x 4.58 x 2.99" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm), 31.4 oz (890g))
• Lower price

5D IV Advantages over the 6D Mark II

• Higher resolution (30.4 MP vs. 26.2)
• Better metering (Approx. 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 252-zone metering. EOS Intelligent Subject Analysis system vs. 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor with the area divided into 63 segments)
• More AF points and wider point coverage
• Faster max shutter speed (1/8000 sec vs. 1/4000)
• Slightly higher burst rate (7fps vs. 6.5)
• Dual memory card slots (CF + SDHC/SDXC vs. SDHC/SDXC)
• 4K video recording
• Selectable .MOV or .MP4 video formats vs. .MP4 recording with .MOV available only in time-lapse movie mode
• Multi-controller joystick

Note: The advantages listed above should not be considered an exhaustive list, but instead represent some primary differences between the cameras.

Who should opt for the EOS 6D Mark II?

If you are stepping up from an entry level EOS Rebel/****D/***D/**D/7-series camera, the 6D Mark II will offer at least one big feature you didn't have in your previous camera – a full frame sensor. But depending on the model being displaced in your kit, the 6D Mark II may offer a wide variety of feature upgrades that make it an attractive primary camera for your needs, especially for the price.

If you already own a recent 1-series or 5-series DSLR, the 6D Mark II should prove to be a great backup camera that's more compact and easier on the budget compared to a new/retail duplicate of your existing camera.

And while we're on the subject of the camera's size and weight, anyone who is traveling to remote locations with the responsibility of carrying their camera kit on their backs for long distances and/or long periods of time will certainly appreciate the 6D II's smaller dimensions and lighter weight.

Who should opt for the 5D Mark IV?

While the 6D Mark II can easily produce professional-looking results from an image quality and AF perspective, its lack of dual memory card slots may make it a less ideal choice for those who are shooting once-in-a-lifetime imagery (think, weddings). And with a more advanced AF system (with more points and more coverage), you can expect the 5D IV to perform a little better in challenging AF conditions or when framing subjects closer to the edges of the viewfinder.

If you are primarily interested in video filming with your DSLR, the 5D IV offers more video features – including 4K recording – that will make it a much better option compared to the 6D Mark II.

Summary

The 6D Mark II represents a huge step up from its predecessor, and its upgraded features along with a budget-friendly price make the 6D II an incredible value in Canon's DSLR lineup. For those that don't require the extra features found in the 5D IV, the 6D II should prove proficient at tackling most photographic challenges with ease.

But for those who need an edge in AF performance, dual memory card slots and 4K recording, the 5D Mark IV is your camera.

More Information

• Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review
• Canon 5D Mark IV Review

The release of the Sony a9 introduced yet another intriguing option in the pro sports photography market. As such, you may be curious as to how Sony's first sports-oriented mirrorless full frame camera stacks up against Canon's top-of-the-line full frame DSLR, the EOS-1D X Mark II.

Let's first take a look at some of the high level features where the two cameras differ to see how they contrast with one another:

Size, Weight and Battery Life

As indicated by the table above, the Sony a9 is smaller and lighter than the Canon 1D X II. And as also evidenced by the table above, a downside to the smaller body is the inability to house a large battery. In other words, you can likely shoot more than twice as many images with the [significantly larger] 1D X II before the battery is exhausted. Adding a battery grip to the a9 doubles battery capacity and adds the extremely useful vertical control buttons, but inevitably reduces the size and weight advantages of the camera.

Native Lens Lineup

Consider that the EOS-1D X II is Canon's 11th 1-series digital SLR, the long-standing camera maker has had plenty of time to fill out its product line with a wide variety of lenses ideal for sports photography. Aside from the general purposes lenses sometimes used for sports photography, Canon telephoto (and telephoto zoom) lenses often used for sports photography include:

• Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
• Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
• Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Ext 1.4x
• Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM
• Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
• Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
• Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM
• Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
• Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM
• Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM
• Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM

Compare the lens selection above to the Sony E-mount lenses available now with a focal length of 300mm or greater:

• Sony FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G OSS
• Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS

Sony likely has several long telephoto lenses currently in development. However, it's very difficult [i.e., impossible] to take great sports images with lenses that are simply unavailable. For the meantime, Canon likely has a lens to cover your sports needs, no matter what sport you're photographing.

Of course, you can use non-native lenses with the Sony a9 when adapters are thrown into the mix. However, expect the AF performance of adapted lenses to be negatively impacted.

Viewfinders

Viewfinder implementations differ significantly between the Canon 1D X II and the Sony a9, where the Canon body offers a traditional optical viewfinder (with customizable overlays) and the Sony body features an electronic viewfinder. Each type of viewfinder has benefits and drawbacks compared to the other (such as an EVF's elimination of viewfinder blackout times), and Bryan shared his thoughts on the advantages/disadvantages of electronic/optical viewfinders in his article, "Comparing Electronic Viewfinders to Optical Viewfinders" . Be sure to check out the preceeding information to determine which of these systems you may prefer.

Durability & Reliability

With Canon's tendency to be relatively conservative regarding its 1-series updates, it's safe to say that you can expect their top-of-the-line series to perform reliably in the field, with robust weather sealing keeping the camera operational in adverse conditions.

Indeed, the a9 isn't Sony's first foray into the full frame digital camera market. However, it is the first camera Sony has designed specifically for sports photography and the rigors that pursuit entails. The Sony a9 may prove to be as reliable as the 1D X II, but... the first iteration of a company's product line is rarely as refined a competitor's benefitting from many more years of experience in design and manufacture.

While we didn't stress test the camera, the Sony a9 with its magnesium alloy frame and weather sealing is designed for the rigors that professionals encounter. Three hours of clay dust created at a dirt track sprint car race turned the camera red, but this issue was completely mitigated by an air blower.

Autofocus Performance

Based on our tests, the Sony a9 focuses in extremely low light, similar to the 1D X II. Focus accuracy in One Shot mode/ AF-S single focus lock is also very similar between the cameras, although the 1D X II is noticeably faster in One Shot AF mode as the a9 defocuses before focusing again even when the subject has not moved. With subjects moving at a constant rate of speed, the a9 does an excellent job of tracking subjects. However, from our experience, the 1D X II tends to track erratic subjects better and maintains subject tracking as those subjects get closer to the camera.

Of course, it's impossible to perform a complete, exhaustive, apples-to-apples comparison between the two cameras' AF systems because conditions are never precisely repeatable. It's possible that either camera’s AF performance could be situationally improved by adjusting the focusing parameters from the default settings.

Customer Support

Canon is widely recognized as having an excellent support system, including (not not limited to) Canon Professional Services, the division which specifically caters to those who make a living with their imaging gear. The support we have received from Canon USA and Canon Professional Services has over the years has been very good. Canon USA's Customer Service Technicians have been eager to help and knowledgeable when we have needed phone support, and our experience with Canon's repair department (in the few times we've needed a repair) has been equally satisfying.

On the other hand, Sony is still in the building process when it comes to customer support for their E-mount camera system. As such, they don't necessarily have a reputation for exemplary customer service [yet]. And that reputation (or lack thereof) is seemingly appropriate, at least considering our own [minimal] experience with Sony Support.

Price

At the time of this comparison, the Sony a9's MSRP is 25% lower than the Canon EOS 1D X Mark II's MSRP, and that translates to a not-so-insignificant savings. If you're ready for the Sony a9 ecosystem, that savings will certainly be appreciated. For a more versatile, similar-to-a-1D-X-II setup, you may wish to use some of the savings to pick up the Sony VG-C3EM Vertical Grip and an extra battery for increased shooting time and better handling with larger lenses.

Unfortunately, your savings experienced by purchasing a Sony a9 may be negated as your lens kit grows, as comparable Sony lenses tend to be more expensive than their Canon counterparts. Check out the Sony a9 vs. Canon EOS 1D X II vs. Nikon D5 price comparison table near the end of the a9 review.

Wrap-Up

So which pro sports camera body is best for your needs? Well, if you're planning on making a living shooting sports imagery in the very near future, or you've already invested heavily in a Canon system, the EOS-1D X Mark II would likely be the best choice.

However, if you're a semi pro or enthusiast sports shooter, and you haven't already invested heavily in a particular camera system, the Sony a9 shows obvious potential and is definitely worth considering if its current lens lineup is appropriate for your needs.

Suggested Retailers

Canon EOS-1D X Mark II – B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Wex Photographic
Sony a9 – B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Wex Photographic

If you currently have a Rebel/***D or **D series camera, the Canon EOS 6D and EOS 80D are logical upgrade candidates you may be considering. Or, if you already own a 1D-series or 5D-series camera, the 6D or 80D may be considered for backup purposes. Either way, while they share a similar size and weight, they are very different cameras from a features standpoint. Let's take a look at these two DSLR bodies to see which upgrade/backup option may be right for your needs.

First, let's consider the EOS 6D's benefits over the 80D:

• Full frame sensor capable of cleaner imagery at higher ISOs and stronger a background blur
• Larger ISO range: Auto (100-25600), 100-25600, L: 50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400 vs. Auto (100-16000), 100-16000, H1: 25600
• Built-in GPS vs. optional accessory
• Slightly higher battery life: Approx. 1090 (at 23°C, AE 50%, FE 50%) vs. 960

And here are the EOS 80D's advantages over the 6D:

• Higher resolution: 24.2 MP vs. 20.2
• Compatability with EF-S lenses
• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor
• Pop-up master flash vs. No flash
• Ambience priority / White priority AWB vs. Ambience only
• Touch screen Vari-angle 7.7cm (3.0") 3:2 Clear View II TFT LCD vs. fixed LCD
• Headphone socket vs. None
• More powerful image processing: DIGIC 6 vs. DIGIC 5+
• More advanced AF system: 45-point all cross-type AF (f/2.8 dual cross-type AF point at center, 27 active AF points at f/8) vs. 11 points (f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8)
• Newer/more advanced metering system: 7560-pixel RGB+IR 63 zone vs. 63 zone Dual Layer SPC
• Faster continuous shooting and larger RAW buffer: Max 7 fps (110 JPEG, 25 RAW) vs. 4.5 fps (1250 JPEG, 17 RAW)
• Faster max. shutter speed: 1/8000 sec. vs. 1/4000
• Larger viewfinder coverage: 100% vs. 97%
• More movie encoding options: .MOV & .MP4 (max. 1920 x 1080 [59.94, 50 fps] inter-frame) vs. .MOV (max. 1920 x 1080 [29.97, 25 fps] intra or inter frame), no .MP4 option
• Built-in Wi-Fi and NFC vs. Wi-Fi only
• Lower price

Essentially, you're looking at a comparison between Canon's low-end, budget conscious full-frame camera and their mid-range APS-C model. As evidenced by the above lists of advantages, the 80D provides a notable superset of features over 6D.

Who should opt for the EOS 6D?

If you are looking for the absolute best image quality, especially at higher ISOs, you will certainly benefit from the 6D's full frame sensor. If who want a true 35mm angle of view from Canon's EF, TS-E & MP-E lenses, the choice is easy – get the 6D. The 6D makes for an excellent dedicated studio/portraiture/landscape body.

Who should opt for the EOS 80D?

With many features not included in the EOS 6D, the 80D could be considered a more general purpose camera in this comparison. And if you're upgrading from another APS-C body, the 80D allows for a seamless transition because of its compatibility with designed-for-crop-sensor, EF-S lenses, while still being compatible with EF, TS-E & MP-E lenses.

If you shoot sports or wildlife, the 80D's advanced AF system, faster 7 fps burst rate, larger RAW continuous shooting buffer and 27 active AF points at f/8 will prove advantageous. And with the 80D's more pixel dense sensor, you'll have much more resolution when compared to taking the same image at the same shooting location with the 6D and cropping to the equivalent 1.6x focal length. If you're interested in filmmaking with your DSLR, the 80D's expanded movie options, headphone socket and excellent Dual Pixel CMOS AF – allowing for superb focus tracking in movie mode – are huge benefits.

Summary

As is typical of Canon DSLRs, either one of these cameras can be employed to create stunning imagery. Your personal priorities and intended subject matter will ultimately determine which of these bodies is the best investment for capitalizing on your photographic opportunities. Hopefully, the comparison above has provided some insight into which of these bodies is the right addition for your camera kit. If not, check out our full reviews for more in-depth information on these (and many more) cameras.

Shopping Links

Canon EOS 6D – B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Wex Photographic
Canon EOS 80D – B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Wex Photographic

With a feature set tailor-made for general purpose use, it's no wonder that there are several Canon-mount 24-105mm lenses available for your consideration. But with so many options available, it can be confusing when trying to determine which 24-105mm zoom lens is the best choice for your particular needs. And considering that most of these lenses share a majority of significant specifications, including focal length range (FLR), max aperture (except for one), and built-in stabilization, it's easy to see why singling out the right lens could be a challenging endeavor.

With that in mind, let's dig into the differences between these very popular lenses to see which one might make the best addition to your kit.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens

Announced in August 2016, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM is the newest lens in this comparison. As such, you may expect this lens to outperform the rest of the pack in just about every measureable way, having benefitted from the latest and greatest technological advancements. However, this lens' superiority is not so clear-cut.

From a sharpness perspective, the 24-105L IS II is very similar to its predecessor, a lens that was released 11 years prior to version II's introduction.

While that may sound a bit disappointing, keep in mind that the 24-104L IS USM was no slouch when it came to sharpness and version II brought forth other advancements – leading to reduced vignetting, distortion and flare – which adds up to an overall better image quality. IQ aside, version II also benefitted from build quality and design refinements as well as an upgraded Image Stabilization system capable of 4-stops of compensation (compared to version I's 3-stops). The 24-105L IS II is weather sealed, making it a great option for those who intend on photographing in inclement weather.

In other words, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM may not be significantly better than its predecessor, but with all things considered, it is indeed better. And considering that it debuted sporting an only slightly higher price than its predecessor, this lens provides an excellent standard (from performance and value standpoints) by which all other lenses in this category can be compared.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens

Released in 2005, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM was the default full frame kit lens for more than a decade. As such, there are likely more 24-105Ls in the marketplace than any other L-series lens. Its versatility, reasonable price (especially if purchased via a white box sale) and solid performance made this an ideal general purpose lens for many photographers.

As mentioned above, the original 24-105L competes quite well from a sharpness perspective in regards to its predecessor. However, it does show more vignetting, distortion and flare compared to the same lens. Of course the 24-105L features a more classic design, but a more significant difference between it and its predecessor, as noted, is its 3-stop IS system compared to version II's upgraded 4-stop IS system. Like its successor, the 24-105L is also weather sealed (though a front filter is required for optimal sealing).

With version II becoming more widely available, though, you can expect the original version of the lens to be phased out in the not-so-distant future. This lens represents an excellent deal – especially when white box and grey market versions are considered – while it remains available.

Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS HSM Art Lens

Announced in 2013, the 24-105 Art lens became Sigma's first stabilized full-format general purpose zoom lens. With a sleek design, high build quality, good image quality and a reasonable price, the 24-105 Art epitomizes the hallmarks of Sigma's Global Vision series of lenses.

With major features like focal length range, maximum aperture and built-in stabilization similar to the Canon L-series lenses, the Sigma represents an excellent value relative to its peers.

Compared to the 24-105 L II, the Sigma is slightly heavier, similar in size and lower priced. The Sigma has a higher MM (0.30x vs 0.24) to its advantage.

In the image quality comparison between the Art-series lens and the 24-105L II, we see the Sigma turning in slightly sharper results at the wide end, the two being very similar over most of the focal length range and the Canon taking the advantage at the long end. At 24mm, the Sigma has less CA and slightly more barrel distortion. The Sigma has slightly more vignetting at 24mm and modestly more at the long end. The Sigma is slightly more prone to flare.

We were pleased to find the Sigma 24-105 Art's AF performance to be quite good (often an issue with third-party lenses). It's not as fast as the Canon L-series lenses, but AF accuracy proved to be – for the most part – reliable in One Shot and AI Servo mode.

One drawback of the Sigma 24-105 Art – a lack of weather sealing – means that those photographers intending on photographing in adverse weather conditions may be better served by one of the Canon L-series options.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens

The Canon EF 24-105mm IS STM lens was announced in 2014 and, being a full-frame compatible lens with STM, foreshadowed the introduction Dual Pixel AF in Canon's future full-frame camera lineup (although it would be another 16 months before the EOS-1D X Mark II was announced).

Without the Luxury branding of a red ring around the end of the lens, it would be reasonable to expect the 24-105 IS STM to feature a lower build quality, inferior image quality and a lower price. In this case, however, only two out of three expectations would come to turn out to be definitively accurate.

The 24-105 IS STM indeed features a lower build quality and a lower price tag compared to its red-ringed counterparts, but... it performs competitively in regards to sharpness, vignetting, distortion and flare. Depending on which focal length and aperture you choose in the comparison between the 24-105 IS STM and 24-105L IS II, either could be slightly better than the other. As such, image quality alone should not be considered a primary differentiating factor.

Comparing the lenses further, the STM has less CA at 24mm and has slightly less pincushion distortion at mid and long focal lengths compared to the 24-105L IS II. The L lens has a wider aperture over the 42-105mm range, but the STM has a 1/3 stop advantage for a few mms (24-27mm) and has a higher MM (0.30x vs 0.24). The 24-105 IS STM is not a weather sealed lens and does not have a focus distance window.

Now would be a good time to address the elephant in the room – the 24-105 IS STM's variable max aperture with a 1-stop narrower max aperture (from 67-105mm) compared to the rest of the lenses mentioned above. This means that you'll need twice as much light using the same ISO and shutter speed with the 24-105 IS STM compared to using one of the f/4 max aperture lenses above (or to put it another way, you'll need a shutter speed twice as long or a 1-stop higher ISO to achieve the same exposure). The 1-stop narrower aperture can be especially detrimental if photographing in dimly-lit conditions.

On the plus side, the 24-105 IS STM includes Canon's stepping motor-driven AF system which allows for smooth and nearly silent autofocusing in video mode, a valuable feature for DSLR filmmakers.

Size and Weight

As is evident by the image atop this post, the Canon 24-105L IS II is the longest lens in this comparison, the Sigma 24-105 Art is the widest and the 24-105 IS STM is the shortest. Indiscernible by the picture, the Sigma Art lens is also the heaviest.

While there are minor differences, as reiterated throughout this comparison, image quality is not likely a determining factor when deciding among these lenses. As such, other factors – such as max aperture, image stabilization performance, weather sealing and price – become more prominent factors.

With all things considered, most will find the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM to be the best fit for their needs as long as the budget stretches to its (very reasonable) price tag. If the budget is limited, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM and Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG HSM Art remain very solid options, with the Canon lens being our preference thanks to its weather sealed design. On the other hand, if DSLR filmmaking is a high priority, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM will likely be the best choice, forgoing the f/4 constant maximum aperture in favor of a smooth and quiet AF system.

Those looking to invest in a 400mm telephoto lens have a several options available for consideration. One such option available is the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens. And while the telephoto zoom is certainly a versatile option, opting for a 400mm prime lens over the zoom alternative will typically either a) give you a wider maximum aperture at that particular focal length or b) save you some cash (but unfortunately, those benefits seem to be mutually exclusive).

Before we get started, it's important to note that I wouldn't necessarily consider wide-open image quality to be a differentiating factor among the 400mm prime lenses in this comparison. While there are certainly differences, all perform very well. With that in mind, let's take a look at the notable benefits/drawbacks associated with each of the 400mm prime candidates.

The Canon EF 400 f/2.8L IS II USM is the biggest, heaviest and priciest 400mm prime option. However, there's another "-est" descriptor that justifies this lens' price tag for many professional photographers – "widest." The 400L IS II's f/2.8 maximum aperture is 2-stops wider than most zoom lenses including the 400mm focal length, and 1-stop wider than the formidable EF 400mm DO IS II model. This lens is unparalleled when action stopping shutter speeds are necessary, especially in locations where the available light is less than abundant. Of course, the background blur at f/2.8 is noticeably stronger than it is at f/4 or f/5.6, with the benefit of stronger subject isolation. As you might expect, this lens is built for the needs of professionals with weather sealing and excellent AF performance.

Speaking of AF, a 3-position focus limiter switch allows focusing distances to be limited to a specific distance range - or to be unlimited: 8.85' - 23' (2.7m - 7m), 23' (7m) - ∞, 8.85' (2.7m) - ∞. Limiting the focus distance range can improve focus lock times and reduce focus hunting. Autofocus Stop buttons near the objective lens allow autofocus to be temporarily stopped. The Autofocus Stop feature makes it easy to obtain focus lock, turn off autofocus and recompose for a framing that places the active focus point(s) off of the subject.

The 400L IS II features a 4-stop IS (image stabilization) system with normal, panning and tracking modes available (Modes 1, 2 & 3 respectively). And while I mentioned image quality wasn't necessarily a differentiating factor in this comparison, the 400 f/2.8L IS II edges out the other two in most regards.

As noted, a high price isn't the only compromise one must accept to gain a wide, f/2.8 aperture at this focal length; consequently, this lens is neither small nor light. With the hood installed, the 400L IS II weighs in at 143.7 oz (4070g) with and is 7.68 x 13.8" (195.1 x 350.5mm) with the hood reversed for storage. While this lens can be used handheld, most will likely need a solid tripod or, at the very least, a monopod for comfortable medium-to-long-term use. Support/stabilizing gear necessary for long-term use will of course add to the size and weight storage/transport requirements when traveling with the lens.

If price is no object and small size and weight are not priorities, this is the ultimate 400mm option.

It's not often that a lens measuring 6.32 x 9.45” (160.45 x 240.13mm) and weighing in at 80 oz (2265g) (with hood) can be considered small and lightweight, but... everything is relative. Compared to its massive f/2.8 big brother, the Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM Lens' size and weight are quite manageable considering its focal length and f/4 max. aperture, allowing for much longer periods of handheld use before fatigue takes its toll. This lens' diffractive optics elements allow for a very compact design that sports and wildlife photographers will especially appreciate.

The 400 DO IS II features a 3-position focus limiter switch with the following settings: 10.8' - 26.2' (3.3m - 8m), 26.2' - 8 (8m - ∞) and 10.8' - ∞ (3.3m - ∞). Autofocus Stop buttons are also included near the objective lens and allow autofocus to be temporarily stopped. Like the 400 f/2.8L IS II, the 400 DO IS II is weather sealed and features a 3-Mode, 4-stop IS system.

While an f/4 maximum aperture may not be considered "wide," the moderately-wide max. aperture combined with this lens' IS system makes for a very versatile tool that's reasonably sized for handheld shooting. Bird, wildlife and sports photographers will often forgo the f/2.8 maximum aperture to enjoy the smaller size, weight and price benefits associated with the f/4 DO IS II option.

Representing the lowest tier in Canon's 400mm primes in size, weight, max. aperture and price is the Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM. Note that I didn't list "image quality" in the preceding list as the 400 f/5.6L is no slouch from an image quality perspective. That a lens designed nearly 25 years ago can perform compete so well with the 400L IS II (released only 6 years ago) is impressive, to say the least.

The most alluring aspects of the 400 f/5.6L, aside from the focal length shared by the other lenses in this comparison, are its small size, light weight and comparatively low price. The 400 f/5.6L measures 3.54 x 10.44” (90.04 x 265.17mm) (with hood unextended) and weighs in at only 47.7 oz (1351g). While the 400 DO IS II is shorter with its hood reversed, the 400 f/5.6L's diameter is significantly smaller and it weighs 32.3 oz (915.7g) less than the DO II model, making it significantly easier to travel with and use handheld for long periods of time.

On the downside, image stabilization is not a feature of this lens and it is only partially weather sealed (a lens mount gasket is not present, but the switches and focusing ring have moderate dust and moisture resistance). The lack of IS means that notably higher shutter speeds (up to 4-stops greater) will need to be utilized to negate camera shake compared to the other lenses mentioned above.

And speaking of the sealed switches, this lens only has two: an autofocus/manual focus switch and a focus limiter switch with settings of 11.48' (3.5m) - ∞ and 27.89' (8.5m) - ∞.

Without IS and a wider maximum aperture, the f/5.6 model's high image quality combined with its low price will represent the primary reasons why photographers choose it over one of the other 400mm prime options as well as the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM (which features the same max. aperture at 400mm).

Size Comparison Images

While I mentioned the sizes of the lenses detailed above, the comparison images below will put those numbers into relative context. The first image (also displayed atop this post) shows the lenses in their ready-for-the-gear-bag form with hoods reversed (or not extended).

As I mentioned in the introductory paragraph, while there are certainly small differences in image quality (including sharpness, vignetting, flare and [less so] distortion), most will not consider IQ to be a differentiating factor between the 400mm prime candidates listed above. Instead, the significant differences in price found in the available choices directly correlates to the max. apertures available, the inclusion of image stabilization and (to some extent) the amount of weather sealing featured in the lens' design. Ultimately, your max. aperture needs, size/weight requirements and budget limitations will be the most important factors in determining which of these lenses is the ideal addition for your kit.

Purchase Links

Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens – B&H | Amazon | Adorama
Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM Lens – B&H | Amazon | Adorama
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens – B&H | Amazon | Adorama

Rental Links

Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens – LensRentals | LensProToGo
Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM Lens – LensRentals | LensProToGo
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens – LensRentals | LensProToGo

If you currently have a Rebel/***D or **D series camera, the Canon EOS 6D and EOS 7D Mark II will likely be considered prime upgrade candidates as you look to expand your imaging capabilities. As such, let's take a look at these two DSLR bodies to see which upgrade option may be right for your needs.

First, let's take a quick look at the EOS 6D's benefits over the 7D Mark II:

• Full frame sensor capable of cleaner imagery at higher ISOs
• Larger ISO range: Auto (100-25600), 100-25600, L: 50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400 vs. Auto (100-16000), 100-16000, H1: 25600, H2: 51200
• Built-in Wi-Fi
• Higher battery life: Approx. 1090 (at 23°C, AE 50%, FE 50%) vs. 670
• Slightly smaller/lighter: 5.7 x 4.4 x 2.8" (144.5 x 110.5 x 71.2mm), 26.6 oz (755g) vs. 5.85 x 4.43 x 3.08" (148.6 x 112.4 x 78.2mm), 32.10 oz (910g)

Now let's check out the EOS 7D Mark II's benefits over the 6D:

• Compatability with EF-S lenses
• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor
• Pop-up master flash vs. No flash
• Headphone socket vs. None
• Multi-controller joystick & AF area selector vs. None
• More powerful image processing: Dual DIGIC 6 vs. DIGIC 5+
• More advanced AF system: 65-point all cross-type AF (f/2.8 dual cross-type AF point at center) vs. 11 points (f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8)
• More advanced metering system: 252 zone Dual Layer SPC vs. 63 zone Dual Layer SPC
• More sensitive metering range: EV 0 – 20 (at 73°F/23°C and ISO 100) vs. EV 1 – 20
• Faster continuous shooting and larger buffer: Max 10 fps (infinite JPEG, 31 RAW) vs. 4.5 fps (1250 JPEG, 17 RAW)
• Faster max. shutter speed: 1/8000 sec. vs. 1/4000
• Larger viewfinder coverage: 100% vs. 97%
• More movie encoding options: .MOV & .MP4 (max. 1920 x 1080 [59.94, 50 fps] inter-frame) vs. .MOV (max. 1920 x 1080 [29.97, 25 fps] intra or inter frame), no .MP4 option
• Faster Interface: SuperSpeed USB 3.0 vs. Hi-Speed USB 2.0
• Dual Memory Cards: CompactFlash (UDMA 7 compatible) & SD/SDHC/SDXC (UHS-I) vs. SD/SDHC/SDXC (UHS-I) only

At the heart of it, you're looking at a comparison between Canon's low-end, budget conscious full-frame camera and their high-end, top-of-the-line APS-C model. Based on Canon's historical naming conventions, the camera bodies' names suggest the the EOS 6D is placed just above the 7D Mark II in the lineup spectrum, but that's simply a sensor-based categorization. Otherwise, as is clearly evident, the 7D Mark II provides a significant superset of features over 6D.

There are two key differentiators that usually appear in our camera comparisons – resolution and price – which remain unlisted above. In this case, these attributes fail to be differentiating factors between these particular cameras. Both DSLRs feature the same 20.2 MP resolution (although the 6D's sensor is larger, providing a larger pixel pitch) and both are priced similarly (the 7D II's MSRP is $100.00 USD higher, although instant and/or mail-in rebates can level out pricing).

Who should opt for the EOS 6D?

If you are looking for the absolute best image quality, especially at higher ISOs, you will certainly benefit from the 6D's full frame sensor. If who want a true 35mm angle of view from Canon's EF, TS-E & MP-E lenses, the choice is easy – get the 6D. If you want built-in Wi-Fi, the EOS 7D Mark II doesn't have it; the 6D does. The 6D makes for an excellent dedicated studio/portraiture body. Although the 6D is slightly smaller and lighter than the 7D II, I wouldn't necessarily consider it compelling differentiator between the two bodies.

Who should opt for the EOS 7D Mark II?

With a myriad of features not included in the EOS 6D, the 7D Mark II could be considered the jack-of-all-trades in this comparison. And if you're upgrading from another APS-C body, the 7D II allows for a seamless transition because of its compatibility with designed-for-crop-sensor, EF-S lenses, while still being compatible with EF, TS-E & MP-E lenses.

If you shoot sports or wildlife, you'll love the 7D II's advanced AF system and substantially faster 10 fps burst rate. If you're interested in filmmaking with your DSLR, the 7D II's expanded movie options, headphone socket and excellent Dual Pixel CMOS AF – allowing for superb focus tracking in movie mode – are huge benefits.

Aside from the advanced AF system, faster burst rate and impressive movie options, the 7D II's dual memory card slots is another feature that I consider to be a significant benefit over the 6D. The extra memory card slot provides the benefit of redundancy should a memory card become corrupted (or otherwise unavailable due to forgetfulness). If redundancy is not needed, the extra memory card slot can provide up to twice the storage available for use. And if the benefits of redundant/more storage are deemed unnecessary, you can always throw a Canon W-E1 Wireless Adapter in the SD card slot for the benefits it provides.

Summary

As is typical of Canon DSLRs, each of these cameras can easily be utilized to create stunning imagery. Your personal priorities and intended subject matter will ultimately determine which of these bodies is the best investment for capitalizing on your photographic opportunities. Hopefully, the comparison above has provided some insight into which of these bodies is the right addition for your camera kit. If not, check out Bryan's full reviews for more in-depth information on these (and many more) cameras.

If stepping up from a crop sensor camera like the EOS 80D or a Rebel-series camera, there are two full frame Canon DSLRs outside of the 1-series that one might consider – the EOS 5D Mark IV and EOS 6D. Both offer a step up in high ISO image quality afforded by a larger full frame sensor, but feature gap between them is as significant as the price gap. Let's dig a little deeper to see which body might be the better option for your needs and budget.

Before we analyze the differences between the two bodies, let's first take a look at the features they have in common:

• Full frame 1.0x 35mm field of view with EF lenses
• Excellent high-ISO image quality
• AF working range: EV -3 - 18
• Autofocus Microadjustment
• AEB: 2, 3, 5 or 7 Shots +/-3 EV 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments
• Viewfinder: Pentaprism, approx. 0.71x magnification
• Exposure compensation: +/- 3EV in 1/2 or 1/3 increments
• Top LCD Panel: Yes
• Wi-Fi and GPS: Built-in

From an image quality perspective (assuming a properly in-focus subject), the two bodies perform very similarly (disregarding differences in resolution). And from that standpoint, either body can serve as a very compelling upgrade for those stepping up from a 1.6x crop sensor camera like the **D or Rebel/***D/****D series. With that in mind, let's take a look at the specific benefits of each DSLR.

Benefits of the Canon EOS 6D over the 5D Mark IV

• Smaller size/lower weight: 5.7 x 4.4 x 2.8" (144.5 x 110.5 x 71.2mm), 26.6 oz (755g) vs. 5.9 x 4.6 x 3.0" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm), 31.4 oz (890g)
• Better battery life: Approx 1090 shots vs. 900 (at 23°C/73°F, AE 50%, FE 50%)
• Significantly lower price

Benefits of the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV over the EOS 6D

• More resolution: 30.4 MP vs. 20.2
• Newer image processor: DIGIC 6+ vs. DIGIC 5+
• Dual Pixel CMOS AF: Yes vs. No
• Better AF system: 61 Point / max of 41 cross-type AF points inc. 5 dual cross type at f/2.8 and 61 points / 21 cross-type AF points at f/8 vs. 11 points inc. f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8
• Better metering system: Approx. 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 252-zone metering vs. TTL full aperture metering with 63 zone Dual Layer SPC
• Higher Metering Range: EV 0 – 20 vs. EV 1 – 20
• Higher max. shutter speed: 1/8000 sec vs. 1/4000
• Faster continuous shooting/higher buffer: Max. approx. 7fps. with full AF / AE tracking, speed maintained for up to unlimited number of JPEGs or 21 RAW images vs. max. approx. 4.5fps. with full AF / AE tracking, speed maintained for up to 1250 JPEGs or 17 RAW images
• More memory card slots: 2 (CompactFlash, SD/SDHC/SDXC) vs. 1 (SD/SDHC/SDXC)
• Selectable auto white balance setting: AWB (ambience priority, white priority) vs. AWB (ambience priority)
• Larger viewfinder coverage: Approx. 100% vs. 97%
• Better mirror assembly: Motor driven quick-return half mirror vs. quick-return half mirror
• Higher shutter durability rating: 150,000 shots vs. 100,000
• Light flicker detection and shutter timing: Yes vs. No
• Better LCD: Touch screen 3.2" (8.10cm) Clear View LCD II, approx. 1620K dots vs. 3.0" (7.7cm) Clear View TFT, approx. 1040K dots
• Slightly faster flash sync speed: 1/200 sec. vs. 1/180 sec.
• Higher max. movie resolution and frame rates: 4K (17:9) 4096 x 2160 (29.97, 25, 24, 23.98 fps) Motion JPEG, FHD (16:9) 1920 x 1080 (59.94, 50, 29.97, 25, 23.98 fps) intra or inter frame vs. FHD (16:9) 1920 x 1080 (29.97, 25, 23.976 fps) intra or inter frame
• NFC: Yes vs. No
• Faster interface: SuperSpeed USB 3.0 vs. Hi-Speed USB 2.0
• Headphone socket: Yes vs. No

While it's obvious from above that the EOS 5D Mark IV is a full featured, advanced DSLR with numerous benefits over the 6D, the 5D IV's superior feature set results in a significant price differential in respect to Canon's entry-level full frame DSLR. How significant? Considering current manufacturer suggested retail pricing (without rebates), you could purchase two Canon EOS 6D DSLRs in place of a single 5D Mark IV (and still have a little money left over).

It's difficult to deny that the 5D IV is a general purpose powerhouse, with the ability to cover a wide range of situations including sports (thanks to its faster frame rate & flicker avoidance), wildlife (due to the advanced AF system and cropping ability afforded by its higher resolution), architecture, portraiture, event photography and... well, just about everything else. But if you're upgrading to a full frame camera for the first time, or otherwise are looking to add a backup camera to your full frame capable kit, then the EOS 6D represents an excellent value for the feature set it does have and the image quality it is capable of.

Of course, the 5D IV would be an easy recommendation for many enthusiast/advanced/pro photographers. However, one's budget and primary photographic disciplines must be considered. For instance, if you're a wedding photographer, you could easily make the case for investing in two EOS 6D bodies rather than purchasing on a single EOS 5D Mark IV (we recommend always having a backup body for wedding/event photography purposes). Or, if you're a hobbyist who is uninterested in DSLR video recording and does not intend on needing/wanting the majority of the 5D IV's benefits, then the EOS 6D will ultimately be the better choice.

For everyone else, there's the 5D Mark IV.

If upgrading from a Rebel/***D series camera, or even an earlier **D model (like the EOS 60D), the Canon EOS 80D and EOS 5D Mark IV can each provide unique benefits that make them sensible upgrade candidates. So let's break down the differences to see which body provides the right upgrade path for you.

Let's first look at the EOS 80D as it will likely provide an easy, seamless transition for those who are already using a crop-sensor camera such as a Rebel/****D/***D/**D. By "seamless transition," I mean that all of your current lenses should be compatible with the 80D. I say "should" because there's a very small chance that some older third-party lenses may not be fully compatible with bodies released after their manufacture.

And make no mistake, compatibility with EF-S lenses can be a significant benefit. Lenses designed specifically for crop sensor cameras are generally smaller, lighter and less expenisve than their designed-for-full-frame counterparts. Of course, EF-S lenses do have their drawbacks, such as often a lower build quality and a lack of weather sealing.

Now let's look at the 80D's benefits over the 5D Mark IV:

• Built-in Master Flash: Yes vs. N/A
• Higher Continuous Shooting Buffer (RAW): 25 RAW vs. 21
• LCD: Vari-angle Touch Screen vs. Fixed
• More Custom Functions: 26 vs. 17
• Higher Battery Life: Approx. 960 shots vs. 900
• Smaller Size: 5.47 x 4.14 x 3.09" (139.0 x 105.2 x 78.5mm) vs. 5.93 x 4.58 x 2.99" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm)
• Lighter Weight: 25.75 oz (730g) vs. 31.4 oz (890g)
• Compatible Mounts: EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E Lenses vs. EF, TS-E & MP-E
• Significantly Lower Price

Of the benefits listed above, the most compelling for most consumers is the significantly lower price. In fact, you could nearly purchase (3) EOS 80Ds for the price of a single 5D Mark IV at MSRP (without rebates).

That kind of price differential brings the 5D Mark IV's numerous benefits into perspective. And while we're on the subject, let's take a look at the 5D Mark IV's benefits over the 80D:

• Higher Resolution: 30.4 MP vs. 24.2
• Image Processor: DIGIC 6+ vs. DIGIC 6
• Better High ISO Results (example: comparison @ ISO 6400)
• More AF Points: 61 Point / 41 cross-type AF points inc. 5 dual cross type at f/2.8 and 61 points / 21 cross-type AF points at f/8 vs. 45 cross-type AF points inc. center dual cross type at f/2.8 and 27 points / 9 cross-type at f/8
• Metering Sensor: Approx. 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 252-zone metering vs. 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, metering with the area divided into 63 segments (9×7)
• Lower Light Metering Range: EV 0 – 20 vs. EV 1 – 20
• Larger ISO Range: 100-32000, L:50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400 vs. 100-16000, H: 25600
• More Durable Shutter: 150,000 shots vs. 100,000
• Higher Continuous Buffer (JPEG): Unlimited JPEGS vs. 110
• Higher Max. Video Resolution: 4K (17:9) 4096 x 2160 vs. Full HD (16:9) 1920 x 1080
• GPS: Built-in vs. optional accessory
• Mult-controller (Joystick): Yes vs. N/A
• Faster USB: Super-speed 3.0 vs. High-speed 2.0
• Memory Cards: CompactFlash Type I (UDMA 7 compatible) & SD/SDHC/SDXC (UHS-I) cards vs. SD, SDHC or SDXC (UHS-I)
• Body Materials: Magnesium Alloy vs. Polycarbonate resin with glass fiber

One benefit I did not list for the 80D is the FOVCF (Field of View Crop Factor). Because the 80D's sensor is smaller than the full frame sensor found in the 5D Mark IV, it captures a narrower angle of view at the same focal length compared to the 5D Mark IV. A good description of the effect can be found in our Field of View Crop Factor page:

Although the physical focal length of a lens is not actually changed on a FOVCF camera, the subject framing certainly is. By multiplying the lens focal length (or focal length range) by the FOVCF, you get the full-frame focal length lens subject framing equivalent when used at the same distance. For example, if you are looking for similar framing that a 50mm lens (the classic "normal" lens) provides on a full-frame (1.0x crop factor) SLR body, you probably want a 35mm lens on your 1.6x FOVCF body. 35mm x 1.6 = similar framing to a 56mm lens on a full-frame camera body. This focal length is often referred to as the "Effective Focal Length". The lens is still a 35mm lens, but your final image will only include a crop of the lens' complete image.

Where the 80D's FOVCF becomes especially problematic is wide angle photography. Because crop sensor cameras provide a narrower angle of view at the same focal length compared to full frame cameras, wide angle views are sacraficed when using full frame compatible lenses on the 80D.

A big advantage of the larger full frame sensor camera is the ability to create a stronger background blur. Because a longer focal length is required for the 5D IV to create the same subject framing as the APS-C format 80D, the background can be more diffusely blurred in comparison.

So which DSLR should you get between the two bodies compared above? As usual, one's personal preferences, specific needs and budget will provide the answer. That the 5D Mark IV is the more capable, better spec'd body is an easy conclusion. However, the price difference between the 80D and 5D Mark IV is substantial, and one must be able to justify the 5D IV's superset of features to justify the higher investment.

Those who may be easily able to justify the 5D IV's higher investment include photographers who primarily appreciate the camera's better image quality including cleaner high ISO results and higher resolution, increased shutter durability, dual memory card slots, wider angles of view and 4K recording capability. And for those photographers who don't feel that the 5D IV's benefits are worth the incremental price difference over the 80D can enjoy the wealth of features afforded by the crop sensor camera at roughly 1/3 the cost.

With two excellent, similarly-priced general purpose zooms available for Canon users, both of which feature an f/4 maximum aperture, weather sealing, great AF performance and image stabilization, choosing between the EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM and EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM can be a challenge.

The primary and significant advantage held by the 24-105 f/4L IS II is the extra 35mm of focal length range on the long end.

The 24-70 f/4L IS is a smaller and slightly lighter lens. It is 0.99" (25mm) shorter when retracted (actual measured length) and 1.25" (31.8mm) shorter with the hood installed. The 24-70 weighs 6.7 oz. (189.9g) less with hood installed (actual measured weight). Are these differences? Yes. Are they significant ones? Possibly.

For many, a more significant advantage of the 24-70 is its very impressive macro capability. A 0.70x maximum magnification from a non-prime-macro lens is eye-opening and significantly more impressive than the 24-105L II's 0.24x spec. However, it should be kept in mind that a 12mm extension tube can push the 24-105 to 0.60x maximum magnification. Disclaimer: I have not made an image quality comparison with the extension tube in play.

Image quality comparisons I have made show that:

The lenses are more similar than they are different in terms of sharpness. The 24-70 has less CA at 24mm, but more at 70mm. The two lenses have a similar amount of vignetting aside from at 24mm where the 24-105 has an advantage even stopped down. The 24-105 shows less flare effects while the 24-70 has less linear distortion.

Affecting image quality on a limited basis is the aperture blade count. The 24-70 has 9 blades vs. the 24-105 L's 10. This difference will primarily be noticed when point light sources are photographed at narrow apertures, with the odd blade numbered aperture creating 18-point sun stars vs the even's 10-point stars.

On the whole, I would not consider image quality to be a primary differentiating factor between these two lenses.

There is a minor difference in these lens' IS systems. The 24-70 features Canon's 4-stop Hybrid Image Stabilization, correcting both angular and shift movement in macro mode. The 24-105 L has 4-stop non-Hybrid Image Stabilization.

The Price

If price remains a deciding factor for you ... the Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM's retail price is slightly lower than the freshly released EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM's, though rebates will likely increase or decrease the price differential from time to time.

Get your Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM Lens or Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens from B&H.

If you are considering the purchase of the Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM Lens or the Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM Lens, you are likely a discerning photographer pursuing sports action or wildlife.

While there are other uses for these lenses, these are by far the most commonly photographed subjects with these focal lengths. While no one will consider these lenses inexpensive, no one will consider the image quality they deliver to be anything short of stellar and image quality is not a differentiator here. Those who know what they want, want these lenses. While having both of these big whites in the kit would be perfect, most of us cannot afford or justify the purchase of both. Thus, the question of "Which one?" arises.

The obvious (and only) difference in the names of these lenses is the focal length number. These lenses were announced at the same time, arrived on my doorstep on the same delivery, appear very similar and indeed share the same overall design concepts and construction materials. Those wanting as much reach as possible will of course want the 600mm option.

But, sometimes a selected focal length can be too long. A too-narrow angle of view may make it too hard to quickly find a subject in the viewfinder, hard to keep a subject in the frame (especially if it is in-motion) and, if framed too tightly, important parts of a scene may be cropped from the frame. Because APS-C-format cameras have smaller imaging sensors and therefore use a smaller portion of the image circle provided by these lenses, they "see" an angle of view equivalent to a 1.6x longer lens on a full frame body. Thus, on an APS-C body, these lenses frame a scene similar to a 800mm and 960mm lens on a full frame body and at these angles of view, "too long" comes more frequently.

Similarly, a focal length can be too short. Too short is usually the result of not being able to get close enough to a subject. Reasons for this situation include physical barriers (a fence, a body of water), subjects that are not more closely approachable (wildlife tends to be uncomfortable with us nearby) and safety (dangerous wildlife, unsafe proximity to race cars). Too short usually results in an image being cropped with a lower resolution image remaining.

Another focal length related tip to consider is that, the longer the focal length, the longer the time span a moving subject is likely to remain in near-ideal framing. Without a zoom range available to quickly fine tune framing, prime lens-captured images often require cropping in post processing. However, the longer focal length lens has a narrower angle of view, which requires you to be farther from the subject for optimal framing and at that longer distance, an approaching or departing subject changes size in the frame at a slower rate. That means more images can be captured within the period of time with optimal framing. For the same reason, a larger physical area can be ideally-covered by the longer focal length – such as a larger portion of a soccer or football field. While the difference between 500mm and 600mm is not dramatic in this regard, the 600mm lens has an advantage.

Another benefit provided by a longer focal length is greater-enlarged background details, meaning that a longer focal length can create a stronger background blur. The 600mm lens can create a stronger separation of a subject from its background than the 500mm lens can. Most of us love an extremely blurred background and the longer focal length makes it easier to produce (though both of these lenses rank very highly for this purpose).

A longer focal length means a longer camera-to-subject distance and with more atmosphere placed between a lens and its subject, there is an increased likelihood that heat waves will cause image distortion. The longer working distance required by the longer focal length also provides more opportunity for obstructions, such as tree branches to get between the lens and, for example, a wildlife subject. The longer subject distance also delivers a slightly more-compressed perspective, creating a slightly different look to the subject (not necessary a benefit to either lens specifically).

Although focal length is typically my first priority for choosing a lens, it is not always the most important. In this lens comparison, there is a substantial size, weight and price differential that can sometimes be more important than the differences already discussed.

The site's lens specifications comparison tool has a detailed comparison between these lenses, but here is a quick look:

How old are you? How old do you want to become? How do you want to feel when you get that old? Safe to say is that all of us are getting older and also safe to say is that most of us reach a maximum strength point somewhere far prior to reaching the age we hope to survive until. And, how we feel at the end goal date is partially conditional on how we treat our bodies during the younger years. Just because you can handhold a 600mm f/4 lens for long periods of time now does not mean that you should do this and the strain placed on our bodies now may be long-lasting. If you are not able to use a lens support most of the time, the 500mm option is going to be the better option for most.

Size also matters, but when lenses get this big, the size differences don't seem to matter so much. Smaller is better, but neither is close to what I would consider small. You will likely find the biggest size difference to be in the volume of comments generated on the sidelines and the case size required by the lens. That said, I frequently carry the 600 with me on airplanes (in the USA), typically using the MindShift Gear FirstLight 40L and always as carry-on. With the 500, a modestly smaller case can be used or slightly more can be included in the same case.

The size difference between these lenses is apparent in the product comparison image accompanying this post. See the same comparison with the lens hoods on here (and also compare these lenses to other models).

The 500mm focal length is 83% as long as 600mm and the similarity factor for a majority of the above-discussed differences is about the same. One exception is the price factor, with that one dropping to just below the 80% mark. While neither lens is inexpensive, the 500 costs considerably less than the 600 and that factor alone will be the basis for this decision for some. That quality lenses typically hold their value well means that overall cost of ownership is not as bad as it first appears.

Recommendations

Most often, I recommend the 600mm lens for full frame bodies and the 500mm lens for APS-C bodies, though there are some exceptions.

If photographing big field sports such as soccer, the 600mm lens is my choice for a full frame camera and I would rather have the 500mm lens on an APS-C body.

Those photographing small birds will likely find the 600 preferable in front of any camera.

Those needing to handhold the lens with any frequency probably should select the 500mm option.

The Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM Lens is one of the most important and most used lenses in my kit (primarily composed of full frame cameras). Many of my favorite images can be attributed to this lens, from irreplaceable memories of the kids playing soccer to captures of incredible wildlife in the mountains. The weight of this lens is a definite downside and I have more-than-once become worn out from carrying it, but ... the results are worth every bit of the effort.

To Learn More About These Lenses

Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM Lens Review
Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM Lens Review

Better Yet, Add One of These Lenses to Your Kit

Get the Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM Lens at: B&H | Adorama | Amazon
Get the Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM Lens at: B&H | Adorama | Amazon

Add One to Your Kit Temporarily

What are you doing this weekend? Spend some time getting to know and having fun with these big white lenses without the large price tag. Try renting! Lensrentals.com has the Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM Lens and Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM Lens ready to ship to your doorstep.

by Sean Setters

A few short years ago, there were no super telephoto zooms featuring a 150-600mm focal length range. How things have changed...

In 2013, Tamron introduced the 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD, an affordable super telephoto zoom with a huge and versatile focal length range. The following year saw Sigma introducing a pair of similar lenses – the 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports & Contemporary models. Now Tamron has released an update to their original lens, adding a "G2" tag to the name.

Considering that neither Canon nor Nikon makes a native 150-600mm lens, it seems a bit odd to be spoiled for choice in this particular market segment. However, that's exactly what's happened. The third party manufacturers have solidly filled a niche that the big two lens manufacturers have yet to fill.

With so many options available, you may be wondering which one is the right lens for you. Read on for our take on this interesting crop of lenses.

Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD Lens and
Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 Lens

The lens that started it all, the Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD Lens, burst onto the scenes in 2013 and was immediately a popular choice for sports and wildlife photographers whose budgets did not extend to the Canon big white telephoto lens range. Its price-to-performance ratio makes it an excellent value.

This lens is sharpest in the middle of its focal length range with less sharp results produced at its widest and longest extents. Unfortunately, this lens turns in its worst performance at 600mm, an important factor considering that most consumers purchasing a 150-600mm lens likely intend to utilize the longest focal length a significant percentage of the time.

The Tamron 150-600 G1's vignetting performance is typically mild for lenses in its class, showing roughly 1-1.5 stops of corner shading when used on full frame cameras. Flare is fairly well controlled. You may notice mild pincushion distortion if straight lines are near the long edges of your frame.

Important for a lens such is this is weather sealing, and indeed Tamron's initial 150-600mm offering has a level of weather sealing. Like three of the four lenses in this comparison, the Tamron 150-600 G1 features a 95mm front filter thread. Filters of this size are certainly not inexpensive, but... compatibility with filters makes for a more versatile lens. Some may find Tamron's zooming mechanism, which rotates in the opposite direction compared to Canon lenses (Nikon standard), a bit frustrating.

Focusing is probably the weakest aspect of this lens. The Tamron 150-600 G1 we tested sometimes failed to lock on to a subject in good light even with a high contrast and accuracy consistency was not stellar. The good news is that Tamron eventually issued a firmware update to improve focus performance. We did not retest the lens, but initial reports suggested the AF performance was improved. The bad news is that, unlike its successor, this lens will require a trip to Tamron's service department to modify the firmware should an upgrade be necessary.

One obvious advantage of this lens is its budget-friendly price.

In a rather surprising move, Tamron released the 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2 (Generation 2) Lens only 3 years after the introduction of its predecessor. Improvements included increased sharpness and contrast in the shorter and longer focal length ranges (with the middle focal length range remaining similar), an updated exterior design with metal construction, better AF and VC performance, a new zoom lock mechanism and compatibility with Tamron's new TAP-in console.

Differences in vignetting, flare and distortion are largely insignificant between the G2 version and its predecessor, which is somewhat surprising considering they feature different optical formulas. Lateral Chromatic Aberration (LatCA) is moderately apparent in both of these lenses, though correcting the issue in post processing is typically quite easy.

With the ability to update the lens' firmware and adjust focus parameters, the G2 version allows for more flexibility and peace of mind for its users. For those needing focal lengths beyond 600mm, the G2 has new dedicated 1.4x and 2x teleconverters available.

Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary Lens and
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens

Sigma made a big splash in September 2014 when they announced two 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Global Vision lenses at the same time, featuring a Contemporary model and a higher grade Sports model.

Before we can quantify the differences between the Sigma models and Tamron models, we first need to see how the two Sigma models stack up against one another. Here's a brief rundown of the main differences:

• Sports lens is roughly 2x more expensive
• Sports lens has 24 elements in 16 groups while the Contemporary has 20 in 14
• Sports lens has two FLD ("F" Low Dispersion with performance similar to fluorite) and three SLD (Special Low Dispersion) glass elements vs. one FLD and three SLD glass elements
• Sports lens is significantly more-ruggedly constructed – alloy barrel and lens hood vs. composite
• Sports lens is moderately larger
• Sports lens is significantly heavier – 6.96 lbs vs. 4.49 lbs (3.16kg vs. 2.04kg)
• Sports lens has a larger, smoother manual focus ring
• Sports lens has dust & splash proof "construction" while the Contemporary has a dust & splash proof "mount"
• Sports lens has a stronger, non-removeable tripod ring vs. removeable on the Contemporary
• Contemporary lens has a 1/3 stop wider aperture over a small subset of the focal length range
• Contemporary lens utilizes smaller filters – 95mm vs. 105mm

From a sharpness perspective, the 150-600 Contemporary lens edges out its Sports counterpart until 600mm where the Sports version is slightly better. Full frame camera owners will experience roughly 2 stops of vignetting in the extreme corners with both lenses. However, the Sports lens' vignetting is more gradual and encroaches farther into the center of the frame compared to the Contemporary lens (which has sharper falloff around the edges). While both lenses turn in average performances when it comes to flare, the Contemporary version features more contrast when the sun is in the corner of the frame. Both lenses show very slight pincushion distortion over the entire focal length range.

A benefit shared by both lenses is compatibility with Sigma's USB Dock, allowing for easy end-user firmware updates and access to customizable focus options.

Feature Comparison & Max Aperture by Focal Length

Below is a feature comparison chart followed by the available maximum apertures by focal length for the lenses discussed above.

With all of these lenses featuring identical focal length/aperture ranges and similar features (like vibration/optical stabilization), other lens aspects become the prominent differentiating factors. And, even image quality is close enough among the group to not be a major decision factor. Here's how we would rank each lens based on our own personal experience:

Image Quality

1. Sigma 150-600 Contemporary & Tamron 150-600 G2
2. Sigma 150-600 Sports
3. Tamron 150-600 G1

1. Tamron 150-600 G2 & Sigma 150-600 Sports
2. Tamron 150-600 G1
3. Sigma 150-600 Contemporary

1. Sigma 150-600 Sports & Tamron 150-600 G2
2. Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
3. Tamron 150-600 G1

1. Sigma 150-600 Contemporary
2. Tamron 150-600 G2
3. Tamron 150-600 G1
4. Sigma 150-600 Sports

If you do not need weather sealing, it's difficult to top the value offered by the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary lens. It's only slightly less expensive than the Tamron 150-600 G1 (the least expensive lens in this group) yet offers class-leading image quality and customizability via Sigma's USB Dock. If weather sealing and focus consistency are a priority, the Sigma 150-600 Sports and Tamron 150-600 G2 should be your top considerations, with the deciding factor likely being the price-to-image-quality performance ratio desired. And lastly, the lens that started it all – the Tamron 150-600 G1 – still remains a good choice if one's budget is the primary limiting factor.

The following cameras have been added to the site's Camera Comparison Images:

• Canon EOS M5
• Canon EOS M3
• Canon EOS M10
• Sony a7R II

B&H carries the Canon EOS M3 / M5 / M10 and Sony a7R II mirrorless cameras.

A 24-70mm zoom is the quintessential general purpose lens for full frame camera users. The versatility afforded by the focal length range makes it well suited to a huge number of tasks including travel, lifestyle, documentary, architecture, wedding and event photography. Countless photojournalists have built careers on the pictures created with their 24-70mm lenses.

Largely because of the focal length range's popularity, just about every major manufacturer makes a version (or two) of the 24-70mm lens to satisfy customer demand. And most of the lenses we will be comparing today feature an f/2.8 constant maximum aperture which further adds to the lenses' versatility. Using an f/2.8 aperture will allow you to freeze motion in half as much light (at the same ISO setting) as an f/4 aperture. That's why a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens has been so popular with wedding photographers; when ambient light levels are low (as in a church or reception area), the wide f/2.8 aperture can be used to help stop motion at tolerably high ISO levels.

So which lens is right for you? Well, let's find out.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens

The EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM became the Canon general purpose when it was introduced in 2002. The lens quickly gained favor for its versatile focal length range (being 4mm wider than the 28-70L) and wide, constant f/2.8 aperture. A decade later, Canon introduced the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, a worthy successor to the ultra-popular 24-70mm lens it replaced with improvements to image sharpness, vignetting and AF speed. A disapointment to us was that Canon decided not to include image stabilization as one of the upgraded features, claiming that excellent image quality was paramount in this release.

The 24-70L II is impressively sharp in the center throughout its focal length range with very good contrast. Corner performance slightly trails the center until f/5.6 where even sharpness is obtained. With more elements than its predecessor, it doesn't fair quite as well in the flare department. The 24-70 L II exhibits typical distortion in its class, with moderate barrel distortion at the wide end that transitions to moderate pincushion at the long end.

Where the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM really shines is in AF speed and consistency. Version "II" is significantly faster than its predecessor when used on Canon DSLRs featuring advanced AF systems (non 9-point Rebel-series AF systems). Fast and consistent AF is yet another reason why so many photographers depend on this lens. When you do your job right as a photographer, it takes care of you.

Like its predecessor, the 24-70L II features weather sealing with a front filter in place. This feature alone differentiates it from most (if not all) of the 24-70mm lenses produced by third-party manufacturers.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM Lens

When the Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM was announced about 9 months after the 24-70L II, quite frankly, we were left a bit bewildered. Why would Canon release a lens with a shorter focal length range than the popular EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM and charge significantly more for it? At announcement time, the 24-70 f/4L IS's MSRP was $1,499.00. Since then, the lens' retail price has been lowered significantly putting its capabilities and performance into better perspective.

The 24-70 f/4L IS's image sharpness is difficult to summarize in a single sentence or two. Therefore, I'm going to pull from Bryan's review for a detailed description:

With a wide open f/4 aperture: At 24mm, the Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM Lens is very sharp in the center with good sharpness extending to the periphery of the full frame image circle. This lens gets very slightly softer at 35mm and modestly softer yet (especially in the mid and peripheral image circle) at 50mm f/4 where the lens performs its worst. Sharpness improvement by 70mm brings the 24-70 f/4L IS back up to performance similar to that at 35mm.

Benefits of this lens over its f/2.8 big brother are reduced size/weight, image stabilization and reduced cost. Another huge benefit (one the 24-70 f/4L IS holds over the rest of the lenses in this comparison) is maximum magnification (MM). The 24-70 f/4L IS features an impressive 0.70x MM (compared to 0.21x for the 24-70L II) which means it can double as a macro lens in a pinch. The fact that the 24-70 f/4L IS can negate the need to carry a second lens in your pack for macro work is a unique and worthwhile benefit. At the time of this comparison, the 24-70mm f/4L IS is less than half the cost of its f/2.8 counterpart (MSRP).

The downside, of course, compared to the rest of the 24-70 competition is significant – an f/4 maximum aperture.

Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 DI VC USD Lens

The Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC USD broke new ground in 2012, becoming the first stabilized 24-70mm lens. Four years later, it's still rather unique in the marketplace as only Nikon has [relatively recently] released a specification matching f/2.8 zoom with stabilization.

It took us a few tries, but we finally received a copy of the Tamron 24-70 VC which produced sharp results throughout the zoom range (look for the term "ISO 12233 resolution chart" in Bryan's full review for details on our experience with testing this lens). With a good copy in-hand, you can expect impressive center sharpness at the focal range extents and remarkable image quality throughout the zoom range (even out to the corners of the frame) at f/4.

You can expect anywhere from 2-3 stops vignetting on a full-frame camera, wide open, depending on the focal length. A little more than a stop of vignetting remains at f/11. Flare is decently controlled, but CA wil likely be visible at this lens' shortest and longest focal lengths. Distortion is both typical and average for a lens in this class.

This lens' biggest advantage over the rest of the lenses listed here, of course, is its vibration control system which is capable of up to 4-stops of camera shake compensation. The ability of this lens to capture sharp imagery of static subjects in low light is extremely beneficial. That the Tamron is significantly less expensive than the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II is another important advantage.

Unfortunately, this lens' biggest crutch is AF consistency. The copy we tested did not focus very consistently on One Shot AF and performed even worse in AI Servo. For some lens usage, AF consistency may not need to be consistently spot on. But for a lens that would otherwise be ideal for shooting once in a lifetime moments (like weddings), less than ideal AF consistency can be problematic. If interested in acquiring this lens, be sure to purchase from an authorized retailer with a no-hassle exchange policy just in case the lens does not meet your minimum requirements for AF consistency. Otherwise, utilizing Live View focusing can aid in increasing your hit rate of static subjects.

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM Lens

Announced at Photokina 2008, the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM is by far the oldest (and least expensive) lens in this comparison with a maximum aperture of f/2.8. As Bryan mentions in his full review, it's extremely difficult to summarize this lens' performance in a couple of sentences. Unfortunately, it's a bit complicated.

To fully understand the image quality you should expect from this lens, read the Image Quality section in Bryan's full review. The good news is that results at f/5.6 are very good throughout the entire focal range. The bad news is that image quality at f/2.8 various from "very sharp" at 24mm to you-should-avoid-this-focal-length at 70mm, unless you prefer to specialize in artistic blur. And if you're buying a general purpose lens with an f/2.8 aperture, odds are you intended on using it wide open at least occasionally.

Flare is very well controlled (though with less contrast) at 70mm, but flare is certainly noticeable at the lens' wider focal lengths. The distortion this lens exhibits is very similar to the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM.

Like the Tamron, the Sigma's AF performance will likely be a significant differentiating factor for many. The copy we tested front focused at 24mm and focused inconsistently at 70mm. AI Servo performance was, "to be kind – poor." Again, Live View focusing may help increase your hit rate with this lens; however, thorough personal testing is needed to determine whether or not this lens meets your AF performance needs.

Tokina 24-70mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro FX Lens

Introduced last year, the Tokina 24-70mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro FX receives the honor of being the newest lens in this comparison. Unfortunately, we don't have enough first-hand experience with the lens to adequately describe its AF performance. However, we did run the lens through our standard lab tests which illuminated a few things.

The Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 is quite sharp in the center at 24mm and 70mm wide open, although we did notice a slight drop in center performance at 50mm. The lens transitions to relatively soft with less contrast in the corners at f/2.8. Sharpness in the corners improves through f/5.6 where the difference between the center and corners becomes negligible.

I would consider the Tokina's flare performance to be very typical for lenses in this class. The same could be said about the Tokina's distortion performance as well.

Tokina lenses typically feature a very solid construction. This lens follows that trend. It's not the largest lens among those in this comparison, but it is certainly the heaviest (see below).

We didn't field test the lens to assess the Tokina's AF performance, but... it's unlikely to match the performance and consistency of Canon's USM lenses. Be sure to thoroughly test the lens within the retailer's return/exchange period to ensure the lens meets your needs.

Size, Weight, Maximum Magnification and Filter Size

It's especially important to consider the size and weight of your general purpose lens which is, by merit, likely to stay on your camera for long periods of time. Small differences in size and weight can be noticeable when packing space is limited and the hours of handling your camera begin to add up.

Filter size may also be a differentiating factor for a good number of photographers. All but one of the lenses in this comparison feature an 82mm front filter thread. These filters tend to be less common (though their popularity is rising among newly released lenses) and more costly compared to more common 77mm filters.

So which lens is right for you? If you need an f/2.8 maximum aperture, the best-available AF performance and your budget allows for it, the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens is probably the right choice. If you can get by with an f/4 maximum aperture, the Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM Lens offers great image quality, fast and accurate AF, image stabilization and a very handy 0.70x maximum magnification at a budget price. From there, the decision gets a bit murkier. I think each of the remaining lenses will appeal to different people based on their priorities with center/corner sharpness, image stabilization and price being the biggest differentiating factors.

A wide-aperture 50mm prime lens is a staple in the photographic world. It was often included in 35mm film DSLR kits because of its versatility and familiar angle of view (the focal length approximates how we see the world with our own eyes). With such deep roots, widespread availability, general lack of distortion and the ability to tackle a myriad of situations, it's no wonder why 50mm primes are so popular.

For the purposes of this comparison, we're only going to compare lenses featuring wider-than-f/2 apertures that are capable of autofocus. While there are certainly great manual focus 50mm primes out there (the Zeiss Milvus 50mm f/1.4 being one of them), the lack of AF makes them more of a special use tool rather than a versatile, general use prime. And since distortion is generally not very significant in 50mm primes, we won't be comparing that aspect of these lenses.

Let's start at the top and work our way down.

1. Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM

At the top of the list (in terms of maximum aperture and price) is the Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM. This high quality L-series lens has been Canon's top tier 50mm prime for a decade now. Unfortunately, its age is starting to show.

If you need the widest aperture you can get in an EF-series lens, it's your only choice. However, the lens has a "dreamy" quality at its widest aperture. A more specific way to describe the lens is it's a little soft in the center and very soft in the corners wide open. With it, you'll see pretty heavy vignetting until f/2 and chromatic aberrations (CA) will be evident the lens' widest apertures. And on top of that, it's by far the most expensive option in this comparison.

So what are the Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM's pros? Although it isn't Canon's fasted focusing USM lens, it is fast enough to be effectively employed for some sports uses. And unlike its longer focal length big brother featuring an identical aperture and all but one other lens in this comparison, the 50L is weather sealed (with a front filter in place).

2. Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art

While the naming convention Sigma uses for its Global Vision Lenses still confounds us, there's no doubt that Sigma's reputation has been bolstered by its Art and Sports series lenses. High quality construction, sleek styling, excellent optics and reasonable price have become hallmarks of the Sigma brand. The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art seems to check all of those boxes.

The Sigma 50 Art is impressively sharp wide open and improves to tack sharp across the frame at f/2.8. Vignetting, flare and CA are all well-controlled. One more significant benefit of the 50 Art is Sigma's 4-year warranty (1 + 3 year extension in the US market) compared to Canon's 1-year warranty.

As is too-frequently typical with third-party lenses, you can expect the Sigma 50 Art to focus less consistently accurately than the typical Canon USM lens. While results in One Shot mode may leave you scratching your head from time to time, AI Servo performance is noticeably better. I [Sean] have used the Sigma 50 Art for a number of indoor basketball games and, while not perfect, it performs admirably at the task. That the AF can be customized via the USB Dock is a nice advantage.

If there's a shot you cannot afford to miss (like a bride & groom's kiss at the end of a wedding ceremony), I'd suggest using Live View shooting to minimize the risk of missing focus. As Live View uses data coming from the actual sensor to achieve focusing, phase-detect calibration issues can be avoided.

3. Tamron 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD

Yes, I know that the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC doesn't technically qualify to be included in this comparison, but I think it's close enough in focal length to deserve consideration. Along with the 35mm variant, the 45mm f/1.8 VC became Tamron's first in a new series of lenses competing directly against Sigma's Global Vision Lens line (see Sigma GVL hallmarks above). And just like Sigma's GVLs, the Tamron's AF can be customized via a similar USB device. Like the Canon, this lens features weather sealing.

While the Tamron's maximum aperture may have a 2/3 stop narrower aperture than the Sigma, its Vibration Control (a unique feature among its competitors) capable of up to 3-stops of assistance more than makes up for the difference in aperture while photographing static subjects.

The Tamron features nice, relatively even sharpness across the frame wide open and improves noticeably at f/2.8 where results are great with minimal vignetting. Flare performance is good at wider apertures but results are less visually pleasing once stopped down to its narrowest aperture. Chromatic aberrations are decently controlled. The Tamron features the highest maximum magnification (0.29x) among its 50mm prime competitors.

As is too-frequently typical in third party lenses, you can expect less consistent AF results while using the Tamron 45 f/1.8 VC. We found center AF performance quite good (probably the best we've seen from a Tamron), but outer AF point consistency will likely be a problem for many. Just as with the Sigma, use Live View focusing for your fleeting moments using the Tamron.

4. Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

Introduced in 1993, the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM is by far the oldest lens in this comparison and one of Canon's longest-produced (and still current) lenses. Its price point, wide f/1.4 aperture and better build quality than Canon's f/1.8 variants have made it an attractive investment for many photographers wanting explore the benefits of prime lenses. However, its performance compared to contemporarily designed 50mm primes may be considered lackluster.

The Canon 50mm f/1.4 is very soft wide open across the entire frame but improves greatly at f/2.8. Keep in mind that for those who are stepping up from a kit lens with an f/5.6 maximum aperture at 50mm, the results of the Canon 50mm f/1.4 prime at f/2.8 may be worthwhile considering the 2-stop wider aperture advantage. Vignetting is very heavy at f/1.4 but clears nicely at f/2.8. Flare is very well controlled through f/8 (with a small amount of contrast lost) and minimal at f/11.

With a mid-grade design that's now more than 20 years old, the 50mm f/1.4 USM is not the most durable or stylish 50mm lens. It should stand up well to typical use, though. It features a very attractive price tag compared to the other lenses listed above it in this comparison. However, as far as affordable pricing is concerned, there's another Canon 50mm variant that takes the cake.

5. Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM

Canon's 50mm f/1.8 lenses have been the budget-conscious photographer's introduction to prime lenses for many years. Their newest variant features Canon's STM focusing technology which was developed to produce smooth (and quieter) autofocus results during video capture. And while the AF is not silent, it's significantly quieter than its predecessor (the EF 50mm f/1.8 II).

And speaking of the 50mm f/1.8 II, the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM features a long list of upgrades (more aperture blades, higher build quality, STM, higher maximum magnification, etc.) that make it a worthwhile replacement for Canon's most inexpensive lens. Unfortunately, a new optical formula was not one of the upgrades (though new coatings have been employed).

The 50mm f/1.8 STM's sharpness is very similar to the Canon 50mm f/1.4 when both lenses are compared wide open, though the f/1.8 STM is noticeably better in the center. Sharpness improves significantly by f/2.8, but it still lags behind its f/1.4 cousin at the same aperture. The 50 f/1.8 STM features impressive, not-terribly-noticeable-wide-open vignetting results for a lens at its price point. At wide apertures, flare is mild but reduces to virtually nonexistent at f/5.6. Expect minimal CA when using this lens.

Undoubtedly, one of the 50mm f/1.8 STM's most attractive features is its price point. To put it into perspective, you could buy 11 EF 50mm f/1.8 STMs and still have money left over compared to the investment required to add the Canon 50L (at US MSRP) to your kit. If you are a photographer who currently uses one of Canon's 18-55mm kit lenses and wants to experience the benefits that wide-aperture prime lenses have to offer, this lens is an easily justifiable investment.

Before we move on, there are a couple of differentiating factors I didn't address above – size and weight. There is definitely a significant difference between the biggest/heaviest and the smallest/lightest options. If size and weight are a differentiating factor for your photography (especially important when traveling), use the table below to aid in your decision making process.

Size and Weight

Summary

As you can see, the 50mm(ish), wide-aperture prime lens market is not short on options. The fact that Canon has three 50mm lenses featuring an f/1.8 or wider aperture is a testament to this prime focal length's appeal. And the fact that third party lens manufactures are devoting significant resources to producing high quality 50mm variants is unsurprising for the same reason.

For what it's worth, there isn't one right option when it comes to 50mm primes. The order of your own personal priority list – considering build quality, image quality, AF accuracy, size/weight and cost – will ultimately determine which prime lens deserves a place in your gear bag. I hope the comparison above has helped illuminate the right answer for you.

A 24mm f/1.4 prime lens is equally at home in a wedding photographer's gear bag as it is perched upon a tripod and pointed up toward the night sky. It's an excellent lens for indoor events (like parties) where ambient light is low.

For those looking to invest in a 24mm f/1.4 prime for Canon DSLRs, two candidates likely to be considered are the Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM and Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lenses. Today, we're going to see how these lenses compare to one another so that you can make the right investment for your needs.

First, let's first look at image quality. At f/1.4, the Canon 24L II is sharp in the center but the mid-frame and corners are noticeably softer. The Sigma 24 Art trails the Canon in center sharpness wide open, but it features a more even sharpness across the entire frame which results in the mid-frame and corners being sharper than the Canon. By f/2, the difference between the two lenses in the center is negligible but the Sigma is still clearly sharper in the corners.

The Canon exhibits significantly more vignetting than the Sigma but typically controls flare a bit better. Distortion between the two is pretty much a toss-up.

Both lenses feature similar size and weight and accept 77mm front filters. If weather sealing is a high priority, the Canon 24L II is the lens you want. Otherwise, let's look at some other differentiating factors.

As usual with third party lenses, you can expect the Sigma 24 Art to focus less consistently compared to the Canon. Live View focusing can be used to increase focus accuracy (as the actual sensor data is being used for focusing), but Live View focusing may not be suitable in some situations.

However, in this particular case, a 24mm lens' relatively short focal length helps mitigate focus inaccuracies to some degree as depth of field (DOF) is derived from the relationship between sensor size, focal length, aperture and distance to subject. Let me share an example.

With a subject positioned 5 feet away while using a full-frame camera with a 50mm focal length and an f/1.4 aperture, the in-focus DOF would be about 3 inches (7.62 cm). If using a 24mm focal length under the same circumstances, DOF would increase to 1.12 feet (34.14 cm).

Of course subject framing would not be the same with different focal lengths being used, but suffice it to say that shorter focal lengths will give you more DOF at typical working distances.

As is typical of Canon vs. third-party lens comparisons, one big differentiating factor is price. Right now the Sigma 24 Art is only 55% the cost of the Canon counterpart. This represents a significant savings that could easily be applied to other lenses or desired accessories.

To summarize, if you need weather sealing and consistent AF, the Canon 24L II is the best 24mm f/1.4 lens to add to your kit. Otherwise, the Sigma makes a strong case for saving a decent amount of cash while investing in your 24mm prime.

B&H carries the Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM and Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lenses.

Canon has no more than two L lenses sharing any same focal length or focal length range with one exception – they currently offer 4 different versions of the EF 70-200mm L lens. More choices are great, but more choices of course lead to more difficult decisions. While some may desire to have all 4 of these lenses in their kits, most do not need or want to afford all of them and one or two need to be selected. However, there is enough difference between the f/2.8 and f/4 models to make having two of these lenses in a kit make sense.

The No-Brainer Choice

The bottom line is that, if size, weight and price are not issues for you, the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens is definitely the lens to get. This lens offers the best of everything and it is the most versatile among the 4 options.

The Rest of the Options

The decision becomes harder if the f/2.8L IS II lens is not affordable or if size/weight concessions are necessary. The 4 lens models are separated, in specs at least, by having or not having IS and by having an f/2.8 or f/4 max aperture. Fortunately, the remaining three options do not sacrifice performance as they all reliably deliver great image quality.

If size and weight are concerns, the f/4 models are the direction to go. At roughly half the weight of the f/2.8 models, your arms, shoulders, etc. are going to clearly know the difference after hours of carry and use. At roughly half of the cost of the respective f/2.8 model, your wallet will understand the weight difference as well.

Image stabilization adds to the cost, but it also adds greatly to the value of the lens, adding a great amount of versatility. If handholding in low light with still subjects, the f/4L IS model is the right choice between the f/4 models and possibly the better choice over the f/2.8 non-IS. This lens features weather sealing like it's f/2.8 counterpart (filter required) and delivers better image quality than the older, non-IS model and it is arguably better than the f/2.8 non-IS also.

The f/4L non-IS has the most attractive price tag and has been the introduction to Canon's L-series lenses for a huge number of photographers. If your budget is a primary limiting factor, the 70-200mm f/4L USM is a very capable lens with inherent benefits far exceeding its cost. It’s small, easy to pack, solidly built and a great introduction into Canon’s highest-tier lenses. However, caution should be exercised as weather sealing does not come with the budget price tag.

If stopping action in low light is important, the f/2.8 non-IS lens likely has your name on it at this stage of the selection process. The 1-stop wider max aperture can stop action in 1/2 as much light as the f/4 options at the same ISO setting. The wider aperture can also create a stronger background blur. Note that the f/2.8 non-IS version is only partially weather sealed.

As mentioned, the difference in features between the f/4 and f/2.8 lenses is significant and I currently have both the f/4L IS and the f/2.8L IS II in my kit. Both see frequent use.

A fast, 85mm prime lens is often a portrait photographer's best friend. The focal length helps to create a flattering perspective (ideal for faces) while the wide aperture aids in separating a subject (or subjects) from the background.

As such, many planning to invest in an 85mm prime will likely consider the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM and Tamron 85mm f/1.8 VC USD. To assist in the decision making process between these two lenses, we're going to take a look at how they compare.

First off, let's start off with the similarities. Both lenses feature the same focal length and same wide f/1.8 aperture. Both are compatible with full frame cameras as well as APS-C sensor cameras. There, that was easy. Now let's move onto the differences.

The Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM was released in 1992; the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 VC was released earlier this year (2016). The Tamron exhibits more even sharpness from the center of the frame to the corners, where it is noticeably better than the Canon. The IQ difference is significant, especially when factoring in the Canon's rather heavy CA wide open. Distortion is slightly better controlled with the Tamron (but neither is bad) and the third-party lens handles flare a bit better too.

The Tamron also features Vibration Control rated to 3.5 stops of assistance, meaning you can handhold this lens in much lower light compared to the Canon. For many, that additional feature alone would be the deciding factor in choosing the Tamron lens over the Canon offering. Tamron also offers a significantly longer warranty than Canon (6-years vs. 1-year).

So far, it looks like the Tamron is the clear winner of this comparison. But the Canon has three important advantages that should not be overlooked – size/weight, consistently accurate AF and a much lower price.

The Canon is smaller (2.96 x 3.15” vs. 3.36 x 3.9”) and significantly lighter (15.2 oz vs. 26.1 oz). Those packing and traveling with the lens may appreciate the Canon's edge in portability.

As Tamron must reverse engineer Canon's AF algorithms as opposed to having the blueprints at hand, you can expect the Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM to focus more consistently with better AI Servo tracking. Note that the Tamron also suffers from focus shift as the aperture is stopped down. To compensate for this behavior, you may need to focus slightly in front of your subject when using narrower apertures.

One way Tamron is dealing with AF issues (including the possibility of incompatibility with future DSLRs) is by copying Sigma's approach of end-user firmware upgrades and AF customizability with the introduction of their TAP-in Console. Purchasing the relatively inexpensive accessory (compatible with recently announced Tamron lenses) will ensure your lens works the best that it possibly can.

Now let's look at prices. At full MSRP, the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 acquisition would require only 56% of the investment required to purchase the Tamron. And with the Canon currently qualifying for an instant rebate, you could purchase two of the Canon lenses for the price of the Tamron. For budget-conscious consumers (especially those investing in their first prime lens), the price difference will be the biggest deciding factor.

Some may wonder why I didn't include the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM and the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM in this comparison. From my point of view, the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM is a more specialized tool and carries a price tag to reflect its status. If you need its 1-stop aperture advantage, there is nothing else that is comparable. And as far as the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 goes... it's currently listed as "discontinued" at B&H (Canon mount).

I wonder if that implies anything?

B&H carries the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM and the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD.

With the arrival of the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV, many questions are being raised. Recently, we answered the Should I get the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV or the 5D III? question. Here, we're going to compare the 5D Mark III's successor to the ultra-high resolution 5Ds and 5Ds R models in attempt to answer the "Should I get the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV or the 5Ds/5Ds R? question.

It seems logical to start such a comparison by showing a chart of the specification differences. For the purposes of this post, we'll lumping the 5Ds and 5Ds R models together as they are identical except for the low-pass cancellation feature found in the "R" model.

Obvious from the table above is that the EOS 5Ds/5Ds R has one notable advantage over the EOS 5D Mark IV – resolution. The 5Ds R model, specifically, also has a slight sharpness advantage on the 5D IV as the latter features a traditional low-pass filter without the R's cancellation feature. Here is a resolution test chart comparison between the 5D IV and the 5Ds R.

Just as I noted in the 5D IV vs. 5D III post, if you're interested in creating 4K content, or otherwise need the benefits of Canon's Dual Pixel CMOS AF, the choice is clear – get the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV.

If you're a landscape, wildlife or studio photographer who requires the ultimate in resolution for making big prints, the 5Ds/5Ds R models offer 40% more resolution compared to the 5D IV. Aside from big prints, the additional pixels allow for more leeway in cropping while maintaining still-manageable resolutions. To put that into point perspective, the 5Ds/5Ds R's 1.6x crop feature (simulating the field of view realized by using an APS-C sensor camera) results in a 19.6 megapixel image. This difference is noticeable. To obtain the same APS-C field of view with a 5D IV base image, the end result would be 11.7 megapixels.

Does that make the EOS 5Ds/5Ds R a better camera for those interested in wildlife? Maybe, but not necessarily. There are a lot of factors that go into creating a compelling wildlife image. The ability to crop an image heavily is just one of them.

Other factors like burst speed, buffer depth, high ISO noise results and AF capability/performance also play significant roles. That the 5D IV allows for two additional frames-per-second in burst shooting may not seem like much, but it can definitely help. The greater buffer capacity is always welcome. As hinted to by the increased standard max ISO setting (to 32000), the 5D IV performs better in the noise department than its predecessor, the 5D Mark III, and the 5D IV also performs better than the 5Ds at the pixel level in this regard.

Downsize the 5Ds image to 5D IV dimensions and the comparison becomes considerably closer. The 5D IV is still the better performer, but the equivalent comparison shows this attribute being less of a decision factor. The 5Ds/5Ds R's standard max ISO tops out at 6400.

The 5D IV also features a vertically expanded AF point spread to its benefit. This is a feature that wildlife (and many other) photographers will appreciate. If a subject is moving, AI servo is needed and if AI servo is in use, a focus point must be held on the subject (usually their closest eye). Having a larger AF point spread sometimes permits better subject framing in these situations (I provided an elk photo example in the 5D IV review).

So, which body is best for you? If you want the most versatile, general purpose DSLR, the 5D Mark IV's feature set will likely make it the best overall choice. At their introduction, the ultra-high resolution 5Ds and 5Ds R were marketed more as specialty cameras rather than a camera for everyman. And their place in Canon's camera lineup hasn't changed; the only difference is that the everyman camera has a "IV" in its name and packs a great new feature set to go with it.

Get your Canon 5D Mark IV and/or EOS 5Ds/5Ds R at B&H.