Two cameras both potentially suitable for Netflix – the Sony a7S III (Amazon, B&H) and the Canon EOS R5 (Amazon, B&H). Which one is a better investment for serious filmmakers?
Here’a fun comparison.
Important!
I haven’t reviewed the Sony a7S III yet. Treat this as a fun comparison, or a placeholder article, with currently available information.
In many ways, I’m writing this article to understand the distinction myself. Do these cameras serve an overlapping market, or will they appeal to different sets of filmmakers?
Check out my comprehensive real world review of the Sony a7S III:
Check out my comprehensive real world review of the Canon EOS R5:
What kind of filmmaker needs autofocus?
I recently shot a documentary. I had an assistant who also operated a DJI Ronin S (Amazon, B&H).
The idea is, I could potentially have shot the documentary myself, with the entire kit in a backpack.
For the solo filmmaker, having AF is a tremendous advantage. But it has to be reliable. The importance of good autofocus for corporate videos, interview situations, gimbals and weddings cannot be stressed enough. It just saves you a lot of time and money.
I think as far as autofocus is concerned, the differences won’t make that much of an impact for most video shooters’ work. Both Canon and Sony are class leaders.
However, I’m giving this to the Canon EOS R5 (Amazon, B&H). It is the gold standard, and it has more lenses you can autofocus with. The RF mount has manual focus rings that are not focus by wire. The Canon adapters are also great options. Sony really has nothing to compare.
Who are these cameras aimed at?
Sony has aimed the Sony a7S III (Amazon, B&H) at wedding shooters and event shooters, since they form the core of the business. Of course, the a7S III is good enough for many other kinds of productions, as well as Netflix. It is also a B-cam for more expensive cinema cameras.
Canon has clearly aimed the R5 as a B-cam for Canon’s video flagships, the Canon C300 Mark III and the Canon C500 Mark II.
Ruggedness is critical. It is assumed you are not pulling out your camera in air-conditioned halls all the time.
Reliability is key. Both cameras are expected to do well.
And finally, we come to the price – which is where image quality is also important. Even if you have indie filmmakers pining for 8K RAW or whatever, the reality is theirs films don’t really warrant it. There is little or zero ROI on independent projects or low budget films.
So, even if they can buy these cameras, they are not really the market these cameras are aimed at. If you’re not earning good money already it is hopeless to spend money on expensive gear.
I’m personally only interested in both cameras as A-cams, but I’m not the main market for them!
This article, though, will try to balance all worlds.
Quick menu
- Comparison of sensors and video features
- Exposure, focus and ergonomics
- The costs of media and batteries
- Which is cheapest to own?
- Verdict. Who wins?
Comparison of sensors and video features
Here’s how the camera sensors compare for video:
| Camera | Resolution | Maximum FPS* | Video ISO Range^ |
| Canon EOS R5 | 8192 × 4320 | 29.97p | 100-25,600 |
| Sony a7S III | 3840 x 2160 (4264 x 2408 in RAW) | 119.88p | 40-409,600 |
* Maximum fps at 4K is 120 fps for both cameras.
^Even though the cameras seem to go to impressive ISOs, that’s only in stills mode. The ISO range for video is limited – but not for the Sony a7S III (Amazon, B&H). This is the low light champion of the world! The Rr5 is no slouch either. I think both cameras will be equally good for most practical shooting needs.
Both cameras do 4K 120 fps. The a7S III does 240 fps in HD, but the Canon R5 does 8K RAW. Not really comparable. I’ll give this to the Canon EOS R5 (Amazon, B&H), because it also has DCI, and internal RAW is an important advantage – even if limited by overheating.
What about 4K frame rates?
| Camera | Max fps at 4K | Dynamic Range | Max fps at 1080p |
| Canon EOS R5 | 119.88 fps | 12 stops | 59.94 fps |
| Sony a7S III | 119.88 fps | 15 stops | 240 fps |
The Sony a7S III (Amazon, B&H) really is a step ahead here, with better frame rates in HD, and more dynamic range.
Even if we account for discrepancies in dynamic range measurement between the two companies, I fully expect image quality to be on par with each other, practically speaking.
The a7S III has overheating limitations in 60p and 120p. It isn’t as bad as the Canon EOS R5, though. The R5 can only record up to 20 minutes in 8K until it needs to cool down. It has similar restrictions for 4K as well (in its best modes). I’ll need to test this in the real world, though it looks like you don’t want to record in more than 10-minute spells.
This goes to the a7S III.
Next, the codecs and color information:
| Camera | RAW and Code in 4K and Higher | Color Information |
| Canon EOS R5 | Canon RAW Lite | H.264/H.265 ALL-I, IPB | RAW | 10-bit 4:2:2/8-bit 4:2:0 |
| Sony a7S III | Prores RAW* | H.264/H.265 ALL-I, IPB | RAW* | 10-bit 4:2:2/8-bit 4:2:0 |
If you’re restricting yourself to 10-bit 4:2:2 4K, you should be happy with either camera. But if you want internal RAW recording, the R5 is your camera.
But I’m giving this to Sony. Why?
The a7S III goes up to 4.2K in RAW, and at a maximum frame rate of 60p. There’s no recording limitation or overheating with an external recorder. You need the Atomos Ninja V for RAW.
| Camera | Expected Rolling Shutter Performance |
| Canon EOS R5 | Rolling Shutter is Average to Poor* |
| Sony a7S III | Rolling Shutter is 3x better than the a7S II, and looks good! |
The rolling shutter in the a7S III seems to be better but it needs to be tested.
I’ll not talk about the audio features since that needs to be tested in the real world. They have similar features and ports.
Focus and exposure aids, and ergonomics
What’s the point of RAW if you can’t expose it correctly? The little things make all the difference:
| Camera | Exposure |
| Canon EOS R5 | Histogram, Meter, Zebras |
| Sony a7S III | Histogram, Meter, Zebras |
Both are crap. Both have focus peaking.
As far as size and weight are concerned:
| Camera | Ergonomics | Weight |
| Canon EOS R5 | I expect the grip to be okay-ish (but not DSLR-like). | 650g |
| Sony a7S III | Small grip makes the camera front heavy with most cine or zoom lenses. | 614g |
Weather sealing is promised on both cameras, though I expect the Canon EOS R5 (Amazon, B&H) to be tougher. To be fair though, I’ve falled on my a7R II, and my a7S II and a7S have fallen many times. Sony still goes strong.
Overall, for ergonomics this is a tie. Especially because Sony has improved their menu.
Image Stabilization
Both the Sony a7S III (Amazon, B&H) and Canon EOS R5 (Amazon, B&H) have internal image stabilization (IBIS). If the lens doesn’t have IS, then I think it’s limited to about 3-5 stops.
In initial tests, the a7S III has great stabilization, especially with the new “Active Mode” (but with a small crop). But the Canon R5 is no slouch either. I think people will be happy with both.
Batteries and media cards
Here’s a look at the media
| Camera | Dual card slots | Price per GB for 512 GB* |
| Canon EOS R5 | Yes, CFexpress Type B and UHS-II SD Card | $1.17/GB and $0.33/GB |
| Sony a7S III | Yes, CFexpress Type A or UHS-II SD Card | $2.49/GB and $0.33/GB |
CFexpress cards are not cheap (comparing Sandisk Extreme Pro to be fair). For practical shoots, you will need multiple cards. This could really add to your budget for RAW shooting.
For the a7S III, you need CFexpress Type A cards for 4K 120 fps. The SD cards can only go up to 60p in 4K. Also, you need to buy a special Sony reader as well. It gets expensive, fast!
For now I’ll give this to Canon, because CFexpress Type B is easier to find in different sizes.
What about battery life?
| Camera | Battery life | Cost one one battery | Cost of 6 hours of operation |
| Canon EOS R5 | Unknown | $79 | $600* |
| Sony a7S III | 80 minutes | $78 | $351* |
I’m going to give this to Sony for smaller and lighter batteries, and for better battery life. I don’t expect the Canon R5 to last long with its gigantic 8K sensor and heating.
Which is cheaper to own?
Let’s just add up the costs:
| Camera | Sony a7S III | Canon EOS R5 |
| Camera body | $3,498 | $3,899 |
| Media and Reader^ | $1,273.6 + $118 | $649.99 + $99.99 |
| Batteries* | $351 | $600 |
| Total | $5,241 | $5,249 |
*Guesswork, for 6 hours of operation.
The prices are really similar to both. The external recorder will add costs to both if you need RAW (which as of this writing is still not available). It looks like Sony is cheaper and it is, as long as you don’t want CFexpress. Buy one card and reader, and you’re even!
Recap
First, a recap:
| Feature | Winner |
| Resolution | Canon EOS R5 |
| Video features | Sony a7S III |
| DR and Color | Sony a7S III |
| RAW and Codecs | Sony a7S III |
| Low Light Performance | Sony a7S III |
| Rolling Shutter | Sony a7S III |
| Exposure Aids | Tie |
| Media | Canon EOS R5 |
| Lenses | Canon EOS R5 |
| Ergonomics | Canon EOS R5 |
| IBIS | Tie |
| Ports and Monitoring | Tie |
| Audio | Tie |
| Autofocus and Manual Focus | Canon EOS R5 |
| Battery life | Sony a7S III |
| Longer shooting | Sony a7S III |
Before we take our final decision, we’ll let the cameras tell us what they offer that the others don’t:
| Camera | USP | Major Cons |
| Canon EOS R5 | 4K fine and crop mode, 8K RAW, 4K 120 fps, 45MP | Overheating, expensive media for this price-class |
| Sony a7S III | 4K 120p and 4.2K RAW in 60p, Autofocus, lightweight | Overheating, expensive media for this price-class |
My Verdict
I said I’ll try to provide a balanced overview, even though it’s hard. Here’s what I think:
| Type of Filmmaking | Preferred Camera | Major Reasons |
|---|---|---|
| Short documentaries and corporate videos | Sony a7S III | Overheating makes the difference. |
| Major documentaries or B-cam to the same | Sony a7S III | Long recording times with an external recorder makes the difference. |
| Short or feature films | Tie | Both are good enough. It really depends on the shoot. |
| Music Videos | Sony a7S III | 120 fps and 240 fps |
| Journalism | Sony a7S III | Lightweight, battery life, low light performance |
| Wildlife | Sony a7S III | Battery life and low light performance |
| Weddings and Events | Sony a7S III | Low light is very important. Longer recording times. |
Wow, the Canon EOS R5 (Amazon, B&H) is nowhere! The overheating issue seriously limits its. utility as a videography tool. It’s best for short films or feature films where you can control record times. The saving grace is there’s no overheating to 30p in 4K.
If you’re under a budget and seriously considering which camera is best, I hope this comparison helps you some.
For me, the Sony a7S III (Amazon, B&H) wins.
It’s the camera I would pick if I had to fulfill multiple roles as a video shooter or cinematographer.
What do you think?
