>>3936303>M50 is cleanerIt's definitely softer.
>1 stop advantage to m50Well it clearly doesn't, as the Sony is much cleaner when they're at the same iso
>At base iso they are the sameExcept the huge resolution advantage to the sony and the fact the Sony has a 1 stop signal to noise ratio advantage throughout the iso range, pic related.
>Wants the smallest, lightest kit.Which will go in Sony's favour, whilst the body might be 90g heavier, as it's full frame you can use lenses that are a stop slower and still get the same low light performance and dof.
Even the canon 22mm f2 pancake is 25% heavier than a samyang 35mm f2.8, and performs worse.
>If you sharpen the Eos it gets as sharp as the SonyWhy are you implying you can't just sharpen the Sony to get them back out ahead by the same margin again, well done on admitting that the Sony has the image quality advantage though.
>>3936341This is true, if you take a shot at 1\100, f4, iso 800 on a Fuji and a Sony, the Fuji will be a stop darker. They lie to make themselves look better in reviews, whilst also threatening legal action against any website that wants to objectively measure Fuji lenses and gear; and if that doesn't set off all the red flags about them, I don't know what will.
