>>4385258>the r6 sucker punched the a9ii at a lower priceno buffer?
significantly worse rolling shutter?
lower max shutter speed?
sure. Didn't read the rest since you proved you are retarded.
>>4385259>STILL hyperfocusing on a bad lot of ancient cameras >one so small, you have to repost the same few images repeatedlyCanon can't compete in full frame. Their lenses are dogshit (50mm f1.2 vignettes more than the sony one, 24mm f1.4 doesnt even cover the whole sensor, lets not get started on that 24-70's quality, or the 28-70 being a behemoth... lmfao). Their cameras are low DR compromise clusterfucks. They have no true compacts. It sucks.
Yeah yeah sure MUH VIDEO CODECS! Here's the thing about the market. If you are not a professional, you do not. fucking. need. 6k. raw. PERIOD. If you are a professional, you're not going to do something stupid, and buy a canon hybrid that is mediocre at video and medicore at stills. Why not? Well, you can't film and take photos at the same time, so it doesn't matter if your photo body shoots 10 bit video.
Sony owns full frame right now because they make separate cameras instead of all in ones. The A1 is a professional's stills camera, the ZV1 is a professional's video camera.
Canon expects you to double up on two of the same EOS R at the cost of everything being worse on average. What do you get out of the R3,R1? APS-C dynamic range, rolling shutter, "ok" specs all around, and you need two anyways. I'm sorry, but in the real world, in real use, canon fucking sucks. It does not matter if you have sharper 4k60. If you are a professional, you don't need sharper 4k60 on your photo body. You need all-i 4k60 on your dedicated video body.
>Better high ISOYou keep saying this. But the high ISO isn't actually any better than sony, except at a point where both cameras are unusable regardless and no actual professional goes there
Just schizophrenics mumbling about “seeing a threat approaching my compound” (you actually said that)
