For the last few months, Jason and I have been working to bring you a detailed camera comparison database – a place where you can see side-by-side specifications from dozens (eventually hundreds) of cameras to decide on the best one for your needs. I’m excited to say that the database has launched today!
We’ve worked hard to make this the best database of its kind online. While there are other camera comparison websites out there, they are full of inconsistencies, and they often don’t include relevant information like buffer capacity in the first place.
So far, there are 51 cameras in our database, including the newly-released Canon EOS R1 and Canon EOS R5 Mark II. Recently, we have also been creating to-scale comparison images for all of these cameras so that you can picture them easily side-by-side. More cameras will be added in the coming weeks and months.
If you’re interested, take a look at the Camera Comparisons homepage here, where you can select any two cameras via a simple dropdown menu:
Please let me or Jason know if you spot any inaccuracies in the specifications lists or have any other questions! Also, I will be running a poll on our Member Page later today to hear requests for which cameras you want us to add next.
It would be useful to have a toggle switch to only show differences.
great work, it helps a lot, respect from chinese reader
We appreciate it! Glad you like it.
Spencer/Jason – Excellent worthy comparisons. Question – have you heard anyting about Nikon implementing the pre-burst RAW function? Maybe they have but I haven’t heard.
I haven’t heard anything directly, but I strongly expect them to release it in their next generation of Z9 and Z8 cameras. If they release it in an earlier firmware update, I would be surprised.
This is wonderful! Thank you so much guys.
I appreciate it!
Large pixels are given higher ratings than small pixels. I’d have expected the reverse to be true, given that the smaller the pixels the higher the resolution.
We do give a separate higher rating to higher resolution sensors, but larger pixels are also generally preferred. The difference is across sensor sizes, though. A 24 megapixel full-frame sensor has larger pixels than a 24 megapixel APS-C sensor, and that’s a benefit of it. Within the same sensor size, I agree with you that I prefer more resolution.
I see what you are trying to do. However, why do you say that “large pixels are generally preferred”? Yes, a large pixel gathers more light per pixel but on a unit area basis large and small pixels capture the same amount of light. Any sensor with small pixels can be downsampled in post processing to give an image equivalent to one from the same sensor with big pixels.
Larger pixels *are* generally preferred. More pixels are also generally preferred (usually even more so than larger pixels, as you suggest). But if you had to choose between 24 megapixels of smaller pixels or 24 megapixels of larger pixels, I suspect that I know which one you would pick! Although feel free to mentally flip the order of the green background in any of the camera comparisons that you wish, they’re just guidelines.
I will also point out, although I still definitely prefer higher resolution sensors myself, that cameras within the same generation/sensor size with lower resolution typically have better high ISO performance even when downsampling. An example would be the Nikon Z6 II versus the Nikon Z7 II. It’s not a major difference, and not one that I personally care about, but there are some photographers who deliberately choose cameras like the Sony A7S series because of these low level benefits.
I conducted blind testing several times. I took images from the dpreview resource. They have the ability to compare images without processing in RAW and at the same time bring them to a single resolution and look at a scale of 100%. And the leaders of detail are cameras with 45 megapixels up to ISO 6400 (I don’t use higher ISO).
So after the matrix developers were able to reduce the size of the boundaries between the sensors, and ensured that the focusing lenses actually came into contact. All the benefits of a large pixel disappeared even without noise processing in the converter.
The benefit of matrices with fewer pixels:
The matrix is cheaper.
High reading speed with the same specifications. The Z6iii has a higher read speed than the Z8 and Z9 in video. In this case, the matrix is partially folded. Or another example. The A7iv has a higher read speed than the older A7iii. Because the resolution has increased.
Less micro-grease.
Smaller file sizes.
Less load on the computer during processing.
Autofocus misses are less noticeable.
Yeah, if you don’t use higher than ISO 6400, the higher resolution sensors usually have an advantage. Take a look at our Nikon Z6 vs Z7 comparison — you can see in the crops that the advantage only swings toward the Z6 above the 3200 mark. Again not a difference that I personally care about, but there is a consistent advantage of this type to larger pixels from a given sensor generation: photographylife.com/compa…n-z6-vs-z7
Checked for ISO 12800. The Z8 gives more details and makes the text easier to read. But the Z6iii is better than the A7iv… But the A9iii is the worst.
Really cool. BTW, I’m glad to see Nikon has kept the AA filter on the ZF, otherwise, considering it’s actual IQ and sharpness, my eyes would probably cry tears of blood :D….
Thank you! Some AA filter proponents say they prefer it because you can always sharpen up those files more aggressively. I don’t know, I prefer without, but try telling that to Canon.
They differ from one camera to another, I think. There also may be different “baking” when higher ISO are reached, especially in cameras like R5. I don’t think it’s only a question of AA filter, and I don’t think it’s the most important thing to pay attention on ZF for instance, as I don’t see any problem with its 24MP sensor, even when sharpness is let to a low level in the file processing.
Maybe the filter is weaker than those from Canon, or maybe it’s just the way Nikon have designed the sensor and the raw processing that makes it behave differently from Canon.
Anyway, I must say I’ve never been obsessed by sharpness or pixel count.
As long as it is good enough, I pay more attention to contrasts, micro-contrasts, colours rendition and tones, shadows balance and shaping.
Also, to my sense, tuning the final sharpness in the exporting process according to the target results and renders (printing, screen, whatever) may be more important. And sometimes, it can be tricky.
I’d love to see full-frame Lumix cameras added to the database. (S1, S1R, S1H, and any successors as they get announced,
It’s on the list!
Guys, this is an excellent idea with an outstanding implementation. Well done!
Thanks, Massimo!
Good idea. Would be great to have similar comparison tool for lenses as well with all the charts available to compare!!
I was thinking about lenses….now that we’ve got the experience doing cameras, a lens version would be not so hard.
The tricky thing with lenses would definitely be the test charts – figuring out how to arrange that data in a way that looks nice and works well, especially if we’re dealing with a zoom that may have 5-10 test charts or more (we generated over a dozen for the Nikon Z 28-400mm). Specs would be the easy part.
Perhaps with zoom lenses you could only present the relevant focal lengths for a comparison. So a comparison between a 24-70 and the 28-400 would show MTF, CA, vignetting, and distortion charts for 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 70mm, or for a comparison between a 24-70 and a 14-24 then only charts for the 24mm focal length would be presented. But between two primes it would show charts for their respective fixed focal lengths, so a comparison between a 24mm and 28mm would still show their charts even though the focal lengths don’t match. In the third case of a comparison between a prime and a zoom then the zoom’s closest focal length to the prime should be used for comparison, so for that 24mm prime, 28mm charts from the 28-400 zoom would be presented in comparison.
Sounds like a good feature, but nothing I’m interested in comparing yet.
What cameras would you be interested in? Right now, Nikon full-frame DSLRs, Fuji X cameras, and Fuji GFX cameras are leading the poll on our member page (in that order).