WEDDING SEASON SALE! 30% Off Training Systems!

Your content will be up shortly. Please allow up to 5 seconds
Gear Reviews

Sony a7R II vs Canon 5DS | A Quick Comparison

By Joseph Cha on October 15th 2015

Goliath vs. A Slightly Smaller Goliath

For years, the Nikon D800, D810, and Sony a7R have been the high megapixel kings, boasting 36 megapixels. Now we have 2 new high megapixel hitters, the Canon 5DS (weighing in at 50.6 MP) and the Sony a7R II (42MP). There’s not enough room in this bakery for 2 high megapixel cameras, so which one takes the cake? Find out in the video and article below!

sony_a7rII_vs_canon_5ds_featuredSony a7R II vs. Canon 5DS | A Quick Comparison

Click to Subscribe!

High Megapixel Test

The first thing I’m obviously going to test is the resolution. On paper, the Canon 5DS already has an advantage, having packed 20% more pixels in its 24x36mm sensor. For me, on my 27inch 5k iMac, I had trouble discerning a noticeable difference when the images were side by side in Lightroom fit to screen. When the images were at 1:1 or 100% crop, I had to get closer to my monitor, but I began to see a discernable difference. When I zoomed in even closer at 3:1, I found that the difference was clear in the roof shingles and tower.

Sony a7RII Left Canon 5DS Right | Fit to Screen

Sony a7R II Left /Canon 5DS Right | Fit to Screen

Sony a7Rll Left Canon 5DS Right | 100% Crop

Sony a7R ll Left/Canon 5DS Right | 100% Crop

Sony a7Rll Left Canon 5DS Right | 300% Crop

Sony a7R ll Left/Canon 5DS Right | 300% Crop

For me, and probably most photographers, 42MP is more than enough. I will say though, that I am excited for the photographers that can utilize this kind of resolution, and what they’ll end up with because of that.

Shadow Detail Test

This is one of the most important tests for me. If you have shot once in a lifetime events, like a wedding, you know that things can happen quickly, and you might miss some shots due to improper exposure. A camera that can maintain shadow detail on an underexposed photo is sometimes the difference between a made and a missed shot. For this test, I shot these two images severely underexposed (please note, this is not how I normally take photos). I then added +5 stops of Exposure in Lightroom and observed the two photos at 100%.

Sony a7RII Left Canon 5DS Right | Straight Out Of Camera

Sony a7R II Left/Canon 5DS Right | Straight Out Of Camera

Sony a7RII Left Canon 5DS Right | +3.5 Exposure in Lightroom

Sony a7R II Left/Canon 5DS Right | +3.5 Exposure in Lightroom

Sony a7RII Left Canon 5DS Right | 100% Crop

Sony a7R II Left/Canon 5DS Right | 100% Crop

I am extremely impressed with the amount of detail the Sony a7R II was able to return in a photo that was that underexposed. You can see how well the a7R II maintains the shadow detail on the wall and on the Matterhorn sign. If you’re a photographer that likes to “fix in post,” then the Sony a7R II will give you a more flexible RAW file than the Canon 5DS.

High ISO Test

Now for the final and hardest test, the high ISO test. High megapixel cameras are notorious for having poor high ISO performance because the tiny densely packed pixels get hotter quicker. I started this test by taking a shot at ISO 3200, and then I added +3.5 stops of Exposure to both images and zoomed in at 100%.

Sony a7RII Left Canon 5DS Right | Straight Out Of Camera

Son7 a7R II Left/Canon 5DS Right | Straight Out Of Camera

Sony a7RII Left Canon 5DS Right | With +3.5 Exposure in Lightroom

Sony a7R II Left/Canon 5DS Right | With +3.5 Exposure in Lightroom

Sony a7RII Left Canon 5DS Right | 100% Crop

Sony a7R II Left/Canon 5DS Right | 100% Crop

In this test, the a7R II performed significantly better than the Canon. What’s interesting is that the Canon 5DS loses resolution faster than the a7R II. In the trees, rooftop, and fence, I’m seeing more details in the a7R II image than the 5DS one.

Who These Cameras Are For

For me, and I would imagine for most photographers, the Sony a7R II is a better all around camera. It has so many features that any photography discipline can find a use for it.

The Canon 5DS, on the other hand, is more of a specialty camera. Photographers who need the absolute best in resolution now have a viable option with Canon, and with their extensive lens lineup, they’ll be able to do things that weren’t possible with Medium Format cameras.

So which one would you pick? Let me know in the comments!

This site contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links, however, this does not impact accuracy or integrity of our content.

I’m a photographer and cinematographer based in Southern California. When I don’t have a camera in my face I enjoy going to the movies and dissecting the story telling and visual aesthetics.

Q&A Discussions

Please or register to post a comment.

  1. John Whittall

    The Canon for me, if you actually step up the ISO on the Canon instead of using lightroom it performs so much better with very little noise at 6400

    | |
  2. Ivy Lu


    | | Edited  
  3. Adrian Sidney

    Curious… If they are both full frame why are you cropping the Canon in so much closer? Doesn’t seem like an accurate comparison to me.

    | |
  4. Austin Swenson

    Oh my, has this video/article made quite the debate… Having owned the 24-70 E-mount lens for a while, I can comfortably say that this is not really a great choice to test the Sony on, but you gotta do what you gotta do. I am satisfied with its performance and such in normal situations, but it is definitely not great at AF in super low light, which is why I am surprised it did so well comparatively to the Canon.

    Anyway, the argument that the Sony’s AF isn’t that great seems like something every sports/wildlife photographer would complain about, but not very many people who use that argument even shoot that kind of stuff… they are just using that line to feel better about what they have, and that’s fine. NOBODY is going to convince you to use a tool for the job that just doesn’t cut the mustard in a particular category, and they shouldn’t. I think Canon and Nikon sports/wildlife shooters can be perfectly fine with their choices several more years down the road and nobody will judge you for it.

    | |
  5. Branko Sreckovic

    My point was actually ‘photographers of all countries unite and don’t buy crap’. LOL
    We have power and not them. Utopia huh?
    But I will never ever buy plastic dog plop signed by any of ‘them’.

    | |
  6. Branko Sreckovic

    I cannot agree with everything written.

    ‘Yes we have all the lenses you need (if you don’t mind adapters)’
    Not true. Fuji has complete line of lenses, from 10 (20) till 200 (300)mm in first class of quality. Not to mention primes which line starts from 14(21)mm. I cannot remember that I have met Fuji lens less than superior or at least higher class quality. Even from the time of 110 film format Fujica, back there in 80s. Or was it in 70s.
    Not familiar with Olympus line but I believe they should not be underestimated.

    ‘Yes we have the settings/mode you want (if you don’t mind drilling down through menus to get them)’
    Not true. Fuji flagship has real command dial buttons and knobs not the menus or not the menus only. Top models of their ‘rangefinders’ also have these buttons and knobs.

    ‘Yes we have the flashes/accessories/triggers you want (if you don’t mind third party compatibility shenanigans)’
    True. But… I bet that Nikon, in their time during Korean war when they really made their breakthrough, had more or less the same support or lack of the support in accessories and flashes. That I admit.
    Essentially if we don’t talk of creative mind behind the camera, who is the most important, photography is made by:
    1. optics (lens)
    2. shutter and
    3. sensor (film)
    Everything else is more or less marketing pitch or should I say howling?
    In old times I use to keep both systems. If I wish to make B&W photos I’d go with Nikon. If transparencies were in question I’d go with Canon. And if I needed to make something really serious Mamiya was the answer. Naturally in present time it became way too expensive to hold both systems. I flipped the coin and Nikon won. Literally! I wished It didn’t. Why?
    I was extremely ‘lucky’ to get first D7000 plagued with severe autofocus issue and after that D600 with damned oil drops. If they manage for the third major systemic issue I bet I will get it too. Should I be fed up?
    In old times nobody ever heard of ‘focus issue’ or systemic failure in design?

    | |
    • adam sanford

      Branko, I hear you — we’ve gone around and around on this on other postings. If you believe you can get what you need with Sony, Fuji, etc. by all means, go and do it. I’m certainly not saying ‘don’t buy their gear.’ They make fine products.

      I just think for that extra 5% of IQ you can squeeze out of those great sensors, there will be 2-3 holes in terms of product functionality (wireless flash triggering, a specific lens you need, etc.) that you will need to manage somehow. That might be a small price to pay to realize your shot more completely with that new rig, but for many, that’s a hassle that isn’t worth the payoff.

      | |
  7. Branko Sreckovic

    Good points Adam and Alisdair. My photographic memories reach back there…1971 or 72 when i was 6 or 7 years old. Dad, me, darken kitchen, mystic smell (only then, never after that) of fixer, old Opemus-Axomat enlarger ORWO BW films, Altix camera Made in Yugoslavia… Evolution to more and more expensive cameras, optics, accessories… Everybody were heading for Nikon, Canon, ‘Blad. Leica was mostly the trophy from WWII. If somebody had new then that person 100% was tightly connected with communists! LOL
    All that time Asahi Pentax was making excellent cameras. Even today people who are into chemical photography HIGHLY appreciate Spotmatic, K1000, MX, ME, MEsuper or LX. Not to mention their excellent 6×7 medium formats or lenses. Yet almost nobody was particularly oriented to Asahi. They kept their position, not highly exposed.
    On the other hand two ‘Empires’ kept pushing up or down their tracks, dictating trends, wearing their new suits which seems to me more and more new and invisible. As world itself becomes more and more multipolar place something similar is happening in photographic industry. I believe that Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Samsung or Panasonic should have their substantial piece of the cake.
    The only obstacle for them would be…WE. Buyers and users and pretend-to-be users. They are the power of TWO emperors. Pure blind ‘dick-o-metry’.

    | |
    • adam sanford

      I hear you. I do. Innovation is needed, and Sony, Fuji and others have been delivering it. It’s awesome.

      But then there’s also the notion that Canon and Nikon tend to say “Yes, you can do that with our system” far far far far far more often than these newer platforms can. I love these new mirrorless systems, but let’s face it, so many of their “Yes you can do that” answers come with an asterisk:

      Yes we have all the lenses you need (if you don’t mind adapters)

      Yes we have the settings/mode you want (if you don’t mind drilling down through menus to get them)

      Yes we have the flashes/accessories/triggers you want (if you don’t mind third party compatibility shenanigans)

      Those are not no’s, but they are qualified yes’s. With the two big companies you just slap stuff on and go and it works.

      I just think there so so so much more a camera platform that how slick folks think the sensor is. So I welcome Sony’s disruptive innovation, but until it can say yes *natively* with its own hardware (on so many fronts), it makes more sense to stay with one of the two ‘Empires’ you talked about.

      | |
  8. Alisdair Richter

    I’m just waiting for the high MP Pentax FF DSLR to come along. I’m betting – well hoping at least – that this camera will have the best of both of the above models. And it will probably be cheaper too. A win/win…er, win situation.

    | |
    • adam sanford

      Alisdair, there was a pretty massive leak on Pentax recently. Looks legit:

      The weird hotness? It apparently adapts their 645 MF lenses. (Not cheap, but having glass immediately available is huge for a new mount.)

      | |
    • Alisdair Richter

      As far as I understood all the pre-launch leaks, Pentax were going to go with the tried and tested K-mount, which of course means that there’s loads of legacy and rangefinder glass out there. The 645 mount uses an adapter to be used on a K-mount. Plus there’s still a lot of 3rd party manufacturers that either still include a Pentax mount in their line up, or who, like Sigma, have stated that they would look at including a Pentax mount in their range when the need arises.
      I don’t see an immediate availability of quality glass as being a problem.

      | |
  9. Branko Sreckovic

    Bear in mind that this was review of two entirely different system cameras.
    Perhaps future will bring dominant presence of mirrorless cameras. Fewer moving parts , chance to gain bigger profit etc. DSLR would be rare, more exotic more ‘specialized’ (whatever it means) and more expensive/

    | |
    • adam sanford

      100% correct. In X years time, the only modern SLRs that will be in use will be on sports sidelines, out on safari, or tracking a soaring eagle. Just about everything else will be mirrorless.

      The big question, of course, is what is ‘X’:

      Control freakish pro photographers would say never, but if you twisted their arm, they’d say X = 20 years. For all of mirrorless’s advancements, there are still things it cannot do that some pros absolutely need.

      Enthusiasts who dwell in forums think X = 0 years. The changeover has already happened and all those resisting it need professional psychiatric treatment :-)

      The truth is somewhere in between the two.

      | |
  10. dave birch

    would love to see a review of the Vaio Z Canvas

    | |
  11. Dalibor Tomic

    Great comments people :)

    | |
  12. Felix Wu

    +5 in exposure to test sensor? You nail it, Canon’s sensor can barely push 1 stop and look good, and 2 stops max. But that is not the whole story. The would knows Nikon sony perform better than Canon when pushed far. Canon is behind in sensor DR period.

    But sony can’t handle sports wildlife AF, sony has no native F2.8 as per video, sony has short battery life that it won’t last a fashion shoot session. All around camera? As a pro photographer who shoot for extended period of time I certainly wouldn’t even consider that for battery and AF alone.

    What about 3rd party support? Oh, Profoto hasn’t even designed a trigger that could shoot TTL with OCF system for Sony camera as of today. What does it tell us? A hobbyist camera? Maybe. For pro? No please. : )

    | |
    • J. Cassario

      The Sony is not an all around game changer, and they are still behind in certain areas, BUT… they are quickly making changes to get there. Canon on the other hand, has done nothing but frustrate me as a professional shooter with their lack of improvement over the past several years. Sure, there are some things like sports AF on the Sony, and lack of lenses that hurt it, but I dont think it will be long before they get there. 3rd party support will come along, but as of right now, I can easily shoot professional OCF by using Pocketwizards. Trust me, Sony can easily be used in a professional environment. Either way, just like Ben Perrin stated above, none of these systems are doing everything right. You know what I like though, Sony is improving, and at a fast pace. Canon has done nothing over the past several years to show me that they will be able to keep up, and that is coming from someone who still shoots Canon gear, along with Nikon. Your right, Canon sucks at DR, and thats not the whole story. The whole story is, as a professional that pays his bills with his photography gear, I want a system that gets the job done the best. That same system might not be the best for someone else, you need to find what works for you. For me, I need good DR, bottom line. I dont want to have to bump my ISO up to 128k and have to smooth it out later.

      | |
    • Ben Perrin

      Sony certainly is improving at a fast pace as you say Jay. I believe they deserve the recognition they have been receiving.

      | |
    • adam sanford

      +1. Sony is absolutely crushing things on the sensor front, but it’s still missing some fairly major items to drop the mic and declare victory over SLRs:

      * More / better native glass (the A7R II adaptor work with AF is impressive but not as fast/reliable/consistent as the real thing

      * A large and mature accessory ecosystem

      * Ergonomics and handling, esp. the ability to change major settings without looking down or drilling into menus that often.

      * Reliable/fast/consistent tracking/servo AF for sports/wildlife/action

      Note that I didn’t but battery life on that list. That’s the price of admission with mirrorless, and I’m done flogging it over that point. Keep in mind those batteries get you focus peaking, in VF realtime histos, light amplification in dark rooms, etc. so I would accept that compromise someday.

      | |
    • adam sanford

      I think J is dead-on with his Sony comments. They aren’t completely there yet for professionals, but their *trajectory* is so promising — especially compared to the relatively stagnant Canon/Nikon — that it makes sense to put your chips on the table with Sony.

      And yes, I lump Nikon in with Canon, actually, for having realtively plateau’d innovation-wise. Keep in mind the #1 reason we aren’t flogging Nikon for being just like Canon is that they are licensing Sony sensors…

      | |
    • Stan Rogers

      I’ve been a Minolta (Sony) shooter on and off (mostly on) since the early ’70s, and this has been a major theme in the story for a very long time. They’ll make a camera that should, by all rights, have them owning the industry – except for one or two [expletive] details. They’ve been frustratingly consistent with this since the X-700 came out in ’81: it had everything in the system a pro could have possibly wanted (except interchangeable viewfinders, which we thought was important back then, given the lack of LCD screens and all), great handling, ambient metering and AE (for when you needed it) that put everyone else to shame, and a TTL/OTF flash system that was years ahead of everybody else. But you could only use the TTL/OTF at X-sync (not “X-sync and slower”), and that X-sync was at 1/60s. Every once in a while, they’ll finally get everything right at a given technology level and use a “9” (their “pro” designation) in the model name, but by then nobody cares anymore. I really hope they can break the pattern; it’s the only way they’re going to get meaningful 3rd-party support, and as you’ve noted, that’s kind of important when making a system choice.

      | |
  13. Unknown Unknown

    The overhyped comparisons of dynamic range are slowly getting old.
    Instead of a high ISO test, he did a dynamic range test again.
    Its no big news that Canon cameras perform not so well, when you push them over +3. But the fact that they perform the same or better at an unpushed ISO 6400 and up is always overlooked. Also the fact that you can apply noise reduction which gives you roughly the same quality.

    | |
  14. adam sanford

    Cha, nice work. I dig the comparison work, and it’s clear the Sony has the better sensor (esp. with the 14 bit RAW output coming soon).

    But I see a *sensor* comparison yielding the conclusion that the Sony is the better all-around *camera*. Does the Sony have a better AF system? How about the menus, controls and ergonomics? Is the Sony more responsive? More reliable?

    Again, nice work here, but I’d limit your conclusions to only that which you showed/proved/demonstrated.

    | |
    • Cha

      Hey Adam! I’m glad you enjoyed the video. I understand how my conclusion may look limited, and I might have to expand in the article. My conclusion that the a7RII is a better all around camera comes from committing to both camera systems at different times in my career.

      I shot professionally with Canon for 5 years, then when the Sony a7 first came out it piqued my interest, and I picked up a camera and a lens. Flash forward about a year and now I’m selling all my canon gear for when the a7S came out. But even with the advantages with ridiculous ISO, size, and other digital features dslr’s don’t typically have, the camera system itself just wasn’t reliable enough for my other professional needs.

      Now flash forward a year, the a7RII comes out with nearly every feature available plus some. Now this is an example of a camera manufacturer who cares about innovation in improving the technology in their cameras.

      What really pulled my vote though was when I picked up the 5DS for the first time. It felt exactly like the 5dm3 that i bought in 2012, but not in a good way. It feels like an old camera, with a new trick.

      With the a7RII you feel like you can do everything. Need to shoot with vintage rangefinder lenses? Need to shoot 4k? Need a high resolution camera? Need a small camera for the weekend? The a7rII is the answer to all of these and more.

      I know this sounds subjective because a lot of it sounds like how I “feel”, but I do believe objectively the a7RII is a more useful camera than the 5DS for most photography disciplines.

      | |
    • adam sanford

      100% fair answer, I appreciate it.

      I would *not* add “hit moving targets” in the A7R II’s favor. The 5DS is packing the same 1DX autofocus setup that is relied upon by the world’s sports/wildlife photographers. Though the 5DS doesn’t have a high FPS, I would imagine that it would miss far less shots than the A7R II. So as much as the 5DS is indeed a tripod/studio rig compared to other Canon models, it’s a far better rig for action than the A7R II, IMHO.

      Further, one might contend the 5DS ‘feels old’ because the 5D3 really nailed the body shape and ergonomics and little needs to change. In contrast, the A7R II feels far less substantial/solid, and the controls are Sony-menu-labrinthine as always.

      The A7R II has more to offer under the hood and on paper. But there’s a reason why so many pros are still hanging on to their mirror-slappin’ SLRs — they work really well. No alarms and no surprises.

      | |
  15. mikel mikel

    All is I wish is that either one of these camera will be mine tthis christmas… i dont really care which better as long as it will take photographs..

    | |
  16. Matthew Saville

    Gee look at those sample photos, what a tough job you have. (Looks like I started a trend, going to Disneyland to review cameras! What a tough life…)

    | |
    • Cha

      it’s a tough job, but someone’s gotta do it

      | |
  17. J. Cassario

    Awesome review and even better video Cha, loved it!

    | |
    • Cha

      thanks jay! you’ll be joining me for my next one right?

      | |
  18. Ben Perrin

    After using both of these cameras I’ve found almost every single comparison video I’ve seen frustrating. Could we please stop with the +5 stop exposure push comparisons? It’s just not a real world scenario. Second, if you are going to compare you should use the 5dsr as the a7r2 has no anti-aliasing filter, or at the very least make that point. Having said that, both cameras are excellent. The 5ds has an advantage with resolution, autofocus (especially in low light), dual card slots and better weather sealing. The a7r2 has 4k video, IBIS (which is really fantastic for video), slightly better dynamic range and the tilt screen which makes a big difference for landscape photographers. Both have their pros and cons.

    At times the sony feels like a toy (to me) whereas the 5ds is a solid camera. Reliable but boring. The a7r2 has wifi + apps but if you are going to tether you’ll prefer the usb 3.0 option that the 5ds provides. Both are great cameras really. I really couldn’t justify using the a7r2 9 times out of 10 over the 5ds like you said. YMMV.

    | |
    • J. Cassario

      Ben, when reviewing a camera or making comparisons, pushing the DR +5 stops is simply seeing what the sensor can do, the same way you crop at 100% to compare resolution. No one crops that much in real life either. I personally like knowing that if I make a mistake and underexpose a shot, it can be recovered if need be by pushing the exposure. These cameras cost a lot of money and are the newest technology out there, when I am reviewing them or making comparisons, you better believe Im going to push them. Bottom line here, the sensor alone of the Sony is all around more capable, and I have shot both, I currently have both to test right now. I feel that the DR of the Canon makes the 5DS and the 5DSR a specialty camera, designed for studio use or landscape, not so much portrait use in general. Being that I shoot Canon gear still, along with Nikon and Sony, the banding in the shadows makes the entire 5D series difficult to use in low light for someone like myself who likes to use the flexibility of good DR.

      | |
    • Ben Perrin

      I have no problem with stating that dynamic range is important to some, but so much emphasis these days seems to be put on a stupid push the shadows 5 stops test. The a7r2 and 5ds are such different cameras that the decision to purchase one or not is made up of many more factors than just dynamic range.

      I also disagree with the speciality camera argument that people keep throwing around. It has the same af as the 5d3 (or at least they are both very very similar). So it can do sports and wildlife just as well as a 5d3 if not better. The downside (for some) being the file size.

      I own the a7r2 so don’t think I’m having a go at the camera at all but I did shoot it side by side with a 5d2 (on a black rapid double strap) and I can tell you that many many more times I was reaching for the 5d2 simply because I could trust the low light af performance much more and also because it felt so much more responsive and reliable to me. This waiting several seconds to review an image and blackout time is something new to me.

      Like I said, DR is important to some but placing so much emphasis on this one small aspect alone is frustrating and completely misleading. I don’t care how good the DR of the shot is if I miss the moment.

      | |
    • J. Cassario

      I dont think there is too much emphasis put on it, its part of the review, same as the resolution. Im not a fan of the Sony simply because I dont like other things about the camera, like the way it feels, shoots, or lag with certain things. Your right, there isnt really a difference between the 5D3 and the 5DS or 5DSR, only the higher resolution which is why I dont see most photographers needing it. The resolution of the 5D3 is plenty, leading me to look at the 5DS as a specialty camera. You are only buying it for the extra resolution, which isnt noticeable unless cropping in. If Canon had made some other improvements, along with the higher resolution, then I might consider it. They didnt. As far as the DR goes, your right, its moments that are important, which is why I like knowing that if I dont have time to get the perfect settings and catch a moment that happens to be underexposed, I know I can at least fix it in post. This has been my biggest complaint with the 5D series…. the lack of DR. Its also the reason I shoot Nikon for as my main system. Canon has fallen behind drastically, and unless they make a huge improvement over the 5D3 and 5DS, they are going to fall behind even more.

      | |
    • Ben Perrin

      Yeah, I certainly think Canon has fallen behind in terms of DR but also shadow noise at lower ISO levels. Nikon probably has the best all round system on the market at the moment. It’ll be interesting to see what happens with the 5d4 and Nikon d820/900 to see where both are at. I still think Canon has the best lens system with Nikon a close second. Sony isn’t very competitive in that area yet.

      All systems seem to have strengths and weaknesses which make it up to the user to decide the correct choice. Really all these modern cameras are capable of amazing things.

      | |
    • dale clark

      I have no problem with extreme comparisons. Every review for every product is taken to extremes. We normally do not drive cars at 120mph, but magazines taken them there. 99% of computer users do not use their systems to capabilities, however there’s always speed comparisons on extreme graphics files. Why should cameras be any different? I’m a Canon pro and I can overcome pretty much any photo obstacle thru my years of experience. I can figure out exposure without a meter, I can manually focus, I can take great images without looking at an LCD. Those things, like improved DR, makes life easier. Especially when your time is $$. I think many are more interested in letting the world know that they are a “real” photographer by knocking comparisons. Sounds like the Hasselblad shooters years ago when 35mm started making in roads. Sounds like film shooters when digital came around.

      | |
  19. Brandon Dewey

    good video!

    | |