This was not a rigorous controlled comparison. I had the Canon shot
and as I was working with it I said, 'Hey, let's see what the Sony can
do too'.

The lighting was natural from the window on an overcast day but the
time was close enough that it shouldn't have made any difference. I
didn't use a tripod, and the Sony , but not the Canon, has its version
of "Image Stabilization", so that could have been a difference.

In these models, the Canon actually has a significantly larger sensor,
and I guess that my main surprise was that the larger sensor didn't
produce a clearly better image, which I would have expected.
JD


The Canon image is definitely "greener". Seems a bit unnatural though.
Since you have the original plant and consider that the Sony yields
truer colors, I would concur.
Did you use a tripod in both/either instance?
Was the lighting precisely the same in both case? No fluorescent light
assist in the Canon?
Canon Auto White balance may be a little off if shot indoors.
Different cameras use different amounts of sharpening by default.
Canon may use less sharpening.
Sony uses the legendary Zeiss Tessar lens. This may account for some of
the increased sharpness.

To get a really valid comparison of the two cameras it is necessary to
shoot both pictures under precisely the same conditions.
Tripod, Reproducible lighting, Identical in-camera sharpening (as close
as possible),same image quality (degree of compression), etc.
BTW, nice pictures.
Bob Williams