Just curious if anyone on the forum was thinking they would be getting the R5 and R6 that appear to be ready for the official announcement later this week along with a slew of new RF lenses?
Printable View
Just curious if anyone on the forum was thinking they would be getting the R5 and R6 that appear to be ready for the official announcement later this week along with a slew of new RF lenses?
Possibly, but I want to build my lens collection first and I don't mind waiting for the used market of RF lenses and bodies to start populating. I usually buy used. I prefer the next guy to buy something he couldn't really afford and I pick it up for 25% off for something that's as good as new.:D
Still waiting to see about AF tracking performance.
My current kit is just fine for static subjects and landscapes or portraits .... an upgrade for me would be if the AF tracking for birds in flight is as good or better than the Sony a9 or Nikon D850 / D500 / D5.
Don't really want to begin another lens collection at the moment....so the AF system will need to be stellar for me to consider it.
Yep. I know the M6 II probably should not be directly compared to the R5, but it has the Digic 8 processor, DPAF, etc. My 5DIV focuses faster. I will say Eye/head tracking/detection are very nice. The R5 is likely better and is also going to have animal/bird eye AF. So, I am intrigued by that, but they would need to leapfrog the 5DIV by a pretty significant margin in terms of speed.
Plus, I really do enjoy my OVF.
Agreed ....
Also the 1Dx III has me put off a bit because of the relatively low pixel count AND to achieve max performance you must use live view and not the OVF ... bummer for my style of shooting.
If, in the near future, I do convince myself that I have to have a better BIF rig I will most likely consider adding a used Nikon or Sony body and lens specifically for that purpose.
A used Nikon D850 or D500 + 500mm PF would be great.
The Sony a9 and a9II are great BIF cameras but lenses are a bit of a dilemma. Based on multiple reviews, I'm not totally in love with the Sony 200-600 so lens choice here (even used) might be big bucks .... another 500 or 600 prime .... yikes!!
Both cameras appeal to me but at the moment, I'm really happy with my R. Has anyone seen the article on Canon Rumors about leaked pricing for the R5, R6 and the lenses? https://www.canonrumors.com/here-are...r6-and-lenses/
Not really shocked about the price of the R5 but I am a little shocked at the price of the RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM. I really thought it would be north of $3000. I'll have to rent it when it is available to make the decision to buy.
Have you seen anything much from birders saying the 1DX III isn't as good as a BIF rig? It is a bit odd, but I have seen remarkably little on it in terms of true BIF evaluations. But, Jonathan is doing pretty well with it :)
I am tempted, at least a little, by everything. The R5 and R6 actually tempt me a little. The weaknesses I have with my 5DIV are AF coverage, AF speed/tracking, buffer size, and fps. I want to say there is something else, but, I am not recalling it at the moment. The R5/R6 both "solve" my fps and AF coverage issues. The R5 has a CFExpress Type B card slot, so that would solve the buffer issue (just write to the one card). So that is great. AF speed/tracking is TBD.
But I am not a fan of the EVFs I've played with (including the R, a Sony in stores and renting the Fuji and owning the EVF-DC1/2). I do not really want more MPs than the 5DIV. And, probably most significant, I do not want to be tempted by the RF lenses. I really just got my EF lens kit where I want it. I know I could use an adapter, but I know me, and as soon as I have an R body, I'll want at least a few RF lenses.
Add that all up, if I want to "solve" my "problems" (I use quotes as the 5DIV really is remarkable) I am leaning toward swallowing hard and the 1DX III.
Yep, just saw those. As for the RF 100-500, it is an f/7.1 lens....and f/5.6 at 400 is not that different than f/7.1 at 500 (400/5.6 = 71 mm while 500/7.1 = 70 mm). So, you are really talking about the same lens as the 100-400, just mirrorless can AF a bit better with less light, or so it seems.
Overall, I get the temptation. If I was coming in with a less populated kit, I would probably be going nuts. And, for someone that takes pictures of pretty much everything, moving...or not, the R5 or R6 both seem like a nice step up given the Eye-AF, fps, and AF point coverage.
I am looking forward to hearing what people think.
All good points! The 'low' pixel count of the 1DXIII (compared to other cameras) does allow for some other performance perks, like lower noise at high ISO and faster shooting. Plus file sizes are smaller so your memory cards and computer won't get bogged down quite so much. Yes there are some things it can arguably do better in the awkward-to-use mirrorless mode, such as eye tracking for portraits, and providing focus points on nearly the entire image. Plus it will shoot even faster in mirrorless, if that's actually necessary (sorta like having "ludicrous mode" in a Tesla?). But I've had great experience with BIFs in the normal optical mode, and as long as you keep the bird within the focus area the camera will track it through all kinds of clutter. For example, one Great Grey Owl that I was tracking a few months ago flew right between me and my buddy. The camera continued to nail it:
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...HFvhpKm-XL.jpg
I mount my 500 mm lens on a gimbal tripod, whereas something like the Nikon 500 PF would be a breeze to hand hold. So if you don't need the high-ISO performance, or the super fast shutter speed and infinite buffer, then going Nikon and using the PF lens is pretty tempting, for sure. But I think we've come a long ways in terms of tracking performance from previous Canon models including the 1DX II. And I'm sure the R5 will be just as good in that regard.
I should also add, in response to the 'low' MP comment, that 20 MP is still really good. I've sold two copies of this image as 3' x 6' prints, and the clients have been absolutely thrilled with the result.
https://photos.smugmug.com/Nature/Bi...-Edit-2-XL.jpg
At Jonathan,
How do you feel the noise compares to the 1Dx II (Or just in general) in real life? It seems to be better but have a weird darkness to them (For lack of better words) in Bryans crops and DXO says it's actually worse than the MKII. Which I'm not really sure how they got that score but I digress. Was wonder how real world usage compared as I found out my 1D III is definitely got a bigger edge to the 60D I had even though on paper there was not "That" much difference. I found in real life the 1D III to be a noticable step up as a whole noise wise.
Hi Fast Glass...where do you see DXO mark saying the 1DX III is worse than the II? I just looked and it has a higher score and checking their measurements, it looks better.
____
EDIT: Just saw this go by. Looks like DXO Mark has backtracked on their initial test. What I looked at this morning was updated and the 1DX III is now scoring above the II.
_____
Ok...back to the R5/6....so, just saw the first reference to something I have wondered...as Canon is working to economize and cut costs, it makes sense to re-use parts....and, the sensor in the R6 is the same 20 MP sensor and same Digic X processor as the 1DX III.
I am really wondering if all the attention given to the R5 is a bit misplaced....the R6 is looking like a very equivalent camera, except for the resolution and a few high end video specs.....we'll see.
I look for this frequently and there isn't much that I can find. Jonathan has shared some wonderful results....his owl images are wonderful. The relative lack of user reports is one reason I'm not completely convinced about the 1DXIII being my ultimate BIF solution.
This image is simply spectacular in every way.
My comment about megapixels was only intended to convey that I was expecting the 1DXIII to be outfitted with a higher resolution sensor and that in comparison to other bodies I had considered for BIF it has a relatively low pixel count. Certainly 20 mp is capable of fine images and large prints.
The biggest advantage I had in mind for the high resolution sensors was the ability to crop significantly and still retain high IQ in terms of resolution. In situations where you can get close or have enough focal length to nearly fill the frame with your subject it wouldn't matter near as much.
After the news today it looks like the R5 and the 100-500mm may actually be a strong contender for my ultimate BIF rig......
Thank you! And yes for sure, the R5 and the 100-500 would make a very fine setup for BIF. Being able to shoot without a tripod is a huge advantage. I tried hand-holding my big rig for shooting skimmers in flight, and I ended up with a serious case of tennis elbow that took months to heal.
I would say that as long as you have plenty of daylight, then you don't need to worry about losing any detail to noise when you crank up the shutter speed to 1/2000 or faster as is usually necessary. But I'm guessing that if you need to go above ISO 3200, then you might start losing some of the advantages of the high pixel count. My wildlife photography is often happening in low light conditions so I appreciate the advantages of a low-noise sensor and a f/4 lens. But that advantage vanishes completely when light is ample, and the higher MP sensors should definitely show better results.
My short answer is I really have no idea! Both the Mark II and Mark III are excellent with regards to noise. I've been really happy with the image quality from both. I assume the Mark III is better but I can't say for sure because I don't do tests like the experts. For me the speed and focus performance are what really matter. And I think the R5 and R6 will match the Mark III focusing quite well, since a lot of the performance improvement comes from the new high speed processing chip.
So, some of the specifications I am most interested in are coming out. With my 5DIV, my buffer fills in a matter of seconds (clocked it at 3.2 secs with 160 MB/sec CF only and 2.3 sec with SD card) and it is rated at 21 RAW images. This has been a limitation in numerous circumstances.
Buffer size:
R5: 180 RAW/260 CRAW
R6: 240 RAW/1000+ CRAW
I was hoping to be able to do the 12 fps for >5 seconds. Looks like both pass that easily with the R5 being at a minimum of 15 seconds continuous shooting of RAW at 12 fps (I say minimum as usually buffer size does not include what is being written to the card) and the R6 is well past that. Even at 20 fps, that is 9 sec of continuous shooting. I have seen one reference to this being to the CFExpress card only, which would be fine with me. I am starting to shoot to CF card only in the 5DIV to get my 3.2 sec buffer.
So, in terms of my boxes, consider this one checked.
An interesting spec I was not expecting, AF at -6 EV. I am plenty happy with the -3 EV lower AF limit in the 5DIV, so that is not something I am looking for, but for those of you that want to AF in a closet with no lights on. There you go.
In terms of a negative, Bryan doesn't include this yet, but I am hearing that battery life is 300-400 pics per charge. This is a negative. Granted, I have shot double the rated 305 images on my M6II on a single charge. So, we'll see, but this is one I am now watching.
Overall, these two cameras are looking very very good. Where the 1DXIII I view as sort of the apex of the DSLRs, it does look like, in particular the R5, these are everything the mirrorless/"next generation" folks have been asking for.
Most likely tomorrow going to local dealer to try and make some agreemend getting R6 to replace my 5d4. The R5 would be wonderfull, but its price in finland is quite horrible atm 4900€ish even with 5d4 its over 3.3k and there is limit of 110k pictures taken for the price given from old one and mine has over 143k =) So much likely have to also give couple of my lenses etc. on the trade to get myself nice R6 for my night time adventures, apperently that is quite an low light monster.
One thing that really is worrying is the battery, since i shoot a lot of time lapses, the 5d4 can easily give me nearly 1.5-2k images per battery. That seems to be an issue with canon, to have good battery life. IF R6 can be used with powerbank attached, then i am happy....
At current prices and for my goal of having a light, hand holdable, high res rig for BIF I think I would prefer the R5 + 100-500mm + 1.4 TC as opposed to the 1DXIII
I could also see using my EF lenses with an adapter on the R5 for more static shots
I would keep my 1DX which is still a very good camera for low light.
Also would keep my 5D MKIV
My 5DS-R I would consider selling to partially offset the cost of the R5 rig
Now I only need a $7K winning lottery ticket;)
Probably a good strategy overall (especially the part about the winning lottery ticket!). The new 100-500 with 1.4 TC will have a wide-open aperture of f/10 at full zoom, so you're definitely going to need a lot of light to get BIFs at 1/2000 sec without hitting crazy high ISO. So that's the only downside I can see. Time will tell how good the R5 is for noise, but at 45 MP it is inherently limited by the laws of physics so it's going to be noisier than the 1DX no matter what. The only question is how much noisier. Then again, it should be better than the 5DS-R, so given that you have good experience with that already, you probably already have a really good sense of how the R5 will perform.
I think the only thing missing on the R5 which I would have liked to see is the same AF-ON button with trackpad controller, that is on the 1DX III. I find that such a fantastic feature, and it is soooo much better to use than the joystick controller for moving the focus point around. I love how you can swing the point around while pressing the button (I'm a back-button focuser). If the R5 had that I would almost be tempted to get it for my second body. I'm guessing that you should be able to move the focus point by dragging your thumb over the LCD screen (like you can with the Canon R), but that isn't anywhere near as nice as the AF-ON trackpad. A lot of the time you can use auto focus point selection, so moving the point around manually is unnecessary. But when you're shooting bears and other large wildlife, you typically want to go with a single point and then put that point right on the eyeball. So being able to move it around quickly is a real bonus.
I would agree that noise may well be an issue for the R5 and f/10 is not optimum for sure but I may not use the 1.4 TC for flight images very often.
I'm hoping the sensor will have similar or better performance than the Nikon D850 (also 45 mp)
I have a couple of friends who have used that body with great success for flight photography.
The RAW images from the Nikon D850 are pretty good up to iso 3200 and any noise in those files cleans up readily especially with Topaz DeNoise AI.
Also curious to see how a 600mm f/4 with an adapter will fair with the AF tracking .... would not expect it to be as good as an RF lens of course.
I like the joystick and using it has become second nature to me so not too worried about that feature.
I have used back button focus a lot but have not been convinced to stay with it all the time....the more traditional AF on button next to the joystick won't bug me (I think) since I have never used a camera with the trackpad.
I'm going to stay with what I have.
Dave
I would need to be more proficient at shooting fast action and video to notice the advantages of the R5 or R6 over my current 5DIV. Undoubtedly Jonathan, Joel and Brant (and others on the forum) could make good use of the new features.
Yeah after reading this following thing i am having high hopes that right type of powerbank could actually work as "battery"also.
Both the Canon EOS R5 and the Canon EOS R6 also support USB charging or being powered via the USB-C connector using the PD-E1 USB power adaptor or other compatible USB-PD certified devices with high power output and a USB-C to C cable.
I may be in the same boat. At least for awhile. I will probably buy a new camera sometime in the next year or so as I have decided that if I start going on major photo opportunities I'll have a second body. But, so far the 5DIV has been working well for my current needs.
And while the R5 is checking boxes for what I have ultimately decided I would like to improve upon my 5DIV, I actually think the biggest advance is not the fps/buffer size, etc that we are talking about. But rather face/eye/head detection. If a photographer is willing to "surrender" control to the camera, it seems that the R5/R6's system is now good enough, while taking photos of people/pets/etc, all you have to worry about is settings and composition.
And to a photographer that is shooting in "P" mode, think about it, they do not even have to worry about settings, they just point the camera, it will find the heads/faces/eyes, pick the settings, so all the "photographer" does is compose the image and snap the picture. This is an amazing thing for people just getting into photography, especially, say, young parents.
While I do remember manual focus cameras, I am very much used to autofocus but having to control everything else: settings, composition, and AF point location. As with others, I have become used to selecting AF location with the joystick to the point where I looked back at some family events and I do occasionally miss an eye or so, but I generally did not consider this to be a "need." But, I have to admit, playing with this on even the M6II, it is remarkable, and the R5/6 are supposedly better.
I think when people look back, this is going to be the major advancement here. I have heard a couple of the portrait/wedding photographers that have had hands on experiences comments like "tack sharp images on the eye every time at f/1.2"....
For example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_byYwav5ccM&t=595s
~11:10 has a comparison of similar images taken with R5/R6.
So, I still believe in shoot until you identify a need. So, I am not one of those that are running out and getting this. But, from the sidelines (for now), I am impressed.
Ok...I do not shoot this way, but if I did, that is cool.
I came across where B&H compared the R5 to an number of different camera bodies and here where a number of Canon Explorers of Light, who have used the R5/R6, answer questions about them.
This is starting to answer my next main question, I am seeing a number of people commenting on how good the AF is. Speed/accuracy. Rick Sammon saying the R6 is going to be his "go to" wildlife camera...
No doubt Canon is behind the marketing getting advanced cameras to youtubers and EOLs, etc. But, I am seeing pretty consistent reports.
I should really get off the internet and go take pictures......
I would someday love to have a camera WITHOUT video capabilities, since i don't have any use of them. Give me just camara, should be cheaper and suffer no overheating issues like R6 and R5 have :P
But yeah, R6 with th 600mm and both extenders, good enough since the nice R6 af on both =)
So the 5 has 8 stop IBIS.
"Stabilization gets better if you pair the in-body stabilizers with a compatible RF- or EF-mount lens."
So has anyone found the list of EF lenses that it is compatible with?
How would this stack with the in body IS of my 500mm?
This might be a bigger improvement and benefit to eliminate noise in low light than having the lower mp sensor. I can get my 500mm down to 1/250 before shake really becomes an issue. Getting it down even lower would be huge.
What are you shooting with the 500 mm lens, that would benefit from a slower shutter speed? If it's birds or other wildlife, they will need to be perfectly still to get the shot. I can see where the IBIS is a game changer for people that want to use the camera for walking around, especially with that new 100-500 RF zoom. But when you are attaching it to a big lens like the 500 f/4, you're probably using a tripod so the lens IS should be more than enough to deal with the regular vibrations.
The early morning blind, big game like deer seldom moves that fast. Even the bobcats like to stop and look around. Carrying a tripod in the field is not always the best option and I seldom do.
If your maxed out in the evening or morning, an extra IS stop might get you 7 to 8 more minutes with a lower shutter speed for a shot that you normally wouldn't even try.
More IS would help in all situations where you do not have the tripod.
I almost pucked uo the R, the R5 is likely in the bag soon. Why?
Here is my logic.
I loved the resolution of the 5DsR that I rented... close enough.
Mirrorless, I almost went to mf4/3 for the benefit of no flappy mirror. Ta da.
Twistt Flippy!!!!! Man everytime I borrow my friends 80d the touch flippy gets me and when I go back to the 5d3 aaaarrrggghh
My sigma art lenses now are IBIS and that is cool.
34 mp Still capture from movie frames for "net" published photos moves the equivalent fps to 30?!?!? Belly LOL!!
I have use for movies/vids in wild life shooting.... wonder how close the shutter speed can get to the fps.... cant shoot 30 fps at 1/15th.
Saw the silent disables aeb... darn but 12 fps with no mirror is same as my 1dx.1 so that works.
I will be getting it in the fall. Too freaking hot in FL right now. Hope the supply chain is decent.
STAY SAFE AND UNINFECTED. Lets just say I am way deep the epidemiology of cobid and while dying is bad the rate of permanent disability is the story missed by the media.
The media has missed many things. They dilute the reports on symptoms so you have to much information and do not focus on the major things you should be watching. It is Silent Hypoxia, if you get it buy yourself a pulse oximeter and if your oxygen starts getting below 90% get to the emergency room. This thing kills by stealing your ability to take in oxygen.
Wear masks, social distance and be safe. We have been there and back already. It is no fun and scary as hell.
This sentence pretty much sums up what I think about these new cameras. When I first saw rumors about the R5 and R6, I thought the R6 could be a worthy replacement for the 6D I bought in 2012 (to be fair, I think the EOS R already is at the price you can get one now). It looks like it should have a better sensor while the improvements in AF would be night and day.
But lately I thought about what kind of pictures I'm taking, how many of them benefit from a Full Frame camera, how much I like my M50 since I've bought it and in the end, I decided not to buy either the EOS R nor the R6.
During the last two years, I bought a few lenses for the M system and I now have a pretty nice collection. The M50 and all of these lenses (6 in total) cost me less than my 6D and 24-105 L kit in 2012. Even if Canon completely stops the development of the M line, I have more than enough gear to take great pictures and have fun doing it for a few decades, so I'm not worried about that. The EF-M 32mm and sigma 56 finished to convince me. I'll probably add another M camera in the future, either the rumored high end model or, if it never comes out, the M6 mark II, because the compact size of these cameras makes it easy to take two of them with you when hiking. I'd like to do this as I always found that changing lenses when hiking was uncomfortable, but didn't want to carry two heavy Full Frame cameras for hours.
To sum up, the only times I feel the need for an R or an R6 is when I read forums on the internet. When I'm actually taking pictures, my M50 is a joy to use and has far more features than I'll ever need.
So, I have wondered if this says something about the future of crop sensor cameras, but....
An EOL (Rick Sammon) talking about the R6 and the new RF 600 mm f/11 and RF 800 mm f/11.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_mfqryFqBw
Not "L"....not aimed at the professional crowd, but a pair of <$1000 "super tele" lenses for the masses.