I agree with you, the 1Dx III does have some advantages for sure.
I'd have to shoot more side by side with the R5. But I'm pretty open minded for both OVF and EVF, thus far I'm fine with either. But I have not used it extensively enough like you to say which has advantages in what applications.
I did give a shake down with my 1Dx III, 300mm f/2.8 IS II, 24-70mm f/2.8 II, 85mm f/1.2 II 5Ds R for a proposal shoot on Sat, OMG I forgot how awesome this body is!!!! The unlimited buffer depth (Used the 300mm while hiding in a corner) allowed me to shoot burst in a way I would not have been able with the R3. I think I did 600 shots in a matter of a few minutes of the proposal! It was a suggestion of the previous photographer who got the gig but couldn't do it. And he said to shoot lots of burst images when she is being proposed. Too get all the emotions and expressions. She did not disappoint with happiness, joy, crying, back to laughing, crying ect. She was over the moon.
Now, I could shoot in a way that could have kept me from over running the buffer of an R3. But it so was nice having those extra frames.
Now if I was shooting much much faster action the R3's frame rate could definitely be an advantage and change my mind. But to be honest 16/20 is very fast for my use. But this could definitely be a factor for someone else. But thus far I prefer the unlimited buffer depth. Maybe I will change my mind with use though.
I have not ruled out the R3, still wanting to make the best choice. But thus far the 1Dx III has made a very good impression. I'm kinda in a way looking for an excuse for the R3. Because I try to be as objective as possible. Part of it is I have not shot an R3 yet. Which I'm sure will be very good.
Also I shot a display R5 just to compare it to the R5 I had shot before from my good friend with the RF 85mm f/1.2. The guy at the counter was super insistent that the AF accuracy was excellent and he had shot it with the 85mm f/1.2 for a multiple shoots with at least 90% accuracy.
Well even in decent light he nor I could get a truly perfectly in focus shot no matter what we did, masks made it completely impossible and glasses made it near impossible to get an in focus shot.
And it always just barely missed, it never landed it with perfection. Good enough for web viewing or small prints, but that is it. I would not do an 8x10 with them. Needless to say I walked away with the same impression of the R5's AF as I always have.
VS I shot probably 100 shots at the proposal with 100% dead on accuracy with no fuss and it was scary accurate. This was the EF 85mm f/1.2 II. Yes it is not near as fast, but it didn't need to be. It was more than fast enough taking only a split second to focus and it was dead on every single time.
Needless to say I find most people who say the R5 has AF that is better than a 1Dx III has not shot one side by side or is not picky about their focus. Or uses lenses that have much more DOF and it is not an issue. But the 85mm is my bread and butter lens, it gets me my money shots every time and I use it frequently wide open. So I use it in a way that will show the weakness of any camera body.
But, and it is a big but. The R5 is touted constantly has have far better AF than even the 1Dx III. Well if your version of better AF is auto detect. Then I guess it is. Personally I would rather have an in focus picture for taking a portrait with an 85mm f/1.2. The R5 is not capable of that. I have tried and tired. It just doesn't. Which is a shame really. Even old EF bodies could do that much.
I'm more than willing to be proved wrong, but between two R5's and three people it just doesn't do it.
So far I have regulated the R5 to having poor AF performance with an 85mm. There is just no nice way of putting it.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Fast Glass
