Canon R5 Mark II is announced

[Kayaker72]

Still early and learning about the newly released camera, but here is the link to Bryan's news feed and landing page.

A few items catching my eye:

1. Pre-shooting mode, 1/2 of a second
2. 14 bit, up to 30 fps, 6.3 milli-second (~1/160th of a sec) readout speed in electronic shutter. FPS is now programmable. Big thumbs up from me on that one.
3. Great that it is mostly the same very good button layout. A few small changes...I like video/stills switch location
4. About the same size, slightly lighter (68 g) than R5.
5. Claims about upgraded AF system
6. New battery that provides better "higher continuous power". I am hoping this means that the mechanical fps does not drop off as the battery charge goes down.
7. R3's EVF, or something very similar. Eye-controlled AF. Initial impressions seem good.

There are many other features that might appeal to others. Seems like there are overheating improvements, including a cooling-grip. 8K video has improved. Etc. For video, I am seeing it has waveforms, which I hear videographers complain about not having, so that is good.

Then, a lot is the same: 12 fps mechanical shutter, ~45 MPs, general size, button layout, and ergonomics. But, hey, if it ain't broke.....

Actually, that is a big deal to me, as if I went to two cameras for some event, I could have a R5 I and II and likely not lose much in terms of muscle memory switching between cameras.

The R5 is an amazing camera. I am not sure I need more. I have pre-ordered the R5 II, but I will wait to see/read more to see if I keep the pre-order.

I did notice that the new R5's are now ~$2900. A great price, IMO.

[Kayaker72]

Perhaps I am the primary person interested in the R5 II. I do have it pre-ordered and am waiting to hear more about its abilities. I have thus far run the gamut of being very excited to going back and using my R5 and being completely satisfied and wondering if I shoudl skip a generation.

So, I decided to take a minute to look back at the list I created here where I talk about my issues with the R5 Mk 1.

A quick summation:
Cons:

• Battery and FPS.

The issue I had appears to no longer be present with the Mk II. At least the owners manual for the R5 II does not come with the same caution regarding as battery charge drops, the FPS will decrease. Rather, the FPS is more consistent throughout the battery charge (with the new batteries).

• Bit depth and FPS.

Again solved with the R5 II. The issue here was the faster FPS modes dropped bits on the R5: "H" mode and slower is 14 bits, but "H+" dropped to 13 bits and electronic shutter dropped to 12 bits. With the R5 II, Bryan (in his review) clearly states that it is 14 bits in these different modes.

• File size.

Is what it is. This is likely the same. I should probably switch to cRAW. While the computer I built in 2021 can handle it, I am noticing that my libraries are getting larger ever since moving to the R5.

• AF.

I noted this was not a true con as the R5 is very good, but an area where I could see improvement. That holds true. In fact, this is a key factor I want to hear about in order to keep my preorder. The R5 AF was great, but not infallible. The R5 II does not have Quadpixel AF or even the rotated rows of DPAF like the R1. So, is it better? Does AF work better with vertical lines? Does it stay on osprey's better as they dive? Does it stick to small birds better as they flit around? They did add the "Digic Accelerator" chip that seems to be focused on aiding AF while the other processor handles other duties. So, there is reason to hope in addition to simple evolution.

• People/mammal eye-AF.

This seems to be a focused area of improvement for the R5 II. They even included the ability to program in peoples faces so the camera would preferentially pick their face. I expect this to be improved.


So, that is my list of cons. It seems like they were mostly to completely addressed.

In terms of reasons to keep my preorder:

1. If the AF has improved
2. The 0.5 second pre-capture mode will open up opportunities. That was desired.
3. Eye Control AF might be in this list. I haven't used it, but I can see that being very useful

Some lesser but still attractive features:

1. 30 fps. I will not want this often. I usually shoot with 8 fps, even for wildlife. I occasionally go to 12 fps, and even less often use 20 fps. But still, I can see using 30 fps with pre-capture to try to get birds taking off/landing.
2. Faster readout speed = less rolling shutter. Not a huge issue, but sure, that is a good thing.
3. More options for electronic shutter mode. Not a huge deal as I shoot electronic first curtain, but I do like that.
4. I do like the Stills to video switch. I do not like having to go into a menu to switch to video...in fact, I just use the button that defaults to a single mode/limited control.
5. The R5 II is a tick lighter.
6. I wonder if the R5 II will be the last R5 with a shutter.

I am hearing about a con to the R5 II. We'll see how it plays out, but some are saying the battery life is a bit worse and that the R5 II is a power hog. We'll see. The CIPA ratings are slightly better with the R5 II, so we'll see if that holds true. But it would be a concern.

Anyone else considering upgrading?

[Jonathan Huyer]

I'm always intrigued when new cameras come out, but I haven't hit the preorder button as of yet on either of these new models. I do like my R5, but I have a few quibbles with it:
- Frame rate drops with battery charge under about 50% in mechanical shutter mode
- Slow start-up time when turning it on (or bringing it back to life after it goes to sleep)
- Could use better weather sealing (viewfinder will fog up if camera gets wet)
- Animal eye-detect works for birds and cats and dogs but not much else
- Single-point autofocus square is rather large in the frame. Smaller focus point would be nice, to get it exactly where I want it.

I'd be keen to hear if any of these issues have been improved upon with the new R5. Or maybe all of these are reasons I should get a R1 ?

Also regarding file size --- I've been using C-RAW for quite a while and I like it a lot. Smaller file size means more images on the card, and best of all a larger effective buffer size so I can hold down the button for longer when the action gets going.

[Kayaker72]

I just changed my mode to cRAW. I'll try it for a while and if I do not notice a difference, it'll be here to stay.

The first issue appears fixed. I've heard reports that the start up time is much faster, and the weather sealing is better, but those are somewhat TBD. The animal eye detect I am curious about myself. There is a lot of emphasis on sports, particularly with the R1. But not much chatter about animals, at least not that I've heard. As for the single-point square, I use the smaller point. Historically (5D III/IV) the smaller point was slower and I used expanded point AF. With the R5, I use the smaller point and it works very well for me.

I still have a few days of thinking before I decide if I will cancel my pre-order. Overall, I preach "shoot to need" and I do not have many needs with the R5. However, it does look like the R5 II fixed my minor quibbles and I do like my gear . So the temptation is there.

[Kayaker72]

In terms of Noise and DR, Bryan has posted his results, as has Photons to photos.

Big picture statement, no real change. Very similar to each other. The R5 break between ADC is at ISO 400 and it is at ISO 800 for the R5 II. I prefer the ISO 400 change, I find having ISO 400 being similar to ISO 100 on the R5 very useful.

There isa slight hit to DR for ES. Given the claims that ES is 14 bit, that was a unexpected.

[neuroanatomist]

There isa slight hit to DR for ES. Given the claims that ES is 14 bit, that was a unexpected.

The R3 outputs 14-bit in all shutter modes and takes a similar (slightly bigger, actually) hit with ES compared to mechanical, so I wouldn’t call it unexpected for the R5II.