R5? R6? Anyone?

[Fast Glass]

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.

[Kayaker72]

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.

[Joel Eade]

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 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.

[Joel Eade]

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.

Certainly agree with you here!

[Joel Eade]

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.

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......

[Jonathan Huyer]

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.

[Jonathan Huyer]

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.

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.

[Kayaker72]

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.

[Karsaa]

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....

[Joel Eade]

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