R5- Longer term thoughts

[Fast Glass]

At Jonathan.

I have to agree with your results with the R5 after I have also shot a lot with it. It's a great camera, but definitely has it's weak points and the 1Dx III has been the finest body I have ever used and love that thing to death. I really do. It's aging mount and the impressive RF primes is the only reason I couldn't justify it.

But I have to see how the R1 performs. If they still struggle. I may do what you do and keep a 1Dx III in the bag as well, when the application calls for it.

It really is a fantastic camera from a user standpoint and it's consistency and confidence it brings. And I have little doubt the R1 won't do the same. But Mirrorless is new tech and there could be some technological teething happening with it as well. So who knows, but I'm sure as a whole the R1 will rock the house in a very big way.

But with used 1Dx III prices dropping, there could be a value aspect the 1Dx III could bring to the table.

[Jonathan Huyer]

That's great to know. I'm also keen on your experience with using the spot AF mode, when you have the chance to give that a try. It makes the focus box a lot smaller obviously, but it gives reduced performance when the light is dim or the subject is low contrast. I'm wondering if the spot-AF in the R3 gives better performance than the R5.

[HDNitehawk]

That's great to know. I'm also keen on your experience with using the spot AF mode, when you have the chance to give that a try. It makes the focus box a lot smaller obviously, but it gives reduced performance when the light is dim or the subject is low contrast. I'm wondering if the spot-AF in the R3 gives better performance than the R5.

I had trouble with the R5 focusing on tight areas with spot AF with good light. What I checked I would give the R3 a slight edge over the R5. I started to check it last night at dusk on the lab pups, if I get time I will tonight. They should be contrast deficient enough.

[HDNitehawk]

That's great to know. I'm also keen on your experience with using the spot AF mode, when you have the chance to give that a try. It makes the focus box a lot smaller obviously, but it gives reduced performance when the light is dim or the subject is low contrast. I'm wondering if the spot-AF in the R3 gives better performance than the R5.

I did some test shots tonight on one of the lab pups. The test ended about 15 minutes after sunset and started just as the sun was setting. It seems the answer is yes the R3 is better and substantially so. I shot the 70-200mm at F/2.8, 1/100 and stopped shooting when the ISO went over 10,000.The R5 was gradually worse and more erratic, the shots were slightly OOF even when it hit. The R3 was still nailing shots all the way through. At the very end I turned on Animal/Eye detect on both. I didn't have time to switch the lens around so I used both one with the 24x70 at 70 and the 70x200 at 70. The R5 couldn't find focus, but the R3 could hit the eye although it was a bit erratic. Keep in mind I was shooting a black lab pup after sunset.

I know the pictures in the view finder are JPG's, but even the quality of the JPG's out of the R3 are better than those out of the R5. It also seemed like the R5 was struggling with metering and the R3 was not.

My R5 is still under warranty, I decided I am going to ship it back to Canon and have them check it out.

[Fast Glass]

Good to know, seems like the R3 performed like it what I and many expected. I am curious to try it myself the R3, is it good enough were I can use fast primes wide open and have great consistency? Seems like it might.

I still find the 3-series market placement a bit curious. Not so much that it exists. That's fine. But at 6k. I'm a little scared to know what a R1 will cost!

[HDNitehawk]

Good to know, seems like the R3 performed like it what I and many expected. I am curious to try it myself the R3, is it good enough were I can use fast primes wide open and have great consistency? Seems like it might.

I still find the 3-series market placement a bit curious. Not so much that it exists. That's fine. But at 6k. I'm a little scared to know what a R1 will cost!

I think the longer it takes to get an R1, the more likely it isn't several thousand more than the R3. If we see one soon it may have significant separation.
I had the 35mm II shooting at near wide open on the R5 and had really good results. I haven't put the prime on the R3 but did have the RF 24x70 F2.8 wide open and it did great, with face and eye detect it did great. I also played with eye focus and while it wasn't accurate enough for spot or point focus if you were in any kind of expanded focus it would lock on to the face and eye you were looking at. It may be a bit gimmicky but it might have its uses.

[Fast Glass]

I was actually pondering that, but I know the 1Ds III also came with an 8k price tag. So I was debating whether it will cost 8K and the R3 will keep it's price or will the 1Dx III and R3 drop in price and the R1 be lower in price.

This could go both ways and both being possible. I sure hope it is the latter.

[Jonathan Huyer]

Wow interesting! I'm guessing that the R5 issues aren't warranty related, because they sound awfully familiar to me. But it's certainly worth confirming. Regardless, it's good to know that the technology is improving. Thanks for the feedback.

[HDNitehawk]

Wow interesting! I'm guessing that the R5 issues aren't warranty related, because they sound awfully familiar to me. But it's certainly worth confirming. Regardless, it's good to know that the technology is improving. Thanks for the feedback.

I sent the body in, got a message from Canon to call. Their initial check out showed nothing. They asked for some pics so I sent a few pics which showed how it looses focus when tracking and blows highlights occasionally. The pics were of my new Labrador pups running from shade to sun. I would randomly loose focus then it would re-acquire.

I just got it back and this is their response:
"Your product has been examined and it was found that the adjustment of the imaging sensor was out of specifications causing the auto focus to function improperly. Electrical adjustments were performed. Product functions were confirmed...."

As for the blown highlights they recommended using a set ISO as it would swap from shade to sun while running.

I doubt this does anything for the low light performance we were talking about earlier.

So the moral of the story is, if your under warranty and not sure I wouldn't hesitate.

[Fast Glass]

That is indeed awesome findings! This would absolutely mirror my frustrations with it in low light wedding shooting with the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II. When the light gets low enough it was struggling to lock on at all. Or not reliably. And of course it struggles with the RF or EF 85mm f/1.2 hitting perfect eye focus, focusing instead on the eye lashes or on the wrinkles around it. Any of my 1-series hits the focus much more reliably.

This is kinda exciting that the AF is finally getting close to 1-series level accuracy. Makes me really excited to see how amazing the R1 AF system will perform. I'm getting an itchy buy it now finger. LOL.